Re: Other Awesomely Awesome Books We've Read or Want to Read.

by **Patricia** Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:14 am

Rageane wrote:@ Patricia, just out of curiosity...did you read the novella that started the Alpha and Omega series? If you didn't I think you should...it really gives you the foundation of where the heroine is coming from in terms of character growth...you might be surprised and actually enjoy where the series is going.

Yes, I read it. I didn't even know it was a novella, until someone told me - It was included in the first book edition I read. Smile

Still I didn't like it that much. I just opened the anthology in which the story has been pubslished and have to agree with those of the people who told me that the translation sucks. But still the plot's not exciting enough to make up for the non-existing chemistry. Some parts I actually enjoyed about the book, such as whatshisname seeing her for the first time et cetera. There were several scenes I really liked, but then, just when Briggs had the chance to make them awesome (for me, at least) she dropped the whole thing and continued with stuff I didn't really care about or changed the whole atmosphere from intense to calm and boring.

At least that's what I remember. It's been quite a while since I read the books. I'm going to read two books today and then reread the Alpha Omega series - This time part English part German, to compare. Smile

Ah, I just noticed how my English sucks again. Humor me, there's no caffeine anymore and I'm tired and angry, because Kristi, the Story Siren, has this awesome giveaway and I can't fill out the form, because the shipping costs'd be too expensive. Neutral

Question: Did any of you read books written by Ana Alonso and Javier Pelegrin? A for-review-copy of Tatuje just arrived. I also have to review 7 Souls written by Barnabas Miller and Jordan Orlando. Anyone read that?

Sonia, I think I'm going to read Kitty too, someday. I own some copies of the series already, but I was reluctant about it for several reasons - Although I didn't even know about her being so subordinate. Anyway, it sounds like the characterdevelopment's good and I love that about books, esp UF and PNR. Not happening that often anymore. Sad

I have a question, though.

Spoiler:

Kay, that's it. :>

by kitarad Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:33 am

Spoiler:

by Nina Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:02 pm

Spoiler:

by kitarad Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:35 pm

Spoiler:

by **Patricia** Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:43 pm

Spoiler:

by kitarad Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:58 pm

Spoiler:

by **Patricia** Thu Jun 30, 2011 3:35 pm

ARG! I ACCIDENTLY DELETED MY ANSWER GRRR!!! >_<

Spoiler:

by Nina Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:15 pm

Ditto. I just was really wordy and lost it all. Why the heck did the site log me out?! It never does that!!!

Ticked. Ticked. Ticked.

I'll try and respond later...

Grrrrrrrrrrr

by **Patricia** Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:19 pm

Yes, I wasn't logged in right now, either. *confused* At least this time I didn't write a 900 words long text. Neutral

by kitarad Fri Jul 08, 2011 8:04 am

I finished the second book now. Liking it so far. Again she was placed in a position a nightmarish situation I felt so bad for her I wanted to scream and cry. God Carrie Vaughn sure knows how to push my buttons. You know how it is in some books you get some payback I have to say past two books you never get that. She does not get to see the ones who hurt her get their dues. I mean you want to see them crawl but no first book hardly anything and I guess it makes one stop and think because life is seldom like that is it. So this is like that too in some ways I wish she could have punched out some people's lights but no she never even got to kill the guy.

Perhaps I am trying to make it fit some formula but no lots of books already do the same formula I am glad for books that don't because they stay in your mind and make you mad. Like Kate Daniels her mouth she sure reminds me of Anita sometimes but I get her although she makes me want to punch her myself I still get it. She sure does not know when to shut up.

You know the other day someone was writing on a forum about how women always do not have as much sex as guys. The male characters in the books are always getting it on with others while the females are virgins or have not had sex for ages. I watched this movie " Last Night" and I was struck by the points of view it represented. Which is a worse form of betrayal loving someone like mad and not having sex with them or having sex with someone you do not care about at all. I was actually surprised to say loving was worse in my mind. I guess in that way women who do not go round hound dogging are not stupid not that random sex is a problem for me but I get why women are not more inclined in books to sleep around although it makes me mad that the guys are flaunting their sexual encounters while they even know the women is chaste. It makes it worse when they admit it grrrrr.....

