Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Like a long and complex dream, 06 Feb 2008
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, and a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.

The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no work in the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier and more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.

Whilst not denying a strong gothic element in the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, and even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, and Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, and the descent of landed property feature heavily in the plot - but this time set on the continent and in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."

Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeble in characterisation ... lacking in moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speak in this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, and the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.

There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prose in this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin and Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describes in such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett and Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is set in Gascony and Languedoc; volume two in Venice and Udolpho; volume three in Udolpho and Tuscany; and volume four back in Gascony and Languedoc.

Ostensibly set in the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners and sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time and place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives and forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, and the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castle in her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto and Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s and the city of Tintoretto and Monteverdi.

There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life and then leave only when they have some part to play in Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companion in all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasions in order to heighten tension or play a minor part in Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castle in which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.

So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. But in a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long and complex dream - the kind in which pleasure and apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, and determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.

The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheld in this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology and end-notes all appear to guide and enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.




If only there was more Udolpho..., 08 Aug 2007
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.

The middle third of the book actually set in the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful and has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced and resolved in this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-on in Udolpho and the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.

I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, and I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!

(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).

Just plain good fun!, 12 Feb 2005
I came to this book after reading about it in Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.

By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame and childish, but if you're like me and don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror and supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, and that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass and you get on with the story.

I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explained in the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' and so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)

Have fun!=)

Over-rated and over-written, 23 Mar 2004
Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" and Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pages in which bugger-all happened.

The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonment in a dark and scary castle and all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue and sexuality.

However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things up in 200 pages). Her writing in "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe nature in its most 'sublime' and 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.

As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents and secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.

The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters and what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.

All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically and start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" and "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.

I would urge anyone interested in Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" and compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.

rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw., 09 Sep 2003
This book is great fun. It's far too long, and some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French and Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes set in the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, and a bit of Mills and Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrown in for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body found in the gatehouse, and a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream and faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you get in this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interested in her for her money and the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants and their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do it in a very panto-ish way!

Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Like a long and complex dream, 06 Feb 2008
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, and a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.

The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no work in the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier and more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.

Whilst not denying a strong gothic element in the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, and even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, and Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, and the descent of landed property feature heavily in the plot - but this time set on the continent and in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."

Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeble in characterisation ... lacking in moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speak in this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, and the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.

There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prose in this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin and Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describes in such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett and Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is set in Gascony and Languedoc; volume two in Venice and Udolpho; volume three in Udolpho and Tuscany; and volume four back in Gascony and Languedoc.

Ostensibly set in the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners and sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time and place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives and forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, and the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castle in her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto and Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s and the city of Tintoretto and Monteverdi.

There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life and then leave only when they have some part to play in Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companion in all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasions in order to heighten tension or play a minor part in Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castle in which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.

So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. But in a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long and complex dream - the kind in which pleasure and apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, and determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.

The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheld in this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology and end-notes all appear to guide and enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.




If only there was more Udolpho..., 08 Aug 2007
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.

The middle third of the book actually set in the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful and has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced and resolved in this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-on in Udolpho and the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.

I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, and I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!

(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).

Just plain good fun!, 12 Feb 2005
I came to this book after reading about it in Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.

By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame and childish, but if you're like me and don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror and supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, and that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass and you get on with the story.

I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explained in the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' and so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)

Have fun!=)

Over-rated and over-written, 23 Mar 2004
Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" and Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pages in which bugger-all happened.

The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonment in a dark and scary castle and all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue and sexuality.

However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things up in 200 pages). Her writing in "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe nature in its most 'sublime' and 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.

As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents and secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.

The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters and what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.

All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically and start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" and "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.

I would urge anyone interested in Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" and compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.

rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw., 09 Sep 2003
This book is great fun. It's far too long, and some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French and Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes set in the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, and a bit of Mills and Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrown in for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body found in the gatehouse, and a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream and faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you get in this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interested in her for her money and the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants and their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do it in a very panto-ish way!

Fun & romantic, 02 Mar 2007
There was recently a bit of a debate on The Book Club Forum on the subject of the entire Romance Genre and how there's a general perception that they're all Mills and Boon-type bodice-rippers, full of heaving bosoms and quivering members, which can be rather off-putting to modern women who feel they want more Sex and the City than Romp in the Hay. There's also a bit of a boom in supernatural chick-lit, and vampire chick-lit in particular seems to be peaking recently, so it was only a matter of time before a slew of vampire-romances came to the fore.

Surprisingly, SWV is a lot of fun and, as a romance, it certainly has bite (please, forgive the punning - it's utterly unavoidable in such cases!). Sands has a great sense of humour that shines through, but adds enough no-nonsense titillation to keep the most ardent romantic happy. It also explores the very real possibility of having to give up absolutely everything (i.e. your family, your job, etc) in order to gain things such as love and almost-eternal life - there's a real dilemma there that we're often not really expected to broach in many other vampire love stories and it makes a nice change to have this injection of realism in out-and-out fantasy.

