Most Helpful Customer Reviews
80 of 91 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Disappointing, January 20, 2009
This review is from: Chance Encounters (Paperback)
Jane Austen is my favorite author and Pride & Prejudice is my all-time favorite book. I am usually happy to read any fan fiction just so I can live a little longer in the world of Elizabeth and Darcy. This book, however, was anything but a joy to read; it was actually quite painful. There are errors throughout the book. On page 79, for example, Mrs. Collins' family is described as "Sir John Lucas and his daughter Maria." He later returns to being Sir William Lucas.
The reference to the book Kama Sutra was interesting. Pride & Prejudice was published in 1813. According to Wikipedia, the first known English translation of Kama Sutra was privately printed in 1883, 70 years later. So, how did a copy find its way to the library at Pemberley? I know readers have to suspend belief when reading fan fiction, but c'mon. This is a fact that could have easily been researched.
The book, in general, did not seem to fit the Regency period. The author tries to put 21st century attitudes on adoption, for example, into the 19th century and it does not work. Propriety and manners were also quite different. There is a scene where Georgiana meets Alex Carrington in a milliner's shop and he asks to be introduced to her aunt. Georgiana's aunt is the wife of an Earl. No introduction would take place unless it was at the Countess's request. Recall the scene in Pride & Prejudice when Lady Catherine arrives at Longbourn. Elizabeth does not immediately introduce her mother to Lady Catherine. She waits until Lady Catherine shows a willingness to be introduced: "That lady, I suppose, is your mother?" And Lady Catherine is NEVER called Aunt Catherine. Where in canon do you see Darcy or Colonel Fitzwilliam call her Aunt Catherine? The woman had a title and that is what was used. Even an untitled woman was never called "Aunt First Name" - recall Aunt Gardiner and Aunt Phillips.
The sex scenes started out interesting, but after the first 150 scenes, the novelty had quite worn off. Yes, I get it. They are a newlywed couple very much in love, but after reading about them in the woods, in the carriage, in front of an "audience," etc., it got to be a bit redundant. In addition, the language used to describe the events became cruder and cruder. I guess I just expected a variation on a Jane Austen to have a bit more taste and refinement. My imagination is vivid enough; I don't need every minute detail explained to me. Leave the crassness and vulgarity to the trashy drug store romance novels, please.
So much for the small annoyances. The biggest problem with this book is the plot - there isn't much of one. There is plenty of action - stuff happens for over 400 pages. What is lacking is any type of identifiable theme. One of the reasons why Pride & Prejudice has been so endearing for almost 200 years is because of Jane Austen's use of character development. She uses a combination of action, dialog and the third person omniscient narrator to take us into the minds of her characters. Elizabeth prides herself on being an excellent judge of people's characters, yet she totally misreads Darcy. Mr. Darcy has been prejudiced by his upbringing to care for none beyond his own family circle and to think meanly of the rest of the world. Both characters must realize their faults and correct them before they can hook up in the end. The journey of their self-discovery is why we love P&P.
In Chance Encounters, Elizabeth and Darcy lock eyes and are eternally in love. The author then spends 400+ pages droning on and on about how in love they are and how strong their love is. I found myself rolling my eyes thinking, "They've only know each other 4 months. New love is always perfect. Let's check back in a few years and see if they can still stomach the sight of each other." There was no change to either of the main characters. They fell madly in love at first sight and that was that. The author did attempt some character development in Mr. Bennet. First, she turned him into a total psycho. Then he had one of those "Saul on the road to Damascus" moments and turned completely around in one split second. He also was given the power to cure his wife of 20 years of nervousness with a single embrace. (Yeah, like that's believable!) Making Mr. Bennet so controlling and possessive is contrary to his original character and the other changes are too little too late.
So, if you like romance novels with explicit sex and no theme, then buy this book. If you are looking for something in the same vein as Jane Austen, save your money and keep looking because you won't find it here. Yes, I have the contradictory view of this book, "...and now despise me if you dare!"
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
46 of 52 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
I feel something like regret for buying this..., March 15, 2009
This review is from: Chance Encounters (Paperback)
I am a fan of ALL of the re-tellings, sequels, alternate realities, 'what ifs', etc. of Pride & Prejudice. I don't care if there are inaccuracies, or the language is not like Jane Austen's (I mean, really, who's going to write exactly like her, I ask?). Anyone expecting a "second Jane Austen" to emerge out of these types of books will always be disappointed.
I think that the point is that Jane created two amazing literary figures in Elizabeth and Darcy. And it's always interesting seeing these well-developed characters in new situations, with new interpretations by different authors. To me, if the representation of Jane's characters are true to the original spirit - then bring on the new situations to put 'em in! But not in this book...
I'm sorry, but I really regret buying Chance Encounters. I guess I don't understand why there are so many positive reviews about it?! In fact, it's these same positive reviews that prompted me to spend $22 and are now prompting me to write my first ever review. I felt so much regret, that I didn't want someone else making the same mistake.
