![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
erastesI've just finished these books and am staring at the title of Blade, and really don't get why the book was called this. I vaguely remember a brotherhood being mentioned but it certainly didn't stick in my mind, and I have little clue as to why it's relevant.
All in all, this was definitely the best of the Lord John books, but still I find myself reading them just because they are gay historicals, rather than being over-excited about the arrival of the next volume. They certainly don't blow me away.
I think the blurb to Brotherhood of the Blade sums it up for me, it's such a crap blurb. The enigmatic Lord John Grey, a nobleman and high-ranking officer in His Majesty's Army, pursues a clandestine love affair and a deadly family secret. Grey's father, the Duke of Pardloe, shot himself just days before he was to be accused of being a Jacobite traitor. Now, seventeen years on, the family name has been redeemed; but an impending marriage revives the scandal. Lord John knows that as Whitehall whispers, rumours all too often lead their victims to the wails of Newgate prison - and to the gallows.From barracks and parade-grounds to the bloody battlefields of Prussia, Grey faces danger and forbidden passions in his search for the truth. But it is in the stony fells of the Lake District that he finds the man who may hold the key to his quest: the enigmatic Jacobite prisoner Jamie Fraser.
The blurb is wrong in a couple of points for a start. I wish I could put my finger on why these books just don't do it for me. There's a certain amount of repetition which always annoys me (just like I'd get annoyed with JKR when she felt she had to remind us of stuff that had happened a chapter or so ago) and some of the continuity drives me bonkers. Gabaldon obviously knows her stuff, she's researched this period very thoroughly, but then she throws an entire spanner into the works by having John's mother get married in "Blade" and there is attendance by John, his brother Hal and his new half brother and lover, Percy but then in Haunted there's SUDDENLY two more brothers from his mother's first marriage. And I'm all. BWUH? Why didn't they come to the wedding?
And she doesn't follow through enough, for me. There's this whole "Armory Ghost" thing in Haunted Soldier but this isn't resolved. Why should the Armoury Ghost be Philip's ghost, and if so why was he wearing a uniform of a different age? It's like she starts with an idea but loses her grip of it as she goes through the novel.
And don't get me started on Jamie Fraser. OK. Let's get started. For me, this is another case of Author adores her character no matter what, in a similar vein to JKR being absolutely devoted to Harry and not being AT ALL able to see that she's actually writing him like a complete git. OK, so I haven't read the Outlander series, so my exposure to Fraser is limited to these books, but gah - he's the most unlikeable man in the books. He's revolted by John's attentions, instead of looking past that and treating John like a human being, he recoils with his homophobia. Not unlikely, I suppose, but there's a dichotomy between the fact that he's only staying there for honour's sake. But, as the only reason he's there is for John's "unnatural lusts" (his words) you'd think that he could give his honour a miss. I know love is blind, and all that - but I've loved on a one-sided basis and that was when the other party had no idea I loved him. He treated me no differently to anyone else. Fraser is so revolting to Lord John I can't help but think less of LJ for continuing to love him - and in fact can't understand how his love remains under such revulsion. For me, it's completely unrealistic, but please tell me if you think otherwise.
Also, his behaviour to Percy is pretty appalling. He can't decide if he loves him. Then he realises he DOES love him. Then he tells him that he doesn't. Then he helps him out and doesn't give him any hope. Then in Haunted Soldier... he doesn't bloody think of him at all other than once hidden under an ellipse. Sheesh. He's a cold fish, Lord John and he drives me bonkers.
I like the way that she's addressed the homophobia and the way that a man could have been hanged on word alone - this was nicely done - but even this was almost glossed over, there's really no sense of the impact that Newgate would have had on a gentleman, he hardly seems disturbed by the place. So it's all dissapointing.
It's a shame, because these are mainstream, hardback, accurate gay historicals and I should be shouting to the rooftops about them but every time I read them with hope and anticipation and come away feeling empty. There are other authors doing so much better work in this genre and it's a damned shame they aren't all selling nice thick hardbacks.