Seeing as this is actually the first in a series, I may even be tempted to give the others a bit of a nibble...

Very funny, love it!!, 08 May 2004
I bought this book because of the reviews I read & I wasn't disapointed. The style of writing reminded me of Sandra Hill. There are some very funny parts which had me bursting out laughing. One instance is when Lucern is at the conference for romance writers & he is searching for condoms, I was laughing that much that I had tears running down my face.

I don't want to spoil the plot by giving to much away. But if you like red hot passion & laughter in a story this book is for you. I'm about to start "Love bites" about Etienne & Rachel, (Lucern's brother). Can't wait for the rest of the family's stories to come out.

DISAPPOINTING, 29 Apr 2004
I bought this book because I had found myself laughing out loud at some ofLynsay's earlier books, like Bliss. However this was a disappointing read.For starters, I just didn't find it funny, and secondly,the story dragged.It just lacked that special something. Yes, Lucerne is a vampire and Kateis initially unaware of this, but the slapstick scenes just lack the comictension that would make them funny. Also, despite several love scenes,there is a distinct lack of sexual tension-so the love scenes were justboring.If you want to read a Lynsay Sands, stick to her historicals.Sorry, but this just didn't work for me.

My favourite book this year!!, 28 Sep 2003
This is one fabulous books, so full. It would be a good movie. Lynsay's writing in sparklings, fun and the characters oh so funny.

If you need to have a really good laugh this is the medicine.

Lynsay shines while making you howl!!, 25 Aug 2003
Lynsay absolutely rocks with her new series about a dysfunctional vampire family! I won't go into the plot line
too heavy because you need to experience all the surprises
and delights yourself.

A mother, two sons and a daughter (and more relatives to come hopefully) face the every day struggles of vampire existence in the 21st Century. In this tale, originally called Lucern, we meet Lucern Argeneau, the first son.

He is a four hundred year old vampire, getting by in the dreary world by writing contemporary romances about...well, vampires...only no one catches on he is merely writing about his family. To his surprise, they are a big success, so much so his editor, Kate C. Leever of Roundhouse Publishing is determined to drag the reclusive writer to the Romantic Times Convention.

Lucern is a grumpy - albeit sexy - curmudgeon, and he is determined NOT to go to a book convention. However, Kate is a whirlwind, an editor - who has little life outside her work - so she is firmly determined to drag him kicking and screaming into the limelight. She gets aid from his family, who think Kate is not only a super editor, but also the perfect mate for Lucern. And while Lucern loves her as an editor - at a distance - he hates to admit he feels an attraction for the pushy lady.

Only, romance for the vampire - as well as attending a book convention - has a lot of modern day drawbacks. Kate fits in well with his family, though she finds them a bit odd. Lynsay is known for her side-aching humour, but she is at top form as Lucern is forced into the world of sunshine and supermarkets. Being your totally civilised vamp, Lucian does not go around biting necks - let's face it, in today's situation of aids, drugs and diseases only a foolish vampire runs around taking blood without knowing the donor's lifestyle! Being a smart vampire family, they have invested in a series of blood banks, and have a steady supply delivered to them. Only Kate's presence causes Lucern to miss din-din more than once, making him so famished he considers attacking a steak in the local market.

By the time Kate installs Lucern in the convention hotel, she is becoming concerned there is something very wrong with Lucern's health. From the mad escapade at the Ball for the Romance Times (with an appearance of Lady of RT herself!!) to Kate coming to terms with her popular vampire writer might just be writing biographies instead of fiction, it is typical Lynsay wit and brilliance.

Lucern is sexy, deliciously grumpy and is the new wave of vampires for the 21st Century. I have always enjoyed every book Lynsay was written, but I must say she takes the gold ring with this wonderful funny book! I fell in love with Lucern, so cannot wait for the rest of the Argeneau family

Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Like a long and complex dream, 06 Feb 2008
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, and a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.

The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no work in the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier and more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.

Whilst not denying a strong gothic element in the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, and even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, and Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, and the descent of landed property feature heavily in the plot - but this time set on the continent and in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."

Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeble in characterisation ... lacking in moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speak in this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, and the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.

There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prose in this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin and Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describes in such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett and Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is set in Gascony and Languedoc; volume two in Venice and Udolpho; volume three in Udolpho and Tuscany; and volume four back in Gascony and Languedoc.

Ostensibly set in the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners and sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time and place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives and forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, and the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castle in her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto and Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s and the city of Tintoretto and Monteverdi.

There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life and then leave only when they have some part to play in Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companion in all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasions in order to heighten tension or play a minor part in Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castle in which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.

So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. But in a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long and complex dream - the kind in which pleasure and apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, and determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.

The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheld in this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology and end-notes all appear to guide and enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.




If only there was more Udolpho..., 08 Aug 2007
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.

The middle third of the book actually set in the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful and has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced and resolved in this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-on in Udolpho and the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.

I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, and I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!

(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).

Just plain good fun!, 12 Feb 2005
I came to this book after reading about it in Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.

