Shades of Milk and Honey

I thoroughly enjoyed this Regency-style fantasy novel. I sped through it in just a few hours -- the style, while reminiscent of Jane Austen, is much simpler and faster than those nineteenth century classics -- and I found myself quite caught up in the fates of the main characters.

The heroine, Jane

Show More

Ellsworth, is one of the best Austen-redux characters I've ever read -- she is plain, first of all, but very talented in "the womanly arts", including the use of magical glamour (there is the fantasy twist) and, of course, dashed clever and sensible. I find this combination of traits to be a perfect transformation of the typical (I use that word reluctantly) Austen heroine into a realistic twenty-first century heroine -- retaining the most admirable characteristics, but turning the physical emphasis on its head, so that we -- the generations of the perpetually self-doubting, thanks to our culture -- can relate in a genuine and complete way. Jane Ellsworth struggles with the way people treat her due to her plainness, but she is also blind to the genuine regard that some people feel because she dismisses herself in a similar way; her journey toward true self-awareness is a significant part of this novel's emotional meaning.

This is, naturally, a romance. The fantasy here is light -- no wizards or dragons or big special effects scenes -- and, like the novels that inspired it, this book focuses on the minutia of everyday. At least, everyday in a world where magic is sort of like glorified needlepoint. The interplay between the characters is the real delight here and one thrills as the various figures are revealed for who they truly are and as the romantic entanglements get sorted. I won't spoil who ends up where and with whom, of course, but I will say that this novel contains one of the better proposal scenes I've read in a Regency-style novel. I found it charming.

Charming, in fact, really sums up the entire package. Some readers will be frustrated by the simpler aspects and the occasionally uneven pacing -- the end comes all at a gallop, but I am reminded that it often happened that way in Austen too, and Kowal is entirely forthcoming about the fact that Austen was the key inspiration for the novel. If one goes into this expecting the level of detail and brilliance that Austen's own work consistently displayed, however, one may be disappointed. No redux can approach that level, but Kowal's originality and fresh elements -- including the limitations of the magic, which make everything more plausible -- make this a wonderful read in and of itself. Approached as a bright, entertaining homage to a favorite writer and light, clever read in its own right, this novel shines.

Show Less

Of the two Ellsworth sisters, the younger, Melody, may be prettier, but it is Jane who has the highly desirable talent of working with glamour, a must for any well-to-do lady in this alternate Regency England. However, Jane feels like she is forced to acquiesce to Melody’s physical superiority,

Show More

and sit on the sides while Melody flirts with the gentlemen in their social circle: Mr. Dunkirk, their kind and gentle neighbor; Captain Livingston, a childhood friend who has just come home; and Mr. Vincent, an accomplished glamourist hired by the neighbors.

As Jane navigates the everyday life of a respectable woman, she learns more about glamour, people, and herself.

SHADES OF MILK AND HONEY sounded like it was going to be my favorite type of novel. Who can resist a magical version of Regency England? The idea is certainly nothing new in books. However, while I thought SHADES OF MILK AND HONEY captured the language of the time fairly well, it ended up having very little substance to fully ensnare me.

My favorite thing about this book was its language. Kowal’s writing style is very loyal to Austen’s—to the point where it might feel like you know exactly what’s going to happen, because you can find nearly all of the possible plot twists in Austen novels. I enjoy it when the language of a novel feels appropriate to its setting, and SHADES OF MILK AND HONEY did that in my opinion.

I liked the idea of glamour as a quality of feminine status, and enjoyed reading about Jane’s glamour workings, and what exactly it entails for her and her social circle. I couldn’t help but feel, however, that the glamour idea was not as well integrated into the world as it could be. That’s because, when it comes down to it, I feel like this book tries to be no more than a pleasant portrait of life in this alternate-world Regency England, lacking in the memorable characters and social satire and make Austen’s novels so beloved. The characters are either blandly generic (like Jane) or irritatingly obsessed with the “feminine duties” of flirtation and presentation (like Melody).

I don’t mean to say that this book required a “deeper message” in order to be a good read. But I wish that it had done what it attempted to successfully. The plot developments piled one on top of the other so rapidly and inconceivably that it was like watching a TV show with a lot of potential for charm gradually but steadily go the way of the ridiculous. Secret affairs, double engagements, deception, an armed showdown!—I became really confused as to what this book wanted us to get out of it, especially when it had tried so hard to present itself as poised, instead of melodramatic. But that’s what it became, in the end.

