A Rogue to Remember
This historical romance début from Emily Sullivan shows promise, but despite its good points (likeable characters with great chemistry and well-written love scenes) the book is ultimately derailed by a lack of focus and clear direction, uneven pacing, nonsensical plot points and some poor editing. That the author’s ability to actually write shines through is what earns A Rogue to Remember book a (very) cautious recommendation – she’s worth checking out, because if those problems can be eliminated, then she could very well become an author to watch.
At twenty-four, Lottie Carlisle has had enough of London Seasons and the marriage mart. After causing a scandal when she publicly rejected the suitor her uncle favoured (the heir to an almost bankrupt earldom who wanted her fortune), she decided enough was enough and set out to ruin her reputation so as to put herself beyond the pale. Sent out of the country on a trip to Italy with a battleaxe of a chaperone – and also with a warning from her uncle that she’ll be married to a man of his choosing before the year is out – she gives the chaperone the slip and leaves behind a note saying (or strongly implying) that she’s run off with her Italian lover. She hasn’t, of course; instead, she poses as a widow and heads for the cottage in the small Tuscan village where her late parents had spent their honeymoon. She’s leased it for a year and intends to live a quiet but independent life there. (The fact she’s planned to live in Italy without being able to speak more than a few words of Italian bugged me right off the bat.)
Lottie has managed this quiet independent existence for a few months when, out of the blue, she receives a visit from someone she hasn’t seen in years – Alec Gresham, the boy she’d grown up with, and the young man who’d broken her heart when he left England without a word five years earlier. Alec was her uncle’s ward, and was groomed by him for a career as a spy (Lottie’s uncle Sir Alfred appears to be a mild-mannered eccentric, but is actually a ruthless government spymaster) – even though Alec’s real interest was ancient history and he wanted to pursue an academic life. Alec and Lottie were both orphans and they had something of an idyllic childhood, growing together as they grew up, and slowly falling in love. But when Alec asked for permission to marry Lottie, Sir Alfred refused, telling Alec he’d ruin his life if he didn’t leave the country immediately and start working as one of his agents. Between the scandal of his birth and his complete lack of funds, Alec was convinced he could never give Lottie the life she deserved and scurried off with his tail between his legs.
Now, five years later, Alec has been sent to bring Lottie back to England because her uncle is seriously ill and probably dying. Lottie isn’t happy to see him (even as she can’t deny that even after five years and serious heartbreak she’s still attracted to him) and is even less so to hear that the news of her flight with her imaginary lover has been hushed up and her reputation is still more or less intact. After many argumentative exchanges (all dripping with lust and longing), Lottie agrees to return on condition they stop off in Venice.
The next part of the story is the road-trip (and yes, there’s Only One Bed, accidental (post-bathing) ogling and lots of lusty imaginings – oh, and that one time Lottie can see “the sizeable bulge at the front of his trousers” even though Alec has his back to her. #editingfail.) But in general, it’s nicely done with some good descriptive prose, and I appreciated the non-English setting. When Lottie and Alec get to Venice, the author introduces one of Alec’s colleagues for no good reason (other than to signal ‘next hero’, I presume) together with a spy-plot in which Alec is ordered to cozy up to a French widow with connections to a German arms dealer. There’s a fight to the death (well, almost) and a daring escape, but this subplot doesn’t really go anywhere, and while I suppose it’s intended to show us exactly why Alec is The Best Spy Evah (according to Sir Alfred, he has “the best instincts I’ve ever seen”) – it actually makes him seem rather inept. And the final chapters, after Lottie returns to England, veer off into melodrama territory, with a dastardly plot to force Lottie into marriage and the introduction of a traitor who has been selling information to the enemy, a last-minute plotline that comes and goes so quickly it might as well have not been there at all.
Lottie and Alec are likeable individually and make a good couple, and the author writes their yearning for each other extremely well. The sexual tension between them is palpable, and the childhood friendship, while only glimpsed a handful of times comes across strongly. I liked Lottie’s spirit and the way she challenges Alec without being one of those ‘look at how unconventional I am!’ heroines, and while Alec frustrated me at times, he’s a sexy, brooding hero (hello, hot history professor!), a decent man trying to do the right thing by the woman he loves.
