Lies Jane Austen Told Me (Proper Romance Contemporary)
Ever since Emma Pierce read Pride and Prejudice, she's been in love with Mr. Darcy and has regarded Jane Austen as the expert on all things romantic. So when it turns out that what her boyfriend Blake wants is more of a hook-up than a honeymoon, Emma is hurt, betrayed, and furious. She throws herself deeper into her work as CMO of Kinetics, only to find her job threatened when her boss brings in a consultant to help her expand the business to the East Coast. Her frustration turns to shock when that consultant turns out to be Blake's younger brother, Lucas. Emma is determined not to fall for Lucas, but as she gets to know him, she realizes that Lucas is nothing like his brother. He is kind and attentive and spends his time and money caring for the less fortunate. But as perfect as Lucas seems, he clearly has his secrets. After all, there's an angry woman demanding money from him and a little girl who Lucas feels responsible for. Realizing that her love life is as complicated as anything Jane Austen could have dreamed up, Emma must figure out the truth--and soon--if she wants any hope of writing her own "happily ever after" ending.
BUY THE BOOK
Community Reviews
I’ll read whatever “Jane Austen” themed trash you throw at me. I don’t even have to like it, it has nothing to do with “enjoying” it at this point. I’m just a mindless consumer of Jane Austen fandom.
On that note: why do romance novels tend to have such misleading titles? I’m not dumping on the romance genre: I like romance novels. But more often than not, the title will be the best part of the actual book. (You can love something and acknowledge that it’s not great)
This might be the case here. It’s not to say I was exceptionally surprised that this book didn’t live up to its title, which isn’t even an especially fun title. The better question is why I continued to read such a luke-warm novel? Well, see the above point. I will read anything Jane Austen-y.
Honestly, the book was not that bad, but it wasn’t that good either. It will never stick out in my memory (and its association with Jane Austen is so marginal, I feel lied to.) It was a quick, clean, light read, but ultimately forgettable.
Emma is a 20-something who has made her life and has everything she could ever want, except her family. 😞 Oh, and you know what else? She doesn’t have a husband. Her love-affair with Jane Austen, trusting her as her number one source of romantic advice, is over. After all, Austen was never married so how much could she really know?
OOOOHHH MY GODDD I hate having this conversation, but we’re gonna do it. We’re gonna do it right here. Stop reading Jane Austen as a manual for how to catch a man, Y’all. Austen’s novels were half social commentary & satire, half wishful thinking. For the exact reason we’re reading romance novels today, it’s a form of escapism. Austen dared to die a spinster in a time when spinsterhood was ruination. She had her chance and turned it down because she was so well aware of how much more miserable a joyless marriage to some bloke would have been in comparison to… WELL! Her career as a writer! Though she might have died poor, she did see some of the money she made for herself, and it was enough to sustain her for a while. This was something that could never have happened at the time if she’d had a husband.
Anyway. The review. Ah yes, where was I?
Emma’s boyfriend is rather wealthy, but as it turns out, a bit of a playboy. She finds this out after dropping in on him unexpectedly, you know, as you do. She runs off the nurse her wounds, but friends and co-workers are still expecting her to be engaged to this crummy man.
But Emma is a professional through and through, and when her boss hires a consultant to help her with an expansion into New York who just happens to be her ex’s brother, well… Shenanigans ensue. Feelings are caught. A tangled web is weaved. And then everything turns out ok.
Jane Austen factors in, like, nowhere. Am I emphasizing this enough for you? To the best of my knowledge, this isn’t a modern retelling, though it does have the flavor of one.
Also, it’s a clean contemporary romance. For me, that’s all fine and dandy. I don’t care one way or another, but some readers might find the lack of spice a deal-breaker, whereas other readers will be looking for this explicitly. Honestly, even if there had been some steamy scenes, it wouldn’t change my opinion on how tepid the novel was overall. I’m glad I read it for my yearly book-count but other than that – I’d say pass over it.
book review originally posted on my blog found here
On that note: why do romance novels tend to have such misleading titles? I’m not dumping on the romance genre: I like romance novels. But more often than not, the title will be the best part of the actual book. (You can love something and acknowledge that it’s not great)
This might be the case here. It’s not to say I was exceptionally surprised that this book didn’t live up to its title, which isn’t even an especially fun title. The better question is why I continued to read such a luke-warm novel? Well, see the above point. I will read anything Jane Austen-y.
Honestly, the book was not that bad, but it wasn’t that good either. It will never stick out in my memory (and its association with Jane Austen is so marginal, I feel lied to.) It was a quick, clean, light read, but ultimately forgettable.
Emma is a 20-something who has made her life and has everything she could ever want, except her family. 😞 Oh, and you know what else? She doesn’t have a husband. Her love-affair with Jane Austen, trusting her as her number one source of romantic advice, is over. After all, Austen was never married so how much could she really know?
OOOOHHH MY GODDD I hate having this conversation, but we’re gonna do it. We’re gonna do it right here. Stop reading Jane Austen as a manual for how to catch a man, Y’all. Austen’s novels were half social commentary & satire, half wishful thinking. For the exact reason we’re reading romance novels today, it’s a form of escapism. Austen dared to die a spinster in a time when spinsterhood was ruination. She had her chance and turned it down because she was so well aware of how much more miserable a joyless marriage to some bloke would have been in comparison to… WELL! Her career as a writer! Though she might have died poor, she did see some of the money she made for herself, and it was enough to sustain her for a while. This was something that could never have happened at the time if she’d had a husband.
Anyway. The review. Ah yes, where was I?
Emma’s boyfriend is rather wealthy, but as it turns out, a bit of a playboy. She finds this out after dropping in on him unexpectedly, you know, as you do. She runs off the nurse her wounds, but friends and co-workers are still expecting her to be engaged to this crummy man.
But Emma is a professional through and through, and when her boss hires a consultant to help her with an expansion into New York who just happens to be her ex’s brother, well… Shenanigans ensue. Feelings are caught. A tangled web is weaved. And then everything turns out ok.
Jane Austen factors in, like, nowhere. Am I emphasizing this enough for you? To the best of my knowledge, this isn’t a modern retelling, though it does have the flavor of one.
Also, it’s a clean contemporary romance. For me, that’s all fine and dandy. I don’t care one way or another, but some readers might find the lack of spice a deal-breaker, whereas other readers will be looking for this explicitly. Honestly, even if there had been some steamy scenes, it wouldn’t change my opinion on how tepid the novel was overall. I’m glad I read it for my yearly book-count but other than that – I’d say pass over it.
book review originally posted on my blog found here
See why thousands of readers are using Bookclubs to stay connected.