Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.76 AVERAGE
3.76 AVERAGE
Spice: 4/5 Open door – Angst 3/5 – Action: 2/5
This book (the whole series really) was so fun. I love a troubled protagonist and David’s struggles with his internalised homophobia was really intriguing to watching him develop through it, I love a self-loathing hero working through his troubles of perceiving himself as unnatural or wrong within historical novels. The hurt/comfort and ‘reluctant’ lovers’ aspect scratch my angsty romance itch so well. The sexual tension and the inevitable falling into bed (or an alley way) with each other was also very hot, Chambers writes very good sex scenes.
The story outside of the romance was fast paced and engaging. I really enjoy historical political unrest and the chase of solving something before it all implodes in this story made it hard to put down, all while following David and Murdo’s desires and struggles within their personal relationship. One of my favourite historicals.
This book (the whole series really) was so fun. I love a troubled protagonist and David’s struggles with his internalised homophobia was really intriguing to watching him develop through it, I love a self-loathing hero working through his troubles of perceiving himself as unnatural or wrong within historical novels. The hurt/comfort and ‘reluctant’ lovers’ aspect scratch my angsty romance itch so well. The sexual tension and the inevitable falling into bed (or an alley way) with each other was also very hot, Chambers writes very good sex scenes.
The story outside of the romance was fast paced and engaging. I really enjoy historical political unrest and the chase of solving something before it all implodes in this story made it hard to put down, all while following David and Murdo’s desires and struggles within their personal relationship. One of my favourite historicals.
I’m officially on team Just Let Beautiful Hufflepuff David Lauriston Live, Please
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Interesting characters, like that it’s set in Scotland. Engaging story, cliffhanger ending that made me want to immediately start the next one
This was a really good mlm Georgian Scotland. Yes please
emotional
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I'm fairly sure in 50% of my reviews I note I'm Scottish/British but guys I really am. So finding this historical Edinburgh-based ( my family live there, I grew up there) m/m romance.... Give it to me.
It was a slow start with a very slow burn romance. It didn't grab my attention right away but as soon as Murdo and David meet again in Edinburgh, the pace and plot picked up. Feelings were never discussed or fully explained I get the impression that Chambers is waiting.
Really lovely start to a series, I was planning to read something else next but it was so good I have to move on to book two. 4 stars.
It was a slow start with a very slow burn romance. It didn't grab my attention right away but as soon as Murdo and David meet again in Edinburgh, the pace and plot picked up. Feelings were never discussed or fully explained I get the impression that Chambers is waiting.
Really lovely start to a series, I was planning to read something else next but it was so good I have to move on to book two. 4 stars.
I should have read this so much sooner! I've owned a Kindle version for years now. I guess I was thinking this was more like your standard "historical" romance, with the focus mostly on the romance, with cliched treatments of tropes, etc. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy all of those things when done well. They are a fluffy good time. But there's something about the style this book is written in, which frankly reminds me of one of my favorite authors, K.J. Charles, that sets this one apart.
The historical detail is front and center, and you really feel the time and place, in this case the Scottish Enlightenment circa 1820, a time period I really didn't know much about going in. But Chambers uses the historical setting in such a clever way. We've got actual historical happenings; our main character, David Lauriston, is an advocate for the men accused by the state of being radicals who brought about an uprising, the "Radical War", or as it's called here, the weaver plot. Workers in Scotland sought government reform and decided to strike, but the government feared them, and the whole thing ended with Andrew Hardie and James Baird (the leaders) being executed, and many other men transported to Australia. The book actually opens with David attending their execution, and it really pulled me in, the way we see it through his eyes. He clearly cared about his clients, and in some ways sympathized with them, but he's also a man who as the son of a tenant farmer who nevertheless managed to receive an education, is very careful to follow the rules.
