crispycritter's Reviews (516)

In my monster smut era and this book delivered. Two cinnamon rolls fall in love and one is a big green dude. 

Back in the day, aspiring authors were advised not to 'write to the market,' because the pipeline from submitting a manuscript --> release day could take years. 

This is the complete opposite: an indie book that was written entirely for booktok and what's popular now. If you've ever read a book that seemed like it was trying too hard to drop a 'good 'girl' or 'who did this to you,' it's kinda like that. Not really a complaint - I read primarily for enjoyment and vibes and this was pretty fun and I knew what I was getting into.

Bonus points for making Joshey a cute himbo instead of one of those insufferable alphaholes. Minus points for the bizzare & extended

mafia storyline, where?? and why???

The Yellowstone - 50 Shades of Grey mashup no one asked for.

DNFing at page 20 because I learned from a spoiler

that the white male love interest intentionally undermined the Latina heroine's career and professional reputation and his excuse was his mom had cancer so he needed the money? Like he ripped off her dissertation and stole a fellowship from her and we are supposed to root for him?!?! And she forgives him cause they’re boning?

The writing itself was not it. Very juvenile, conclusory sentences rather than honest attempts to create and build tension. An example of what this read like to me: Corrie stared at Ethan in the rearview mirror. Ethan imagined what her stare would look like . . . In bed. Another example: Corrie hated Ethan. He had [literally] ruined her career. But she couldn't pretend that she also didn't want to rip his clothes off. He was so handsome. She hated his stupid, handsome face. Is contemporary romance ok?

What's most upsetting about this book is the marketing. This book is being marketed HARD and you can tell the publisher is putting a lot of money into this. The cover is beautiful. Fairyloot is even doing a special edition. It has a great set-up in theory. Is this what publishing is now? Smoke and mirrors and sprayed edges? Seriously, y'all. Why can't we spend as much time working on what goes on INSIDE the cover of a book.

At no point did Macy ask Jax to “release his little Kraken” and that was a missed opportunity. 

I bought this edition for the Edward Gorey illustrations + red velvet cover and I'm ok with it being a book trophy. I might try to pick it up again in the fall but Johnathan, sir, maybe you should listen to the nice German carriage driver telling you to keep your hands and feet inside the carriage as scary night falls. No, being English doesn't make you quirky and give you a pass to flit off at dusk, in vampire country, all alone. I can appreciate that Bram Stoker created one of the most memorable monsters of all time but did he also unintentionally create the original manic pixie dream girl? Yes, Johnny, I mean you.

 

Chloe Liese positions her book as a feminist retelling of The Taming of the Shrew and hooboy do I have some things to say about that, so here we go, little keyboard, let’s tell the anger of my heart to the good people of the internet.

 

The reason I loathed this book so much has to do with Liese’s handling of the sexually experienced hero/virgin heroine trope. This trope can work in certain contexts, particularly historical romance – where society at the time dictated that women had to remain “pure” for marriage. I’ve also seen it work well in contemporary romance, where we don’t shy away from acknowledging that the hero had prior sexual relationships that were meaningful at the time but are now in the past, or, alternatively, where the hero is regretful of having treated women callously in the past.

 

I’m going to give Liese the benefit of the doubt and assume she had good intentions.  Good intentions aside, I think she failed forking spectacularly. If I could I would hurtle my copy of this book into the sun. But alas, this is the library’s copy. And if I destroy it I’ll just have to spend money on a replacement.

 

Here’s the TL;DR: Christopher was so in love with Kate he fucked everyone but her and didn't apologize for it. Feminism?!?

 

First: Liese sets up Christopher as an “honest” and “generous” lover. Christopher is up front with women that he only wants a one-night stand and “focuses on their pleasure” so it’s worth their while. It’s not the flex Liese thinks it is for Christopher to throw these ladies a bone when he is the one asking to go home with them. In fact, it’s the bare minimum. And listen – being really into casual sex is fine in theory! But the reason Christopher only wants one-night stands is that the object of his true affection (Kate) is unattainable. See, Christopher isn’t really into casual sex, he’s just using it as a coping mechanism to keep Kate at arm’s length and because he's never heard of therapy. Because, for romance novel reasons, he’s been madly in love with her forever. He’s also not taking his conquests to his house, which is his slowly dilapidating childhood home he hasn’t upkept or altered since his parent’s death. Which is also . . . troubling. 

