In A Flaw in the Blood, Stephanie Barron of Jane-Austen-mystery fame explores the pattern of hemophilia in the royal families of Europe... and how far royalty will go to protect itself. Miss Georgiana Armistead, ward and student of the late celebrated doctor John Snow, finds herself and her guardian Patrick Fitzgerald caught up in an old secret that is so dangerous that it could — as the back of my paperback copy assures me — "topple thrones." Indeed.

From a purely cerebral perspective, I suppose this is a good sample of suspenseful historical fiction. It is told from two different points of view, the third person omniscient focusing on Patrick Fitzgerald, and the first person by Queen Victoria. The historical details are good and it's clear that Barron did her research. I can see how the characters could be compelling to many readers. But I don't read books from a purely cerebral point of view, and something about this one left me wanting to get its taste out of my mouth.

Maybe it was partly the predictability. The big shocker of an ending that all the critics rave about really wasn't surprising to me at all; in fact, I had started expecting it about halfway through the book. It certainly presents a very unflattering portrait of Queen Victoria, to say the least. And I really could have done without all the sex; the rape scene in particular was not something I would have chosen to read. And that's not even taking into the account the utter improbability of the rapist's identity. I won't say more for fear of spoilers, but if you've read the book you probably know what I mean.

The characters left me cold; Georgiana was a little too perfect of a tough-gal feminist doctor struggling for acceptance (though apparently the first female doctor in Britain received the title in 1867, so it isn't too far-fetched). She just didn't strike me as a particularly interesting or likable character for some reason. I did like Patrick Fitzgerald, her Irish guardian, a little better; he is drawn with more complexity. But ultimately I felt a disconnect there too. The whirl of events and places moves too quickly; we get to know Fitzgerald a bit, but Georgiana and the others barely at all.

Perhaps it was the constantly shifting narrative that prevented me from really caring about any of the characters. I didn't care for the every-other-chapter switch. Another reviewer has written that this story is "strangely uninvolving," and I find that the perfect description of how I felt about it. Let me just hurry up and get through it, I thought as I read.

I will say that the writing was above average and I enjoyed Barron's deft phrasing. "He wore his fundamental loneliness like a well-cut coat, and the world mistook it for elegance" (74). I have not yet read any of Barron's Jane Austen mysteries, and Barron's skill is probably the only reason I am still planning to try them. This somewhat banal story would not, in itself, cause me to seek out any more of her work. Meh. ( )

Good read, interesting for its historical description of medical knowledge in England at this time.The question must be asked - Did Queen Victoria sanction murder to protect her privacy that is the question? ( )

Barron's prose gets away from her at times, but all in all this was a very interesting book. Patrick and Georgiana were sympathetic, and the plot was certainly exciting. The chapters alternate from a 3rd-person description of Patrick and Georgie to a 1st-person narration from Queen Victoria. That was jarring at first, but after a while I got used to it. Victoria's character was loathsome in this book, which made it all the more fascinating. If you like books about conspiracies, I'd definitely recommend this!

In A Flaw in the Blood, Stephanie Barron weaves a historical thriller around the December 1861 death of Prince Albert, the Consort of England's Queen Victoria. What do Irish barrister Patrick Fitzgerald and his ward, physician Georgiana Armistead, have to do with the event that plunged all of England into mourning? That's what they're desperate to find out as they are pursued through London and beyond.

This novel is definitely a departure from Barron's Jane Austen mystery series. Although historical figures are featured in both this novel and in the Jane Austen series, the Jane Austen novels are much lighter, more in keeping with the cozy genre. A Flaw in the Blood has a darker tone, with more violence and a little more emphasis on the seamier aspects of mid-19th century Europe. Not all fans of Barron's earlier series will enjoy her latest novel. The book is much more like Anne Perry's William Monk series, and readers who like that series will probably enjoy it. ( )

didn't care for it - but love the Francine mathews books