SHADES OF MILK AND HONEY makes for a charming diversion for fans of Austen and light fantasy, but beyond that I’m not sure it has enough power to make an impression. It might even be that the more one thinks about this book afterwards, the more annoyed one might get. I enjoyed approximately the first half of the book, and still think the concept is a good one, but when I came to the end I was glad to be finished. And I’m not sure that’s a feeling I want to get out of reading.

Show Less

Jane and Melody are sisters in need of husbands in a time when propriety was everything and estates were entailed away. Lovely Melody seems to have an interest in either Mr. Dunkirk or Captain Livingston, the nephew of Lady FitzCameron. Jane hopes to attract the notice of Mr. Dunkirk herself; she

Show More

may be plain, but she is quite an accomplished lady, not least in the ability to work glamour.

Yes, you read right. In this Austenesque fantasy, working magic - known as "glamour" - is an art much like painting or music that could be added to a woman's (or man's) repertoire. When one thinks of it as this type of accomplishment, the idea is not so foreign really, and gives the fantasy a light touch. This is an inventive tale that cleverly nods to Jane Austen while succeeding as a story in its own right.

Show Less

Pros: quick pace, seamlessly adds magic to historically accurate pre-Victorian setting

Cons: entirely character driven, ending felt rushed

Two British Regency era sisters, one beautiful the other accomplished, vie for the attentions of men.

Despite her mastery of the womanly arts of painting, piano

Show More

and glamour, 'plain' Jane Ellsworth despairs of finding a husband and is jealous of her younger sister's good looks and easy manner.

The novel's a quick read, with short chapters and lots of dialogue. Though not in first person, we see the world through Jane's eyes, as she tries to deaden her feelings for Mr. Dunkirk for fear that he's interested in her sister. Meanwhile she learns more about magic by examining the techniques of a visiting glamourist, much to his annoyance.

Like the Jane Austen novels it was based on, Shades of Milk and Honey is entirely character driven and has no plot beyond whether Jane will end up married and to whom. Those who enjoy Victorian literature will appreciate the attention to detail Kowal puts into her work. The addition of magic - the only non-historical attribute - adds an interesting element to the story and is seamlessly integrated into the Victorian culture.

Jane could be a Mary Sue character were it not for her rivalry with her sister. Always proper, Jane suppresses her emotions to the point that her art is lifeless, despite her talent.

While the climax was dramatic, the ending felt a bit rushed. Everything was too neatly tied up in too few pages.

If you enjoy Regency literature, this is a great read, whether you're into fantasy or not.

Show Less

I really enjoyed the setting and plot of this book . . . up until the last couple of chapters. I think the ending could have worked if she'd foreshadowed it a bit better. Instead, it felt like some characters got off too easy while other characters we'd come to love were unexpectedly thrown under a

Show More

bus (or carriage). Very disappointing.

Show Less

I'm sorry but this just drove me nuts. I’m kind of at a loss for what other people saw in it. Again and again I found myself channeling Diego Montoya, “I do not think that word means what you think it means.” Some examples:

Both of my girls are too sensible for such nonsense.""Yes. We are

Show More

sensible girls. ...And so we should have no trouble in using our sensibility to convince you of the importance of new gowns..." No. Sensibility is not the ability to be sensible. It is the ability to be sensiTIVE, and open to emotional and aesthetic experience. Anyone embarking upon an Austen pastiche should KNOW that!! Dammit Janet!!!!!!

Buffington expects me to sit in on the next round of rubber
Again, no. Rubber is not a kind of game. Rubber means the best of three rounds. You could play a rubber of any card game but you would never say a round of rubber. I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

a quicksilver of unease flourished through Jane's joints Um. That phrase is just wrong. Its clunky and awkward and makes no sense. If quicksilver is serving as a noun here, well the noun quicksilver means mercury and if she has mercury flourishing in her joints you might want to get her to a doctor. If, as seems more likely, quicksilver is supposed to be an adjective, then what is it describing please? It seems to me there’s a word missing from this sentence. Perhaps a quicksilver feeling of unease flourished (honestly, flourished?) or a quicksilver frisson, or a quicksilver tremor or something but as this sentence stands its just goofy, and I’m sorry but when vague random things start flourishing in people’s joints I’m just...ugh.

Rendered in far greater detail than Mr Vincent had employed in the scenery for his shadow-play, Jane could still sense his hand in the graceful line of the trunks. Please! Get control of your referents! As this sentence stands it says that JANE was rendered in greater detail than the scenery. Well I should hope so, being as how she's a person and not a backdrop.

