This site is currently undergoing maintenance. Rather than shutting the site down completely, we are presenting the site in read-only mode.
You will not be able to login or post, but you can read through the site. We apologize for the inconvenience. Thank you.
I like my westerns "straight up", not the latest trend or some kind of "chic lit" morph. Give me a macho hero who needs a strong western woman, and some good action. If I wanted "chic lit" I'd buy it.
The abundance of cute "quoted phrases" in this passage gagged me -- I know this is all the rage in chic lit, but it doesn't work in a good western:
"true life", "wild west", "eau de manure", "back in the saddle again", "guests", "inmates", "re-enactment", "authentic old west adventures" "a picnic at Mariposa", "life in the old west" . . . there must be 30 of them in this short clip alone.
The writing style just isn't suited to a western type novel, and I'm wondering why the editor didn't catch this problem.
I see where she's going with it, and it could be humorous, but right now it just seems forced. I'll give it another day, but I've read lots of western romances and this one isn't doing it for me.
Well, I guess I was going to be expected to suspend my disbelief for a lot more than simply what's appropriate historical research. Time travel certainly tops that.
I'm with Maria. I usually enjoy Westerns, but time travel I can do without whether it's modern women going back to ancient Scotland or Vikings coming to L.A., I never can overcome my problem with the original premise. I did always enjoy "A CT Yankee in King Arthur's Court," but most of these romance authors aren't quite as talanted as Mark Twain. Perhaps this genre works better as political satire than as romance.
I'll kep reading because I love to read Suzanne's notes, even if I'm not enjoying the week's selection, but I'm looking forward to Monday.