This is the second entry in the Ursula Blanchard series. In this outing, Ursula, a lady-in-waiting to Elizabeth I, is hired by Robert Cecil to determine whether the Mason family is involved in a plot to overthrow the Queen. She is required to become a sewing and dance tutor to the Mason's unruly children, pick the locks on Mason's desk to read his correspondence, and report back to Cecil.

By the middle of the book, the reader no longer cares, if she ever did, whether the Masons are involved in a plot or whether Ursula succeeds one way or the other. The author is incapable of moving the story along at any pace other than a snail's pace leaving the reader's mind to wander to other books waiting to be read. Ursula is not a sympathetic character, rather she is whining, self-centered, and in the wrong business. While she's trying to prove or disprove the Masons' involvement in an attempt to overthrow the Queen, she whines about not being with her husband who is in exile in France for the same offense. Finally, Ursula, it seems, can be placed in any time period and be perfectly happy. The reader, on the other hand, will not be.

I really wanted to like this series because I love the Elizabethan period. But even the setting couldn't save this series for me. I was not enthusiastic about the first book in this series, To Shield the Queen, but decided to give the author and Ursula a second chance because I am particularly fond of the Elizabethan period. There will be no third chance.

THE DOUBLET AFFAIRS is a book about Lady Ursula Blanchard, a lady-in-waiting to Queen Elizabeth 1 in 1561. The novel is an intruging mystery, and one that ought to appeal to those fond of realistic fiction and the Elizabethan period. I don't enjoy summarizing plots (it takes part of the pleasure of reading away) but this is certainly not a book to be missed if you enjoy settling down with a big story full of suspense.

I quickly bought this second book of Fiona Buckley's after reading the first book, "To Shield the Queen". Although I didn't find this one quite as intriguing as the first, it was a quick-moving, fun, interesting story. Although it helps if you have read the first novel before reading this one so that you will understand who all the characters and their relationships are, it is not required. This was one that definitely kept me guessing until the end. And again, Ms. Buckley's fictional account of historical events is creative and fun to read.

Yet another stiff, unimaginative version of the great poet Hafiz. This is a poet of the heart and spirit, not someone who can be pinned down in word-for-word translation. Still, this is an honest academic effort; just not rewarding or uplifting for the spirit.

Elizabeth T. Gray is one of the very few translators who can come close to doing justice to Hafiz. Forget Ladinsky; if you want to get an idea what Hafiz really said, get Gray. To correct a misconception, the convention in Sufi poetry is to invoke Allah as a woman, lover of the male human Sufi. That's why so many Sufi poems are about love for women named Layla or Salma. The Sufi vision of God tends to be female. This is more explicit in Arabic Sufi poetry, because Arabic uses gender unlike Persian. Muhyi al-Din ibn al-'Arabi said in Arabic we can call Allah either huwa 'He' or hiya 'She', the latter because the ultimate Divine Essence (al-Dhat) is Feminine. The genderless Persian pronoun leaves an interesting ambiguity that you can't duplicate in English, but by calling God "She," Elizabeth T. Gray is well within the authenticity of the Sufi poetic tradition. I have heard her speak about how she discovered these poems, and read Hafiz aloud; she told of her deep spiritual connection with these poems and the divine love they inspired in her, and of her visit to Hafiz's tomb in Shiraz. The poet himself must be smiling from Heaven upon seeing her presenting his poems to us moderns with such love and care.

This is the book I was trying to find when I ordered "The Gift," which is an absurd series of forgeries.

This book, clearly a labor of love by Elizabeth Gray, presents the Persian and the English on facing pages. Gray does tend to translate "the Beloved" with a female pronoun, BUT in her very useful introduction she points out that this is probably wrong, since the typical "Beloved" in Hafiz is male.

There's much much more. There is a very useful discussion of the history and form of the ghazal, the meter is annotated, the individual words and similes are extensively discussed, and we are able to understand how Hafiz is the most spiritual of poets through the separate introduction by Daryush Shayegan.