There is page after page after page of this stuff. Gack. Just... gack. Is it too much to ask for Austen pastiche to at least aspire to prose that is not actively painful to read? Austen’s prose was lithe, elegant, balanced, lovely. If you are going to imitate her at least make a better effort than this nonsense.

As much as the style made me nuts, the content made me more nuts. I mean come on. The two sisters at the center of the story spend most of their time backstabbing and one upping each other in hot pursuit of available men by all means necessary. They lie, cheat and steal, I’m not just spouting a cliché, they actually do all of those things. They eavesdrop, they tell tales on each other. They act like two first graders squabbling over a toy. The novelist keeps telling me these are loving sisters, but that’s not what she shows me. What she shows me is pettiness and endless rationalizations for pettiness.

The protagonist discovers that the man she’s been pursuing for most of the novel has done something horribly immoral murdered , I say again, murdered his sister’s husband and it does not appear to give her one moment of pause . But when she gets a better offer she drops him at once. She makes promises to other characters and then breaks them as soon as they become difficult. She always has a reason for failing to live up to her commitments, she’s full of self justifications, but I would trust her about as far as I could throw a Buick.

Plus some of this stuff is just absurd. At one point the main character passes out and lies outside on the ground overnight. !! She then hops up, apparently exhibiting no ill effects except a slight headache and some messy hair, and goes home where no one questions the fact that she’s been MISSING for twelve hours. Then, without changing her clothes or swallowing a cup of tea, she goes racing off (with her father’s blessing forsooth!) first, on foot, then in a carriage, and then on horseback in some strange eighteenth century equivalent of a car chase in order to prevent a duel.

By the way, duels are conducted according to a set of rules, none of which are even acknowledged in the “duel” portrayed here, let alone followed. Which makes what happens not a duel, but a roadside assault. But again, none of the characters even questions that for a moment.

Again and again and again the period details are just wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong. The specifics, names, manners, words, games, rules of precedence and behavior, choices, are nails on a blackboard wrong much of the time. But more than that, the people are just wrong. These are not people of the eighteenth century, they don’t exhibit the beliefs or the world view of people of the eighteenth century. These are people who would be much more at home on Jerry Springer, pretending, not very convincingly, to be from the eighteenth.

I really am at a loss here. Is this supposed to be some sort of Flashman-like comedy? You know, where the joke is in the divide between the morals and manners professed and the morals and manners expressed? If so, throw me a hint, throw me a bone.

Because honestly what I’m reading here is a somewhat cheesy romance novel dressed up with some vague historical and magical set dressing which is in no way integral or important to the story. Don't even get me started on the magical set dressing. The whole business of manipulating glamour could be instantly replaced by painting watercolors or playing the piano without changing the story in any way. Which makes the magic nothing more than a decoration, which means this is not actually a fantasy novel. Nor is it a regency novel. It’s a contemporary romance in a Halloween costume.

Show Less

I decided to read this book because John Scalzi talks often on his blog about Mary Robinette Kowal. They are good friends and she seems like she has a great sense of humour. This is the first book published by her. I can imagine lots of people who would like this fantasy remake of the Jane Austen

Show More

novel but it is not my thing.

And, essentially, that is what this book is. Take any Jane Austen novel, add magic as an art form that all young well-brought-up girls should learn and that's about it. There are romances and dinner parties and long country walks and balls and scoundrels. Kowal has done a good job of evoking the Austen style but having read one I won't be looking for any more.

Show Less

I really enjoyed this Jane Austen-era romantic adventure. The language felt right for the time period, and I enjoyed such a different kind of magic employed as a "womanly art." The storyline was a little predictable, but very much in keeping with the Austen-like feel.

Fantastic, both in the sense of involving fantasy and in the sense of being well-written. The characters are entertaining and although the book definitely has a Regency/Austen feel, it still feels fresh. I was very happy to hear that there will be a sequel.

This novel was inspired by Jane Austen's work and it shows especially in the character types. To me the echoes of Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility were the strongest. Kowal lacks the wit and irony that makes Austen such a pleasure to read, but she does add magic to the mix and manages

Show More

to create a universe of her own. At romance she fails: there's no real build-up and no clue of the heroine falling in love with the man she ends up with. Then again, she is a spinster and might say yes to a proposal just because she receives one... Anyway, to me her motives and emotions were unclear. The pacing of the story wasn't quite right, either. Things went on very slowly for the first three quarters (which I liked) and then everything happened like a lightning stroke (which I didn't like): dramatic conflicts emerged and were resolved all at once. I liked the beginning but was disappointed in the end. Three stars seems fair.