By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame and childish, but if you're like me and don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror and supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, and that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass and you get on with the story.

I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explained in the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' and so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)

Have fun!=)

Over-rated and over-written, 23 Mar 2004
Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" and Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pages in which bugger-all happened.

The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonment in a dark and scary castle and all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue and sexuality.

However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things up in 200 pages). Her writing in "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe nature in its most 'sublime' and 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.

As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents and secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.

The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters and what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.

All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically and start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" and "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.

I would urge anyone interested in Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" and compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.

rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw., 09 Sep 2003
This book is great fun. It's far too long, and some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French and Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes set in the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, and a bit of Mills and Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrown in for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body found in the gatehouse, and a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream and faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you get in this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interested in her for her money and the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants and their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do it in a very panto-ish way!

Fun & romantic, 02 Mar 2007
There was recently a bit of a debate on The Book Club Forum on the subject of the entire Romance Genre and how there's a general perception that they're all Mills and Boon-type bodice-rippers, full of heaving bosoms and quivering members, which can be rather off-putting to modern women who feel they want more Sex and the City than Romp in the Hay. There's also a bit of a boom in supernatural chick-lit, and vampire chick-lit in particular seems to be peaking recently, so it was only a matter of time before a slew of vampire-romances came to the fore.

Surprisingly, SWV is a lot of fun and, as a romance, it certainly has bite (please, forgive the punning - it's utterly unavoidable in such cases!). Sands has a great sense of humour that shines through, but adds enough no-nonsense titillation to keep the most ardent romantic happy. It also explores the very real possibility of having to give up absolutely everything (i.e. your family, your job, etc) in order to gain things such as love and almost-eternal life - there's a real dilemma there that we're often not really expected to broach in many other vampire love stories and it makes a nice change to have this injection of realism in out-and-out fantasy.

Seeing as this is actually the first in a series, I may even be tempted to give the others a bit of a nibble...

Very funny, love it!!, 08 May 2004
I bought this book because of the reviews I read & I wasn't disapointed. The style of writing reminded me of Sandra Hill. There are some very funny parts which had me bursting out laughing. One instance is when Lucern is at the conference for romance writers & he is searching for condoms, I was laughing that much that I had tears running down my face.

I don't want to spoil the plot by giving to much away. But if you like red hot passion & laughter in a story this book is for you. I'm about to start "Love bites" about Etienne & Rachel, (Lucern's brother). Can't wait for the rest of the family's stories to come out.

DISAPPOINTING, 29 Apr 2004
I bought this book because I had found myself laughing out loud at some ofLynsay's earlier books, like Bliss. However this was a disappointing read.For starters, I just didn't find it funny, and secondly,the story dragged.It just lacked that special something. Yes, Lucerne is a vampire and Kateis initially unaware of this, but the slapstick scenes just lack the comictension that would make them funny. Also, despite several love scenes,there is a distinct lack of sexual tension-so the love scenes were justboring.If you want to read a Lynsay Sands, stick to her historicals.Sorry, but this just didn't work for me.

My favourite book this year!!, 28 Sep 2003
This is one fabulous books, so full. It would be a good movie. Lynsay's writing in sparklings, fun and the characters oh so funny.

If you need to have a really good laugh this is the medicine.

Lynsay shines while making you howl!!, 25 Aug 2003
Lynsay absolutely rocks with her new series about a dysfunctional vampire family! I won't go into the plot line
too heavy because you need to experience all the surprises
and delights yourself.

A mother, two sons and a daughter (and more relatives to come hopefully) face the every day struggles of vampire existence in the 21st Century. In this tale, originally called Lucern, we meet Lucern Argeneau, the first son.

He is a four hundred year old vampire, getting by in the dreary world by writing contemporary romances about...well, vampires...only no one catches on he is merely writing about his family. To his surprise, they are a big success, so much so his editor, Kate C. Leever of Roundhouse Publishing is determined to drag the reclusive writer to the Romantic Times Convention.

Lucern is a grumpy - albeit sexy - curmudgeon, and he is determined NOT to go to a book convention. However, Kate is a whirlwind, an editor - who has little life outside her work - so she is firmly determined to drag him kicking and screaming into the limelight. She gets aid from his family, who think Kate is not only a super editor, but also the perfect mate for Lucern. And while Lucern loves her as an editor - at a distance - he hates to admit he feels an attraction for the pushy lady.

Only, romance for the vampire - as well as attending a book convention - has a lot of modern day drawbacks. Kate fits in well with his family, though she finds them a bit odd. Lynsay is known for her side-aching humour, but she is at top form as Lucern is forced into the world of sunshine and supermarkets. Being your totally civilised vamp, Lucian does not go around biting necks - let's face it, in today's situation of aids, drugs and diseases only a foolish vampire runs around taking blood without knowing the donor's lifestyle! Being a smart vampire family, they have invested in a series of blood banks, and have a steady supply delivered to them. Only Kate's presence causes Lucern to miss din-din more than once, making him so famished he considers attacking a steak in the local market.