Until I saw this book, Persian poetry in general and Hafiz in particular were totally opaque to me, although I have some knowledge of Farsi and used to speak it fairly well. Now that I have seen this book, the veil is lifted, and I can begin to see.

Thank you Elizabeth Gray and White Cloud Press for this labor of love!

Perhaps I was expecting too much of this book when I began reading it; I had hoped that this work would provide an interesting and intimate portrait of Elizabeth, as well as a clear account of the contributions of her reign. However, the book did not succeed at doing either. The book provides some interesting events of the period, but too often keeps the reader at a distance from the Queen. Through cumbersome and lengthy sentences, and boring verbiage, the author loses the reader in the reader's attempt to maintain an interest in the life of Elizabeth I. Having finished the book, I reflected on what I had learned about Elizabeth and found that I had more questions about events that were discussed in the book, than I did before I read the author's account of those events.

I highly recommend that any reader looking for a detailed and balanced account of Queen Elizabeth I look elsewhere.

I've been a fan of Hibbert's historical works for many years and this is a solid one-volume introduction to a woman whose fascinating life almost seems made for the movies (as it frequently has been). However, specialists in Elizabeth should be aware this is definitely an introduction and does not go into the depth that authors like Alison Plowden bring to their multiple volumes. And I did find - having read a great many books on Elizabeth - that there was an indefinable quality to Hibbert's work that became slightly irksome. In the early 20th century and before, it was standard convention to write about Elizabeth's prevarication, her changes of mood and occasional bad temper, and the despair of her (all male) counselors, as a typical example of an emotional women who happened to be queen. I've even read volumes which imply that Elizabeth's reputation is largely due to her male council keeping her feminine weaknesses under control. Only in the past decades has that slightly condescending tone been dropped and Elizabeth seen for the statesman she was (albeit, still a difficult woman!) I detected the slightest hint of that condescension in Hibbert's book, particularly in his later chapters dealing with Elizabeth's agonies in deciding how to deal with Mary Queen of Scots. For that reason only, I rate it a "4" and not a "5." With that slight caveat, an excellent introduction overall.

Elizabeth I is one of those historical figures so enveloped in mythology that it is difficult to gain a clear view of the actual person behind the myth. Christopher Hibbert has provided a sober biography of Elizabeth that goes a long way toward providing the reader with just such a view.

The book begins with a poignant prologue that provides a brief history of Henry VIII, his reign, and his six wives, including Ann Boleyn, Elizabeth's mother. The events covered by the prologue are ones that resonate throughout Elizabeth's life. One can scarcely imagine what effect it has on a young girl to learn that before she turned three her mother was executed on orders of her father. Much of the conflict with which she had to contend during her adult life was largely the direct legacy of her father. These conflicts include those with her half-sister Mary, her cousin Mary Queen of Scots, the war with Spain, and the religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants.

The bare facts of Elizabeth's life have the makings of a great melodrama, but Hibbert does not fall into that trap. Nor does he spend much time with conjecture. However, he does paint a vivid enough picture so that it is easy enough to read between the lines. When he writes of Elizabeth and Robert Dudley going off horseback riding together for hours on end, he leaves it at that - most readers will reach the same conclusion. Similarly, Hibbert will relate what a prevailing rumor was, but for the most part resists speculating as to the veracity of those rumors; again, the reader is left free to reach his or her own conclusion.

Good detail is given in describing Elizabeth's personality and physical appearance. The attention to physical appearance is not superficial - Elizabeth put a great deal of thought and effort into appearance, being well aware of the effect it had on nobles and commoners alike. And it is entirely appropriate that Hibbert spends the space he does regarding her makeup, jewels, clothing, etc. Her strengths (intelligence and courage among them) as well as weaknesses (vanity, indecisiveness) are made abundantly clear by Hibbert's writing.

In describing the workings of her court and her administration, a picture is revealed not only of Elizabeth's reign in particular, but of English royalty in general, including the politics and intrigues of the royal court. Of particular interest to me was the chapter titled "The Queen on Progress", which is about the trips the Queen and a veritable army of attendants would make into various locales across England. No other section of the book so clearly revealed the tremendous waste and corruption that is inherent in any monarchy.