Although I begin to wonder if I am prudish. Keri Arthur's character Riley Jensen sleeps around like there is no tomorrow and I found that a tad disturbing although it was a biological thing it still perved me out. I know what a stupid thing to say but I want the women to be more like the men in the books. I hate virgins although in regency and historical romances I understand them but in in these urban fantasy or paranormals I want the women to be more adventurous. However not as bad as Riley though. This I guess was brought on by Kate not sleeping with Crest at least Kitty had no such qualms so I am happy with her portrayal.

by Nina Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:51 pm

I think a lot of today's horny heroines come from authors who are either afraid of offending the feminist crowd or really don't want to perpetuate the swooning virgin heroine cliche. The first reason is dumb, because (in general) feminists who decry PNR, historicals, etc. are going to continue doing so even if the heroine is a kick-ass bed-hopper. The second is dumb, too, because what was wrong with the swooning virgin wasn't her virginity, it was the way she was portrayed. Making a heroine sexually experienced doesn't fix any past literary wrong.

In my opinion, both the swoony virgin and the sex-addict are equally offensive. Well, maybe not. The second ticks me off a little more because she is usually portrayed by the author as a paragon of modern femininity. It's like the author is telling readers a person's worth is based on their ability to hop beds. That's just as bad as the authors that basically told their audience that a woman's worth is based on their virginity.

Now, if an author wanted to show-off their talent they should write a heroine who is a virgin as well as confident and smart without any hang-ups about sex. Go fetch, authors!

Embarassed

So... end rant. Sorry, that hit a wee little nerve of mine - not your opinions kitarad, just the subject. I was raised when all of the baby boomers were constantly harping about sex...

by kitarad Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:08 am

You are absolutely right it is the way that virgins are portrayed that I hate not the virgin itself. My goodness how come I did not see that. Yes that is precisely why I get mad at some of the books I read.

Laurell Hamilton pissed me off because of what she did to Anita. I also want women to be more sexually active but not for the feminist thing at all or even to get even. Just being themselves which include a sexual appetite but I also get why women have more restraint but when they behave like Riley I know my senses get offended a bit am I nuts or what.

I cannot seem to decide what I want actually. I know though when Bones told Cat he only tasted I was so relieved because for once you did not get this guy hound dogging and the women staying celibate. Yes it is official I am a nut and prude.

Whenever I read the historical romances set in Regency ,Victorian and so forth I understand that the women more often than not are virgins but I dislike the way they are portrayed sometimes like you said it makes me cringe when they are so inexperienced but at the same time I do not know how to remedy that at all. I mean they are inexperienced so they would behave that way I guess. Then of course I hate it even more when by the standards of that day women were expected to be virgins and in some books the men were such hypocrites that they would happily be sleeping around while expecting their wives to be virgins when they get married. Don't even get me started on this topic.

Yes I also understand it has to do with making certain the child you have on a women is yours then and how even fathers would take their son's to places to get laid those days. It is a period that I am so happy never to have been born into. I rail at it but I also know historically it was so and even though I am sure many many women had affairs I just wish things were different while still torturing myself by reading these books occasionally because in spite of it all there is some charm in the witty virgin who captures the worldly 'I have lain with a thousand women' guy.

There is one other thing I wanted to point out . When you read some paranormal romances there are quite a few sex scenes between the leads and yes I enjoy them as much as anyone else but in my mind the couple of scenes that were so scantily described by Patricia Briggs about Adam and Mercy stuck in my head. I guess I was so invested in them that irrespective of there being hardly any details those scenes stayed in my head. There are also scenes from other books that stayed in my head and I am trying to find out what is the key to making them memorable. Mind you one of them was from Christine Warrens "Fur Factor" the library scene of Graham and Missy with Logan looking on. Don't even ask. rabbit

by **Patricia** Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:13 am

Nina wrote:I think a lot of today's horny heroines come from authors who are either afraid of offending the feminist crowd or really don't want to perpetuate the swooning virgin heroine cliche. The first reason is dumb, because (in general) feminists who decry PNR, historicals, etc. are going to continue doing so even if the heroine is a kick-ass bed-hopper. The second is dumb, too, because what was wrong with the swooning virgin wasn't her virginity, it was the way she was portrayed. Making a heroine sexually experienced doesn't fix any past literary wrong.