By the time Kate installs Lucern in the convention hotel, she is becoming concerned there is something very wrong with Lucern's health. From the mad escapade at the Ball for the Romance Times (with an appearance of Lady of RT herself!!) to Kate coming to terms with her popular vampire writer might just be writing biographies instead of fiction, it is typical Lynsay wit and brilliance.

Lucern is sexy, deliciously grumpy and is the new wave of vampires for the 21st Century. I have always enjoyed every book Lynsay was written, but I must say she takes the gold ring with this wonderful funny book! I fell in love with Lucern, so cannot wait for the rest of the Argeneau family

Blood lust at its best!, 31 May 2008
I absalutly love this book, yes parts of it were raunchy....but it wasnt drowned in the sex. I picked up this book strated to read and couldnt put it down. You feel yourself being dragged into the picture of the house its underground secrets, and the love and lust of a dangerous killer.

Savanna a beautiful woman seeking revenge of her brother and sister in laws killer she must go the the source of the death....a vampire. William being as dangerous as any other vampire, is a vampire with morals. Defianltly not a man to meet if your fait hearted for the studs! Savanna must convince william to turn her so she can defeat the vampire that killed her twin brother, but will she fall into this pit of lust and blood and loose herself to William, the dark handsome stranger she learns more and more about.

Great twists in the story with the raunchyness to set a fire, brill read, will definatly bring a tear to your eye!

Fab, 06 Nov 2007
THis is a fantastic Book if you have any sort of thing for vampires youll love it. Very sexy very romantic and funny in places

Supernatural Romance, 27 Feb 2006
This is a very sexy vampire romance that I have read again and again. There are few twists and turns in the story as Savannah and William race against time to find the evil vampire that killed her twin brother and sister-in-law.

I hope that there is another book in the series…

This is a delicious book – don’t miss out!

Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Like a long and complex dream, 06 Feb 2008
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, and a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.

The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no work in the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier and more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.

Whilst not denying a strong gothic element in the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, and even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, and Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, and the descent of landed property feature heavily in the plot - but this time set on the continent and in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."

Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeble in characterisation ... lacking in moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speak in this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, and the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.

There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prose in this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin and Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describes in such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett and Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is set in Gascony and Languedoc; volume two in Venice and Udolpho; volume three in Udolpho and Tuscany; and volume four back in Gascony and Languedoc.

Ostensibly set in the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners and sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time and place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives and forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, and the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castle in her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto and Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s and the city of Tintoretto and Monteverdi.

There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life and then leave only when they have some part to play in Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companion in all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasions in order to heighten tension or play a minor part in Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castle in which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.

So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. But in a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long and complex dream - the kind in which pleasure and apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, and determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.

The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheld in this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology and end-notes all appear to guide and enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.




If only there was more Udolpho..., 08 Aug 2007
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.

The middle third of the book actually set in the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful and has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced and resolved in this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-on in Udolpho and the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.

I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, and I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!

(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).

Just plain good fun!, 12 Feb 2005
I came to this book after reading about it in Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.

By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame and childish, but if you're like me and don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror and supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, and that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass and you get on with the story.

I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explained in the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' and so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)

Have fun!=)

Over-rated and over-written, 23 Mar 2004
Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" and Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pages in which bugger-all happened.

The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonment in a dark and scary castle and all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue and sexuality.

However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things up in 200 pages). Her writing in "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe nature in its most 'sublime' and 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.

As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents and secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.

The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters and what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.

All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically and start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" and "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.

I would urge anyone interested in Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" and compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.

rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw., 09 Sep 2003
This book is great fun. It's far too long, and some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French and Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes set in the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, and a bit of Mills and Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrown in for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body found in the gatehouse, and a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream and faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you get in this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interested in her for her money and the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants and their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do it in a very panto-ish way!

Fun & romantic, 02 Mar 2007
There was recently a bit of a debate on The Book Club Forum on the subject of the entire Romance Genre and how there's a general perception that they're all Mills and Boon-type bodice-rippers, full of heaving bosoms and quivering members, which can be rather off-putting to modern women who feel they want more Sex and the City than Romp in the Hay. There's also a bit of a boom in supernatural chick-lit, and vampire chick-lit in particular seems to be peaking recently, so it was only a matter of time before a slew of vampire-romances came to the fore.

Surprisingly, SWV is a lot of fun and, as a romance, it certainly has bite (please, forgive the punning - it's utterly unavoidable in such cases!). Sands has a great sense of humour that shines through, but adds enough no-nonsense titillation to keep the most ardent romantic happy. It also explores the very real possibility of having to give up absolutely everything (i.e. your family, your job, etc) in order to gain things such as love and almost-eternal life - there's a real dilemma there that we're often not really expected to broach in many other vampire love stories and it makes a nice change to have this injection of realism in out-and-out fantasy.

Seeing as this is actually the first in a series, I may even be tempted to give the others a bit of a nibble...

