Scan barcode
beautifuldissonance's review
5.0
This book broke my heart. I think I cried almost solidly through the last quarter or so. I don't have words right now.
tracey_stewart's review
4.0
I won this book through LibraryThing's Member Giveaway, and I've been far too long in getting to it. I blame a Kindle malfunction which wiped out my collections, so that I lost track of it. That's my story, anyway.
Don't let the terrible cover put you off. It looks like a bad PNR. It's not. Not bad, not PNR (well, there is what could be called a paranormal element, and there is romance, but – no, it's not a PNR). This is a beautiful, beautiful fairy tale, set in Cymru-that-is – perhaps Wales of old, perhaps not – and playing off any number of old stories without ever locking into "retelling" of any one. It is sensual without being explicit, bardic without resorting to archaisms, funny when it isn't busy breaking your heart. There's a sting in the tale, though.
The rest of this review can be found here, on Booklikes, and here, on my blog. However, I will no longer be posting reviews on Goodreads, due to its recent changes to terms of service and, far worse, the boneheaded and incomprehensible way it is proceeding with the new policy. Deleting content, almost randomly, and without warning (whatever they may have said) is wrong, and a half-hearted apology later doesn't make it all better. Failing to provide a sitewide announcement is wrong. Failing to address users' very legitimate concern over the situation is wrong.
Also wrong – worse in some ways – is the failure of Goodreads to adequately pursue the possibility that users real names, addresses, and email addresses are being harvested from giveaways and distributed. The staff is aware of the possibility, and doesn't care. If this is indeed true, I don't think I need to point out the dangers inherent in such a list, do I? Not to mention the illegality of it…
I'm not going to leave GR while I have good friends remaining here, but I will no longer post anything but links for reviews. I'm not what anyone would call a heavy hitter, but I have breached the top reviewers lists from time to time. I have a healthy number of people following my reviews (thanks, all). If nothing else, I want to set an example.
I will also no longer perform librarian functions, however much missing covers and bad information annoys me: I will no longer contribute to a site which cares so little about its users. Again, I'm no heavy hitter as a librarian – but I had about 1500 edits to my name, and there are at least a couple dozen I could have made in the past few weeks and refrained. I was an asset to the site, albeit a small one. I'm not anymore. That is what Goodreads' actions have caused.
I will also be posting the gist of this message on my blog, on LibraryThing, on Booklikes, and anywhere else I can think of. And when I review for Netgalley from now on I will state that I no longer post reviews on GR, and why.
It may not affect the situation here – but people still don't know what's going on (because Goodreads isn't telling them). In good conscience I can't do anything less.
My friends and followers will be seeing some version of this message a lot over the next days and weeks. Sorry.
Don't let the terrible cover put you off. It looks like a bad PNR. It's not. Not bad, not PNR (well, there is what could be called a paranormal element, and there is romance, but – no, it's not a PNR). This is a beautiful, beautiful fairy tale, set in Cymru-that-is – perhaps Wales of old, perhaps not – and playing off any number of old stories without ever locking into "retelling" of any one. It is sensual without being explicit, bardic without resorting to archaisms, funny when it isn't busy breaking your heart. There's a sting in the tale, though.
The rest of this review can be found here, on Booklikes, and here, on my blog. However, I will no longer be posting reviews on Goodreads, due to its recent changes to terms of service and, far worse, the boneheaded and incomprehensible way it is proceeding with the new policy. Deleting content, almost randomly, and without warning (whatever they may have said) is wrong, and a half-hearted apology later doesn't make it all better. Failing to provide a sitewide announcement is wrong. Failing to address users' very legitimate concern over the situation is wrong.