Show Less

I am, I freely admit, a fan of Heyer’s novels, and while I wouldn’t call myself an Austen fan, I’ve certainly read her books. So when I first saw Kowal’s Regency fantasy, I knew that sooner or later I’d be picking up a copy. In fact, I received this book as a Christmas present. And read

Show More

it during the journey back to the UK. It’s pretty much as you’d expect – old-maid-ish daughter of comfortably well-off provincial family gets all excited when eligible men turn up at the local nob’s house. The difference here is that people can practice a sort of light-based magic, “glamour”, which allows them to create illusions – and this has become a new… well, not art-form, but certainly a form of “accomplishment”. Jane is the plain older sister of beautiful Melody, whose charms are sure to land her a good match, except Jane is gifted at glamour – so cue a pair of “interesting” gentlemen who are drawn to Jane, Melody’s bitterness because she’s smart enough to realise a pretty face is not enough, the return of a childhood friend who proves to be a bounder, a young girl who Jane takes under her wing… It’s a polished piece, perhaps a little too polished – there was something that didn’t quite ring true about it all, not that it prevented me from enjoying it. Kowal handles the relationships well, and the glamour is nicely done – but the story seemed wrapped up almost as an afterthought with a throwaway happy-ever-after ending. At the moment, I’m not sure if I’ll be bothering with the rest of the series.

Show Less

A Jane Austen plot, with the addition of small, domestic magics, told in slightly more modern language.

I wasn't really quite in the mood for this. Add at least half a star if you're fond of Austen.

I loved this book! It was amazing and fun. I love Austen so this book was like one of her books but with magic and fantasy. So I loved it! It was also a fast and easy read that I could not put down!

A fast, fun read that very much reads like Jane Austen with magic. I quite liked the characters and adore the magic Kowal's created. I hope to see more in this world!

This was an interesting premise, and I was excited to read it, but it ended up falling a bit flat for me. I had some problems with the development of the relationships between the heroine and certain people, particularly the one she ended up with. She spent the entire book pining for Mr. Dunkirk,

Show More

only to eventually throw aside her feelings when he didn't listen to her during the climatic showdown. And then a few days later she accepts a marriage proposal from Mr. Vincent, who she has yet to show or tell us that she has any strong feelings for whatsoever. It lacked the emotion I like to see in a romance book.

I also found the final climatic showdown a little hard to follow. I had to read it twice because I wasn't sure what was happening.

Ultimately though it was an entertaining, easy read, but not something I will be keeping on my shelves.

Show Less

Picture Jane Austen lite with the addition of magic called glamour because it’s an art whose purpose is to create beautiful illusions and you’ll have a good idea of what this lovely, airy novel is like. Set in an alternative Regency England it borrows Austen’s charming cads, lovesick girls,

Show More

silly marriage obsessed mothers, stern but honorable suitors, and devoted sisters with opposite temperaments, but it has none of Austen’s sharp wit or social commentary. Instead it’s simply charming and engaging, so it’s perfect for when you want to be enchanted but not challenged. I enjoyed it enough that I’m eager to read its sequel, which takes two of the characters to mainland Europe for their honeymoon just as Napoleon escapes from Elba and the continent is thrown into turmoil.

Show Less

It was mildly entertaining, but I think it's a mistake to tout this to Jane Austen lovers--we only snap back "But it's nothing like her!"

The Ellsworth family is a thin copy of the Bennetts (Pride & Prejudice), and the language never moves beyond being a pale imitation of Austen. The characters

Show More

remain flat and so do their relationships...which in the end irritated me because all I could think of was who that particular character may have been based on :p

The element of 'glamour' was interesting, though, and it did remind me of "Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell".

If you want to read it, best to get it used or borrow it from the library :)

Show Less

I think I might have enjoyed this more if I hadn't read Austenland so recently, and Pride and Prejudice earlier in the year. I thought the premise of Austen + magic was interesting and well done. The first half or so was a bit slow, and then the second half felt crowded and rushed a bit. I am

Show More

excited to see what happens with these characters in the sequel. That was actually part of what drew me to this series--the prospect of an ongoing relationship between the hero and heroine, not stopping at happily ever after.

Show Less

"Shades of Milk and Honey" had enough Bronte and modern fantasy feeling for me to like it, but too much Austen for me to help feeling that it was a little thin. Still, Kowal is a good stylist with a light touch and a subtle imagination.