Hibbert makes an effort to provide a thorough portrait of those figures who played pivotal roles in Elizabeth's life, including the two Mary's, Robert Dudley, Sir Walter Raleigh, and Robert Devereaux. (My personal favorite is Sir William Cecil.) Providing us with these portraits makes the narrative of Elizabeth's life all the more compelling.

My complaints about the book are relatively minor. First, the book is organized rather arbitrarily into two sections of 10 chapters apiece. Sometimes the time line is a bit obscure. And I would like to see a little more about the common people of England during her reign, and the effect her policies had on them. But overall, it's a thoroughly interesting and enjoyable biography.

It's rare when I can't finsih a book, but I tried in vain with this for a month and couldn't end it. The author spends far too much time going into detail about a small part of John Dee's life, and seems to lose presepctive about Dee's contributions. We get too much of his court intrigues and that can get mighty dull. This book could have benefitted form being a good deal shorter.

Woolley's book is good-hearted, an attempt to help modern readers see John Dee not at the fringes but at the heart of much that was going on Elizabethan England.

But the book's execution leaves *much* to be desired. As other Amazon.com reviews have noted, the thread of the story gets lost along the way (especially amidst some of the sordid details concerning Dee's relationship with Edward Kelly). There are a number of interesting facts and anecdotes, but they never quite come together as a coherent whole. And Woolley displays such an appalling ignorance of Catholicism when he attempts to describe the religious background of the period (and in some instances, ignorance of Christianity in general) that I tend to wonder whether he's gotten his facts about Dee's life wrong too.

While I'll give the book 3 stars for good intentions, in general, you're better off finding a copy of Peter French's _John Dee: The World of an Elizabethan Magus_.

Benjamin Woolley's 'The Queen's Conjurer' is the most recent attempt to present the life of the English Enigma, Dr. John Dee. Dee is an interesting character and one that has sadly been much maligned over the centuries. Since his death in 1608, he has largely been dismissed at best as an sorcerer and black magicican and, at worst, as a credulous old fool dabbling in astrology and necromancy. Today, despite his prominent historical role in Elizabethan politics and his great contibutions to many fields, he is hardly remembered at all. This book tries to alleviate that problem.

Wolley's work is well-researched and attempts to shed light on Dee's life and his many accomplishments as not only an occultist, but also as an astronomer, mathematician, explorer, and spy. Dee was a product of the Renaissance and devoured knowledge and information. He was an avid bibliophile, a voracious author of various works on astronomy, astrology, mathematics, occult philosophy, and was well-respected by many prominent people at the court of Queen Elizabeth. The Queen herself counted herself one of Dee's benefactors and visited him numerous times at his home at Mortlake, taking a genuine interest in his many magical and mathematical works. Today he is largely remembered for his works concerning "Enochian" or Angel Magic, due to the fact that these are the bulk of his writings that have survived the flames of history. Most of the second half of this book is concerned with Dee's European adventures with the mysterious scryer Edward Kelly, who is largely regarded by history as a charlatan and a rake. Kelly is a shadowy and intriguing figure and we get some insight into his character and motivations but he is never truly revealed to us, perhaps he never will be. In the end, Dee finds that despite a lifetime of great works and accomplishments, he is viewed with mistrust and suspicion by the general public and has lost favor with the new court of King James I. He dies a tired and broken man, and history would continue to tarnish his great name until well into the 20th century.

The Queen's Conjurer is a very readable account of a great and fascinating man.

I purchased this book after seeing the author interviewed on television and reading the reviews. I cannot understand the number of 5-star reviews this book was given. The only plausible explanation is that they were all written by Mr. Streitz himself. Whether or not Oxford was the son of Elizabeth I is irrelevant. This is one of the most poorly researched and poorly written books I have ever tried to read. I finally gave up after the third time he told of event that probably happened, but for which there is no proof yet, stating that sometime in the future "someone" should do the research. No, Mr. Streitz, that someone should have been you, and the time to do the research is before you write the book.

