Wild at Heart, by Patricia Gaffney

[rachelmanija]

In 1893 America, an anthropologist gets custody of the "Ontario Man," who was found running wild and seemed to have been raised by wolves. Thrilled at the thought of discovering the nature of humanity untainted by civilization, he locks the man up and begins performing psychological experiments on him. Meanwhile, the anthropologist's family-- including his young widowed daughter Sydney -- begin to realize that there's more to the Ontario Man than meets the eye.

Considering that this is genre romance, the potential for this story to be sappy, squicky, or embarrassing seemed high. It's actually great: sweet, funny, touching, well-characterized, and with some serious exploration of what would really happen in such a scenario. The supporting cast is given plenty of time and attention, leading to a lot of intriguing secondary relationships. I especially liked the interaction between the heroine's little brother Sam and her older brother Philip with the man whose name, they eventually discover, is Michael. Michael himself is a great character, a feral child re-discovering human interaction, and sentimentalized as little as possible.

The prose is good, too, and the sex scenes are both hot and based on specific character interactions. I don't know anything about this period so I have no idea if its portrayal is accurate, but it was vividly evoked (the World's Fair! The scientists arguing philosophy!) and felt real within the book, at least.

Like many romances, the book has some third-act problems such as Michael's parentage being a total cliche and, more importantly, his relationship with Sydney getting lost for a while. Sydney starts out a very strong, interesting character, and while she doesn't exactly become less strong, she does become less central for portions of the book than I would have liked.

Nevertheless, I loved this a lot and it rekindled my enjoyment of the genre. Has anyone read anything else by Gaffney? What would you recommend?

Wild at Heart

Comments

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

I don't read much romance (I only read it by accident, I think), but I'm interested in what you say about third-act problems. Are romance novels in particular prone to them? Do you mean problems in tying up plot threads, or something more specific?

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

Really a lot of genre romance novels introduce contrived plot twists in the third act in order to keep the hero and heroine apart, physically or emotionally.

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

*nods* Okay: in movies, what my younger daughter calls the Hollywood betrayal. "What? You mean you only dated me that first time because your friend bet I'd never say yes? Well that completely negates the six months of friendship and blossoming love that developed between us; I now believe you care nothing for me and this was all nothing more than a wager with a friend!"

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly.

Though not in this particular case. In this book, there's a perfectly reasonable plot-related complication, but also the heroine becomes somewhat randomly convinced that OH WOES IT CAN'T WORK OUT for unrelated reasons that don't make a whole lot of sense.

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

In the case of at least three Laura Kinsale novels I've read, there is a revolution in Act III. Not that I actually object to that.

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

So for her revolutions are maybe just a natural part of plotting, like having rising action and whatever. Oops, chapter 24--time for the revolution! And sure, what's not to love about a revolution?

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

Kinsale's plotting tends toward the baroque. I reviewed a number of her books, so you can find her in my tags.

[sleary.livejournal.com]

Erk, yes. When your heroine's actions in the third act consist of sitting in a courtroom, your structure has issues! I liked Sydney a lot, though. She was a refreshingly mature heroine.

Try Gaffney's Outlaw in Paradise. It has problems, too, but it's hysterical.

[rachelmanija.livejournal.com]

There was also the baffling "OMG I can't marry you now that you're a Scottish lord!" Which made no sense because the characters who cared about social status all seemed to think that made him way more of a catch than when he was the Ontario Man.

That being said, I too liked Sydney. She was otherwise very sensible.

[daedala.livejournal.com]

I liked the Wyckerly trilogy. (The titles are from parts of the marriage ceremony -- "To have and to hold" and the like -- but I don't remember them exactly.)

"Crooked Hearts" has some way crazy offensive Orientalism going on.

[oracne.livejournal.com]

I have RomanceReader!Fail - I have not read Gaffney, though she's well known. WILD AT HEART is in my giant TBR, though, and has been for a while. It's good to have more confirmation it's a good one.

[oyceter]

Wild at Heart is my favorite of her books. As Daedala mentioned, Crooked Hearts has horrible Orientalism that made me throw the book at a wall (I am SO ANNOYED! It was about two thieves falling in love and I so wanted to like it!). The second book in the Wyckerly trilogy (To Have and To Hold) has an alpha bastard hero. The good thing is that he is actually acknowledged as a complete asshole. The bad thing is that it means I hated him through the entire book and never forgave him.

I'm sad because I like some bits of some Gaffney books, and then she always slips in things that drive me up the wall.