Sign in with Facebook
K.'s Reviews > Delicious
Delicious (The Marsdens, #1)
by
by
[“Delicious” by Sherry Thomas (audiobook: Virginia Leishman/Reader = 3.5*)]
Actual rating 2.5* 1892 England
Verity and Stuart
“Cinderella story” huh?? Uh . . . I suppose if you squint your eyes REALLY hard and tilt your head to one side! A Cinderella story is definitely not the first fairytale that comes to mind here for me. In fact, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t reference this story to any “fairytale” whatsoever, unless your talking about the “less than likely” definition, and in that case, the ending sure does work in those terms. By about three-quarters of the way through this book, I thought that it would end up a 3.5* read for me, “IF” it didn’t take any crazy leaps of faith by the ending. Uh . . . so much for that theory. In fact, in some ways the ending could be removed and put on another book just as easily, as it went somewhere most of the rest of the story wasn’t “visiting.” Suffice it to say Thomas probably thought . . . “Oops, I’m at page limit, better put a bow on it!”
The beginning of this tale is hard to follow as Thomas doesn’t clearly make it understood that the reader is to be thinking in “flash forward/flash back terms.” It took me awhile (and revisiting a couple of reviews) to gain my bearings as it just felt really all over the map as to where the characters were at in “time and setting” at any given moment. Once I checked it out and found she was actually writing flashbacks into the storyline as a regular thing, it didn’t make the beginning significantly more tracking, but at least I was prepared for the next forward/backward sequence of events. Additionally, the beginning is interspersed with lots and lots of over-the-top food metaphors, which made me hungry, certainly, but didn’t necessarily make me feel like I was reading a romance (more like “Gourmet” magazine). Yes, yes, I know. It’s supposed to set a “whimsical” stage for the story I suppose, since the heroine is a renowned chef, whose ability to tease the palate is magical - literally. But it only served to confuse and distract what ended up being a weak storyline in many aspects. Again . . . did it make me want to go check out the fridge? - Yes. Read this romance? - No.
The story begins (once I could figure out where it began), with Verity, the heroine arguing with “Birdy,” her employer (ya – she’s his cook), as well as lover, over the fact that Birdy refuses to marry Verity. I may have missed something, but although it was “referenced” in a less than clear way he may have been the “Prince Regent” . . . or he may not have - who knows! What was clear was that he was a titled gentleman of high rank, and that he was certainly a heartless ass who took Verity to bed frequently (mostly because he loved her food), but flatly refused to marry her based on the ultimate conclusion she was . . . a cook and of the servant classes. (Duh! The only one whose surprised on that point is Verity I suppose.) Between this “beginning” we are introduced to Verity running into a mysterious stranger, “Stuart,” after fleeing a social gathering, and Stuart tries to assist her back to her residence. She refuses to inform Stuart of her identity or where she lives. So I’m thinking at this point - Ah - Stuart must be Birdy . . . Uh . . . No! So is Verity the same person? (LOL!) . . . Yes. Whew, I’ve got that straight anyway. Suddenly Verity is called from the kitchens (Wait -- what happened to Stuart taking her to an “inn” she was (apparently?) staying at?), to Birdy’s bedside, only to find that her lover is dead of a heart attack at 38. Verity is overwhelmed emotionally (but I’m not!! Birdy was an ass afterall!). Whoops – back to Verity at the Inn with Stuart enjoying a pleasant repast and onto yet another descriptive fit for a food and wine magazine photoshoot. Oh wait . . . how did Stuart end up in her room? I thought she told him to take a hike? He’s there . . . so you’re guess is as good as mine. (Rewind to back-track once again and find the “food buried” details that put the story together.) Does this paragraph of my review make any sense? No? Then I’ve done a good job of “tracking” about as well as the story does to this point!
By page 114, I’ve finally figured out that Verity met Stuart, the BROTHER of Birdy, and had a one night affair that was the fireworks of her life. I’m now pretty certain that Stuart is the hero in this story (ya, you heard that right – I wasn’t absolutely certain this far into the story). Verity comes from an unknown past that has resulted in her having a child out of wedlock that she subsequently adopted out (much to her hurt and chagrin), consequently rejected and evicted from her home and family, and thus went on to pursue her cooking skills in order to earn a living. Her past is extremely shrouded in mystery throughout the book (not extremely difficult to guess at correctly, but sufficiently mysterious to keep it interesting). Verity leaves her one spectacular encounter with Stuart via the sneaky route (left him in dreamland), and Stuart is never able to find her, despite years of searching. Meantime Verity ends up in the employment of Stuart’s brother, Birdy, and as Birdy’s eventual lover. (Are you as “icked” out over this as I am yet?? We’re talking the heroine here has slept her way around the family -- and liked it! Oow!) Fortunately, it’s unbeknownst to her, but unfortunately, it’s well known (and even “clear” :D) to me the reader. I could have gone the whole book without knowing that little detail! But it had to be divulged, as much of the storyline begins to intertwine the past and the present by the middle of the book.