Bottom line - unreadable drivel.

According to this book, Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, is not only the author of Shakespeare's plays, but much of the rest of the Tudor canon. He, not Golding, translated Ovid. He wrote Euphues. He wrote The Spanish Tragedy. You name it. But that's just the literary part. It turns out he is not only the son of a 13 year old Princess Elizabeth but also the parent (with his mother, the Virgin Queen) of the Earl of Southampton, the young man of the sonnets.

You might think this is Oxfordianism run amok. You might be right. Moreover, the book suffers from many of the usual defects of the Oxfordian cause. The author is an amateur. His professional credits listed on the dust jacket include service in the 82nd Airborne in Vietnam, an MBA from the University of Chicago, and co-authorship of the musicals "Oh, Johnny" and "Madison Avenue, the subliminal musical". And the book is self-published and suffers from numerous typos and mis-usages, especially in the first part, where credibility is won or lost.

However...the book offers many plausible arguments and some hard data as well as speculation. If you have any interest in the Authorship Question, you should read this book. (If you don't have any interest, you should take an interest; final confirmation and general acknowledgement of Oxford as Shakespeare would illuminate and transform both Tudor history and literature.) Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Henry James and many others long ago pointed out the implausibility of the Will of Stratford story that continues to be taught in school. Searching for the true author, the unfortunately named J. Thomas Looney fitted the glass slipper to de Vere during the First World War. And the professoriat has been trying to ignore it ever since. I suppose they fear looking foolish, and anyway the deconstructionists of the last 40 years have made clear that authorship is of no importance.

One academic, Roger Stritmatter, has recently given attention to the Earl's Geneva Bible in the Folger Library, where marginalia in the Earl's handwriting correlate very strongly with bibilical references in Shakespeare. The greatest need is to find more professors of English renaissance literature and Tudor history willing to break ranks and finally give attention to the mounting evidence in favor of Oxford as the author; they have relied on professorial hauteur long enough.

In the meantime, amateurs should carefully proofread their texts.

"Oxford, Son of Queen Elizabeth" by Paul Streitz (published by Oxford Institute Press, 2001) is an extraordinary and provocative book. It is likely to be considered totally unacceptable to "Stratfordian" Shakespearean scholars, who believe that plays and poems attributed to William Shakespeare can only be the work of the celebrated man of that name, born in Stratford-upon-Avon and christened "Gulielmus Shakspere" in 1564. By contrast, the book will be welcomed by "Oxfordians" who believe that the same plays and poetry should instead be attributed to Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, born in 1548.

This authorship question has been growing for several decades. Streitz has now contributed to the debate by compiling historical evidence to suggest that Elizabeth I was the mother of the Bard, that the biological father was Thomas Seymour, and that the 16th Earl of Oxford (John de Vere) was his foster-father. These suggestions may be considered preposterous by many critics, but Streitz obviously would not have dared to publish his book if he did not have some substance to advance them.

Consider the so-called "Virgin Queen". Streitz notes that "in over four hundred years, there have been no critical investigations of whether or not Elizabeth had children". Evidently there had been rumours circulating in 1549, when Elizabeth was just 15 years old. In a letter addressed to Edward Seymour, the Lord Protector, the princess herself referred to "shameful Schandlers" (slanders) that she was "with Child". In a second letter she appealed again to the Lord Protector, requesting that "no such rumours should be spread". Apparently she succeeded in this regard. Now, 450 years later, Streitz is the first person to link the "Schandlers" with events in the summer of 1548, when a child was born in suspiciously secret circumstances to a "very fair young lady" of about "fifteen or sixteen years of age". There is no proof that this young lady was princess Elizabeth, but Streitz considers this as a possibility in the context of events which he strings together to make a possible if not proven case. Notably, suspicions are associated with "the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the birth of the saide Edward, now Earle of Oxforde" (to quote from a late 16th century document)..