The way Chambers writes the scene was very affecting, and it set the tone for the rest of the book. She even quotes Baird's last words, although she seems to have given them to Hardie instead:
So all that is going on in the background, and in the foreground we have our hero David, the rule-follower, who meets Scottish lord Murdo Balfour, and they have themselves an assignation. David is attracted to men, and he has struggled with it his whole life. Society and his parents and his religion have told him it's unnatural and wrong, and he has internalized that. But still he can't stop himself from slipping every now and then, and then hating himself afterwards. I've only just realized now while typing this review that their relationship parallels that of the Enlightenment. David is stuck in an unenlightened mindset while Murdo openly embraces the ideas of empiricism that propelled the Enlightenment. He says to David that reason tells him his pleasure harms no one, and makes him happy, so he will do as he likes. This attitude is utterly foreign to David, and they clash constantly throughout the novel, all while being attracted irresistibly to each other.
But Murdo doesn't have all the right of it. David is a moral, kind, idealistic man, and he is often in the right in their confrontations, just as often as he is wrong. Murdo's confident personality and temper hurt David in a couple of his most vulnerable moments, as Murdo doesn't understand what really motivates David; he only sees that David is stuck in a backward way of thinking that is harming him. We aren't allowed inside Murdo's head as the book is told exclusively from David's POV; in fact, part of the plot hinges on David not being sure that Murdo can be trusted. There's a plot that spins out from the execution of the weavers, involving an agent provocateur sent from Whitehall to inflame the radicals, and "root out troublemakers," and there is good reason for us and David to believe that Murdo might have been that man.
This book is interesting in terms of its structure. Mostly, romances are one and done, but here, their arc is spread across three books, so we basically just get the opening salvos of their conflict. Presumably next book we'll see how that initial conflict deepens, and how they resolve it. I'm not sure when I'll be able to get to the second two books, but I've already bought them, so hopefully it will be soon.
The historical detail is front and center, and you really feel the time and place, in this case the Scottish Enlightenment circa 1820, a time period I really didn't know much about going in. But Chambers uses the historical setting in such a clever way. We've got actual historical happenings; our main character, David Lauriston, is an advocate for the men accused by the state of being radicals who brought about an uprising, the "Radical War", or as it's called here, the weaver plot. Workers in Scotland sought government reform and decided to strike, but the government feared them, and the whole thing ended with Andrew Hardie and James Baird (the leaders) being executed, and many other men transported to Australia. The book actually opens with David attending their execution, and it really pulled me in, the way we see it through his eyes. He clearly cared about his clients, and in some ways sympathized with them, but he's also a man who as the son of a tenant farmer who nevertheless managed to receive an education, is very careful to follow the rules.
The way Chambers writes the scene was very affecting, and it set the tone for the rest of the book. She even quotes Baird's last words, although she seems to have given them to Hardie instead:
"—in a few minutes, our blood shall be shed on this scaffold,” Hardie cried, “our heads severed from our bodies for no other sin than seeking the legitimate rights of our ill-used and downtrodden countrymen—”
Shouts of encouragement from the crowd echoed all around at his words. The sheriff surged forward to place a restraining hand on Hardie’s arm.
“Stop this violent and improper language, Mr. Hardie!” he demanded. He was almost purple with anger. “You promised not to inflame the crowd!”
The spectators protested loudly at this silencing of the prisoner. “Let him speak!” someone cried. Hardie shrugged MacDonald’s hand off, declaring angrily, “We said what we intended to say, whether you granted us liberty to do so or not.”
A loud cheer greeted this, and it seemed to draw Hardie’s attention to the throng of spectators. He looked about himself. Out at the crowd, then up at the gibbet above his head. At the block beside him, readied for his own beheading, then out at the crowd again. At the people grouped in the square to witness his death, all hemmed in by countless redcoats. Everywhere there was the scarlet of dress uniforms, the glint of weapons, the quiver of nervous horseflesh. David watched as the condemned man took it all in, and saw the potential of what might happen here today. Hardie held up his hand and spoke one last time.
“Do not drink any toasts to us tonight, friends.” His voice rang out clearly, but his tone was sombre as he eyed the soldiers. “Leave the public houses behind. Go to your homes. Attend to your bibles this night.”
