Heartbreaker

"It’s a historical romance unlike a lot of others. It’s action packed and thrilling yet romantic and comedic. It’s a nice blend with interesting characters who come to life through the pages. I unexpectedly enjoyed it. There was never a dull moment in this book. Plus it’s got great female characters that are unapologetically tough, criminal, and just downright hilarious. "

"Enjoyed other Sarah MacLean books, but found this one to be quite boring. "

"Spicy, exciting, difficult to put down! Twists and turns unseen along the way. Loved the story of the Duke and the Nipper. "

"I have read all of her books, and I have noticed a trend in the last few years (starting with the Bare Knuckle Bastards series) in which her heroes become unrealistic vehicles for her feminist protagonists. I am a feminist, and I absolutely love reading about strong, female characters, but not at the expense of good writing, realistic settings, and other characters. If the entire point of your historical romance is to portray a heroine and her crew whose views and actions do not fit in the historical setting, then you’re not staying true to your genre. <br/><br/>I feel that this series is focused too much on creating an unrealistic anti-male world within the existing world that is very much entirely patriarchal. Like, the women’s house in Yorkshire that dates back to Ten Ways to Be Adored When Landing a Lord is totally realistic, and I can see it. I love how it continues to be referenced throughout her novels over the years. However, a series of inns with secret passages, safe houses, and highway women in a reverse harem relationship? Unrealistic. <br/><br/>If you’ve ever seen the John Wick movies, you would remember that there’s one scene in one of the sequels in which John realizes every person in the particular public setting is part of the assassin underworld. That was the part for me where I just said, “Okay, no. That’s ridiculous.” And this is exactly how I felt about this book. <br/><br/>I absolutely love the concept of a group of women working within the aristocracy to bring certain people to justice. I love the concept of using the Matchbreaker to ferret out secrets about those in power, because that’s so clever, and could have easily been done. I love the idea of an underground network for women. But it was not executed well, and the women involved acted cocky and over the top, which spoils the entire idea of an underground network not to be discovered. Wouldn’t the entire idea hinge on laying low or being discreet?<br/><br/>Additionally, I don’t like how the characters—instead of being comprised of shades of gray—are becoming much more black-and-white than her earlier writings. We’re losing a lot of the complexity in character development and histories, and it’s becoming very predictable. The men especially are losing all real definition, and are instead just becoming buff cheerleaders for the heroines’ goals and sexual pleasures. Her stories have lost so much personality, and I feel that I don’t know these characters. I feel as if the women are a composition of backstory + feminist goals, and the men are weak backstory + promotion of feminist goals + providers of sexual pleasure. <br/><br/>Additionally, I hate the fact that she has weakened her male characters so much. This guy, who is supposed to have been a boxer for years, can’t handle himself on his own, and has to have this woman protect him? He can’t even drive a carriage without crashing it because of her beauty? I just felt it was way too much. <br/><br/>Her writings show a very strong shift from realistic, bold heroines and complex heroes to over the top feminist females and basic buff tools in a historical setting, so I think I’m done with her novels for a while."