There is no doubt that the 17th Earl of Oxford was given opportunities to study in Cambridge (in 1564) and in Oxford (1566), and that he travelled to France and Italy (1575). Further, there is no doubt that Edward de Vere did write poetry, but not every modern scholar would accept that the de Vere poems correspond to the quality and style of those attributed to William Shakespeare. By contrast, Gabriel Harvey, a contemporary of the Earl, was absolutely flattering in 1578: "Thou has hast drunk deep draughts not only of the Muses of France and Italy...thine eyes flash fire, thy countenance shakes spears" (from Latin, 'tela vibrat', which can be alternatively translated as "brandishes spears"). Oxfordians venture to say that it is not coincidental that the name Shakespeare can itself be translated into Latin as 'tela vibrat'.

"Shakespeare's Sonnets", with a publication date of 1609 , have been interpreted in numerous ways. Streitz provides novel interpretations, suggesting not only that they include cryptic references to the 17th Earl of Oxford, but also that they were written by that dignitary whose dignity was diminished towards the end of his lifetime.

A poem with metaphorical references to bees is extraordinary. It includes references to henbane, hemlock and other substances, including tobacco. The line "wordes, hopes, witts, and the all the world [is] but smoke" leads to the statement "Twas not tobacco [that] stupifyed the brain". If the verse was indeed written by the Earl of Oxford, as Streitz suggests, perhaps at times he wrote under the influence of a substance more "bewitching" than tobacco: "from those [leaves] no dram of sweete I drayne, their head strong [fury] did my head bewitch"

"Oxford, Son of Queen Elizabeth" makes very interesting reading, even though one need not accept everything contained in it. There are intriguing facts, such as the Queen's grant of 1,000 pounds per annum to the 17th Earl of Oxford. That was an enormous sum of money in 1586. The obvious question is why? Was it really a gift from a benevolent mother to a playwright son? Streitz suggests that the anomalously large grant was intended to support actors and playwrights to prop up political power at a time when Elizabeth I had to be extremely careful against Catholic opposition at home, and the prospect of a Spanish invasion.

To assess the merits of the book, it is strongly recommended that it be read in its entirety. Even if one is willing to absorb and accept only parts of it, those parts may help to "flesh out" an understanding of relationships between Elizabeth I and the 17th Earl of Oxford, in the context of literary debate.

Reviewed by J.F. Thackeray, Transvaal Museum, Box 413, Pretoria 0001, South Africa

Elizabeth Adler's books always entertain, they always bring smiles to my face and sometimes an ache in my heart, I'm so involved with her characters, but it's hard to beat Lara and Dan in Last Time I Saw Paris. Read and enjoy a vicarious trip through France given to you by a master of descriptive narrative - you'll believe you were there and since Ms. Adler tells us all the places she visits are real, you could in fact go there. Which is exactly what I plan on doing - with a husband who hasn't dumped me for another woman I'm glad to say.

I don't usually 'review' books but I had to write about this one. I want to say I loved The Last Time I Saw Paris. I've read it twice and passed it on to my friends. If you've never had a great love affair - then learn about it from Ms Adler. And if you've never been to France, then go with her in this book. Loved it.

Lara Lewis just turned forty-five, but is miserable, and has been ever since her husband of twenty-five years began to ignore her desires. He refuses to allow her to accompany him on his business trip to China, which adds to Lana's belief that he is cheating on her with his assistant. Still she looks forward to her upcoming second honeymoon trip with Bill when he returns to the states.

Bill calls from China informing Lana their trip is off. Outraged, Lara decides to go to France without Bill. To her own amazement, she invites the carpenter working on her deck to join her. Even more amazing, the thirtyish Tom Holland accepts because he finds Lara very attractive. Overseas, the couple bickers, shares madcap adventures, and enjoys each other company until love intercedes and decisions must be made.

THE LAST TIME I SAW PARIS is a fun to read lighthearted romantic romp that will leave the audience in stitches of laughter as they observe the loving duo dives head first from one crazy incident to another. Elizabeth Adlerís tale has a serious undertone as the heroine must face reality and see her husband for what he is and not how she wants him to be. Romance lovers will thoroughly enjoy this first class ride into true love.