So all that is going on in the background, and in the foreground we have our hero David, the rule-follower, who meets Scottish lord Murdo Balfour, and they have themselves an assignation. David is attracted to men, and he has struggled with it his whole life. Society and his parents and his religion have told him it's unnatural and wrong, and he has internalized that. But still he can't stop himself from slipping every now and then, and then hating himself afterwards. I've only just realized now while typing this review that their relationship parallels that of the Enlightenment. David is stuck in an unenlightened mindset while Murdo openly embraces the ideas of empiricism that propelled the Enlightenment. He says to David that reason tells him his pleasure harms no one, and makes him happy, so he will do as he likes. This attitude is utterly foreign to David, and they clash constantly throughout the novel, all while being attracted irresistibly to each other.
But Murdo doesn't have all the right of it. David is a moral, kind, idealistic man, and he is often in the right in their confrontations, just as often as he is wrong. Murdo's confident personality and temper hurt David in a couple of his most vulnerable moments, as Murdo doesn't understand what really motivates David; he only sees that David is stuck in a backward way of thinking that is harming him. We aren't allowed inside Murdo's head as the book is told exclusively from David's POV; in fact, part of the plot hinges on David not being sure that Murdo can be trusted. There's a plot that spins out from the execution of the weavers, involving an agent provocateur sent from Whitehall to inflame the radicals, and "root out troublemakers," and there is good reason for us and David to believe that Murdo might have been that man.
This book is interesting in terms of its structure. Mostly, romances are one and done, but here, their arc is spread across three books, so we basically just get the opening salvos of their conflict. Presumably next book we'll see how that initial conflict deepens, and how they resolve it. I'm not sure when I'll be able to get to the second two books, but I've already bought them, so hopefully it will be soon.
emotional
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I’m not a big fan of writing reviews but ever since I finished reading this book, about two weeks ago, I keep wanting to write this. The reason why I don’t like writing reviews is because my rating system is based solely on my reading experience. What counts for me is only how drawn I was to the story, how immersible it was and if I thought the characters believable, if they helped me understand myself and the world around me… I don’t have much too say on structure of books, their context, their hidden meaning or literary importance… Summarising: I find that my reviews are too personal and therefore not useful at all. Especially when they are about something I liked… It is easier to explain why I dislike something… Therefore, I will write my review explaining what I liked in Provoked in contrast to things that generally annoys me.
So, let’s move on to reasons I liked this book (4 starts for me means: right book at the right time. I loved it, but I can’t say that it changed my life, I don’t know how long the characters will stay important and meaningful to me):
#1: Historical Fiction done right!
My biggest issue with contemporary historical fiction is that it doesn’t seem to be set in the past properly. It seems to be only a scenery decision; the society of the time has no repercussion on the way the characters think and act. It’s just a bunch of people dressed in fancy clothes with titles and the laziest lives that suffer no consequences for acting as if they were 21st century people.
In Provoked, David seems to be a man of his time. I’m not a historian and there are probably many inconsistencies, but he is a believable character within the 19th century constructed in the book. One might point out that someone from his status would never become a lawyer in that period of time and, in this regard, they might be right, but it doesn’t hurt the book. What I mean is: the problems we would imagine would exist for a gay person with no connection on the 19th century are all there. David is well aware of the consequences of his acts and he worries about his condition, economically and sociality. He worries about the fact that he is homosexual, he struggles to stablish himself as a lawyer because he is not from an aristocratic or rich family.
#2: Good heavens. People.
Another problem I find in most contemporary romantic books is that they all seem to revolve solely on the main couple. Sometimes we learn only the names of the secondary characters (2D much?). The main character seems to have no life when they are not with the other person and, in the few pages they are not interacting with this someone, they are still thinking and talking about their love interest to others (although even this has been rare in some of the books I read in recent years ¬¬).