In my opinion, both the swoony virgin and the sex-addict are equally offensive. Well, maybe not. The second ticks me off a little more because she is usually portrayed by the author as a paragon of modern femininity. It's like the author is telling readers a person's worth is based on their ability to hop beds. That's just as bad as the authors that basically told their audience that a woman's worth is based on their virginity.

Now, if an author wanted to show-off their talent they should write a heroine who is a virgin as well as confident and smart without any hang-ups about sex. Go fetch, authors!

So... end rant. Sorry, that hit a wee little nerve of mine - not your opinions kitarad, just the subject. I was raised when all of the baby boomers were constantly harping about sex...

Marry me.

by Nina Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:07 am

Can't darling, I've promised myself to our dear Judd.

Or Walker.
Twisted Evil

Kitarad - I completely agree with you about Hamilton's Anita. Ugh. I stopped reading the Anita books because of the way sex is done in those books. Can't take it. I've got issues with Hamilton's inability to keep her story straight, too. Sad

You know, I don't really like heroes in books who are portrayed as having slept with a bazillion women. It doesn't make me like them any more than I would have otherwise. It doesn't make me admire the heroine for taming the savage, horny beast. All I think about is: 'Dude, have you ever heard of temperance?!' and 'How many STDs did he give her?!'

This is why I didn't absolutely hate JR Ward's book on Phury. I admired his ability to "just say no to hos." His brothers couldn't go into a bar without gorging on a baker's dozen or so... O_o

by kitarad Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:49 am

Yes I worry about venereal diseases too. I keep thinking that may be it was not so bad then then remember clap ,syphilis and gonorrhea were rampant then. I guess it is a little bit of a guilty read that I indulge in even when I hate the whoring men premise. I read for the wit and dialogues not so much the sexual encounters or even the love.It is the repartee that gets to me I do not enjoy the actual virgin and man who bedded a thousand pairing myself if I am very honest with myself.I guess that is why I graduated to other types of reads and dumped the regency and other romances.

by Nina Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:38 am

I understand guilty reads - JR Ward's BDB and Sand's Argeneau Vampires are mine. Though I'm probably going to drop the Sands series - it is so poorly written and formulaic now that I couldn't finish the most recent release. *sigh*

I'm just one of those people that have a hard time immersing themselves in a world if the author overlooks things. It doesn't help that I was a history major: I open a historical and (usually) instantly see something out of place - a character's attitude, political views, something they're wearing didn't exist yet, etc. You'd think most authors would do their homework...

Witty dialogue is something I enjoy in books as well, that and a well illustrated growing relationship and a nicely executed plot. I don't go to romance for the sex scenes either. I think this is why I like Georgette Heyer. Her books are always filled with witty banter and I don't have to worry about gratuitous amounts of pointless sex because... well... there isn't any, lol.

by **Patricia** Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:36 am

I finished the first 12 Argeneau novels and kind of.. idk, I got them for free, so I'm reading them, but they really aren't very good. I always give them 2.5 stars, because they aren't utter bullshit either, but seriously, I don't like most of the things. I don't understand why the h/h like eachother (and the Nano-reasoning stinks), I don't like the no-fanger-nano-thing (It doesn't make sense to me. If she said that no fangers were other Immortals with a gene mutation that made them go crazy, because while their brain screamed at them to grow fangs they had some kind of freak DNA-accident that made it impossible blahblah, but not that it was a complete different 'cure' and they still have all the nano-side-effects except the fangs, Plus, Nanos are so Lamark.. >_< Kay, darwinism and lamarkism were my fav parts in school.. so I'm kinda.. um.. anyway). Plus, is their any characterdevelopment at all? I seldomly see it. And why do they all have to be soo damn alike? Mhe. Sad

Haha, I'm always complaining about people who take historicals too serious, but if you say it like that, i can see why it'd give someone a hard time reading the book.

by **Patricia** Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:37 am

And okay.. Sarah, are YOU going to marry me? We'll have our little harem! *screams around and hopes that Sarah's gonna read it*

by Nina Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:52 pm

Sheesh, Patricia, you recovered from my rejection quickly! You player!