Harriet Klausner

There has been such a glut of books teaching management and leadership lessons from historical figures and spiritual traditions (Attila, the Tao, Machiavelli, etc.) you'd think the market would be saturated by now. Apparently not, for they keep coming. As far as this kind of book goes, Elizabeth l CEO isn't bad. Of course, the theory's premise is basically contrived. While we can draw analogies between 16th Century politics and 21st Century business, the two environments are fundamentally different. For example, one subject Alan Axelrod often refers to in Elizabeth l (he has the unfortunate habit of repeating the same points many times) is Elizabeth's struggle to enforce religious conformity in England. Elizabeth was a devout Protestant in a nation where Catholics still had a strong influence. How exactly does this translate into a modern business context? The fact is, it doesn't. There is nothing in the business world that even remotely resembles Medieval/Renaissance religious orthodoxy. Only someone who takes management platitudes such as the "vision" of a business could fail to realize this. Visions aside, corporations all have the same goal --profit. They are essentially amoral. Any attempt to indoctrinate employees of a corporation with something akin to religious fervor would be absurd (this isn't to say that such efforts are not made by overzealous CEOs and managers). Despite these serious objections, I still enjoyed Elizabeth l CEO and found some worthwhile lessons in it (though not necessarily in the realm of business). Axelrod does a good job of presenting history in an informative and entertaining manner. He effectively portrays Elizabeth as a powerful and innovative leader who kept her many virtues --intelligence, courage, frugality, pragmatism-- in balance. I suspect, however, that the realms of politics and business are both far too complex to be mastered by any simple set of principles. The audiobook version is narrated by Nelson Runger, who does a fine job of presenting the book.

Many history-applied-to-business books are a stretch. Their authors attempt to apply historical situations to modern day business, but the comparisons often lack relevance. Not true with 'Elizabeth I, CEO: Strategic Lessons from the Leader Who Built an Empire' by Alan Axelrod. The author provides interesting lesson's from one of Great Britain's most famous monarchs that can readily be applied to today's business solutions. The manner in which Queen Elizabeth I deals with restructuring, developing leadership and fighting the competition that are benchmarks for modern leaders. No, we all don't have Armada's to battle, but even more minor skirmishes will be easier to deal with after reading this book.

You may have regarded Queen Elizabeth I of England in many ways - as a ruler, as a dramatic historical figure, as the prototype of a powerful woman, but have you ever thought of her as a corporate manager? Alan Axelrod has. He explains how the Virgin Queen exemplified principles of good business leadership during her reign from 1558 to 1603. He shows how these ideals helped her survive to become queen and how she used them to transform England from a tumultuous country to a powerful empire. Lessons from her rule can show any CEO a few things about leadership in perilous times. The book's combination of management principles with the drama of Elizabethan history makes for compelling reading. One critical note - the book skips around historically, which muddies the sequence of events. Otherwise, we at getAbstract recommend this excellent mix of enjoyable historical reading with powerful reminders about the fundamental principles of effective leadership.

Just when I expect Ms. Bevarly's sense of humour to be witty and droll - her latest novel Take Me, I'm yours only shows the ineptitude of the plotting in the novel that renders it a colossal disappointment. Ms. Bevarly's narration is full of hyphenated repetitions and long (and I do mean - long) names that spells tiresome and banal. Her story which involves Ruby Runyon, a waitress aspiring to be an actress meets a mob-related boyfriend Jimmy and when she knows he is married, she is eager to escape and lands herself on a ship Mad Tryst commandeered by Prince Reynaldo of Pelagia. She meets the deliciously handsome Keaton Danning who is the advisor to Reynaldo and Countess Arabella of Toulaine and heads for an adventure...

It is slow-paced and flat-out predictible. Even Ms. Bevarly writes in her novel that readers will call her plot insubstantial. While the saving grace is the chemistry between Keaton and Ruby and a much more interesting secondary romance between Arabella and the bartender Gus, the tale of choosing freedom over obligations is too far-fetched to become palatable. The humour is just too over-the-top-and-too-trying and it really takes a lot of patience to get through the first part of the book which most reader regrettably don't have.