Very funny, love it!!, 08 May 2004
I bought this book because of the reviews I read & I wasn't disapointed. The style of writing reminded me of Sandra Hill. There are some very funny parts which had me bursting out laughing. One instance is when Lucern is at the conference for romance writers & he is searching for condoms, I was laughing that much that I had tears running down my face.

I don't want to spoil the plot by giving to much away. But if you like red hot passion & laughter in a story this book is for you. I'm about to start "Love bites" about Etienne & Rachel, (Lucern's brother). Can't wait for the rest of the family's stories to come out.

DISAPPOINTING, 29 Apr 2004
I bought this book because I had found myself laughing out loud at some ofLynsay's earlier books, like Bliss. However this was a disappointing read.For starters, I just didn't find it funny, and secondly,the story dragged.It just lacked that special something. Yes, Lucerne is a vampire and Kateis initially unaware of this, but the slapstick scenes just lack the comictension that would make them funny. Also, despite several love scenes,there is a distinct lack of sexual tension-so the love scenes were justboring.If you want to read a Lynsay Sands, stick to her historicals.Sorry, but this just didn't work for me.

My favourite book this year!!, 28 Sep 2003
This is one fabulous books, so full. It would be a good movie. Lynsay's writing in sparklings, fun and the characters oh so funny.

If you need to have a really good laugh this is the medicine.

Lynsay shines while making you howl!!, 25 Aug 2003
Lynsay absolutely rocks with her new series about a dysfunctional vampire family! I won't go into the plot line
too heavy because you need to experience all the surprises
and delights yourself.

A mother, two sons and a daughter (and more relatives to come hopefully) face the every day struggles of vampire existence in the 21st Century. In this tale, originally called Lucern, we meet Lucern Argeneau, the first son.

He is a four hundred year old vampire, getting by in the dreary world by writing contemporary romances about...well, vampires...only no one catches on he is merely writing about his family. To his surprise, they are a big success, so much so his editor, Kate C. Leever of Roundhouse Publishing is determined to drag the reclusive writer to the Romantic Times Convention.

Lucern is a grumpy - albeit sexy - curmudgeon, and he is determined NOT to go to a book convention. However, Kate is a whirlwind, an editor - who has little life outside her work - so she is firmly determined to drag him kicking and screaming into the limelight. She gets aid from his family, who think Kate is not only a super editor, but also the perfect mate for Lucern. And while Lucern loves her as an editor - at a distance - he hates to admit he feels an attraction for the pushy lady.

Only, romance for the vampire - as well as attending a book convention - has a lot of modern day drawbacks. Kate fits in well with his family, though she finds them a bit odd. Lynsay is known for her side-aching humour, but she is at top form as Lucern is forced into the world of sunshine and supermarkets. Being your totally civilised vamp, Lucian does not go around biting necks - let's face it, in today's situation of aids, drugs and diseases only a foolish vampire runs around taking blood without knowing the donor's lifestyle! Being a smart vampire family, they have invested in a series of blood banks, and have a steady supply delivered to them. Only Kate's presence causes Lucern to miss din-din more than once, making him so famished he considers attacking a steak in the local market.

By the time Kate installs Lucern in the convention hotel, she is becoming concerned there is something very wrong with Lucern's health. From the mad escapade at the Ball for the Romance Times (with an appearance of Lady of RT herself!!) to Kate coming to terms with her popular vampire writer might just be writing biographies instead of fiction, it is typical Lynsay wit and brilliance.

Lucern is sexy, deliciously grumpy and is the new wave of vampires for the 21st Century. I have always enjoyed every book Lynsay was written, but I must say she takes the gold ring with this wonderful funny book! I fell in love with Lucern, so cannot wait for the rest of the Argeneau family

Blood lust at its best!, 31 May 2008
I absalutly love this book, yes parts of it were raunchy....but it wasnt drowned in the sex. I picked up this book strated to read and couldnt put it down. You feel yourself being dragged into the picture of the house its underground secrets, and the love and lust of a dangerous killer.

Savanna a beautiful woman seeking revenge of her brother and sister in laws killer she must go the the source of the death....a vampire. William being as dangerous as any other vampire, is a vampire with morals. Defianltly not a man to meet if your fait hearted for the studs! Savanna must convince william to turn her so she can defeat the vampire that killed her twin brother, but will she fall into this pit of lust and blood and loose herself to William, the dark handsome stranger she learns more and more about.

Great twists in the story with the raunchyness to set a fire, brill read, will definatly bring a tear to your eye!

Fab, 06 Nov 2007
THis is a fantastic Book if you have any sort of thing for vampires youll love it. Very sexy very romantic and funny in places

Supernatural Romance, 27 Feb 2006
This is a very sexy vampire romance that I have read again and again. There are few twists and turns in the story as Savannah and William race against time to find the evil vampire that killed her twin brother and sister-in-law.

I hope that there is another book in the series…

This is a delicious book – don’t miss out!

A Long Day's Journey into Horror, 31 Aug 2004
If you like horror, you owe it to yourself to read this book from the beginnings of the genre. You will enjoy seeing the themes in Frankenstein repeated in other horror novels that you will read in the future. The book and the movie have essentially nothing in common, so assume that you do not know the story yet if you have only seen the movie.