Yeah, the Argeneau books are pretty bad. It's just that the first one was funny (to me at least) so I kept on reading them. Well, not any longer...

Haha, I'm always complaining about people who take historicals too serious, but if you say it like that, i can see why it'd give someone a hard time reading the book.

I don't really take them seriously. I mean, I'm reading them for entertainment, not to support a thesis or something. However, even if I start a book knowing it will probably not be completely accurate, if the book gets too unrealistic I have a hard time reading it. Since I spent four years learning to spot inaccuracies and implausibilities in historical texts I tend to automatically find flaws in historicals. I can't turn it off... noooooooooo!!!!! *tears out hair*

It's less melodramatic than that, though.

So, I basically ruin my own reading experience. Rolling Eyes

by kitarad Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:22 pm

Lynsay Sands is funny ,she has her moments the whole baby doll and spiderman pyjama scene in the first Argeneau series was hilarious. She however has an annoying habit of over description of the mundane. She spells out every thought and movement and choice instead of just saying she got into the car she will describe how the door is opened and how the person gets into the car and at times I want to scream but then her books have very little plot .I stopped at Accidental Vampire.

by Sarah18 Wed Jul 13, 2011 2:48 pm

Patricia wrote:And okay.. Sarah, are YOU going to marry me? We'll have our little harem! *screams around and hopes that Sarah's gonna read it*

Of course, sweetheart Wink

by Nina Wed Jul 13, 2011 7:02 pm

Lol, poor Thomas.

I loved the first book. I liked that Kate always thought Lucern was bleeding from some fatal wound when it was really a blood bag. I read Bastien's and Vincent's but after that I would just skim to see if I would like it. All of the books got too similar after a while.

I liked Marguerite's book, though. It had some interesting backstory that I wish Lynsay Sands had gone into more. Unfortunately, the next book was simply the usual: Marguerite plays omniscient match-maker, vamp sex O_o, misunderstanding and/or h/h over-thinking their emotions, more vamp sex, blah, blah, blah.

by **Patricia** Thu Jul 14, 2011 4:24 am

Sheesh, Patricia, you recovered from my rejection quickly! You player!

Well... *wince*

Oh, okay figures you can't not notice things like that, then.

Sarah18 wrote:
Patricia wrote:And okay.. Sarah, are YOU going to marry me? We'll have our little harem! *screams around and hopes that Sarah's gonna read it*

Of course, sweetheart

Aw, love. Okay, we need those weird people who throw flowers at other people.. Um and the other ones.. aah, yes, bridesmaids! xD And well, yes, we also need our harem. (Or was it a commune now? xD)

Lynsay Sands is funny ,she has her moments the whole baby doll and spiderman pyjama scene in the first Argeneau series was hilarious.

I loved the spiderman pyjama. I couldn't stop seeing a grown man in this thing. And then his YO DUDE! Aww. Very Happy

by Sarah18 Thu Jul 14, 2011 12:49 pm

Patricia wrote:
Sarah18 wrote:
Patricia wrote:And okay.. Sarah, are YOU going to marry me? We'll have our little harem! *screams around and hopes that Sarah's gonna read it*

Of course, sweetheart

Aw, love. Okay, we need those weird people who throw flowers at other people.. Um and the other ones.. aah, yes, bridesmaids! xD And well, yes, we also need our harem. (Or was it a commune now? xD)

Hmm, harem sounds like enslaving to me... I think a commune would be more peaceful Wink

Mail me a date - oh and we have to plan our honeymoon. I love you

by Rageane Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:01 pm

Sarah18 wrote:
Patricia wrote:
Sarah18 wrote:
Patricia wrote:And okay.. Sarah, are YOU going to marry me? We'll have our little harem! *screams around and hopes that Sarah's gonna read it*

Of course, sweetheart

Aw, love. Okay, we need those weird people who throw flowers at other people.. Um and the other ones.. aah, yes, bridesmaids! xD And well, yes, we also need our harem. (Or was it a commune now? xD)

Hmm, harem sounds like enslaving to me... I think a commune would be more peaceful
Mail me a date - oh and we have to plan our honeymoon.

I only have one question about this commune...Do I have to drink the Cool-Aid? jocolor

by Sponsored content