We also follow Stuart’s reaction to Verity’s desertion of him after their torrid one-nighter, and his eventual history as a bastard son who was reinstated by petition (not really likely to happen, but it’s a “fairytale,” so I’m appropriately suspending my disbelief), as a legitimate child within his father’s aristocratic family. Stuart has risen to high political ranks of the times in pursuing his political career, and finally decided to offer for Lizzie, a long time friend and “suitable” lady for his social position. Here’s where Birdy’s premature heart attack comes into the picture and Stuart finds himself the new heir, inheriting the vast titles and holdings of the family . . . including Birdy’s cook, Verity. (Ironically, Thomas gets a lot of praise for her ability to “create the scene of Victorian times (and she does), even if she’s stretched inheritance and legitimacy laws far beyond the breaking point. She’s the current “new darling” of the romance writing genre, so no one dare whisper the sacrilege term “wallpaper” here I suppose.)
The story becomes interesting by this point, but true to Sherry Thomas’ style, I could have given a rat’s butt about the characters. Not feelin’ the love here at all. Stuart is a cold fish and Verity has made a multitude of left turn wrong choices thus far in her life, not really garnering my sympathies (one big mistake, sure, two maybe, but come on!). Stuart’s secretary and Stuart’s fiancé do strike up an interesting relationship that I was more engaged in than Stuart and Verity’s. We also arrive at the point where pretty much everyone who reads it begins to have the “Oh give me a break” unbelieveability factor, as in the efforts of Verity to keep her identity hidden from Stuart while living as his cook under the same roof, so many opportunistic coincidences to prevent him from actually seeing her face happen, the book almost becomes a wall-banger. Thomas’ writing blessedly keeps it in my hands again. By about the fourth “peek-a-boo” encounter, the only reaction is . . . “Oh Com’on!!” I’m usually EASIER than most on an author in these circumstances, but they can’t expect me to go deaf, dumb (actually meaning “stupid” in this instance) and blind! Toward story end when I should be at least feeling the empathy and a tighter connection for the lovers, Thomas brings back the ghost of Birdy (figuratively, not literally) by way of his funeral, and all begin to gush thoughtfully with introspection over poor Birdy’s worthiness. WTF??!! Even our heroine waxes poetically over Birdy’s virtues. (*Scuze me here while I gag and throw up in my mouth a little bit!*)
The bottom line is, the only “magic” Thomas worked here was her usual ability to write and keep my interest. Just like “Private Arrangements,” she instills so many tidbits that are “hooks” to keeping me going and hoping, I just keep gawking like a typical traffic accident passerby until I finish the book. Her sex scenes in this story were some of the best I’ve read, all because of her skillful writing, and of course there’s always the food! Rich, fragrant and tasty – A virtual meal . . . or 20.
Unfortunately, although Sherry Thomas has a great ability to write prose that engage me . . . she can’t write romance that I love. This may be my last Thomas read, as I actually enjoyed “Private Arrangements” more than this one! Big deal - I’m not a dedicated romance reader to “just” read good prose. I want good prose with captivating romance to accompany it! People that I cheerlead and care about, and make my heart ache for their love for one another. So far . . . Thomas doesn’t do that in her stories. Too bad because the woman sure can write!
Final result: The writing fills you up on rich French cuisine, but the story and characters are like Chinese take-out – you’re starving in about an hour.
K.
NOTE: Mainstream R to NC-17 sex scenes but not heavily laden throughout; Some graphic language occasionally interspersed; No graphic violence; Not recommended for teens under 17 years of age; Not recommended for anyone trying to remain on their diet! ;)]
Actual rating 2.5* 1892 England
Verity and Stuart
“Cinderella story” huh?? Uh . . . I suppose if you squint your eyes REALLY hard and tilt your head to one side! A Cinderella story is definitely not the first fairytale that comes to mind here for me. In fact, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t reference this story to any “fairytale” whatsoever, unless your talking about the “less than likely” definition, and in that case, the ending sure does work in those terms. By about three-quarters of the way through this book, I thought that it would end up a 3.5* read for me, “IF” it didn’t take any crazy leaps of faith by the ending. Uh . . . so much for that theory. In fact, in some ways the ending could be removed and put on another book just as easily, as it went somewhere most of the rest of the story wasn’t “visiting.” Suffice it to say Thomas probably thought . . . “Oops, I’m at page limit, better put a bow on it!”
