Comments on: REVIEW: Mrs. Darcy's Dilemma by Diana Birchall

By: Helen A

Helen A — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 04:32:23 +0000

Okay, sorry to be a bit late to the discussion, but I really feel a need to make a comment or two about Mrs Darcy's Dilemma. I have to disagree completely with the review written here, this book is hardly palatable, let alone enjoyable. The dialogue is forced, the details are sloppy—Jane was always meticulous in her details and this book is like a wild meandering in comparison to any of Austen's novels. Actually, I think the best way I can describe this book is to say it is more nearly like a parody—it has the flavor of the overly sappy gothic novel that JA was laughing at in Northanger Abbey. I thought it was disappointingly flat.

By: mjryan

mjryan — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:10:42 +0000

I think I should amend my last statement to say, “I try to be as constructive in my criticism as possible.” I’m afraid that Mags has a review of mine on her computer, ready to post, that might make that last sentence seem like a big, fat fib.

By: mjryan

mjryan — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:31:12 +0000

Wow. I think I should be offended. However, it’s difficult to get too upset about a completely baseless accusation. I will state, for the record, that other than the information provided on the book I have no idea who Diana Birchall is (in fact, I probably just misspelled her name) and if she’s a regular contributor to Austen Blog it completely passed my notice. I can assure you that my review is unbiased.

While my review is positive, I’d hardly call it glowing. I shy away from proclaiming that books are the best I’ve ever read or ‘worst sequel ever written.’ That’s not my job as a reviewer. My job is to be as objective and fair as possible while still giving a legitimate opinion on the book I’m reviewing. There are criticisms in this review and the others that I’ve done for Austen Blog. I’m just not blatant and rude about it.

By: Fine-eyed Elizabeth

Fine-eyed Elizabeth — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:31:50 +0000

Yoni, I do hope you post a longer review, I would like to read what you have to say. It’s clear you have a strong opinion, and I think it would be great to include here!

And Ruth … well, maybe it’s just me who can’t be expected to give a glowing review to someone I work with, just because I work with them. You can ask ‘em … er, well, maybe you better not …

By: Mags

Mags — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:18:32 +0000

Hi Yoni,

Maya Slater’s book was not reviewed because I wasn’t offered a review copy and no one who read it sent in a review. I don’t get review copies of every JA-related book that comes out, but if one is sent or offered, I try to find a reviewer for it. I don’t think I’ve ever asked for a book unsolicited–I have trouble enough sometimes placing all the books we do get, as our reviewers are volunteers and free to refuse an assignment. I’m happy to publish reader reviews, so if you would like to write one for the Slater book, send it along to austenblog AT gmail DOT com.

I didn’t think to publish a disclaimer about Diana because she’s really not an AustenBlog staff member. She sends stuff in as a reader, which anyone is free to do. (Click on the “Reader Reviews” category and you’ll see a pretty good cross-section of submissions from various readers.) I did ask her to review one book, but I had a particular reason for doing so (that being I thought she might be more likely to be friendly to a self-published book that was, shall we say, lacking in quality; a bit of humanity that, as many such things do, came back to bite me in the butt, though it provided some lulz for the regulars). I’m fairly certain that all of her submissions are clearly labeled as reader reviews. I’m pretty sure she and MJ are not acquainted, even in an online sense, and I’m also pretty sure that if MJ didn’t like the book, she would not be shy about saying so.

I’m sorry that you disagreed with the reviewer, and thanks for sharing your opinion. Balance is a good thing.

By: Yoni

Yoni — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:12:11 +0000

Actually it serves (unintentionally) as a promotional vehicle; more people are likely to know about the book and buy it if Austenblog gives it a glowing review. Being American, I didn’t even know about Maya Slater’s book until it was mentioned here, when they reviewed a review and not the book itself. I promptly went and bought it, and enjoyed it.

I was shying away from descriptions to not spoil the plot. I would be happy to post a longer review when I have the book in front of me again in a few days, as it’s currently lent out.

By: Fine-eyed Elizabeth

Fine-eyed Elizabeth — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:05:10 +0000

Oh please!

I don’t think that anyone who reads this blog or posts here is unaware of Diana’s involvment. And as far as “unprofessional” … it’s a BLOG, not a professional communications or promotional vehicle.

Actually, I’d be very happy to have more detail from you, Yoni, about what you found lacking in the work, rather than just your criticism of the previous review.

By: Yoni

Yoni — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 19:15:21 +0000

After reading this glowing review of a sequel that I would grant the title “worst sequel ever written” if I hadn’t read “Trust and Triumph,” I think it’s unprofessional of Austenblog to not point out that Diana Birchall is a contributor and reviewer at Austenblog.

The only part of the review I agree with is the summation of the plot, though it leaves out the depressing third segment where characters learn their lessons through physical, unrelated ailments or don’t learn them at all.

By: Ms. Place

Ms. Place — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:01:15 +0000

I liked this sequel. Diana made it fun to revisit some of my favorite characters, and her plot was plausible. I wish it had been longer, though, and that we’d had more glimpses of Darcy and Elizabeth alone.