Customer Reviews

Shades of Milk and Honey

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(15)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I would give the book 3.5 stars. But I can see where some would rate it higher.
Premise is excellent.
Easy read - but then as I note below - I found that distracting.
Characters - most needed more development
Plot - pleasant
The premise of the novel is marvelous. Take a regency England family, and make magic (called glamour) an accomplishment pursued by the ton women. I think I may have come to the book with a high expectation. I love Austen and I love Georgette Heyer. I was unconsciously setting the bar pretty high.

From my view point, a book like this should be written with more intricate prose. Kowal wrote her book, the way the vast majority of books are written today - for the 8th grade reading level. (Its not a YA novel, its just short sentences, easy repeatable words) Frankly, she probably couldn't have sold the book if she had written it with complex sentences that go on for a paragraph. But to me that is what the era calls for. That is what evokes that air of sophisticated snobbery, the elitist condescension,and the beautiful culture.

I longed for more detailed history, a more in depth characterization, a reason to like Melody - the beautiful sister, a better and more entertaining character study of the mother.

None of the characters are particularly original, but I don't demand that. I just demand that I get to know them and not end up defining them off characters in other novels to which they are similar.

Kowal's description of glamour is wonderful. Her description of its creation and the finished illusions make you long to see it in person. And she did a nice job of creating & building interest in the mysterious and scowling Mr. Vincent.

As I say, my biggest problem with the novel is one that most would count in its favor. Its easy to read. If Kowal develops this world with more stories, I will undoubtedly test the waters again, because its hard not to love such an idea as magic as an accomplishment for ladies of the ton.

I picked this up on a recommendation from one of my favorite sci-fi/fantasy sites. I have to agree with the reviewer who gave it one star: the characters are bland at best, one dimensional stereotypes at worst. I was hoping for some real character growth, or to show more to the characters personalities as the story went on. There was very little, and what little there was was painfully predictable. That's the problem with this novel: its TOO predictable. You've seen all the characters and plot before, and even the addition of magic adds little to make it much different.

The novel is slowly paced, and I felt like I was waiting for something to happen. Austen could be accused of this, but her writing was witty enough to carry it. There are some interesting ideas, but nothing that really gripped me or made me excited for the climax. I didn't love the novel, but I didn't hate it either. It's a decent read, but easily forgettable. Wait for the paperback edition, or if its on sale to get it.

I agree whole-heartedly with Sherry Livingston's review. I enjoyed the light ease with which "Shades of Milk and Honey" flowed through my mind. I couldn't put it down. I'd hoped to read it before bed, over the course of several nights, but finished it within just 2 days. It's become rare for me to read a modern novel and simply enjoy it -- without feeling confused, bored, manipulated, disappointed, repulsed, or overwhelmed. Not every book has to be chock full of action, suspense, violence, angsty emo self-centered fixation, social commentary, incredible magic/super powers, monsters, and sex. If that's what you want, this isn't it. This is a charming, romantic story which -- like many of my favorite costume dramas -- is all about subtlety. "Shades" of romance, despair, misunderstanding, insult, honor and meaning. The main character is a very selfless, humble, kind person -- another rarity in modern storytelling. And the magic -- called "glamour" within the novel -- was a beautiful, entirely believable element of the story. I eagerly await the sequel, "Glamour in Glass."

I really wanted to like this--the beginning was promising, and I am very forgiving when it comes to non-harlequin regency romances and light fantasy.

But unfortunately the book is dragged down by its own inertia. Characters are underdeveloped, the plot goes nowhere for the first 80% of the book, and in the last 20 pages a number of the characters undergo radical changes in temperament and personality that are never resolved or fully explained.

Unfortunately, I think the author's fame and connections in the entertainment business were what got this book published, and not any merit of the book itself. The main character makes Fanny Price look gutsy by comparison.

If you're looking for good historical "romance" stick with Jane Austen, Joan Aiken, and Georgette Heyer. Not this.

First, a couple of disclaimers might be appropriate: I like Mary Robinette Kowal. She's a nice person, the kind who is easy to converse with and who doesn't take herself too seriously. Vice President of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, she penned one of my favorite short stories of the past few years, "Clockwork Chickadee," a story which delights me each time I read it and is even more delightful hearing her read it out loud. She's very giving of her time to help up and coming writers from teaching them how to do readings to answering basic questions. And she spends a lot of time with puppets. Who can help but like someone who spends her time entertaining and delighting children?

Second disclaimer: other than perhaps a passage or two in English literature classes, I have never read a Jane Austen book, and I think I have only seen one movie based on her work. Despite my weakness for romantic comedies and enjoyment of Nicholas Sparks, I just never felt drawn to Victorian romances. But when Kowal agreed to be with us on Science Fiction and Fantasy Writer's Chat on Twitter, I had to read "Shades of Milk and Honey," out of an obligation to make the discussion as fruitful for everyone as possible.

Am I glad I did.

The prose captures the feel of Victorian writing beautifully, yet remains simple and accessible for readers who might not be familiar with it. Her characters are well drawn and interesting, and although before I read it I'd have thought I wouldn't be drawn in by the personal politics of a female spinster and her family and neighbors, I literally couldn't put this one down.