All in all, this was definitely the best of the Lord John books, but still I find myself reading them just because they are gay historicals, rather than being over-excited about the arrival of the next volume. They certainly don't blow me away.
I think the blurb to Brotherhood of the Blade sums it up for me, it's such a crap blurb. The enigmatic Lord John Grey, a nobleman and high-ranking officer in His Majesty's Army, pursues a clandestine love affair and a deadly family secret. Grey's father, the Duke of Pardloe, shot himself just days before he was to be accused of being a Jacobite traitor. Now, seventeen years on, the family name has been redeemed; but an impending marriage revives the scandal. Lord John knows that as Whitehall whispers, rumours all too often lead their victims to the wails of Newgate prison - and to the gallows.From barracks and parade-grounds to the bloody battlefields of Prussia, Grey faces danger and forbidden passions in his search for the truth. But it is in the stony fells of the Lake District that he finds the man who may hold the key to his quest: the enigmatic Jacobite prisoner Jamie Fraser.
The blurb is wrong in a couple of points for a start. I wish I could put my finger on why these books just don't do it for me. There's a certain amount of repetition which always annoys me (just like I'd get annoyed with JKR when she felt she had to remind us of stuff that had happened a chapter or so ago) and some of the continuity drives me bonkers. Gabaldon obviously knows her stuff, she's researched this period very thoroughly, but then she throws an entire spanner into the works by having John's mother get married in "Blade" and there is attendance by John, his brother Hal and his new half brother and lover, Percy but then in Haunted there's SUDDENLY two more brothers from his mother's first marriage. And I'm all. BWUH? Why didn't they come to the wedding?
And she doesn't follow through enough, for me. There's this whole "Armory Ghost" thing in Haunted Soldier but this isn't resolved. Why should the Armoury Ghost be Philip's ghost, and if so why was he wearing a uniform of a different age? It's like she starts with an idea but loses her grip of it as she goes through the novel.
And don't get me started on Jamie Fraser. OK. Let's get started. For me, this is another case of Author adores her character no matter what, in a similar vein to JKR being absolutely devoted to Harry and not being AT ALL able to see that she's actually writing him like a complete git. OK, so I haven't read the Outlander series, so my exposure to Fraser is limited to these books, but gah - he's the most unlikeable man in the books. He's revolted by John's attentions, instead of looking past that and treating John like a human being, he recoils with his homophobia. Not unlikely, I suppose, but there's a dichotomy between the fact that he's only staying there for honour's sake. But, as the only reason he's there is for John's "unnatural lusts" (his words) you'd think that he could give his honour a miss. I know love is blind, and all that - but I've loved on a one-sided basis and that was when the other party had no idea I loved him. He treated me no differently to anyone else. Fraser is so revolting to Lord John I can't help but think less of LJ for continuing to love him - and in fact can't understand how his love remains under such revulsion. For me, it's completely unrealistic, but please tell me if you think otherwise.
Also, his behaviour to Percy is pretty appalling. He can't decide if he loves him. Then he realises he DOES love him. Then he tells him that he doesn't. Then he helps him out and doesn't give him any hope. Then in Haunted Soldier... he doesn't bloody think of him at all other than once hidden under an ellipse. Sheesh. He's a cold fish, Lord John and he drives me bonkers.
I like the way that she's addressed the homophobia and the way that a man could have been hanged on word alone - this was nicely done - but even this was almost glossed over, there's really no sense of the impact that Newgate would have had on a gentleman, he hardly seems disturbed by the place. So it's all dissapointing.
It's a shame, because these are mainstream, hardback, accurate gay historicals and I should be shouting to the rooftops about them but every time I read them with hope and anticipation and come away feeling empty. There are other authors doing so much better work in this genre and it's a damned shame they aren't all selling nice thick hardbacks.
