Appearance
Castles
So I've had this book for over a decade. I carted it around with my other favorite novels through numerous moves, a marriage, some children, etc. I don't read it all the time, as it's just one of the hundred or so books that I've also carted around while additions to the collection were made.So, I read it again this week and had to ask myself: Why did I carry this with me for so long?I know I liked it when I first read it. I liked the whole series, I think. Garwood does fill a book with sufficient plot, characters and action. But now I'm older and have found the one I want to spend my life with and have opinions about the type of men I'd want my daughters to meet. I find now that I hate the hero and heroine of this book.Like some of the other Garwood books I recently re-read, this book has a Lout for a hero and an Air Head for a heroine. Sure the heroine is supposed to be intelligent and organized. But her expressions, her pushover personality, her incredible "innocence" just translates into an Air Head who might as well be a beautiful blow up doll that the hero pulls around on a string like a floating balloon. Her convent background is supposed to also explain some of her character but.. Nevermind, I find her so boring I can't even stand to go on. The Lout comes from the venerable background of glowering super-handsome actions-speak-louder-than-words Heroes who works for the government and is too uber macho to listen to anything a woman has to say or admit he loves her. Every time she starts to say something remotely relevant he decides to have sex with her to stop her talking. Oh, isn't that what happened? Maybe it just seemed that way. Curiously, the hero is described as the charming one in other books of this series and yet there's not a drop of charm in his dealings with the heroine.So, I ended up hoping the serial killer got them both. Just for a change of pace. Then I got to the end. Damn.
Castles
I've read several of Julie Garwood's books and really enjoyed them. Castles had a lot of potential, but it fell short in my estimation. It was almost as if she was writing two books simultaneously, and got mixed up. I felt the dialogue was not period appropriate. Colin used words like: Yeah, Sure, and baby quite a bit during the middle part of the book. This type of dialogue/writing then disappears. In a modern setting, I have no problem with that type of speech. For a story set in the early 1800's it seems quite out of context.Another nitpick I have about the story, is how the plot line changed. At first it was mystery killer's partner and his daughter who were killed. Then at the end, it was a Frenchman and his sister who were killed. Once again it seemed like she had two books going at the same time. I also found the description of the last murder rather disturbing.Seeing the murderer's thoughts was a plot device similar to one used in The Bride. I thought it was used to better advantage in that book.Colin tended to be very overbearing, more than I would have expected, and Alesandra kept flip flopping. She would be intelligent and strong, and then become an airhead.For the most part I really enjoyed the book, but the discrepancies mentioned above cut into my enjoyment. The book just didn't seem to flow as well as most of the others I've read by this author, and it just seemed rather disjointed and somewhat lacking, which is a shame, since I felt the story had a fair amount of potential.
Castles
I purchased Castles a couple years ago and have read it at least 2 more times since. Its a great story, funny, intriguing and romantic, and I like the hero especially. The heroine is a tad too naive for my taste, but still, she is smart and often flippant and clever when dealing with her husband (which is when I liked her best) and I liked their chemistry. While not one of the very best books I've ever read, it certainly is in the very top tier of outstanding historical romances. If Amazon allowed it, I would give this story 4.5 stars . . .What's compelling me to write this review, however, is that finally a few weeks ago I found a copy of the Lyon's Lady at the library, read it and then went on to read the rest of the series in order, including, once again, Castles. Of the four, the Lyon's Lady is tied with Castles as the best of the series -- they each deserve 4.5 stars. The weakest is probably The Gift (3 stars). Guardian Angel (4 stars) was good, but was similar enough to Lyon's Lady in terms of the dynamics between the leads and the temperaments of the hero and heroine, that it got a bit boring. Overall, the series comes in at 4 stars.I somewhat disagree with those who say you need to read the other books first in order to best enjoy Castles. This is my 4th reading but first time with some knowledge of prior characters, and that didn't really change anything for me. Furthermore, the leads of Lyon's Lady are mentioned but once in this book, in a very ancillary and irrelevant way. The leads of the other two stories (Caine & Jade and Nathan & Sara) were mentioned quite a bit, especially Caine & Jade, and I suppose the Castles story was a bit richer reading this time around already knowing something about Caine and Colin's relationship and family. However, don't worry too much if you haven't read the other three when deciding whether to pick this one up or not. Its definitely worth reading all on its own.
Castles
The fourth book in the series tells the wonderfully warm story of Caine's brother Colin and Princess Alesandra. Although not my favorite book in the series (Lion's Lady is my favorite followed by The Gift) I still couldn't put it down.Though this book CAN be read on it's own, I do recommend that you read the other three before you delve into this one as characters mentioned in Castles are revisted from the previous books.
Castles
Julie Garwood is a very popular romance writer. Many reviews I have seen for other books suggest this author, so I decided to give her a try. I guess I am in the minority on this one, because after reading this story and The Prize, I can honestly say that Garwood is not for me.To start out with, I don't find it romantic in the least to have the hero treat the heroine like a child. This is a regency novel and it being such, I know the husband had the right to order the wife around but this was a little extreme. It seems like every page the hero is telling the heroine what to do and what not to do and it seemed to get to the point where the poor couldn't do anything without giving him the ok. Even choose her own clothes.My second problem is that the heroine, Alesandra, behaves like an idiot the whole time. I think Garwood is trying to make her seem innocent, but she gave a different impression entirely. She comes off as dumb and childlike.Garwood just isn't for me. I can't believe she is so popular. Her work pales in comparison to authors like Mary Jo Putney, Lisa Kleypas, or Marsha Canham.
Castles
Yeah, ok, so I expected a romance, but because it's from J.G., I also expected a bit of suspense, mystery. HOWEVER, since I'm such a little fraidy-cat, I am still a little afraid that Morgan's going to come get me. His death was too graphic. And I read it in the dead of night so that I could finish it in one day.But overall though, I thought it was a pretty nice book. I didn't give it 5 stars because the threat of the general could have been explained a bit more, expanded upon. Also, there were a lot of minute details that were never resolved nor was an explanation supplied.The part where Colin finds something wrong in everyone one of the guys on her list and then how he traps her into marriage...MUCHO HILAIROUS! My brother thought I was crazy, I couldn't stop laughing.All in all, a good book to read and I would read it again, but I'd skip over a quite a bit of pages.