In Provoked, we do have characters apart from David and Murdo. And the subplots with these people matter, not only in what happens in this book but in the trilogy as a whole. David has friends and clients and mentors and people he cares about. He does meet and think about Murdo a great deal, the romance is still the most important thing of the book, and let’s not lie, it is what we came looking for in the first place, but he is a mentally healthy human being with a whole life apart from his love problems.
#3: R-E-S-P-E-C-T
Lately, our romantic tropes seem to really be into abusive relationships. To built tension between the couple, the characters often disrespect each other. They verbally, and sometimes physically, abuse the other. We have this in a lot of heterosexual romances but on m/m stories this seems to be a much worse problem (see 95% of the yaoi mangas available for reference). Controlling (euphemistic version: protective), rude (euphemistic version: misunderstood), stalkers (euphemistic version: love-strucked) characters are often represented as the object of affection of the MC. They are the bad boys said to have hearts of gold (though I’m never quite sure of said heart in the end of most books).
David and Murdo have disagreements on a lot of things. They come from different backgrounds, have different life experiences and different principles. They argue and don’t think alike. There are tense moments, but I never felt that they had an abusive relationship. Sometimes I thought Murdo had some odd behaviours, but they are explained properly on either this book or on the books that follow. Also important, they maintain their beliefs throughout the book. If they have a principle they don’t accept a situation just for the satisfaction of the other. Who they are and how they express their selves is more important than sacrificing their personalities and beliefs for the sake of a romantic relationship.
#4: Because, Reasons…
Have you ever read a book that you kept thinking: ‘why these people keep on meeting and talking to each other if the company is so intolerable?’. Honestly, I think this one of the things that most attract people to write Historical Romantic Fictions; the fact that they can put characters to meet over and over again because society demands it (and it was ok to spend like, a month, on the house of someone else). I’m a fan of the whole enemies to lovers trope but I haven’t read a good one in ages (if ever!).
Though I’m not sure if this book qualifies as enemies to lovers, they do have a tense relationship and Provoked gives us a lot more reasons for David to keep meeting Murdo. The subplots feed the main plot with said reasons. I’m not saying that the subplots are the best thing you ever read or that they are a marvel to behold on their own (without the love story they would need a lot of rewriting to create a good or believable book) but they do serve the story very well. This book is an example on how subplots can actually mean something to the story other than to give background to characters.
#5: High Fidelity
Now, the last pet peeve of mine: characters that discover that they been wrong all along about their own beliefs or on what the love interest thoughts were. Misunderstanding doesn’t have to always be the reason of tension between people. The common alternative is even worst: MC’s that start off behaving and thinking one thing only to change their minds on the third act (and normally without a proper justification). Someone has to change in order for the couple to be together. And these changes seem to be mostly because the author didn’t know how to send their couple towards their happy ending.
Not here. In Provoked, people are who they are. Is not that they never realise they were wrong or that they never learn anything. But there is consistency. And since the narrator is stuck on David’s POV we do understand exactly why he has his opinions and why he is the way he is. Some of his perceptions do make him suffer and we do hope that he changes it, but it is not like one day he wakes up and say: ‘you know what, I was being too harsh in my judgments.’. I could go on and on about this particular topic, because this was definitely something that I loved, but I’m afraid I will end up giving spoilers.
Now, the #1 the thing I didn’t like: Endings
Ok, so the problem is not so much on this book. This book has it, but the problem increases throughout the series. The book and the rest of the series raise a few questions on us, curiosities and expectations about certain characters, situations and meetings. But they are rather disenchanting when they happen. In this book specifically, this comment mostly applies to the resolution of a subplot so it didn’t spoil the experience for me. In book three, however…
A Plus on things I didn’t like (this actually doesn’t matter but it bugs me): What is up with this terrible book cover? Did it need to be so tacky? Is not that I’m embarrassed of reading a flagrant Historical M/M romantic fiction but, this book has quality, it deserved a better, more sober cover (and this man doesn’t fit what I imagined of David… #notmydavid) and not look like something you would buy in a newsletter stand.
