The Doctor’s Lady is Jody Hedlund’s second title and serves as a pretty good follow-up to her debut novel, The Preacher’s Bride. I enjoyed that novel, which seemed to have a bit more meat on its bones than other Christian Historical Fiction works I’ve read. Hedlund’s hook is that she bases her novels on real women of the past, yet changes the names and some circumstances to allow herself the freedom of full imagination that a fiction author enjoys. While The Preacher’s Bride was a loose retelling of John and Elizabeth Bunyan’s marriage, this book lets Hedlund put her spin on Narcissa Whitman, the first known white woman to cross the Continental Divide after the War for Independence. Since I have a real-life connection with Hedlund*,devoured Bride in a day and have a fixation with stories about medical people I figured that I’d table a lot of my reservations about Christian Historical Romance and dive right in.
Hedlund is a skilled writer and very good at telling a suspenseful story. Unfortunately, I felt that she relied too much on some Christian Historical Romance tropes, and that made this book a bit less enjoyable than the first.
Trope #1: The Most Beautiful Girl In The World
From Francine Rivers’ Redeeming Love to Catherine Marshall’s Christy (sort of) and now again in the Doctor’s Lady, we’ve got a heroine who is supposed to be so beautiful that men will kill for her. I find it especially awkward in Christian Romance, because we’ve got Biblical admonishments about women’s true value coming from their kindheartedness, modesty and industry. One of my favourite hooks in Preacher’s Bride was that Elizabeth, while nice-looking, was not conventionally beautiful. I admired Hedlund’s take on her heroine there and was discouraged to have this book be yet another one of those where so much of the masculine motivation centered on the heroine’s good looks.
Trope #2: Endless Flirting Without Any Risk At All
I sometimes wish Janette Oke had never published Love Comes Softly. Because now the Marriage Of Convenience trope is apparently a genre favourite. And yet again we have two people who are married in name only–the Mission Board won’t send single people to the mission field–who spend the book bickering and flirting their way into the inevitable liplock. I truly dislike seeing married adults have what amounts to a high-schoolers’ style of love affair and I think that a diet of this type of book sets up bad expectations for real women in Christian marriages. Like the secular Twilight Series this book with its focus on unconsummated flirtation plays into women’s emotional erotica and continues the Evangelical culture’s consignment of sex to the back room. Hey, gang, I’ve got news. Married sex is a-ok and even a good thing.
Trope #3 A Very Special Episode
This particular twist sent the book from a 4-star read to 3 stars–instantly. Because there is a key plot twist that hinges on one of the main characters acting ENTIRELY out of character and ENTIRELY contradicting all of that person’s previous actions in the first 80% of the story. All of this happens to allow for a Big Message Scene at the end of the book where we get a little sermonette about pride. And when Christian fiction of any type sacrifices character and story for the opportunity to shoehorn in a bit more of The Message, that’s when I break out the side-eye.
So, all in all, I give the book 3 stars out of 5 and do recommend it for fans of Christian Historical Romance. I would, however, encourage such people to also read The Preacher’s Bride, which is a 4.5 star book and, in my opinion, Hedlund’s better effort.
*[Full Disclosure: I went to college with Hedlund]
Oddly enough, I was in the LifeWay store on Saturday, saw this book, and thought of you and your books! I wondered if you would read this book and what you would think. Very glad to have the ‘Kat review’ first.
I wonder when someone will write a book about a love story that isn’t fraught with friction and flirting that supposedly brings the two lovebirds together — what about a love that isn’t devoid of conflict but in which communication is a lot smoother than what you see in the usual Christian Romance trope and shows that the two people actually like, respect, and care for each other. (Like, ya know, Kat, how you and your hubby got together!)
Well, my husband and I DID start out as a bickering couple. Okay, not bickering. But he was my boss at work and I sucked at my job and he was mean to me. But then I did my “kill them with kindness” routine and accidentally misjudged the level of kindness I was putting out there.
What started as “just get him to stop making you feel like dirt” turned into “uh ho. He fell in love with me.”
Of course, this all happened over the course of three weeks, then we spent the rest of the semester (7weeks) growing closer, he went away for 2 months, moved back on Valentines day, we were engaged by the end of March and married a year later. The flirty bickering didn’t take a whole book. Maybe half a chapter.
I know why so many people go for this kind of story. It’s a lot of what makes Jane Eyre really hot–> the unrequited love. And in stories like this where we ping-pong back and forth between two unrequited loves it trips a lot of romance readers’ triggers. I can see that, but from where I sit it just looks after awhile to be a lot of people with really bad communication skills messing up their lives. And that is decidedly not the Biblical model of REAL love we have in 1Cor 13.
You had a 10-week semester?!
Not that I’m trying to be irrelevant or anything.
Seriously, sometime I just need to come over so that you and I can delve into this sort of stuff. I bet you could provide insights into my relationship issues that no one else has thought of… just ’cause you are uniquely *you*.
I also gave Jody’s first book a 4-star review (though not the 1/2 star extra due to too much romance language–eye probing, etc and not enough setting details for my taste). Mostly, I read it because the Restoration is a part of my favorite historical period. I was considering reading the Doctor’s Lady, too, because it’s very early 19th C and think I’ll give it a try, despite the lower rating you give it. I’m not a fan of fiction set in the Victorian period–early 19th C has a much different feel to it. Thanks for this review. Your honesty is refreshing.
This isn’t Victorian at all, really. (I’m so not good with time periods. Like when people say “Edwardian” or “Restoration” or “Post-reconstructionist” I’m forced to nod along until they throw out a date I can latch onto.
)
It sort of reminded me a lot of playing Oregon trail. A lot. In fact in my head I kept joking about it being a novelisation of Oregon trail. “A member of your party has been bitten by a snake. Do you rest for 1, 2, 3 days or press on?”
Like her first book the setting of details was kind of low on the priority list, with the eye probing taking higher priority. Still, I figured it was a Romance book and it fit the Romance novel convention and I couldn’t weigh to heavily against it for doing what it was supposed to do, even if that’s not my thing. (I soooo tire of longing gazes, lurching hearts, tingling skin.) Frankly, since the main focus was the overland journey it felt to me as if it could have taken place any time between 1835 and 1875.
Hah!
@nm
No, it was your average 15 week semester. It just took 5 weeks for me to run out of money and realize I either had to ask my parents for a check or get a job. Not being a Hilton or a Rockefeller I opted for “get a job”.
So you’re saying that if you had been all prudent and proactive and lined up a job before the semester started, you might have had a different boss and your entire life since then would have been different? That [stretching mightily to refer this back to your original topic] could be a great plot device for a romance novel.
@Andrea, we are WELL overdue for a get-together. I’ll touch base when I’m back week after next.
[...] Comments « The Doctor’s Lady [...]