I realise I’ve said quite a few negative things here, so you’re probably wondering why I’m giving this book a low-level recommendation. Well… if you strip away the extraneous spy plot, there’s a decent romance here. The pacing is uneven – the first half of the book is set-up and there’s too much introspection and not enough interaction – and the aforementioned nonsensical plot points and inconsistencies were annoying. But it’s clear that Emily Sullivan can write and knows how to tell a story; what she needs to do now is work on honing that skill to sharpen her focus on the romance, incorporate fewer plotlines and weed out those inconsistencies I’ve mentioned. A Rogue to Remember is a promising début despite its flaws, and I hope Ms. Sullivan is given the time and space to further develop her talent as a writer.
Buy it at: Amazon, Audible, or your local independent retailer
Visit our Amazon Storefront
Book Details
Reviewer: | Caz Owens |
---|---|
Review Date: | March 11, 2021 |
Publication Date: | 03/2021 |
Grade: | B- |
Sensuality | Warm |
Book Type: | Historical Romance |
Review Tags: | League of Scoundrels series |
Huh. I just finished this and while I generally agree with the broader criticisms (the unevenness, the messy weakness of the spy subplots), I really enjoyed it. For me, it was far, far stronger than Bethany Bennett’s 2020 debut, Any Rogue Will Do, or Harper St. George’s first single title, The Heiress Gets a Duke, both of received A grades from AAR.
This isn’t a new all-time favorite and I’m not sure I’d encourage everyone to read it, but I was impressed with the mutual pining/second chance angst, the two-dimensional villain, and the vividly invoked, unusual setting of late Victorian Italy. The sex scenes were well done, even if the spy-heavy latter half was noticeably more rickety than the road trip former.
I don’t know, maybe my expectations were pitched low?? I’ll definitely be picking up the author’s next book.
The fact I (mostly) enjoyed it despite the obvious flaws is why I gave it a low-level recommendation. I really hope the author is able to learn from her mistakes here and use that knowledge to become a better storyteller, because she really does have talent.
Yes, I agree that she has talent. I’m not sure if I know what authors have debuted strongly or with promise, only to later stay in middling territory with their subsequent books, but I can see that being a struggle if you’re a reviewer who reads many debuts a year…for me, it’s a little simpler I suppose — the question is, do I want to read the sequel? And, in this case, that’s a yes.
In the past, I’ve paid a lot of attention to which reviewer at AAR was reviewing which book, but lately, I’ve just looked at the grade more than anything else because I’ve been more interested in reading new releases and want to return to reviews once I’ve read the book. It was a bit of a surprise that this one got a B- whereas others I haven’t found nearly as solid got As, however it’s not a big deal. It helps me clarify which reviewer has taste that mirrors my own.
I haven’t read the two books you mention, so can’t make a comparison. I will say that I am probably tougher than most on HR and find it hard to work up any enthusiasm for 90% of what is currently being published in the genre. But when set against books such as Sally Malcolm’s King’s Man or KJ Charles’ The Gentle Art of Fortune Hunting, books like this one (which comprise that 90%) are merely average.
Intrigued enough to put this on my hunt-when-on-sale-list!
Thanks for the review, Caz. I don’t think I’ll be reading this one because of a lot of the problems you mentioned. Just based on the audio sample on Amazon (there is no “Look Inside” feature yet), I agree that Emily Sullivan has a strong, compelling writing style/narrative voice. Unfortunately, I have a feeling her plotting and pacing skills will stagnate. Gushing 4 and 5 star reviews on Amazon and Goodreads don’t exactly encourage an author to change a working formula…
As for that editing fail, LOL! I can’t blame the author for this though because she is traditionally published. If she didn’t catch that gaffe, someone else in the editorial department should have. Anyway, this goof reminds me of the comedian Doug Stanhope complaining that during an interview, nobody stopped the camera to tell him he had a bulge in the back of his pants from the awkward way he was sitting.