The story was ok. I liked the main character, Jane. But the author states one of her main influences is Austen and this novel didn't have quite the wit of Austen. I also found the over use of the word "shew" a little annoying. The magic was intriguing. I would have appreciated more information on

Show More

glamour and why everyone has this ability. The book kept me entertained for an afternoon, but I do not highly recommend it.

Show Less

Mary Robinette Kowal. Shades of Milk and Honey. Tor, 2010. Jane Austen mash-ups have certainly become the rage and most of them are lamentably forgettable, having been assembled ramshackle-style, rather than penned. From time to time, however, I come across a book that draws upon the manners,

Show More

period, and language of Austen but creates its own integrity. Shades of Milk and Honey evokes much the same atmosphere as those novels, concerning itself with the quiet private lives--and loves--of gently-bred Englishwomen. Kowal's twist, which places her book in the fantasy aisles rather than historical fiction, is the introduction of magic as a drawing-room achievement of those young ladies, much akin to playing the pianoforte, drawing, or speaking Italian. Magic consists in creating and shaping glamours, either to enhance the appearance of a real object or to generate an illusion. A plain woman might use a glamour to disguise her protruding teeth, a pianist to create a color poem to accompany her solo, or a rich patron might commission an environmental "glamural" by an adept. For reasons that are not entirely believable, glamour has no military uses, and therein lies one of the drawbacks of the novel. The unquestioning acceptance of the glamour artist and tutor into polite society begged for an explanation. Austen scholars will undoubtedly find many other lapses in period sensibilities and detail. However, the book has charm and humor, as well as romance.

Trying to mask her dismay and astonishment, Jane rose and went to where Mr. Vincent stood by his paints. So quickly that she could not see him do it, he raised and thinned a fold of glamour. She was a first uncertain as to what he had done because she cold still see the party, but it became apparent from their actions that they could not see her. Then he cast another fold around them and the sounds of the party vanished. Both tricks were astounding enough in themselves, but the speed and ease with which he did them was more so. Even if Jane could understand how he had quieted the world around them, she could never match his speed.
"My apologies, Mr. Vincent, I--"
"They cannot hear us, Miss Ellsworth." He shrugged, rolling his shoulders under his coat. "You need not be civil to me."

Show Less

Jane Austin-style alt-history romance in world where visual illusions are practiced instead of needlework by ladies of quality.

I have to admit, I was a bit put off by the cover of this book. The female picture isn't really .. ugly as much as, I don't know how to describe it but I was somewhat put off by both the pictured girl and the cover itself. I don't think, had it not been for the Nebula Nominee list, I would have

Show More

ever picked this one up.

That said, I did and it was not what I expected. The summary says it's like a mix of Pride and Prejudice meets Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell but I really didn't get that vibe from it. Yes, there were similarities to Pride and Prejudice but it was more like a young adult look at the time period mixed up with a bit of magic.

The magic system in this book seemed very simple - just another accomplishment to add to the list of accomplishments. By folding and tying off "magic" illusions and artwork could be created. While it was fanciful and provided for some interesting moments, I felt less like I was reading a fantasy book and more like I was reading "fantasy-light" for teenagers with some historical backdrops.

While I can see the allure of the book for a cozy afternoon at home spent reading, I don't quite see how this book can measure up to the more hard-hitting titles nominated for the Nebula Awards. It will be interesting to see how it does.

Show Less

Well my goodness, what a strange and charming little volume! Shades of Milk and Honey by Mary Robinette Kowal is described as "Pride and Prejudice meets Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell" -- though I would have suggested Sense and Sensibility as the Austen novel in question (if only for the sisters

Show More

relationship, though other elements clearly owe their foundations to P&P) and the magical element is not nearly as strong in this as in Jonathan Strange. Still, that vague quote will at least clue in a reader to the fact that this is not your ordinary Jane Austen wannabe romantic story. Kowal evidently is quite a Janeite, having thanked the online Jane Austen community in her acknowledgements, and this book could certainly be called an Austenuation, given its tone, character similarities, and occasional spellings. The magical/fantasy element consists of the insertion of "glamour," which I'm sure I will not describe properly, as I'm not sure I even understood it properly. Glamour appears to be a magic pulled from the air that one can manipulate into visual displays -- whether this be the addition of small amounts that would add something extra to an existing item (allow trees in a painting to sway in the wind or give the illusion of light playing against books) or something a bit larger (create an entire theatrical tableau vivant around people, a "glamural" large-scale work, or curtaining off people using folds of glamour so they disappear from view). The thing is, in this world, it doesn't appear as though manipulating glamour is exactly a highly prized skill... at least for men. It seems to be something in the feminine arena, used mostly for improvements in the home, as it doesn't appear to create anything substantial, simply an enhanced visual. There are a few well-regarded artists who work with the medium but, as artists, they are still working at a kind of trade and therefore are a notch above some, but not quite on the level with the usual gentlemen and ladies who do not require a pesky occupation to keep them financially solvent.