If you do not like horror, you probably won't like the book very much at all.

The story opens in the frozen Arctic wastes during an sea-going expedition to find a passage through the ice to the East. Aboard the ship after a strange meeting, Frankenstein tells his story. As a young man he wanted to make a splash in the sciences, and invented a way to create life. Having done so, he became estranged from his new being with significant consequences for Frankenstein and his creation. The two interact closely throughout the book, like twin brothers in one sense and like Creator and creation in another sense.

This book presents significant challenges to the reader. Like many books that relate to scientific or quasi-scientific topics from long ago, Frankenstein seems highly outmoded to the modern reader. In the era of psychological knowledge, the development of moods and character in the book will also seem primitive to many. A further drawback is that this novel takes a long time to develop each of its points (even after the eventual action is totally foreshadowed in unmistakeable terms), so patience is required as layer after layer of atmosphere and thought are applied to create a complex, composite picture. Finally, the structure of the novel is unusual, with layers of narration applied to layers of narration, creating a feeling of looking at never-ending mirror images.

So, you may ask, why should someone read Frankenstein? My personal feeling is that there are two timelessly rewarding aspects to the book that well reward the reader (despite the drawbacks described above). Either is sufficient to please you. First, the book raises wonderful ethical issues about the responsibilities of science and the scientist towards the results of scientific endeavors. These issues are as up-to-date now as they were when the book was written. Those who developed atomic weapons and biotechnology tools appear to have given little more thought to what comes next than Frankenstein did toward his creation. Second, the moods that are built up in the reader by the book are extremely vivid and powerful. The artistry of this book can serve as a guide for novelists for centuries to come, in showing how much the reader can be deeply engaged by the circumstances of the characters.

Why, then, did I grade the book at three stars instead of five? Few will fail to be annoyed by the scientific awkwardness of the story, and that is a definite drawback. Also, only the most dedicated students of style will avoid feeling like the book moves and develops its story too slowly. Less is more in novels. In this case, more is less.

I cannot help but comment that this book is perhaps the finest example of appearances being deceiving that exists in literature. The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a close competitor in this regard, but that fine work definite has to fall behind Frankenstein. In this book, beings of physical beauty act in inhumane, ugly ways. Beings of great ugliness act in beautiful ways. The same being may act in both ways, in different circumstances. Looks are deceiving, and our perceptions are flawed even when our attention is fixed. If the characters could have overcome this form of stalled thinking, the horror would have been averted. So the lesson is that the misperceptions we aim at others rebound (like a reflection in a mirror) right back onto us.

If you have not yet read Paradise Lost, Frankenstein is a good excuse to read that poem. The development of the story in Frankenstein assumes a knowledge of that story about Satan leading a rebellion against God and being dispossessed into Hell.

After you have had a chance to absorb and appreciate the nice issues this book raises, ask yourself where you in your life are acting without sufficiently considering the implications of your actions. Then, commence to examine those potential consequences. You should be able to create more good results in this way, and take more comfort in what you are doing. Both will be excellent rewards for your introspection.

A good selection, 02 Dec 2002
C18th Gothic novels are always worth a read for anyone interested in the macabre, the fantastic, or the downright gruesome, and this selection makes excellent reading. Having said that, if you're looking for a good critical edition this isn't the book for you - the critical apparatus is pretty minimal. There are better editions of Frankenstein out there, of course, but even if you already have one, this is worth it for the other three novels it contains.

Those vile victorians...., 30 May 2004
My goodness....horror at its finest!! some of the best horror writing is found in this book....ever.....trust me on this! 30 kids in a year 5 class can't be wrong when they ask me to read this over and over again! i recommend reading this in a big armchair, a single light source, windows open and the phone off the hook! you will want to keep reading this over and over again!

Like a long and complex dream, 06 Feb 2008
After having read the mere 176-page original gothic tale of 1764, Horace Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto", I embarked on this 672-page equally-famous gothic fantasy by Ann Radcliffe, published thirty years later, and a best-selling literary phenomenon of its day.

The opening of Terry Castle's incisive introduction to the work notes that, "Perhaps no work in the history of English fiction has been more often caricatured." It is supposed to be "the greatest (or at least the most famous) of gothic romances ... has an archetypal `gothic villain' ... is loaded with exotic scenery ... [and] its heroine, a victim of `sensibility', faints a lot." But whilst common opinion may see it as "a bit of a `silly' book too", the conscientious reader must actually "feel a twinge of bad faith"; Udolpho is actually "bigger, baggier and more uncanny than one thought it was." This is so true.