 

So no, Christopher doesn’t lead these women on. He throws them a couple orgasms and writes them a ‘thanks and goodbye’ note (literally you guys). But the real takeaway is that these women are disposable bodies for his sexual gratification. They don’t have names. They don’t have faces. They don’t have personalities. From Christopher’s own words, it doesn’t seem like he’s even particularly discerning – basically, any hetero and willing lady will do. Christopher notes he never leaves his contact info for women in these notes, maybe acknowledging on some level that some of these women might have sought out a relationship after the fact if they’d known how to find him. 

 

Second: Christopher puts Kate in an ivory tower. Ever heard of the Madonna Whore complex? That’s the patriarchal notion that women are either good and chaste (27-year-old virgin Kate) or bad and promiscuous (nameless, faceless, countless women Christopher has slept with). Once Christopher finally tames Kate (in bed! lulz!), all is well. Christopher looks up therapists the morning after as he makes her pancakes. He can finally acknowledge his character flaws and work to right them now that he has the love of a “good” woman. Sorry whoooores. Christopher doesn’t have to say mean things or think mean thoughts about these women for them to fit into this Whore dynamic – it’s enough that they don’t matter beyond their parts.

 

Third: Liese seems to think sexual prowess makes a man a feminist king? Girl, a man can give you 10 orgasms and still be an asshole. It’s cool Christopher is, like, freakishly into pleasuring Kate. It’s always a good sign when a romantic partner is about orgasm equity. But Christopher in some sense still views Kate as the weaker sex outside the bedroom, needing his protection. This is most apparent in how overbearing he is about walking her places. And look, I get it, cities can be dangerous. For me it was done throughout the book in a very heavy-handed “you can’t take care of yourself so I have to” way. It felt dismissive. It felt possessive. And last I checked, we are not in a dark romance nor was Liese trying to position Christopher as an alphahole. 

 

Fourth: Kate’s reluctance to sleep with Christopher unless he can commit to her and assure her it will be something meaningful. See, if this were a historical romance the heroine would be insisting on marriage. But because this is the wrong motherfucking subgenre for this shit, we have to have some handwringing here so readers know to set Kate apart from the faceless women Christopher has slept with. Yes honey, he assures her, you’re special. Why in the internalized misogyny do we need these formal assurances if we’re trying not to make a big friggen deal that Christopher is taking Kate’s virginity? Oh right, because we want readers to know Kate is not going to be another “fallen maiden.” She’s different. She’s special. She gets to stay on her Christopher pedestal. She’s still a good woman.

 

Finally, the window dressing. Christopher runs an ethical hedge fund (HAHAHAHAHAHA) and offers his employees kickass benefits. Kate uses her photography to capture the world’s injustices. Christopher suffers from a chronic illness. Kate is neurodivergent. That’s all great. But this book perpetuates antiquated and harmful gender norms while being billed as something else. It doesn't matter how swoon the hero's job is, because it's just extraneous fluff without the characterization to back it up.

 

 

I’ll just end this review by reminding you that at one point Kate says “you gave me eight orgasms last night” and Christopher corrects her and says ~aCtUaLLy~ it was ten. OK Ted Mosby. Barf. Goodnight.

Fairly low conflict rom com. 

Minus points for so so so many punctuation errors and a few spelling errors. I’m going to be generous and assume the end quotations being flipped after dialogue that ended on a dash was an autocorrect error. It still should have been caught and fixed during editing. 

Minus points for the FMC making a joke about another character “having more boyfriends than Taylor Swift” and also saying wanting to cook and take care of people “made her a bad feminist.” It’s 2024, y’all. Do we not understand that Feminism isn’t out to demonize trad wives and “traditional” values? Do we not understand that humans need food to live and that cooking is not a gendered activity? *sigh* Do better. 

This book is so incredibly mid - it’s like Poston rewrote The Dead Romantics mo betta in The Seven Year Slip. Seriously, there were way too many similarities between both her books. How was this a Good Morning America pick?? How was the romance the weakest part?

I may just be a little salty that this is yet ANOTHER Reylo fanfic I was bamboozled into reading. 

Anyways, The Seven Year Slip was amazing. Go read that instead.