A delight from start to finish, "Shades of Milk & Honey" has been aptly described as Jane Austen with magic, but the magic, the manipulation of light through a technique called glamouring, fits in naturally with the story. Although it flows through and undergirds much of the narrative, Kowal maintains a sense of mystery about it by not telling us too much about how it works and instead focusing more attention on how it is used and how it affects the characters themselves.

The story of Jane Ellsworth, twenty-eight, a gifted glamourist in her own right, who dreams of love and happiness as she watches her much younger sister, Melody, and neighbors Beth Dunkirk and Livie FitzCameron wooed by men. When a few men take notice of her for various reasons, hope rises in her, but she always finds the possibilities threatened by others. Jane is too kind and mannered to wallop in her own jealousy and disappointment, however, and continues fighting her baser urges by befriending and caring for her sister Melody and neighbor Beth Dunkirk, whose brother Edmund seems Jane's most likely suitor.

Then the mysterious galmourist, Mr. Vincent, hired by Lady FitzCameron, the Viscountess, to create a glamour for her dining hall, becomes an intriguing challenge. Jane compares her own skills at glamour to his, while examining his artistry and striving to improve her own. When his response seems to be resentment at her questions and attention, she begins to feel resentment of her own. Especially after he implies her art shows talent without any heart behind it.

There were times I felt Kowal's foreshadowing made later developments predictable, but in the end, I discovered her plotting to be far more clever than I'd imagined. The ending certainly was different than I had expected in several respects, and the book maintains a sense of suspense and motion which kept me riveted and wanting to know what would happen next. In spite of my lack of commonality with these characters, they captured my heart--I cared about them and what happened to them far more than I'd imagined I would.

For a book which I'd not have chosen on its own based on what I knew of it and my own literary preferences to have so held my interest and charmed me, I feel confident in saying it will likely surprise and charm others as well. Kowal is a smart writer, whose gift for words and understanding of people are readily evident on every page. While one can find small deficiencies with which to quibble in her first novel (as in any other), the book shows great promise and is a great diversion. If anything it's greatest weakness is its lightness. There is no heavy moral here. And the story does not create a great set of questions one is left to ponder for months after. Instead, the questions and story are light yet still manage to rise beyond mere entertainment.

Truly a worthwhile read from a worthwhile talent. I look greatly forward to what the future will bring from her.

Kowal's idea is ingenious: Regency England has a dash of magic mixed in. In Kowal's world, where an accomplished woman might possess everything that Mr. Darcy once listed, she also must learn the use of "glamour", the bending of the ether to create art. Kowal does an excellent job with the use of glamour, making magic artistic and proper and very believable as part of Regency England life. This, however, is the only bright point of the novel. The rest of the story suffered in plot, characters, and feeling.

The story centers around Jane Ellsworth, who is twenty-eight, unmarried, and plain, though talented (especially with regards to glamour). Jane might be a poorly mixed Elizabeth Bennett and Persuasion's Anne Eliot, if they lost their self-worth and inner strength and became sad, simpering, unhappy women. Jane's sister, Melody is ten years younger, beautiful, light-headed, and selfish. The novel begins with their father, whose estate has been entailed away (ring any bells?) worrying over the futures of his two daughters as they both sigh after a handsome young man (Mr. Dunkirk) in a delicate war over the virtues of beauty and virtues of brains. Kowal brings together a handful of unmatched men and women to fall in and out of love: Mr. Dunkirk's beautiful sister with a secret past, a man who practices glamour for a living who is patronized by one of the neighborhood's wealthy families, and a young sailor who has returned from the sea.

While Kowal remains true to Austen's writing, without overly using flowery phrases (no "forsooth!", no overly pedantic run-on sentences), she seriously lacks Austen's depth or sense of humor. Jane is a frustrating character, obsessed with her physical short-comings, showing little strength of character and a petty mind. She is as easily swayed in her affections as her younger sister, as well as self-pitying and thick-headed. The romance, which is easily obvious to the reader, somehow is still handled abruptly in the novel. The whole cast seems to muddle through the story; only Mr. Vincent, the mysterious glamourist, has any distinct character that doesn't seem to be peeled (badly) from an Austen novel.

The story is short and skates quickly towards the ending. There is a ball. A strawberry picking. Picnics. Rakes and secret engagements. But there is nothing deep here, no character that is worth paying attention to, nothing really worthy of admiration here except Kowal's creation of glamour. Shades of Milk and Honey is enjoyable, but it is airy. It might have used an extra hundred pages to really get into the characters, create a proper story, real tension, things worth feeling for. On the front cover it is compared to Jane Eyre, Austen, and Beauty and the Beast, which, I believe, is better company than it deserves. Three stars: the ideas were interesting, the read was not horrible, but serious knocks for shabby characters and poorly done plot.