Whilst not denying a strong gothic element in the writing, the book is also a travelogue, a morality tale, a commentary on manners, and even a comedy of errors; just like Shakespeare, the servants provide a focus for humour, and Radcliffe is not even averse to parody herself as well as the tale she tells. Indeed, one can even view the novel as a typical Jane Austen romance - a woman, her marriage options, and the descent of landed property feature heavily in the plot - but this time set on the continent and in a gothic milieu; Jane Austen even drew on some of the scenes for her `Northanger Abbey' of 1818. But Terry Castle draws attention to the title of the novel, namely the `mysteries' of Udolpho. Thus one can add to the long list of genres set out above, even that of an Agatha Christie murder-mystery, a product of the new age of enlightenment when old-style superstitious mystery was replaced by its more reasoned newcomer, although "Radcliffe's supposedly `rational' explanations are at times almost more implausible than the supernatural explanations they are meant to displace."

Whilst the consensus about the book's merits might be overwhelmingly negative - "too long, feeble in characterisation ... lacking in moral or intellectual gravitas ... [and] full of absurdities" - a closer examination reveals "a meticulous stylist ... who can create moments of considerable drama". Indeed, the style of writing is worthy of remark. The book is full of long sentences, often beautifully constructed. The book must be read at a stately pace to accord with the natural breath of the author's rhythm. Did she speak in this way, or are the construction of sentences designed so as to be read aloud within family groups as they sat before the fire on cold, dark, late-eighteenth century evenings? This style can lead to artifice, and the excessive number of commas can be exasperating on occasions.

There are whole chapters of descriptive prose about the sublime effects of the natural landscape. These are of more value than mere curiosity; the author writes very well with a sharp eye for detail. Terry Castle sagely compares her prose in this regard to the landscapes paintings of Salvatore Rosa, Poussin and Claude Lorraine that Radcliffe admired. This is all the more amazing, as she never visited the places she describes in such detail, but sees them through the eyes of fancy. Actually, she saw them through the eyes of the likes of Tobias Smollett and Hester Thrale Piozzi whose travel books she greatly relied upon. Geographically, the novel forms an arc: volume one is set in Gascony and Languedoc; volume two in Venice and Udolpho; volume three in Udolpho and Tuscany; and volume four back in Gascony and Languedoc.

Ostensibly set in the year 1584, the book is imbued with the manners and sensibilities of genteel England of 1794. For this reason, I found it convenient to forego imagining a strict rendition of time and place. Whilst the number of precise factual anachronisms is small, they are nevertheless difficult to ignore; they include such items as coffee drinking, the names of English poets, the use of knives and forks, the wearing by ladies of certain hats, and the naming of rooms as `saloons'. Moreover, the description afforded to the city of Venice is more akin to the 1780s, or what Terry Castle in her introduction describes as "the elegant Venice of Canaletto and Goldoni", rather than that of the 1580s and the city of Tintoretto and Monteverdi.

There is very little character development. Indeed, there is very little character at all, since the novel revolves almost entirely around our heroine Emily. People come into her life and then leave only when they have some part to play in Emily's story. Even her dog, who appears to be her constant companion in all her travels, appears a mere two or three occasions in order to heighten tension or play a minor part in Emily's experiences: on his second appearance, as our heroine seeks to escape from the castle in which she is held, the dog's yapping threatens to disclose her position, but I had by then even forgotten the dog's very existence, so notably absent had his presence become.

So, what is this novel to be? A gothic romance? Travelogue? Morality tale? Commentary on manners or comedy of errors? Or enlightenment mystery? Why, all of the above, of course. But in a twist of blazing insight, perhaps Terry Castle is right to recommend this book for 21st century readers as a precursor of Freud's work on the unconscious, for "like a long and complex dream - the kind in which pleasure and apprehension are so closely intermingled as to become indistinguishable - the book repays imaginative introspection." When Radcliffe writes halfway through her novel that, the heroine "blamed herself for suffering her romantic imagination to carry her so far beyond the bounds of probability, and determined to endeavour to check its rapid flights, lest they should sometimes extend into madness", she is warning the incautious reader too.

The usual high standards of the Oxford University Press's World's Classics editions are upheld in this volume. Not only the introduction, but also the standard textual note, select bibliography, chronology and end-notes all appear to guide and enhance the experience. As with all reprints of classic works of literature, I recommend that the so-called introduction (which is really more of a commentary) is best read after the novel.




If only there was more Udolpho..., 08 Aug 2007
If I'm honest, I found this book to be a major disappointment - almost more so because it could easily have been so much better. The major problem I had was with the structure of the book, which seems designed to kill off a potentially interesting story.

The middle third of the book actually set in the castle of Udolpho is excellent - its dark, suspenseful and has some genuinely compelling moments. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the remainder of the story which bookends this section. The first 200 pages drag by so slowly its almost painful. Nothing happens. There are endless descriptions of mountains. Then we are treated to more sections of nothing happening... The final 200 pages, following Emily's escape from Udolpho, are an improvement but still hugely anti-climactic. The mysteries introduced and resolved in this section really don't hold a candle to the goings-on in Udolpho and the book just fizzles out. Its a shame.

I'm certain I will read more of Radcliffe's works as 'The Mysteries of Udolpho' is essentially a good book ruined by being far too long, and I notice the rest of her works are much shorter!