Also wrong – worse in some ways – is the failure of Goodreads to adequately pursue the possibility that users real names, addresses, and email addresses are being harvested from giveaways and distributed. The staff is aware of the possibility, and doesn't care. If this is indeed true, I don't think I need to point out the dangers inherent in such a list, do I? Not to mention the illegality of it…
I'm not going to leave GR while I have good friends remaining here, but I will no longer post anything but links for reviews. I'm not what anyone would call a heavy hitter, but I have breached the top reviewers lists from time to time. I have a healthy number of people following my reviews (thanks, all). If nothing else, I want to set an example.
I will also no longer perform librarian functions, however much missing covers and bad information annoys me: I will no longer contribute to a site which cares so little about its users. Again, I'm no heavy hitter as a librarian – but I had about 1500 edits to my name, and there are at least a couple dozen I could have made in the past few weeks and refrained. I was an asset to the site, albeit a small one. I'm not anymore. That is what Goodreads' actions have caused.
I will also be posting the gist of this message on my blog, on LibraryThing, on Booklikes, and anywhere else I can think of. And when I review for Netgalley from now on I will state that I no longer post reviews on GR, and why.
It may not affect the situation here – but people still don't know what's going on (because Goodreads isn't telling them). In good conscience I can't do anything less.
My friends and followers will be seeing some version of this message a lot over the next days and weeks. Sorry.
elenajohansen's review
1.0
DNF @ 18%, which was the start of the chapter that (finally) introduced us to the female lead.
I got this book as part of a charity bundle, and thus had not chosen it specifically or read the blurb prior to starting. With that in mind, I peaced out because I was bored by the incredibly simplistic narrative style and my lack of interest in the flat characters.
If I had even known there was another major character coming, which I didn't, my complaint would have been "why are we nearly a fifth of the way through the book before she's introduced?"
The problem is apparently a structural one, now that I've read the blurb and skimmed some reviews. The prologue is wholly about Seren, a setup because she's needed to cause turmoil in the twin brothers' plot. Then the next chunk of the book (until 18%) is entirely their story, setting up their curse so they can be ready to be the turmoil in Aine's story, which is apparently the rest of the book.
And to be clear, I didn't like the twins' story at all. It was rushed (though now I understand why) and there really wasn't much to differentiate the personalities of the two, and I didn't understand/agree with their father's reaction to the curse, and the idea of these two young men being trapped in a Fae sex fantasy cottage was not appealing to me in any way and left me with logistical questions, frustrated with what I was supposed to be inferring or not based on the vague descriptions of their goings-on.
I didn't even get to the end that so many other reviewers object so strongly to, but since I peeked at the spoilers, yeah, if I had read the whole thing, I still would have given it one star for that nonsense, so I don't feel the slightest bit guilty for giving up early.
I got this book as part of a charity bundle, and thus had not chosen it specifically or read the blurb prior to starting. With that in mind, I peaced out because I was bored by the incredibly simplistic narrative style and my lack of interest in the flat characters.
If I had even known there was another major character coming, which I didn't, my complaint would have been "why are we nearly a fifth of the way through the book before she's introduced?"
The problem is apparently a structural one, now that I've read the blurb and skimmed some reviews. The prologue is wholly about Seren, a setup because she's needed to cause turmoil in the twin brothers' plot. Then the next chunk of the book (until 18%) is entirely their story, setting up their curse so they can be ready to be the turmoil in Aine's story, which is apparently the rest of the book.
And to be clear, I didn't like the twins' story at all. It was rushed (though now I understand why) and there really wasn't much to differentiate the personalities of the two, and I didn't understand/agree with their father's reaction to the curse, and the idea of these two young men being trapped in a Fae sex fantasy cottage was not appealing to me in any way and left me with logistical questions, frustrated with what I was supposed to be inferring or not based on the vague descriptions of their goings-on.
I didn't even get to the end that so many other reviewers object so strongly to, but since I peeked at the spoilers, yeah, if I had read the whole thing, I still would have given it one star for that nonsense, so I don't feel the slightest bit guilty for giving up early.
dipanjali's review
1.0
this.... went from sweet and gentle to so awful and so fucked up so fast + unexpectedly...
More...