Until I opened Shades of Milk and Honey, I had no idea I was in the mood for this kind of novel, but evidently I was, because I could hardly put it down, and in fact, read it in an afternoon. I feel like I have to mention that Sense and Sensiblity is one of my favorite movies, and I've seen it, well, let's just say I've seen it multiple times, and I couldn't help but compare Jane and Melody to the two eldest Dashwood sisters. Jane is 28, and therefore, her marriage prospects are pretty much nonexistent. It doesn't help that she's seen as very plain¸whereas her younger sister Melody is everything a suitor looks for in a bride¸beautiful and full of life. However, Jane has a talent that her sister lacks. Jane is a very skilled glamourist, which is seen as a most desirable trait in a wife. In Shades of Milk and Honey, glamour, or magic, is woven into beautiful scenes, or glamurals, for entertainment of guests, but can also be used to disguise more undesirable physical features. It's really up to the talent of the glamourist as to what can be created, and Jane has talent in spades. She also has her eye on a gentlemen that her sister seems to like, but as we get deeper into the story, we find out that Melody's affections are not what they seem, and when the girls meet the mysterious and talented Mr. Vincent, they get more excitement than they bargained for.

Shades of Milk and Honey is a light, effervescent concoction that begs to be read on a gorgeous spring afternoon under the shade of a beautiful tree. Don't worry, it still works if those things aren't available as well. You'll root for Jane and I always have a little fun with books written during this time period because I always just want the characters to say what they feel, but propriety really doesn't allow for it, and it makes for lovely tension. This has gotten a lot of comparison to Jane Austen, of course, but I'll be completely honest and admit that I haven't read any Jane since college (it's been awhile), so it was hard for me to make any direct comparisons (other than Sense and Sensibility), and I think that's a good thing, since even though the girls reminded me of the Dashwoods, I was just able to enjoy a lovely story. And it is lovely. An unusual take on magic, delightful characterizations, and just plain good writing make this Nebula nominee worth a read, and them some. It was the perfect break between darker fantasy books, and made me smile like a goofball at the end. I'd recommend it for anyone that loves gentle fantasy and a happy ending, and I do love a happy ending every now and then.

Basically, if the idea of "Jane Austen with speculative elements" appeals but those silly derivative "and Zombies" style books are not working, this is a godsend. I was thoroughly gripped by the plot, despite the "slow burn" approach, and I loved all the tiny details of the world. The magic system is comprehensible, yet mysterious, and is one of the best thought-out I've ever seen. I've recommended this book to nearly everyone, and my wife bought it as a Christmas present at least twice.

*So* stoked about the sequels...

I was so very tempted to give Shades of Milk and Honey a five-star review, but I'm trying to reserve that rating for titles that live up to all of my expectations, and this book was so close to doing that, but in the end it fell just a bit short.

In short: this book is pretty much Jane Austen, with magic. And when I say 'pretty much' Jane Austen, what I actually mean is, 'if Jane Austen had decided to write a book featuring magic? It would have read exactly like this book.' It has the sensibilities; the oh-so-proper manners; the scoundrel; the aloof stranger who catches our heroine's attention. And threaded throughout the whole story is utterly era-appropriate magic that embodies light and music and delicate folds.

My one qualm -- the reason I would have deducted half a star (if Amazon allowed half-star reviews) -- was that the inevitable character pairing, Jane's storied romance, in the end (to me) felt rushed. So much time and detail had been spent elsewhere, that the ending mostly felt right because it had been expected from the beginning, and not because it was fully developed. I have no doubt that the sequels will further flesh out this relationship, though, and will make me wonder why I'd had any qualms about it at all.

This is a gentle read. The prose flows well. I think Mary Kowal's background in puppetry and voice acting predisposed her to prose that reads aloud. I find that amazing, as so few good books can be read aloud with much success.

The first page very much evokes Pride and Prejudice (P&P). To the point where I was counting up the differences rather than the commonalities. Which prepares you for the much gentler pacing than commonly used. Yet it progresses and quickly becomes distinctly its own story. The divergence from the similar starting points is driven more by a differing cast of characters than from the magic system.

Only a handful of main characters are fleshed out. Back ground walk-ons are rarely even named. It gives a shallower feel for the community, but is less confusing than frequent references to people who I've forgotten already. Overall, I enjoyed the characters, partly due to their contrast with P&P's cast. With the flaws toned down there is less angst to built up but I never could enjoy hating so much of Jane's family in P&P. Mary was also able to play off the built in expectations of the P&P character shadows to hide personalities quirks until they mattered.

Two complaints. First concerns the relationship between Melody and Jane. I understand they have competing types of jealousy. But their arguments and reconciliations didn't seem to make a perceptible dint in their world views. Didn't seem to progress their development as they both fell back into the same behavior. Second concerns Beth. I would have liked more closure with Beth. Yes a conversation with Mr Dunkirk is probably unimaginable. But surely she and Beth were close enough that Jane would have felt compelled to write a note of explanation or apology. I can see the note not being responded too, but I think Jane wouldn't have rested easy till she had made the attempt.

Overall, a very enjoyable read. It will take a couple of months for it to fade enough in my head to see how well it holds up to re-reading.

Written by Hannah - I mention as reader gender may make a difference on enjoyment (we consider this basically a family account as we rarely use this portion of Amazon)