Jane Ellsworth is twenty-eight and has almost resigned herself to the life of a spinster... almost. There is still a desperate hope in her heart that despite her age and lack of beauty, she might still make a match and not end her days serving as a tutor to her beautiful younger sister's sure-to-come children. Jane has two things in her favor -- her father has set aside a bit of a dowry for each of his daughters (as he's smart enough to know that they will need this, given that his estate is entailed away) and Jane herself is a somewhat accomplished glamourist. Not that she would own the description as an official title, but even she knows that she can manipulate glamour relatively well and as this talent is appreciated in women to make a home comfortable, to entertain, etc., there is a hope that it enhances her marriageable value. Her younger sister Melody is quite a beauty and beloved by Jane (though the reader rather has to take Jane at her word on Melody's good points, as Melody comes off as a selfish, flighty, and rather vapid creature). Their parents are quite the image of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, though at least Mr. Ellsworth has a bit more sense when it comes to providing for his daughters and keeping them out of trouble as far as that dreaded city of Bath is concerned.

The neighborhood is small, but still has a number of interesting personages within. First, there is Mr. Dunkirk, of whom Jane thinks rather highly, though she also knows her sister feels the same and is immediately inclined to allow her sister the conquest. When his sister Beth comes to visit, Jane develops a fondness for the much younger girl and assists Beth in her basic study of glamour; this quietly delights Mr. Dunkirk, who has a real appreciation for Jane's talents and more than hints that such talents are what truly make a comfortable home. The local elite family is the FitzCameron family, presided over by Lady FitzCameron, a widow with an unmarried daughter... which is why her nephew, Captain Livingston, is in town... a rather dashing and rakish young man in the service of His Majesty's royal navy. Also a guest in the FitzCameron household, we have the standoffish and gruff Mr. Vincent, a noted glamourist who is being employed by Lady FitzCameron to create a large-scale and grand glamural in her home.

While the novel lacked a real Austen-like focus on social commentary and deeper and yet witty observations, Kowal was able to create a heroine who felt quite like a woman who could have existed in an Austen novel, and one who would have merited the high opinion of those sensible souls around her. Jane is quiet and demure, keeping her shrewder thoughts to herself and able to keep confidences (while yet struggling with the question of whether or not to share them with others if only in the best interest of those concerned who might come to harm). She values her sister so highly that she is constantly trying to repair any breaches that occur, though none of them are Jane's fault. Melody is an incredibly annoying chit of a girl, whereas Beth is only a trifle better, if only because she manages to act decently well on a day-to-day basis. Perhaps the more surprising thing (when it concerns comparing Shades of Milk and Honey to any Austen or other Regency novel) is the fact that for all of Jane's concerns about ending a spinster, she actually plays the field a whole lot more than she realizes. The reader will understand pretty quickly who her ideal match would be, but Jane seems to hold two men in high regard for quite some time -- and indeed, even when the real love-match becomes clear, the relationship with the other fellow is not quite closed off (which is, perhaps, a bit more realistic). There's also a rather ridiculous scene filled with galloping horses and duels that feels a bit over-the-top in this particular novel, but perhaps one can forgive it for the sake of fun. It is a pity, though, that there was not more depth to this story beyond the romantic storylines, as I believed Kowal to be quite capable of greater societal observation than was evinced in this volume. The limited mention of how glamour can be used to mask falling fortunes was not quite enough (or at least it didn't ever come to much) and should have merited a greater exploration.

All in all, I would say that Kowal's novel is rather charming, though Regency purists will not be particularly pleased with all this glamour stuff. As I have noted, I do wish that the magical element actually played a bit more of a role in society as something necessary, as opposed to the surface delight that glamour epitomizes. It just doesn't seem to be necessary in the way I would think such an addition would have to be -- but perhaps in future novels of this world (as one always assumes there must be more, nowadays), we'll get more on that subject. Modern readers who can pick up both Georgette Heyer and light fantasy will be able to enjoy Shades of Milk and Honey as a pleasant diversion and I'll be happy to read the next item that comes from Kowal's pen.

Show Less