The beginning of this tale is hard to follow as Thomas doesn’t clearly make it understood that the reader is to be thinking in “flash forward/flash back terms.” It took me awhile (and revisiting a couple of reviews) to gain my bearings as it just felt really all over the map as to where the characters were at in “time and setting” at any given moment. Once I checked it out and found she was actually writing flashbacks into the storyline as a regular thing, it didn’t make the beginning significantly more tracking, but at least I was prepared for the next forward/backward sequence of events. Additionally, the beginning is interspersed with lots and lots of over-the-top food metaphors, which made me hungry, certainly, but didn’t necessarily make me feel like I was reading a romance (more like “Gourmet” magazine). Yes, yes, I know. It’s supposed to set a “whimsical” stage for the story I suppose, since the heroine is a renowned chef, whose ability to tease the palate is magical - literally. But it only served to confuse and distract what ended up being a weak storyline in many aspects. Again . . . did it make me want to go check out the fridge? - Yes. Read this romance? - No.
The story begins (once I could figure out where it began), with Verity, the heroine arguing with “Birdy,” her employer (ya – she’s his cook), as well as lover, over the fact that Birdy refuses to marry Verity. I may have missed something, but although it was “referenced” in a less than clear way he may have been the “Prince Regent” . . . or he may not have - who knows! What was clear was that he was a titled gentleman of high rank, and that he was certainly a heartless ass who took Verity to bed frequently (mostly because he loved her food), but flatly refused to marry her based on the ultimate conclusion she was . . . a cook and of the servant classes. (Duh! The only one whose surprised on that point is Verity I suppose.) Between this “beginning” we are introduced to Verity running into a mysterious stranger, “Stuart,” after fleeing a social gathering, and Stuart tries to assist her back to her residence. She refuses to inform Stuart of her identity or where she lives. So I’m thinking at this point - Ah - Stuart must be Birdy . . . Uh . . . No! So is Verity the same person? (LOL!) . . . Yes. Whew, I’ve got that straight anyway. Suddenly Verity is called from the kitchens (Wait -- what happened to Stuart taking her to an “inn” she was (apparently?) staying at?), to Birdy’s bedside, only to find that her lover is dead of a heart attack at 38. Verity is overwhelmed emotionally (but I’m not!! Birdy was an ass afterall!). Whoops – back to Verity at the Inn with Stuart enjoying a pleasant repast and onto yet another descriptive fit for a food and wine magazine photoshoot. Oh wait . . . how did Stuart end up in her room? I thought she told him to take a hike? He’s there . . . so you’re guess is as good as mine. (Rewind to back-track once again and find the “food buried” details that put the story together.) Does this paragraph of my review make any sense? No? Then I’ve done a good job of “tracking” about as well as the story does to this point!
By page 114, I’ve finally figured out that Verity met Stuart, the BROTHER of Birdy, and had a one night affair that was the fireworks of her life. I’m now pretty certain that Stuart is the hero in this story (ya, you heard that right – I wasn’t absolutely certain this far into the story). Verity comes from an unknown past that has resulted in her having a child out of wedlock that she subsequently adopted out (much to her hurt and chagrin), consequently rejected and evicted from her home and family, and thus went on to pursue her cooking skills in order to earn a living. Her past is extremely shrouded in mystery throughout the book (not extremely difficult to guess at correctly, but sufficiently mysterious to keep it interesting). Verity leaves her one spectacular encounter with Stuart via the sneaky route (left him in dreamland), and Stuart is never able to find her, despite years of searching. Meantime Verity ends up in the employment of Stuart’s brother, Birdy, and as Birdy’s eventual lover. (Are you as “icked” out over this as I am yet?? We’re talking the heroine here has slept her way around the family -- and liked it! Oow!) Fortunately, it’s unbeknownst to her, but unfortunately, it’s well known (and even “clear” :D) to me the reader. I could have gone the whole book without knowing that little detail! But it had to be divulged, as much of the storyline begins to intertwine the past and the present by the middle of the book.