(As an afterthought, I'm curious as to why the book description states that this work was 'a potent influence on Walpole'. I'm fairly certain that Walpole published his major gothic novel at least 30 years before Radcliffe wrote 'The Myseries of Udolpho', but perhaps I'm wrong).

Just plain good fun!, 12 Feb 2005
I came to this book after reading about it in Jane Austen's 'Northanger Abbey', which I suspect is why many enquirers are now reading this! I really enjoyed it and, although some of the other reviewers' negative comments are at least partly justified, I'd say, if you're not afraid of long novels, give it a go, it's just good fun.

By 21st century standards of horror, this story is tame and childish, but if you're like me and don't appreciate the excesses of modern horror and supernatural/occult things, but just enjoy a good read, you'll find this more to your taste. Yeah, sure there are some unbelievable parts, (like Emily's being able to compose whole sonnets on the spot, for one), but fiction like this is not really meant to be convincing. Mrs Radcliffe wrote to entertain the masses, and that's what she achieves. Yes, the desciptions can be a bit tedious at times, but if you read quickly as most of us do when we're 'in to' a novel, they soon pass and you get on with the story.

I esp. liked the fact that all the mysteries are explained in the end which saves you from having to go through the dissatisfying experience of wanting to know exactly what happened back there when 'x' did 'y' and so on, but never being told. (I sometimes wonder if some authors couldn't think of anything convincing with which to tie up their loose ends!!)

Have fun!=)

Over-rated and over-written, 23 Mar 2004
Having read Lewis' "The Monk", Shelley's "Frankenstein" and Radcliffe's own "A Sicilian Romance" I was really looking forward to a gigantic, 700-page, overblown Gothic novel. But I'm afraid that I found it very hard to account for about 500 pages in which bugger-all happened.

The plot of "Mysteries of Udolpho" is quite good, if rather predictable: arranged marriages, imprisonment in a dark and scary castle and all sorts of anxieties about authority figures, political intrigue and sexuality.

However, unlike "A Sicilian Romance", Radcliffe does not skilfully restrain the excesses of the Gothic genre (the earlier novel wraps things up in 200 pages). Her writing in "Udolpho" is unbelievably bad - as per usual she LOVES to describe nature in its most 'sublime' and 'awe-inspiring'. Though, frankly, every single description (and there are hundreds) is identical.

As for the actual story (which does matter, you know) her knack at creating tension is nowhere to be found. Her enthusiasm for mountain descriptions almost completely eclipses the need for dark undercurrents and secrets that can't be explained. She seems almost unwilling to create intrigue: every hundred pages or so she'll mention a secret document or shocking painting, but they are quickly forgotten until the plot requires them.

The heroine, Emily, is even more annoying - it's clear that you're not supposed to take her very seriously, as she is always under the impression that every man is out to ravish her. But what is the point of having an intriguing main character if the author is only going to happily talk about other characters and what they're up to while Emily's not around? This isn't stream-of-consciousness, it's 'head-swapping' - something most writers like to avoid.

All the ingredients are there, but Radcliffe's the problem here. Her narrative pace just makes no sense: she spends 300 pages on one castle, only to have the heroine escape anticlimactically and start ANOTHER 'adventure' almost near the end of the novel! Critics love to describe this book as "challenging" and "avant-garde", but this is NOT Virginia Woolf.

I would urge anyone interested in Gothic fiction to read "A Sicilian Romance" and compare it to "Mysteries of Udolpho". I honestly can't understand why the latter should hold a candle to the former.

rip-roaring Gothic, red and raw in tooth and claw., 09 Sep 2003
This book is great fun. It's far too long, and some bits of it simply don't make sense, but you can see why Ann Radcliffe's work was so inspirational to so many other writers. Her descriptions of the French and Italian countryside are beautiful (which is all the more astonishing as she never went to those places!), but it is the scenes set in the Castle that are the best. It's like a heady mix of Poe, the Marquis de Sade, Vincent Price films, and a bit of Mills and Boon-style romance. There's even the odd bit of sword-fighting thrown in for good measure. There are some enjoyably OTT Gothic parts, such as Emily's awful aunt being carted off to the tower, the bloodstained body found in the gatehouse, and a bit of a stroll round the catacombs. Plus Emily may scream and faint a lot but she is certainly no wimp. I've knocked off a star because the last couple of hundred pages or so can get very tedious, I found myself losing interest once Emily had left the Castle, plus we don't get to see enough of her wicked guardian. He's an interesting character, different to the usual demonic cad you get in this kind of thing (he has no sexual designs on Emily for one thing, he's solely interested in her for her money and the advantages that marrying her off to the highest bidder can bring). Also I could have done without the stock comic servants and their hammy way of talking, I kept expecting the maid to exclaim "lor bless you ma'am!" (in fact for all I can remember she may well have done!) It would be great fun to see this filmed, but you'd have to do it in a very panto-ish way!

Fun & romantic, 02 Mar 2007
There was recently a bit of a debate on The Book Club Forum on the subject of the entire Romance Genre and how there's a general perception that they're all Mills and Boon