Keaton Hamilton Danning III is getting fed up with his 'wonderful' job. Working for an overthrown-uh, abdicated-Prince Reynaldo, Keaton has spent the last year being basically a cruise director to bunches of Reynaldo's spoiled, rich friends. He'd always seen himself becoming Prime Minister in the small country he'd served as chief advisor in for years. But when the Prince gave the county their independence, he'd chosen to go with Reynaldo-and now he spent all his time fighting with the kitchen help, catering to snobs...he was bored, and ready to move on. Then he meets 'Babs', a woman who claims she is a guest at one of Reynaldo's bashes. Keaton can't help but find her sexy...

When Ruby Runyon has to make a run for her life from a disastrous date turned worse, she finds herself crashing a party on the Mad Tryst, a boat that just happens to be conveniently close. When she finds herself face to face with the hunky Keaton for the SECOND time, she's so startled she spills her drink all over him. She can't believe she's found a boat with such a hunky guy-her luck must be turning. It's not long before she finds herself heading out to sea on the Mad Tryst, and the fireworks exploding between her and Keaton. Keaton is on a mission to find out Ruby aka Bab's real name, and why she lied about it-twice, so far-when another guest verifies her! This leads to a hilarious ride on the Mad Tryst.

Ruby is a wonderful heroine, spunky and courageous. She's never reached her dream of becoming a movie star in California, but she's pulled herself up from her trailer park beginnings that she can't get over being
Embarrassed over, and works hard at succeeding. Keaton is such an aristocrat, it's hard for him to even imagine how Ruby has gotten to the point she's at, and they're from two so totally different worlds.

Elizabeth Bevarly did a fabulous job of creating a fairy tale romance-the Cinderella meets her fair-haired Prince. And although Keaton isn't a Prince, compared to where Ruby comes from, he might as well be. A wonderful story, with hilarious lines starting on the first page, this book flies by in a fun romp. This is a not to be missed Contemporary Romantic comedy!

I really enjoyed this book. It made me laugh out loud in several places. The yacht setting was kind of different, and I liked it that the heroine was just your everyday sort of person. And where else are you going to find mobsters, Marcel Proust and nasty little weiner dogs in one story? Highly recommended.

The second of a (so far) three volume mystery series, The Tidal Poole seems well researched with lots of details suggesting the Elizabethan era. But the characters including Good Queen Bess (a young GQB) are one dimensional and less than compelling. Although I like the subgenre of historical mysteries as a rule, this is one of the weaker series. The fault, I suppose, lies in Harper's portrayal of Elizabeth herself. Her temper, easily aroused passions, and inconsistent relationships with her key courtiers become off-putting and unbelievable. She must have watched the old Bette Davis movie a lot. Too bad. I really wanted to like this...

Historically accurate? I'm guessing not much. Fun? Oh, yes.

This book is about my hero, Queen Elizabeth I. It takes place shortly after her coronation. The new queen finds herself with a mystery to solve and then goes about solving it in a very un-Elizabeth way.

I've never been much of a fan of mysteries, but I got this one from the library (they were selling it for a dollar) and found it was better than most. Great for anyone who likes mysteries or Elizabeth I (but not worth as much on the second reading.)

I just have a hard time imagining Elizabeth I wanting ANYONE to call her Bess, especially servants. You have to suspend reason to enjoy these books - but once you do, you get a nice mystery. The culprit isn't that hard to figure out in this book - but you keep reading to find out why they did it and how "Bess" and her band of slueths gets it all worked out. One thing that I do believe Harper does do convincingly is how she portrays Elizabeth and Dudley. Of course, we'll never know what really went on, but it reads true to me. Worth reading.

