Scan barcode
bschweig717's review against another edition
3.0
This was a fun, quick read for the series. Not my favorite, but certainly entertaining.
ssejig's review against another edition
3.0
Nancy helps a Russian woman find her grandson. They only have a picture from when the boy was four years old and the first contender turns out to be an impostor.
barefootsong's review against another edition
3.0
Look, I don't read these for believable plots, I read them as comforts from my childhood that are now hilarious with all their contrivances. This one was published in 1943 and the contrivances are truly mind-boggling.
Nancy meets an "aristocratic" (because you can totally tell bloodlines by looking) elderly woman having a fainting spell at a department store and she and her chums help the woman get home. Turns out she's thedowager empress "queen mother" of Russia an unnamed country that had a bloody revolution a few decades ago but is currently an ally of the U.S. in a war that is never mentioned so it would be awkward to bring up that tawdry past by naming the country even though all the details are super obvious. Soon (by which I mean, the next day), of course, Nancy is a trusted friend of the former royal and becomes involved in the search for her missing grandson who was smuggled to the U.S. as a small child. (So Anastasia but for some reason with the boy child instead of one of the girls.) River Heights is apparently a popular place for royalist Russians émigrés from the unnamed country, which you would think might make it easier to find the longlost grandson, but of course that wouldn't make for a twisty enough plot.
Also Nancy has ditched her roadster with no explanation and is walking and biking everywhere (with the occasional taxi ride) because it would have offended her readers who were on gas rations (because war, but shh!) to have her driving everywhere. The best part, though, was when her old friend and occasional series guest, Helen Corning, pops in and explains that she's been in Paris with her dad(!), having a grand old time(?!), and they had an "exciting trip" coming back from Europe(!!!). Personally I would think someone having a grand old time in Paris in 1943 during a war that is never mentioned but is influential enough to get Nancy to ditch her iconic roadster would be more offensive than said roadster, but I guess that's just me.
Anyway, (spoilers, lol) our girl sleuth finds the missing prince, catches all the bad guys, models a winning design in a fashion show, and manages to get her dad the perfect birthday present, of course.
Nancy meets an "aristocratic" (because you can totally tell bloodlines by looking) elderly woman having a fainting spell at a department store and she and her chums help the woman get home. Turns out she's the
Also Nancy has ditched her roadster with no explanation and is walking and biking everywhere (with the occasional taxi ride) because it would have offended her readers who were on gas rations (because war, but shh!) to have her driving everywhere. The best part, though, was when her old friend and occasional series guest, Helen Corning, pops in and explains that she's been in Paris with her dad(!), having a grand old time(?!), and they had an "exciting trip" coming back from Europe(!!!). Personally I would think someone having a grand old time in Paris in 1943 during a war that is never mentioned but is influential enough to get Nancy to ditch her iconic roadster would be more offensive than said roadster, but I guess that's just me.
Anyway, (spoilers, lol) our girl sleuth finds the missing prince, catches all the bad guys, models a winning design in a fashion show, and manages to get her dad the perfect birthday present, of course.
nokibay's review against another edition
1.0
I have read just over 20 of these now and, while this one is relatively inoffensive from a racism standpoint (which definitely cannot be said for the others), it is so ridden with plot holes and inexplicable antics that I just could not bare to give it more than one star.
daphne2000's review against another edition
2.0
Even though I know who Nancy Drew is, I never really read her books as a kid. I was much more into Scooby Doo. And honestly, I kind of think young Daphne was correct in not reading many Nancy Drew novels. This book was seriously bad.
The writing style wasn't my favorite, but since this book is old I can forgive that. What I can't forgive is how god-awful the mystery was. This mystery was SO OBVIOUS! I am not a good detective, but I guessed who the 'bad guy' was from page 1. Also, for a mystery book there were so few clues! I feel like clues just fell onto Nancy's lap and she never had to do any real sleuthing.
Honestly, the only reason I'm giving this book 2 stars instead of 5 stars is because my friend annotated this for me and I loved the annotations. I'm not sure if all Nancy Drew books are like this but since I'm probably too old for them anyway I don't think I'll bother finding out.
The writing style wasn't my favorite, but since this book is old I can forgive that. What I can't forgive is how god-awful the mystery was. This mystery was SO OBVIOUS! I am not a good detective, but I guessed who the 'bad guy' was from page 1. Also, for a mystery book there were so few clues! I feel like clues just fell onto Nancy's lap and she never had to do any real sleuthing.
Honestly, the only reason I'm giving this book 2 stars instead of 5 stars is because my friend annotated this for me and I loved the annotations. I'm not sure if all Nancy Drew books are like this but since I'm probably too old for them anyway I don't think I'll bother finding out.
emileereadsbooks's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
The discussion questions I wrote for this book and my answers to them:
1. What did you think about the bad guy being pretty obvious from the start?
I thought the way the plot was laid out in this one was a bit different than normal Nancy books. I felt like instead of Nancy revealing things to us as much, we the reader were given more clues before Nancy found them out. I like this in other mysteries but was not a huge fan of this Nancy book taking on this plot device.
2. How do you feel about Nancy and friends abandoning "Michael"?
Nancy and the gang abandoning "Michael" is the worst thing Nancy has done so far in these books. We all know people who are rude and have bad manners and maybe are a bit socially inept, but you do not abandon them on an island. You deal with them for the day and then maybe figure out how to better handle them in different scenarios in the future. Michael was not threatening their safety, just their snobbishness. We all know Nancy is a bit uppity, but this puts that on full display.
3. Nancy noticeably does not drive herself in this book. Why do you think that is?
My theory is that although this book was revised in 1972, it was originally written in 1943 when there were war rations. That attitude of conserving gas carries over to the revised version.
4. Thoughts on Madame Marie and the nods to the story of Anastasia?
I thought this was very interesting to have a twist on the Anastasia story in a Nancy Drew book. Of course the long lost royal here is a boy, but it is quite interesting that this true crime story made its way into a Nancy book in a way.
5. This is a great book to ask who was your favorite character (other than Nancy)?
Anna is for sure the best non Nancy character in this book. She is doing her best to help Madame and be respectful. Plus she is pretty stealthy at times and I love her for it.
6. How many eyerolls do you give this book?
I give this one 2.5 eyerolls. 1 for Nancy not figuring out the dual pickpockets earlier. 1 for Nancy trusting then abandoning Michael because of his bad manners. 0.5 for the whole dog situation.
mouseinmypocket's review against another edition
As always, an enjoyable read, however I wish all the coincidences that allowed Nancy to solve her case were a bit more believable. As a child, these were great books, so perhaps I'm coming at them with too much skepticism.
More...