Yes, this book is as good as everyone says it is, I loved it! Historical romance set in Paris and England in the 1820's, great chemistry between hero and heroine, lively action between the two, compelling plotline, a real winner!

http://ktleyed.blogspot.com/2009/09/l... ( )

I got this book as the result of seeing it mentioned several times on LT as being one of the best-ever romance novels. Of course, now I can't find the posts that led me to that conclusion. And I don't think it is. One of the best-ever romance novels.

Dain was a troubled boy - physically and emotionally abandoned by his parents - who grew into a troubled man. Jessica was a fiercely independent woman who didn't put up with nonsense from anyone - especially boys, no matter their age, after having raised several brothers and boy cousins. So, while I understand that these two experienced an immediate animal attraction (which was well-written), I didn't buy off on the premise that each so trusted the other that they were willing to forgo their essential natures. Not immediately - I'd have thrown the book at the wall if she'd tried to pull that off - but within mere weeks.

The end of the book was better than the beginning. I got a bad taste in my mouth right up front when Dain so blatantly misbehaves every chance he has, from the time he was about 8 years old. He has his first woman on his 13th birthday, and seemingly another one every night since. He matter-of-factly deals with the babies that result, although they are very few since he mostly seeks "professional" women who know how to avoid such complications. His sense of honor was outraged when he discovered a friend spying on him through a peep hole in a brothel. The feeling is that insulting ladies or cheating at cards, though, would not bother him a bit. Only after slogging through all this do we finally get to the part where he's met his match in Jessica.

Not a horrible romance - more dated, maybe, than bad - but definitely not the best ever. ( )

The Marquess of Dain is a rake if ever there was one, but when he meets Jessica Trent he soon becomes obsessed with her. Jessica herself is a sensible, yet awesome woman who realises that all Dain needs is someone to love him.

The whole premise is somewhat cheesy but it works - this is really good.

Lady Wombat says:

In the course of doing some research on romance for a talk I gave at the Children's Literature Association (ChLA) on Twilight, I came across an interesting article by Dawn Heinecken on how popular romance novel conventions have shifted since the 1990s. Heinecken argues that romance fiction in the 1990s has incorporated earlier feminist discourses. “Novels since the late eighties have moved away from evidencing moments of ‘subversiveness’—i.e., implicit or hidden critiques of patriarchy—to revealing more overtly feminist positions which are ‘feminist’ in that they preset ways of thinking that run counter to the traditionally ‘masculine’ ideology of competition, hierarchy, and autonomy. Thus, the incorporation of feminist values means that not only is the presence of working women widespread and validated, and female characters have both greater social and personal power, but that romance novels embrace a sense of social justice and the necessity for a cooperative relationship that is in direct opposition to masculine modes of thought. At the same time that women’s power is on the rise, descriptions of acceptable male behavior and proper uses of masculine power have been radically altered. No longer content to imply gentleness on the part of the male, romance novelists have launched a penetrating investigation into the male psyche and have constructed a new breed of non-violent hero. Furthermore, sex itself has been problematized and consequentially policitized” (150-51).

Some specific arguments:
Women as competitors in earlier novels; women as friends in later novels
Focus on women as physically attractive vs. focus on personality in later novels
"Alpha male" hero, who keeps emotions hidden except in moments of violence or lust vs. emotionally scarred hero
Less violence against women in later novels
Less assumption that women do not own their own bodies in later novels
Male form more available to the female gaze in later novels
POV both male and female in later novels
Shift toward mutuality between male and female
SEX Older novels: sex is something done to the woman; sex is separate from time, a liminal state in which women can’t control themselves; sex is goal-oriented, ending in climax; sex is the cure to a troubled relationship
SEX Newer: good sex depends upon “specific sexual actions and situations” (167).
Consensual, non-coersive
Sex as part of a process rather than an end
Sex not just physical, but emotional
“sex as an expression of a utopian, reciprocal relationship” (170)
Acknowledgement of the power dimension of sex, thus problematizing sex

I was an avid Harlequin Romance reader as a pre-teen, but always felt vaguely guilty about it. And after taking some Women's Studies courses in college, I understood why. But Heinecken's article suggested that perhaps romance novels had changed since my pre-teen days, in ways that might make their pleasures less problematic. So, with recommendations from the "Smart Bitches/Trashy Books" girls (see their NPR interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...), I set off on a course of Regency period historical romance reading...

Smart Bitches highly recommended Chase's Lord of Scoundrels. I can see why. The writing is strong, and the sex fits all of the criteria outlined by Heinecker. The book, published in 1995, might be a transitional work of sorts -- the hero is a rake, but he has a psychologically compelling reason for being so, a problem that falling in love with the heroine allows him to overcome. The heroine is funny, if without any problems of her own. A good place to start for those interested in looking into what's going on in the contemporary historical romance.

Enjoyable characters ( )