I love books about Elizabeth I, King Henry and the whole Tudor period. I thought the premise of this book was interesting, and a different twist on both the mystery genre, and Elizabeth. For the most part the book was interesting, filled with bits and pieces of historical information. Where the story fell flat for me was the mystery. I found it boring. The protagonist wasn't ayone we get to know during the course of the book, and I like mysteries where there are some surprises and interesting twists. The villain was evil enough, but it was more like, oh so that's the murderer. No slap to the head saying Oh wow, that's the murderer, why didn't I see that coming!! And then you start to piece the clues together. I suppose that this is a cozy mystery, I like a little more suspense. The best parts of the book were the interactions of Elizabeth and her rather interesting mix of "friends". I did enjoy the end, when Elizabeth learns she is the Queen, though, it was a nice touch.

If the story of the Tudors were written as fiction we probably wouldn't believe it - but would have a good time with the story. Karen Harper does a great job of taking this most improbable piece of history and winding a nifty mystery fiction into the life of young Elizabeth.

The strongest part of the book are the characters. Harper had plenty of material for Elizabeth and makes her come alive. Bess is both sympathetic and, at times, annoyingly regal. Her nemisis, known as "she" for much of the book, makes Cruela de Ville look like a PTA president. She may be a bit overdrawn but is lots of fun (in an evil sort of way). The supporting cast of Bess' Privy Council work well - with Harper regularly casting doubts on whether one or more are spies for Mary.

The pacing moves well and kept me turning pages (well, turning tapes as I listened to the unabridge audio version). Bottom-line: a fun historical mystery series that I'm eager to read more of soon.

As a student of Tudor and Elizabethan History and a life-long admirer of Good Queen Bess, I am always nervous of new novels or TV/Film adaptations about Elzabeth. A case in point is the recent "Elizabeth" film starring Cate Blanchett. Why does anyone have to change the basic facts or to take Elizabeth and her character out of context and create a salacious storyline when her own true life and story is exciting and thrilling enough as it is! As a result I was careful when reading THE POYSON GARDEN, but I was exceptionally pleased with the story and book.

The story runs quickly without the risk of losing the reader on the way. Elizabeth is shown as the quick tempered, vain woman she was, yet the reason for this temper is shown - the stress of being under suspicion (let alone the stress of being possibly murdered!). However, she is also shown as a caring person in her treatment and absolute trust of Meg when everyone else distrusts the girl. The new characters of Meg, Jenks and Ned give a new dimension to Elizabeth - that she is prepared to walk in any social circle and to give her loyalty to any who are loyal to her - she was no snob! I assume that the real background of Meg will be revealed in subsequent books and that we see more of all the characters with additions of others who were important in Elizabeth's life such as Robert Dudley and his sister Mary (who actually saved Elizabeth's life at the cost of her own beauty!)

The mystery itself is excellently set from Hatfield to Hever and Leeds. It would have been interesting to note in the book that Hever was previously owned by the Anne of Cleves until her death in 1558! Elizabeth actually visited her quite often and so would have known the house very well. She was taught by Anne all the housewifely skills such as cooking etc that a gentlewoman would require but not a Queen - this gave rise to a speech later in her life that if she had been turned out of her kingdom in her petticoat she could have made a good living!

Thankyou also for referring to Anne Boleyn in pleasant terms. She certainly did not commit any of the crimes that Henry VIII (that old bluebeard) had her charged with. Queen Anne's life and tragic murder was vindicated by her daughter's golden reign!

What I liked most of all was when fact had been ignored or manipulated (like the ownership of Hever), the change was believable and kept in context of the Tudor period.

Karen Harper also brilliantly and believably used a connection with Anne Boleyn as the poisoner - a relative of the Ormondes. Anne Boleyn was to marry James Butler, but Henry VIII stopped that match without Anne and James ever knowing why the match had been prevented. Anne didn't want to marry Butler, and eventually a match seemed to be arranged between Harry Percy and Anne - till that too was prevented again on Henry VIII's orders.

I would say to Karen Harper the authoress, Thank you very much for such an excellent book using Elizabeth as the heroine, but without necessarily rewriting her story yet again. I look forward to the subsequent books. Well done!