We also follow Stuart’s reaction to Verity’s desertion of him after their torrid one-nighter, and his eventual history as a bastard son who was reinstated by petition (not really likely to happen, but it’s a “fairytale,” so I’m appropriately suspending my disbelief), as a legitimate child within his father’s aristocratic family. Stuart has risen to high political ranks of the times in pursuing his political career, and finally decided to offer for Lizzie, a long time friend and “suitable” lady for his social position. Here’s where Birdy’s premature heart attack comes into the picture and Stuart finds himself the new heir, inheriting the vast titles and holdings of the family . . . including Birdy’s cook, Verity. (Ironically, Thomas gets a lot of praise for her ability to “create the scene of Victorian times (and she does), even if she’s stretched inheritance and legitimacy laws far beyond the breaking point. She’s the current “new darling” of the romance writing genre, so no one dare whisper the sacrilege term “wallpaper” here I suppose.)
The story becomes interesting by this point, but true to Sherry Thomas’ style, I could have given a rat’s butt about the characters. Not feelin’ the love here at all. Stuart is a cold fish and Verity has made a multitude of left turn wrong choices thus far in her life, not really garnering my sympathies (one big mistake, sure, two maybe, but come on!). Stuart’s secretary and Stuart’s fiancé do strike up an interesting relationship that I was more engaged in than Stuart and Verity’s. We also arrive at the point where pretty much everyone who reads it begins to have the “Oh give me a break” unbelieveability factor, as in the efforts of Verity to keep her identity hidden from Stuart while living as his cook under the same roof, so many opportunistic coincidences to prevent him from actually seeing her face happen, the book almost becomes a wall-banger. Thomas’ writing blessedly keeps it in my hands again. By about the fourth “peek-a-boo” encounter, the only reaction is . . . “Oh Com’on!!” I’m usually EASIER than most on an author in these circumstances, but they can’t expect me to go deaf, dumb (actually meaning “stupid” in this instance) and blind! Toward story end when I should be at least feeling the empathy and a tighter connection for the lovers, Thomas brings back the ghost of Birdy (figuratively, not literally) by way of his funeral, and all begin to gush thoughtfully with introspection over poor Birdy’s worthiness. WTF??!! Even our heroine waxes poetically over Birdy’s virtues. (*Scuze me here while I gag and throw up in my mouth a little bit!*)
The bottom line is, the only “magic” Thomas worked here was her usual ability to write and keep my interest. Just like “Private Arrangements,” she instills so many tidbits that are “hooks” to keeping me going and hoping, I just keep gawking like a typical traffic accident passerby until I finish the book. Her sex scenes in this story were some of the best I’ve read, all because of her skillful writing, and of course there’s always the food! Rich, fragrant and tasty – A virtual meal . . . or 20.
Unfortunately, although Sherry Thomas has a great ability to write prose that engage me . . . she can’t write romance that I love. This may be my last Thomas read, as I actually enjoyed “Private Arrangements” more than this one! Big deal - I’m not a dedicated romance reader to “just” read good prose. I want good prose with captivating romance to accompany it! People that I cheerlead and care about, and make my heart ache for their love for one another. So far . . . Thomas doesn’t do that in her stories. Too bad because the woman sure can write!
Final result: The writing fills you up on rich French cuisine, but the story and characters are like Chinese take-out – you’re starving in about an hour.
K.
NOTE: Mainstream R to NC-17 sex scenes but not heavily laden throughout; Some graphic language occasionally interspersed; No graphic violence; Not recommended for teens under 17 years of age; Not recommended for anyone trying to remain on their diet! ;)]
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Delicious.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
August 13, 2009
– Shelved
August 28, 2009
– Shelved as:
audiobooks
August 30, 2009
–
26.39%
"Hmmm?! I actually had to go read reviews just to be sure I was following this book's plot. The metaphors are a bit over the top so far!"
page
114
August 31, 2009
–
51.62%
"I have to admit that I'm liking the story more now that I've figured out what relationship of the players are!"
page
223
Started Reading
September 1, 2009
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-10 of 10 (10 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Great review K...think I'll give this one a miss:)
K. wrote: "Big deal - I’m not a dedicated romance reader to “just” read good prose. I want good prose with captivating romance to accompany it! People that I cheerlead and care about, and make my heart ache for their love for one another."I couldn't agree more, K. I was already convinced that this author was not my cuppa, so no "damage" done here. I'll keep staying away from her.
