Quote:
Originally Posted by NixLapi
And Blossom - what's that them I've seen you mention for historical romances which are pretty much contemporaries in fancy dress? I need to make a shelf on GR for these! Just DNF'd Season for Temptation because of it - I'm not usually a stickler for historical accuracy, but this one just felt wrong from the get-go.
|
I DNF Season for Surrender by the same author. I can't comment on the historical accuracy since my expertise is the Early Modern period. I can however say that the book failed for me on many levels.
I do think that there are a lot of misconceptions about history in general. I also think there's a lot of "artistic license" among romance authors, even the ones with better researching skills. I mean, really, how often could a lord marry a poor woman without any consequence? How often would he be able to rub shoulders with poorer women who weren't servants? Not to mention, why are all the books about lords? Where are all the merchants and other classes? Plus, the biggie, times were pretty crappy for women.
Do I always mind these things? No. I think they stick out more when the book is badly written or just doesn't click.