There were some bright moments and interesting new takes (like drawing the conclusion that Darcy's mother had the same constitution of his cousin Anne, showing a family trait), but those bright moments are few and far between and at times it's just painful to read.
Examples: the reason the book is 400+ pages long is not because you're going to get a lot of story or time in the P&P world -- it's that the same story gets repeated over AND over AND over again. Lord and Lady Matlock recognize Elizabeth in a public setting - and that same story is repeated in no less than 6 different places. In another instance (hope I'm not giving anything away here) Mr. Bennett opposes the attachment - and that fact gets repeated over AND over AND over AND over (and not in the context of dialogue of one character relating it to another) which caused many an eye roll for me. It may be just me, but I could find no reason to spell out the same story constantly, as it didn't help the story. When the exact same scene was written out the seventh time, I actually said, "come on!" out loud...
Also, I do believe that Darcy is extremely passionate under that stolid, reserved mask of his, but I don't believe that he would cry as much as depicted in this story. Elizabeth is ALWAYS wiping the tear streaks from this man's cheeks at the drop of a hat. He's a "weeper" according to Linda Wells. As is Colonel Fitzwilliam and all of the other men in the story. Soooooo not the Darcy that Jane Austen wrote.
Which brings me back to the original point. A good sequel, to me, should continue the "spirit" of characters that you just can't get enough of. Regardless of factual points, or true Regency language, or historical accuracy.
I buy the sequels because I love the characters and am still interested in them. But the bad writing style and repetitive nature of Chance Encounters just kept pulling me out of that fictitious world (even more than all the typing errors, unfinished sentences, lack of plot and grammatical issues).
In fact, the story made me think more about the chunk of money I lost in buying it, than losing myself in the brilliant Jane Austen characters. I feel pretty comfortable in saying that there are MUCH better sequels out there with so much more to feed our obsession with Elizabeth and Darcy than this book. Trust me.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
2.5 stars---Less would have been much better., April 6, 2009
This review is from: Chance Encounters (Paperback)
Can I just say that I loved the cover? Would that be enough? I had taken one of my grandchildren to see a performance of The Lion King in my towns' wonderfully restored, ornate theatre downtown one Saturday afternoon. As we sat there waiting for the curtain to rise I began to wonder about all the personal stories that had played out within the walls of that space, across the expanse of those plush red velvet seats. Soon afterward I chanced to see the cover of this book and then found that it was one of my favorite genres for reading, a Jane Austen variation. How could I resist?
This "Chance Encounter" happens within the first few pages of this book and involves Elizabeth Bennet, attending a theatrical performance with her Uncle and Aunt Gardiner, and William Darcy in attendance with his cousin. Elizabeth notices the attractive, dark haired, brooding, gentleman and endeavors to make him smile by smiling at him first. It works, his attention is caught and nothing will stop Darcy from finding out who the beauty is and force an introduction. The idea was a good one to have Darcy and Elizabeth meet under completely different circumstances and to have them mutually attracted immediately. I don't have any quibbles with Linda Wells about that. But actually I think I would have liked this story much more if she had not used the Pride and Prejudice characters, but had made up characters of her own and had them tell a story of their own. If the deviation from the original becomes too substantial, just give it up and call your people by other names.
I'm not a Jane Austen purist, I can allow authors freedom to guide me and the Austen characters into areas not considered by Austen. But...please don't turn the characters I love into another type person entirely. Invent a new person to be used to add a new element into the story. One of my favorite people is Elizabeth's father, Mr. Bennett. He has always been somewhat of an enigma to me because his character wavers between complete self-absorbtion and complete concern for Elizabeth's welfare. He's rock solid for me because I can't completely pin him down. Ms Wells not only pins him down in her story, she makes me dislike him intensely. The motivations for his actions were so incredibly weak that it was laughable. I don't like being made to laugh at the stupidity of a favorite fictional character. And Darcy....may I just go off on a tangent here....please call him Fitzwilliam Darcy, after all, it was his name, but no, William Darcy is someone I just don't recognize and really don't want to know. Darcy crying? Not just once but many, many times? I'm just fine with a hero who feels emotion, who broods, who is tormented, but Darcy crying???
I felt that the book was too long. How many times can an author write about two people with their fingers "entwined" before you begin to get tired of reading that phrase? How many times can an author have her two lead characters profess their complete, total, undying love for each other before the reader (in this case - ME) gets tired of reading those sentiments. How am I supposed to recognize the Fitzwilliam Darcy of my previous experiences when this one is written as a boorish, immature man who challenges Elizabeth's childhood friend with grave bodily harm just because that man was reliving a childhood memory of playing with Elizabeth? And then Darcy sits pouting in a corner? And when Elizabeth banishes him from their marriage bed because of it he hangs around the door waiting for her to speak to him, to notice him? How can I respect a man who has that level of unjustified jealousy? The book was too long for me. It gave the author too much time to get into trouble with her characterizations of beloved, recognized fictional people. I'm sure that Ms Wells poured her heart and soul into this book. I'm sorry. For me less would have been much better and have made for a better book. Actually, at 455 pages this might have done better as a two book series. Just not for me.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