This is a problem with HR across the board I think, and has been for some time. I don’t think many of the big publishers actually have many editors who really understand the genre and who have the faintest idea about titles, transatlantic vocabulary differences etc.
Agreed.
In regard to transatlantic vocabulary differences, I wonder if this has to do with marketing as well. I read a similar criticism lately on an erotica forum. A UK writer decided to use Americanisms and American spelling- even for stories that took place in the UK- because 90% of their customers were American. And a big chunk of that American fanbase complained of misspellings and misused words, when in fact, they were accurate reflections of British English. So maybe there’s a similar problem going on with HR set in the UK/Europe but with a large American readership who would mistake UK English as being littered with mistakes.
On that note, I don’t think an editor has to understand the genre to catch which way the hero is facing and where his bulge is located…
Americanisms in UK set Historicals has been an issue forever; it’s got a bit better recently as some authors actually care about getting it right. But most of the time, those of us outside the US get the impression that we don’t matter. And okay, yes we’re a smaller market, but I get annoyed when authors are happy to use my country as the setting for stories but don’t respect it enough to find out how to correctly address a marchioness or that we never walk on a sidewalk or down the road “a ways”.
Oh, I totally get what you’re saying. Like you, I think UK-based HR in particular should pay attention to historically accurate language, forms of address, and so forth. Naturally, there are times when authors are better advised to employ some modern conventions for readability. For example, I doubt many readers would derive enjoyment from reading a medieval HR written entirely in Shakespearean/Elizabethan English. Although kudos to the writer who pulls it off and keeps it interesting!
But how hard would it be for traditional publishers to keep a cheat sheet of aristocratic titles/forms of address, common Britishisms, and other frequent transatlantic language blunders? Editors could keep a laminated printout on the walls of their cubicle to refer to, and hopefully, memorize it. They could also include a downloadable list on their Submittable page and urge potential authors to refer to it before starting a submission. Just a thought.
And honestly, how are potential Regency writers who hail from America going to know the correct way to address their titled characters if a great deal of their reading inspiration is woefully incorrect? Well, you know, besides doing research. Frankly, whether a reader intends to write her own HR or not, doesn’t she deserve some semblance of accuracy?
Also on the subject of transatlantic language blunders, Fifty Shades of Grey got some flack in Amazon reviews for its British expressions when the story takes place in Seattle, Washington with an American heroine who has never left the states. Some of the examples cited are “match” for “game,” “lift” for “elevator,” and “arse” for “ass.” But I have a feeling there are more examples of American misuse of British English in romance novels than the other way around.
Finally, I remember a friend from Australia came to visit years ago and said, “Do you have loos in America?” Smart aleck that I am, I replied, “Yes, but we don’t call them that.” ;-)
Ditto everything you say. I was less forgiving in my grade – this is firmly in the mid to lower C’ville for me, but I agree that the central romance is quite good and so are the principal characters. I also noted the misplaced bulge in my review, but Caz, what about THE TRAIL OF CLUES that even a moron could follow and find Lottie? Her uncle is a SPYMASTER!!!!! (And she knows it). I mean, come on! If Alex didn’t find her I would have been seriously worried about his skills. For real.
I think I probably will read book 2, but if it isn’t better…well, I’ll be done!
Yes, it wasn’t as though she “hid” very well – that was one of the inconsistencies I mentioned but I didn’t have time or space to expound upon. Like you, I’ll probably read the next book, but as you say, if there’s no improvement, then I probably won’t read any more. As we know, there are a number of newer authors out there – well, newish now, I suppose – who débuted a few years back and showed great promise, but have never managed to write their way out of middling/C-low-B grade territory. Maybe they’re happy with their contracts and have no incentive to improve (we know that some people will by any old tat provided it’s got a duke in it) but it will be a real shame if this author ends up hovering in the middling range because I think she could be a LOT better than that.