Scan barcode
vireogirl's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
Very clever. Charming characters.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Death of parent, Grief, Injury/Injury detail, Murder, Abandonment, Alcohol, Blood, Death, and Sexual content
foxon's review against another edition
3.0
I was surprised by how much I liked this book. Maybe I was judging the authors pen name which gave me visions of fan fiction but this is a well written mystery that puts our protagonist into the middle of the action in a realistic way. There is a love triangle but it is on the back burner and not a major part of the story. I also was surprised that I enjoyed the third person multiple narrative as much as I did. Will be following this series!
readbooks_fightpatriarchy's review against another edition
3.0
Despite a little bit of a slow start, I enjoyed this book as a nice, fun read. There may have been a few situations that seemed a bit "out of the ordinary" for those who have read a lot of books set in this time period, but this book was supposed to be just that- an atypical story for the time period. Some things may have been a bit more modern than may have actually happened, but I liked it!
incandescentreads's review against another edition
2.0
Rating : 2 ⭐
The story never really focused on the mystery, and the solution was very obvious from the start. The characters didn't feel fully realized and the relationships underdeveloped. There is a lot of telling, not showing, when it comes to the main character and how she made herself such a "useful woman" to the upper class. I hope there is some improvement in the next instalment.
The story never really focused on the mystery, and the solution was very obvious from the start. The characters didn't feel fully realized and the relationships underdeveloped. There is a lot of telling, not showing, when it comes to the main character and how she made herself such a "useful woman" to the upper class. I hope there is some improvement in the next instalment.
yasmine_w's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
4.0
drpig's review against another edition
lighthearted
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
avlavl's review against another edition
adventurous
lighthearted
relaxing
fast-paced
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
maplessence's review against another edition
4.0
Copy gifted by the author, posted to me by Sarah C one of the moderators of the Jane Austen Group. Thanks very much for that.
This book isn't Heyerish (a definite point in it's favour - most of GH's imitators turn out very shoddy work!) but it does contain two things that pop up often in Heyer's Regency works- the very exclusive social club Almack's
As has often been mentioned in Regency works, Almack's wasn't comfortable or even attractive, served bad refreshments and the patronesses were crashing snobs. But well done to these women for making their Assemblies the most sought after events of the London Season.
and the predecessor to the modern police force, the famous (or infamous) Bow St Runners.
Welcome to the world of Rosalind Thorne a gentlewoman who, through no fault of her own, is now impoverished. Rosalind is managing to eke out an existence with her wits, charm, discretion - and because the ladies of the Haut Ton find her "a useful woman."
When the aristocratic but unscrupulous Jasper Aimesworth is found dead in suspicious circumstances, Rosalind finds herself involved in that most ungenteel of occupations - *gasp* solving a murder and fighting an attraction to an astute and attractive Bow St Runner. Adam Harkness.
I've mentioned the two main pluses for me above. The others were some signs of very solid research and the fast paced ending.
I'm neutral on Rosalind as I found her character (till close to the end) quite bland. But Rosalind probably had to suppress all distinctive personality traits to pick her way through all the social traps & petty humiliations in London Society.
Definite flaws: This book sagged badly in the middle and I had to force myself to keep going.
The speech is often quite modern or sometimes just plain odd like;
Mother had already scented that something was wrong.
A few anachronisms. The most jarring for me was the Lady reporter friend of Rosalind's. Alice appeared more like a character from a Hollywood movie about the late nineteenth century. I've never read any account of the Regency world that suggested journalists as we know them existed.
But I still enjoyed this example of a Regency Whodunnit- far more than the single offerings I have read by [a:Ashley Gardner|15295|Ashley Gardner|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1239746238p2/15295.jpg] and [a:Stephanie Barron|17764|Stephanie Barron|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1321489264p2/17764.jpg]
I'm looking forward to Miss Thorne's next adventure.
Edit; The lovely Ms Wilde has just been on the jane Austen Group for a Q&A session. Ms Wilde says the Regency era most definitely did have female journalists but they were working around marriage, children & were very underpaid compared to their male counterparts.
I stand corrected. :)
This book isn't Heyerish (a definite point in it's favour - most of GH's imitators turn out very shoddy work!) but it does contain two things that pop up often in Heyer's Regency works- the very exclusive social club Almack's
As has often been mentioned in Regency works, Almack's wasn't comfortable or even attractive, served bad refreshments and the patronesses were crashing snobs. But well done to these women for making their Assemblies the most sought after events of the London Season.
and the predecessor to the modern police force, the famous (or infamous) Bow St Runners.
Welcome to the world of Rosalind Thorne a gentlewoman who, through no fault of her own, is now impoverished. Rosalind is managing to eke out an existence with her wits, charm, discretion - and because the ladies of the Haut Ton find her "a useful woman."
When the aristocratic but unscrupulous Jasper Aimesworth is found dead in suspicious circumstances, Rosalind finds herself involved in that most ungenteel of occupations - *gasp* solving a murder and fighting an attraction to an astute and attractive Bow St Runner. Adam Harkness.
I've mentioned the two main pluses for me above. The others were some signs of very solid research and the fast paced ending.
I'm neutral on Rosalind as I found her character (till close to the end) quite bland. But Rosalind probably had to suppress all distinctive personality traits to pick her way through all the social traps & petty humiliations in London Society.
Definite flaws: This book sagged badly in the middle and I had to force myself to keep going.
The speech is often quite modern or sometimes just plain odd like;
Mother had already scented that something was wrong.
A few anachronisms. The most jarring for me was the Lady reporter friend of Rosalind's. Alice appeared more like a character from a Hollywood movie about the late nineteenth century. I've never read any account of the Regency world that suggested journalists as we know them existed.
But I still enjoyed this example of a Regency Whodunnit- far more than the single offerings I have read by [a:Ashley Gardner|15295|Ashley Gardner|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1239746238p2/15295.jpg] and [a:Stephanie Barron|17764|Stephanie Barron|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1321489264p2/17764.jpg]
I'm looking forward to Miss Thorne's next adventure.
Edit; The lovely Ms Wilde has just been on the jane Austen Group for a Q&A session. Ms Wilde says the Regency era most definitely did have female journalists but they were working around marriage, children & were very underpaid compared to their male counterparts.
I stand corrected. :)