34 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Hardcover vs. paperback- there is a difference!, May 21, 2000
By A Customer
I read the "Potent Pleasure" and I enjoyed the story very much. After reading it, I came online here to read the reviews of other people. I was amazed to see both wonderful and very terrible reviews. I began reading the 1-2 stars reviews and I discovered that the historical errors the "unhappy" readers talked about were not present it my "Potent Pleasures" book. I was confused and I truly thought that the 1-2 stars reviews must be talking about a different book than I read. I even went back to try to find the numerous historical errors which other people found, but I couldn't find them. Anyway, finally I figured the puzzle out. Apparently, I am the first one to be reviewing the paperback version of this story (which came out in May 2000) and I can tell you that the story errors, that the other readers pointed out, have been cleaned up and/or rewritten before the paperbacks went into print.
This is Eloisa James's first novel and on the whole I found the story to be very interesting and enjoyable. However, I am surprised that an unknown author would have had her first historical romance novel printed in a hardcover book. If I had purchased the $20.00 version of the book and found all the initial errors in the story, I too would have been upset. But for $6.00 the revised softcover version it well worth the money. It's a good story, and I am looking forward to Ms. James next "paperback" book. This new author has alot of potential!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Plenty wrong, but couldn't put it down., March 18, 2006
I felt I had to write a review with the several scathing reviews already written. There are too many characters and the author tends to go off on a tangent with many of them. The first meeting between Alex and Charlotte WAS slutty. How could he have sex with a complete stranger and it supposedly mean a lot to him, yet he never recognizes Charlotte later. I found myself skimming over the too long paragraphs that had little to nothing to do with the plot. HOWEVER, these problems were mostly in the first half. I nearly put the book away to never finish it. I am glad I stuck with it. The second half is what grabbed me and didn't let me put it down till finished. The second half of the book is emotionally wrenching and moves along swiftly. The ending saved the book for me. The birth scene was heartbreaking and the love scene 2 months later was redeeming for Alex.
If you can plod through the first half, you will enjoy the second half enough to make it worthwhile.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Riddled with historical innacuracies!, August 18, 1999
By A Customer
This book was so poorly written I don't quite know where to begin. Since the author is a PHD in English, I suppose I'll begin there. The text is chock full of unnecessary colons, semi-colons, and exclamation points. At one point the heroine sees her mother's (the duchess), carriage arriving to pick her up from finishing school and she notes that the footmen are all 'in livery!'. I would think that it would be more remarkable if they were not in livery. The fact that they are in livery would not be a surprise to Charlotte. Colons and semicolons are even used in the dialogue, where it would have been far more appropriate to use dashes or dots.
There are also a couple of dangling participles with unintentionally humorous results. "Gasping, her eyes stared up into the dark leaves." is one that is particularly bad.
Here is a description of Charlotte (taken from the book).
'Just now the rage was for blondes: blondes with curly locks and blue eyes, but Charlotte had jet-black hair, her mama thought despairingly. She did have green eyes, but her skin was so white -- not a drop of color. True, with some coaxing her hair formed perfect ringlets, and her skin was creamy, but she was no pertly sweet debutante. Her eyebrows arched like question marks over eyes as green as the ocean on a cloudy day. In fact, her whole face was pointed like a question mark: Her chin formed a delicate triangle that simply led back to her eyes and those flying eyebrows.'
Her face was pointed like a question mark? Also, all through the book we hear about her flying eyebrows, and the hero's flying eyebrows (yes, he has them too) and the hero's daughter's flying eyebrows. Their eyebrows fly up in surprise too! A lot!
And then there is the problem of the plot being based on a misunderstanding that could have been cleared up with one sentence. "I was the girl you made love to at the Hooker's ball." Instead, the hero won't let the heroine explain, and he behaves so terribly I was surprised that she didn't shoot him rather than take him back. He called her a whore on more than one occasion.
Regency fans will want to avoid this book at all costs. The year is 1799, yet at the ball they are dancing the waltz, which had not been invented yet, and wouldn't be for at least another 10 years. In another passage, the hero is wearing pajamas. A nightshirt would be the appropriate bed attire for the time, since pajamas would not be worn for at least a hundred years. Also, there is the problem of innapropriate dialogue for the time. At one point the heroine says, 'thanks' and a paragraph later, 'Forget about it'. She sounded vaguely like the Italian mobster Regency Lady.
I could list more problems, but I hope you get the idea.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No