So, here we are. Final considerations:
The book is very enjoyable to read (I’m a very, very slow reader but I couldn’t put it down. I needed to know what happened next) and I finished in about 24 hours (and only because I needed to do other stuff). I liked the style of writing and that it didn’t felt like it was written five years ago. It wasn’t like a book actually written in the 19th century, mostly because the interactions we see would never be allowed to appear in such book, but it felt like I was reading a 19th century story and the style of writing matched that.
I loved the dynamics between David and the other characters, especially his relationship with Murdo and Elizabeth. About Murdo specifically, I liked that things happened in a pace that seems believable (I don’t want to elaborate on this much because spoilers!) and this was also a very big reason I loved this book profoundly. It wasn’t rushed and, at the same time, the obstacles presented didn’t feel forced. They get to know each other, respect each over and fall in love gradually, and it is so good! (and yes, you will need to read books 2 and 3 to get a complete grasp on their relationship).
But most of all, I adored the character of David Lauriston. A lot. I suffered and cared for him, I understood him, I wanted to know more about him, I liked the way he was a gentleman and had strong principles, that he was faithful to his friends and loved ones. And I generally wanted to spend more time with him. I would gladly read a prequel about his early story (though I don’t think that would be necessary… throughout the series we learn all that we need about him).
So, let’s move on to reasons I liked this book (4 starts for me means: right book at the right time. I loved it, but I can’t say that it changed my life, I don’t know how long the characters will stay important and meaningful to me):
#1: Historical Fiction done right!
My biggest issue with contemporary historical fiction is that it doesn’t seem to be set in the past properly. It seems to be only a scenery decision; the society of the time has no repercussion on the way the characters think and act. It’s just a bunch of people dressed in fancy clothes with titles and the laziest lives that suffer no consequences for acting as if they were 21st century people.
In Provoked, David seems to be a man of his time. I’m not a historian and there are probably many inconsistencies, but he is a believable character within the 19th century constructed in the book. One might point out that someone from his status would never become a lawyer in that period of time and, in this regard, they might be right, but it doesn’t hurt the book. What I mean is: the problems we would imagine would exist for a gay person with no connection on the 19th century are all there. David is well aware of the consequences of his acts and he worries about his condition, economically and sociality. He worries about the fact that he is homosexual, he struggles to stablish himself as a lawyer because he is not from an aristocratic or rich family.
#2: Good heavens. People.
Another problem I find in most contemporary romantic books is that they all seem to revolve solely on the main couple. Sometimes we learn only the names of the secondary characters (2D much?). The main character seems to have no life when they are not with the other person and, in the few pages they are not interacting with this someone, they are still thinking and talking about their love interest to others (although even this has been rare in some of the books I read in recent years ¬¬).
In Provoked, we do have characters apart from David and Murdo. And the subplots with these people matter, not only in what happens in this book but in the trilogy as a whole. David has friends and clients and mentors and people he cares about. He does meet and think about Murdo a great deal, the romance is still the most important thing of the book, and let’s not lie, it is what we came looking for in the first place, but he is a mentally healthy human being with a whole life apart from his love problems.
#3: R-E-S-P-E-C-T
Lately, our romantic tropes seem to really be into abusive relationships. To built tension between the couple, the characters often disrespect each other. They verbally, and sometimes physically, abuse the other. We have this in a lot of heterosexual romances but on m/m stories this seems to be a much worse problem (see 95% of the yaoi mangas available for reference). Controlling (euphemistic version: protective), rude (euphemistic version: misunderstood), stalkers (euphemistic version: love-strucked) characters are often represented as the object of affection of the MC. They are the bad boys said to have hearts of gold (though I’m never quite sure of said heart in the end of most books).
David and Murdo have disagreements on a lot of things. They come from different backgrounds, have different life experiences and different principles. They argue and don’t think alike. There are tense moments, but I never felt that they had an abusive relationship. Sometimes I thought Murdo had some odd behaviours, but they are explained properly on either this book or on the books that follow. Also important, they maintain their beliefs throughout the book. If they have a principle they don’t accept a situation just for the satisfaction of the other. Who they are and how they express their selves is more important than sacrificing their personalities and beliefs for the sake of a romantic relationship.
