The Reluctant Miss Van Helsing [Mass Market Paperback]

Wow- this was significantly better than the first in the series, THE REMARKABLE MISS FRANKENSTEIN. Jane Paine Van Helsing is a very likeable character. Her father is the drill sergeant of vampire killing and has taught her from an early age how to kill vampires in a myriad of ways, usually involving the use of the Van Helsing stakes. Unfortunately for Jane, she gets nauseated at the sight of blood and is absolutely terrified of the spiders that tend to populate the cemeteries and crypts where vampires are usually found. Jane would prefer to be bird watching, and much to the embarrassment of her family has never successfully staked a vampire. Oh she has tried, generally resulting in ruining her gown and causing great amusement for her cousins. Clair Frankenstein Huntsley, Jane's best friend and the main character from the first book in the series, has the hare-brained idea to matchmake Jane and the Master Vampire of the city, Neil Asher, the Earl of Wolverton. Meanwhile, Jane is determined to please her father and attempts to stake Asher, only to have the two of them found in a seemingly compromising situation. And did I mention that Jane also staked Asher in the rear end? Needless to say, Asher reluctantly marries Jane and it is only when the true villain of the story, the infamous Dracul, attempts to make Jane his bride that Asher fully realizes his feelings for Jane. This book was funny from beginning to end with numerous plays on words and intermingling of history. I was particularly amused with the play on words involving Madame and Colonel Saunders and the house of ill repute, the Birds of Paradise Club. This book is highly recommended! I'm glad I gave Minda Webber a second chance as she truly delivered with this hilarious novel.

How many times does the reader really need to be reminded that our heroine is a plain Jane? Apparently about 30 times or so to make sure we get the fact she's not a babe. Fine. She's plain. Move on.

When I find myself talking to the heroine, telling her to get a backbone, it's always a bad sign. Jane is brave on occasion, but is an utter doormat and victim when dealing with her father, another person who reminds us Jane isn't pretty. Her willingness to be abused by every man in her life made me a little sick.

And, the sad attempts at humor by changing cliches and sayings into vampiric mottos got tiring very quickly.

The book had a great premise, but a good editor would have made a huge difference in this book.

I read vampire novels (you can see my reviews of dozens of them). I read Regency romances (and have reviewed a few). So you'd think that something that purports to be about a Regency-ish vampire hunter would be right up my alley, right? Well, it would be, if it were well done. But I'm picky about "well-done." I insist on at least the basics of characterization and plot, and a bit of historical accuracy in my historical romances, and dialogue that's witty. This book fails on all those counts.

It falls most seriously short on historical accuracy and period atmosphere. Some of that is deliberate; the author is trying so hard to get in sly puns and allusions to 20th-21st century pop culture that she deliberately stretches the way the characters talk. But other anachronisms are accidental and annoying - references to going to Plan B if Plan A doesn't work; references to someone's ego (I notice that one in many historical romances; people seem to space over the fact that we didn't start using that terminology until Freud laid it out at the turn of the 20th century...) Incidentally, the book is allegedly set in 1828, which is technically post-Regency, but not yet Victorian. There's a reference to Dr. Jekyll, even though Stevenson didn't write "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" until 1885. And so on.

Some of the plot devices were so predictable as to be passe - our heroine is carrying a flask of brandy and a vial of holy water in the same pocket; of COURSE she's going to accidentally throw the brandy instead of the holy water. (Let's never mind how our heroine has a liquor flask in the pocket of a light muslin gown; let's never mind that gowns of the period did not have pockets as we know them...)

And many of the allusions to pop culture were not worth making - the version of "Santa Claus is Coming to Town," for example, was (a) stupid; (b) not very well done as to imitating meter and rhyme, and (c) totally pointless with regard to the plot.

There are also the usual typos, grammatical errors, and word misusages that one finds in all too many mass market paperbacks these days; publishers don't seem to employ copy editors any longer.

To give the book its due, it's not totally unreadable. For a few pages, the allusions to pop culture are fun; if they came at about 1 every 10 pages, instead of being smushed together in run-on fashion, it would be a very funny style. I suspect that someone who isn't a dedicated Regency reader would be far less annoyed by the anachronisms than I am, and might therefore enjoy the book more. And if your only previous exposure to vampire fiction has been recent work that's more or less romance - Betsy the Vampire Queen, for instance - and has not included the serious authors such as Chelsea Quinn Yarbro, then you probably wouldn't be as bothered by the haphazard treatment of vampire powers and weaknesses, or the mixing of vampire and other supernatural cultures, as I am. So, if all you're looking for is a light read, not holding out for an actual good Regency or intense vampire experience, then this might be acceptable.

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 21 reviews  2.7 out of 5 stars