Wonderful - and hilarious - review, K.! :)
Ah, yes, it's true, you have to get used to her flashbacks. You raise a good point though, I won't be reading this while I'm fasting, LOL. You have to admit though. As romance readers, we come across the contrived separation a lot (I mean, a lot!) LOL. I think we just notice it more from Thomas because the rest of her book has such a subtle tone and her characters are more realistic. Don't you think?
Adrienne, Dina and Barbara: Hey ladies - thanks so much for the thumbs up . . . snarking on a book can be cathartic, but I'd rather it had been a good one (especially when it comes to Sherry Thomas! [*sigh*:])K.
new_user: Ya - I usually have no problem with flashbacks, but I don't like it when I have to go back in the book and re-review once I realize that's what's going on (life's too short, and I have waaaaay too many books to read! ;) I take it you liked this one new_user (or Thomas in general)? Perfectly alright! You can see I really support Thomas's ability to write. Yes, I definitely agree that Thomas instills a good amount of reality in both her stories and characterizations -- much to my personal chagrin though at times. I'm one of those hopeless romantic, mushy, gushy, lovey-dovey readers! LOL! So basically, I don't expect any more out of my romance than I get out of my REAL LIFE romance! LOL! ;D Yes, I am very fortunate so I lien a bit "Mary Sue" and when characters' morals and values start looking more like TSTL (as many people in real life are I'm afraid), I have a hard time respecting them, which leads to a hard time giving a crap about their love story. The love story ends up appearing both dysfunctional and the lovers pathetic co-dependents from where I sit. The author loses me at that point. Verity made a laundry list of mistakes, especially considering where she started from.
So yes, NU, lots of personal "eaches" going on there with why I have such a tough time with Thomas's characters. I'm CERTAIN she has to get it right soon for me. Have you read her latest book?
K.
Strong feelings, LOL. ;) No, I haven't read this one yet. I do love Thomas' writing, but thus far, I've been happy I haven't seen any TSTL in her other books-- but flawed certainly. I'm not sure what I'll make of this one, since it seems considerably lighter and contrived than those others. I'm one of those readers who likes ambiguous characters, emotion, and challenging situations in my romance. ;) I did read NQaH, and to me it read like a more romantic version of PA, so if one of your qualms with PA was that the starring couple didn't demonstrate any motivation/enthusiasm for reconciliation, you might like NQaH. On the other hand, the flashbacks and character flaws continue. No saints in sight yet, LOL. ;) I like that there is so much demonstrable passion between her characters and yet we still question, "Could I forgive someone this?" To me, the character in question's mistake was forgivable, but I have an inkling you might be little more strict with him, LOL. ;) I'll say this though: Leo was damn hot. xD I'd be interested to see what you think of it. :)
new_user said: "I did read NQaH, and to me it read like a more romantic version of PA, so if one of your qualms with PA was that the starring couple didn't demonstrate any motivation/enthusiasm for reconciliation, you might like NQaH."NQAH just might be my winner for ST than NU! :D PA was a bit of a dichotomy for me. I loved the book but hated the protagonists. I found them both to be morally unsound (self-involved, immature and backbiting personalties to a really questionable degree. They went out of their way to REALLY hurt the one they supposedly loved in a very consciously deliberate manner). Had a very hard time believing those two would recognize an HEA, since they had so much to learn about giving for the sake of giving to each other. However, I still ended up liking that book because it was like one long soap opera (a regular "War of the Roses"). As soon as I decided I didn't like either of their personality types enough to care if they had an HEA, I stopped reading it for "romance" and just enjoyed the ride. I didn't have as hard a time recognizing the flashback sequence in PA either. I just think it was a better written book overall (flowed more smoothly than this one did).
And your right NU, I am a little more strict probably with my reading for "entertainment," but only in fiction! Real life is a whole different ballgame. ;) It'll be interesting discussing NQAH with you for sure. (See how easy I was talked into that! LOL! "Delicious" must have not damaged me too much! HA! :D)
K.
I definitely agree. They were both immature, and I also enjoyed it more as fiction than as traditional romance. Glad you're going to give NQaH a shot. ;) Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on it. :)
Great, great review. Definitely hit on everything I was thinking while reading this book. Incidentally, this is the book where I realized that Sherry Thomas, while an excellent writer, is just not my cup 'o tea; though, I wish I had read your detailed review beforehand and just saved myself the time and trouble! :D
I'm pretty sure I'm still going to go on to her third book . . . like a true gambling addict, I just know the next one is the winner! ;D Thanks for the kudos, hope it was at least entertaining.
K.