#4: Because, Reasons…
Have you ever read a book that you kept thinking: ‘why these people keep on meeting and talking to each other if the company is so intolerable?’. Honestly, I think this one of the things that most attract people to write Historical Romantic Fictions; the fact that they can put characters to meet over and over again because society demands it (and it was ok to spend like, a month, on the house of someone else). I’m a fan of the whole enemies to lovers trope but I haven’t read a good one in ages (if ever!).
Though I’m not sure if this book qualifies as enemies to lovers, they do have a tense relationship and Provoked gives us a lot more reasons for David to keep meeting Murdo. The subplots feed the main plot with said reasons. I’m not saying that the subplots are the best thing you ever read or that they are a marvel to behold on their own (without the love story they would need a lot of rewriting to create a good or believable book) but they do serve the story very well. This book is an example on how subplots can actually mean something to the story other than to give background to characters.
#5: High Fidelity
Now, the last pet peeve of mine: characters that discover that they been wrong all along about their own beliefs or on what the love interest thoughts were. Misunderstanding doesn’t have to always be the reason of tension between people. The common alternative is even worst: MC’s that start off behaving and thinking one thing only to change their minds on the third act (and normally without a proper justification). Someone has to change in order for the couple to be together. And these changes seem to be mostly because the author didn’t know how to send their couple towards their happy ending.
Not here. In Provoked, people are who they are. Is not that they never realise they were wrong or that they never learn anything. But there is consistency. And since the narrator is stuck on David’s POV we do understand exactly why he has his opinions and why he is the way he is. Some of his perceptions do make him suffer and we do hope that he changes it, but it is not like one day he wakes up and say: ‘you know what, I was being too harsh in my judgments.’. I could go on and on about this particular topic, because this was definitely something that I loved, but I’m afraid I will end up giving spoilers.
Now, the #1 the thing I didn’t like: Endings
Ok, so the problem is not so much on this book. This book has it, but the problem increases throughout the series. The book and the rest of the series raise a few questions on us, curiosities and expectations about certain characters, situations and meetings. But they are rather disenchanting when they happen. In this book specifically, this comment mostly applies to the resolution of a subplot so it didn’t spoil the experience for me. In book three, however…
A Plus on things I didn’t like (this actually doesn’t matter but it bugs me): What is up with this terrible book cover? Did it need to be so tacky? Is not that I’m embarrassed of reading a flagrant Historical M/M romantic fiction but, this book has quality, it deserved a better, more sober cover (and this man doesn’t fit what I imagined of David… #notmydavid) and not look like something you would buy in a newsletter stand.
So, here we are. Final considerations:
The book is very enjoyable to read (I’m a very, very slow reader but I couldn’t put it down. I needed to know what happened next) and I finished in about 24 hours (and only because I needed to do other stuff). I liked the style of writing and that it didn’t felt like it was written five years ago. It wasn’t like a book actually written in the 19th century, mostly because the interactions we see would never be allowed to appear in such book, but it felt like I was reading a 19th century story and the style of writing matched that.
I loved the dynamics between David and the other characters, especially his relationship with Murdo and Elizabeth. About Murdo specifically, I liked that things happened in a pace that seems believable (I don’t want to elaborate on this much because spoilers!) and this was also a very big reason I loved this book profoundly. It wasn’t rushed and, at the same time, the obstacles presented didn’t feel forced. They get to know each other, respect each over and fall in love gradually, and it is so good! (and yes, you will need to read books 2 and 3 to get a complete grasp on their relationship).
But most of all, I adored the character of David Lauriston. A lot. I suffered and cared for him, I understood him, I wanted to know more about him, I liked the way he was a gentleman and had strong principles, that he was faithful to his friends and loved ones. And I generally wanted to spend more time with him. I would gladly read a prequel about his early story (though I don’t think that would be necessary… throughout the series we learn all that we need about him).
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes