Deadly Kisses

Brenda Joyce

Rich-girl sleuth Francesca Cahill returns for another adventure in early twentieth-century New York, this time attempting to exonerate her fiance of murder. Much to the dismay of her parents and most of polite society, Francesca is engaged to a self-made, wealthy enigma of a man, Calder Hart. She alone can see the goodness and vulnerability in this former rogue, and her faith in him is severely tested when his former mistress is murdered and he becomes the number-one suspect. Francesca dedicates herself to finding the real killer, in spite of much opposition. Calder attempts to distance himself from her until he realizes that no matter what he has or hasn't done, and no matter what is said of him, Francesca will loyally stand by even as things go from bad to worse. 

My Take:

Very rarely do I dislike a book as much as this one.  I couldn't stand the man character AT ALL.  She is in love with an absolute, well, the only way I can think of to describe him is D-bag, to be quite blunt.  She is proclaimed to be super intelligent and have amazing judgement, yet, the reader is forced to swallow this romance.  Francesca spends over half of her dialogue defending her "true love" and at least 3/4 of her inner thoughts defending him to herself and the reader.  Yuck.  I skipped pages and pages and pages (something I oh so rarely do) because it was so repetitive and unenjoyable.  Now, aside from the romance that bugged me, I was completely unimpressed by Francesca's sleuthing skills.  It wouldn't be a big deal, except that her character is famous for her ability to solve crimes, but I saw absolutely no evidence of her crime solving prowess.  In fact, she was so blinded by her personal life that she missed out on a ton of important clues and she was totally off base in a bazillion of her assumptions.  She didn't even have the slightest inkling of who the killer was until said person was waving a gun in her face.  I know it is easier for the reader to figure out whodunnit than it is for the characters, but I had the killer pegged so early it wasn't even interesting.  Also, the final showdown, a scene I always look forward to in mysteries, was a zzzzzzz fest.

Not only did I find the storyline lackluster, but the writing as well.  My apologies to the author, but contraction removal alone does not authentic period dialogue make.  Period dialogue is tough, if the author doesn't know what they are doing, the reader will see right through you and your dialogue.  I, personally, am a super crappy historical dialogue writer, which is why I stay away from it.  All in all the book felt clunky, badly paced, and completely uninteresting.  There was a very distinct feel of been there done that-a total no no for a mystery.  There were a few side story lines that I really enjoyed but since they took up a total of probably 40 pages, they weren't nearly enough to save this book for me.  I absolutely hate assigning this rating, but I have no choice.  5-Don't Even Bother 

Tell me what you think!  Have you read this book, or any of the other Francesca Cahill mysteries?  Have you read anything by Brenda Joyce?  Do you think I am totally off base in my review?  Hit the comments and let me know!

If Deadly Kisses were a movie, it would likely be rated R for some strong language and brief but strong sexual content

***FTC Disclosure:  Deadly Kisses was provided free of charge by the publisher through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.  No other compensation was given, all opinions are my own***

If you are interested in purchasing Deadly Kisses, please consider supporting The Book Buff by purchasing from the following Amazon links, thank you!

Paperback:                          Kindle:

Share the Love!

Save iT Digg this Stumble It Reddit It Twitter More

An Interview with Mina Harker

In Dracula in Love, a new novel by Karen Essex, Mina Harker finally comes clean about what happened between her and a certain Count.  Ms. Harker agreed to a short telephone interview under the condition that she not be asked about her present identity or her life today.  Here is what the vampire’s eternal muse had to say:

Q:  Ms. Harker, journalists and vampire hunters have been trying to track you down for one hundred thirteen years.  Why did you choose now to come out with your own—and, may I say, startlingly different—version of the story?

Ms. Harker:  As you can imagine, I needed to wait until some people died, and in my circle, death can take a very long time, if it comes at all.  Also, for a long time, I thought my story too outlandish for the public to accept.  I did not wish to be scorned as a fantasist or attention seeker.  But whereas humans once shuddered at the very notion vampires, now more and more “normal” humans are fantasizing about becoming one.  The timing seemed perfect.

Besides, this is the age of the tell-all, so I am telling all; I’m just omitting the modern habit of going into rehab first.  I find this need to repent for, be cured of, and then confess one’s “transgressions,” a tedious aspect of today’s culture.  I prefer to keep a stiff Victorian upper lip.  I am telling my story; I am not confessing it.  Do you know the expression, “never complain, never explain?”  My version is “never repent, never recant.”

Q:  Well, I confess that I found some of your revelations surprising and shocking.  Without revealing any spoilers, you take us on a journey that crosses centuries and introduces exotic mythological creatures into what used to be a traditional vampire tale.  Are we really to believe this hidden history of blood-drinking?

Ms. Harker:  Modern readers have no idea of the real roots of the vampire.  Bram Stoker gathered a lot of information, some of it true and some of it based on old wives’ tales.  He simplified a very complicated matter for easier public consumption, creating rules for the vampire’s creation and destruction.  Please!  As I say in the book, crosses and garlic have no power in the supernatural world! 

People love things served up in the form of good versus evil, though we all know that reality is always more complex.  There have always been sexy, scary blood-drinkers, and there have always been immortals—obviously.  I’m not going to explain it to you again.  You did read the book, didn’t you?

Q: Yes, and you do make a good case for the history of these immortal blood drinkers.  I just had no idea that it dated back to pre-biblical times.

Ms. Harker:  It predates Time itself, my dear.

Q: In Dracula in Love, you accuse your tormentors, who were the heroes of Mr. Stoker’s classic, of some appalling behavior.  How do we know that you are telling the truth, and moreover, how did he get your side of the story so wrong?

Ms. Harker:  Bram needed what you now call a “blockbuster.”  He had spent years and years as a theater manager living in the shadow of the actor Henry Irving.  He had written a few books that didn’t sell very well, and he was determined to reverse that.  Besides, he needed money!  And to be fair, he was completely under the spell of the man he named Van Helsing, who as you now know, had some very strange ideas about blood and about women!  I don’t hold any grudges.  Men of that era had absolutely no clue into the female psyche, nor did they want one.  Today’s men are much more understanding.

As to my telling the truth, well, madam, you did not live in the 19^th century!   I decided to reveal what life really was like back then.  “Career” women like you were considered freaks.  You have no idea of how “fallen” women were treated.  Despite all of that, I miss those days—candlelit rooms, feather beds, soft velvet gowns, satin gloves, not to mention the beautiful lingerie.  Don’t get me started!  

Q:  Why did you allow Ms. Essex to call the book Dracula in Love when it really is your story?  Why not Mina in Love?

Ms. Harker:  I’m a little miffed about that.  I thought I was being clever, telling my story at a time when the world has a mania for vampires, and when women have made unprecedented gains.  I gave the story to a writer known for retelling the stories of history’s misunderstood women, and I certainly have been one of those.  But she sat me down and explained that, feminism be damned, the Count is still the bigger draw—at the box office, on bookshelves, everywhere!  “Face it, Mina, in the eyes of the public, you’re nothing without him.”  Indeed!  I don’t want to imply that he and I are competitive with each other; we’re not.  I was just hoping that in the 21^st century, a woman could get equal billing. 

I guess I’ll have to wait another hundred years. 

Q:  Whoa, are you saying that you and he are still together…that he is still…but at the end of the story….

Ms. Harker (interrupts):  This interview is now over. (Click.)


***For more about Dracula in Love, check out my review here***

Share the Love!

Save iT Digg this Stumble It Reddit It Twitter More