Scan barcode
ipanzica's review
1.0
It's so horrifyingly bad that it is amazing. I am still in shock that a woman wrote this sexist piece of flaming garbage, which I could ironically not put down. It's well written but it's so racist that I can not give it even a decent rating. The love interest is a middle eastern when the mysterious evil kidnapper but instantly after saving the leading lady, it turns out he was 100% white the entire time. WFT! Then, the leading lady has Stockholm,'s syndrome is so obvious it's painful.
P.S. It turns out that the racist term "sand n-word" is over 100 years old, fuck this book
P.S. It turns out that the racist term "sand n-word" is over 100 years old, fuck this book
mrswythe89's review
1.0
Oh god this is HORRENDOUS. I skimmed this very quickly and deleted it from my Kindle the minute I was finished.
To describe this sufficiently I'd have to type the word HORRENDOUS over and over again. HORRIFIC also suitable. One star for the first chapter of Diana, whom I liked as a character. I would like to read a story about her that wasn't all HORROR.
Synopsis: mind-bogglingly racist chronicle of beautiful high-spirited woman who dresses and lives as a man, travels into the desert and is raped into submission and self-abnegating love by a sheik. I read this because of the extremely interesting and worthwhile reviews of the book by dorothean and sanguinity on DW:
http://dorothean.dreamwidth.org/9826.html
http://sanguinity.dreamwidth.org/50386.html
I particularly recommend dorothean's post even if you haven't read the book and have no plans to. (DON'T READ THE BOOK.)
ETA: Editing to add, having read the other reviews on GR, that I didn't actually find any moments of guilty pleasure in it. I thought the writing was surprisingly decent but only liked the parts where Diana is thinking -- the parts at the beginning where she's revelling in the joy of being in the desert, for example, are quite vivid -- and once the abduction, rape and mental torture begin it's just like, OH GOD GET IT AWAY.
To describe this sufficiently I'd have to type the word HORRENDOUS over and over again. HORRIFIC also suitable. One star for the first chapter of Diana, whom I liked as a character. I would like to read a story about her that wasn't all HORROR.
Synopsis: mind-bogglingly racist chronicle of beautiful high-spirited woman who dresses and lives as a man, travels into the desert and is raped into submission and self-abnegating love by a sheik. I read this because of the extremely interesting and worthwhile reviews of the book by dorothean and sanguinity on DW:
http://dorothean.dreamwidth.org/9826.html
http://sanguinity.dreamwidth.org/50386.html
I particularly recommend dorothean's post even if you haven't read the book and have no plans to. (DON'T READ THE BOOK.)
ETA: Editing to add, having read the other reviews on GR, that I didn't actually find any moments of guilty pleasure in it. I thought the writing was surprisingly decent but only liked the parts where Diana is thinking -- the parts at the beginning where she's revelling in the joy of being in the desert, for example, are quite vivid -- and once the abduction, rape and mental torture begin it's just like, OH GOD GET IT AWAY.
read_100_books's review
4.0
Given that this book was written in 1919, I went into it with a very open mind and was pleasantly surprised.
Modern day readers may read it and shun it because of how it portrays the issues of race, women, rape, and Stockholm Syndrome, but I think that for these reasons it is an astounding book that clearly reflected its time.
If we think of the time this book was written then it is easy to see the feminist ideals that Hull was trying to promote through Diane, and she was not afraid of implying subjects that were ignored in every day conversation i.e. rape. Her book also is an early example of a good woman "taming" or "changing" a brutish man. This is a theme that is still very prominent in our modern culture. Historically her treatment of race is what was typical of Europeans during the time of imperialism.
This book has many problems when looking at it through a modern lens, but when looking at it as a historical classic it is easy to see why it inspired such love and loyalty in the 1900s.
Modern day readers may read it and shun it because of how it portrays the issues of race, women, rape, and Stockholm Syndrome, but I think that for these reasons it is an astounding book that clearly reflected its time.
If we think of the time this book was written then it is easy to see the feminist ideals that Hull was trying to promote through Diane, and she was not afraid of implying subjects that were ignored in every day conversation i.e. rape. Her book also is an early example of a good woman "taming" or "changing" a brutish man. This is a theme that is still very prominent in our modern culture. Historically her treatment of race is what was typical of Europeans during the time of imperialism.
This book has many problems when looking at it through a modern lens, but when looking at it as a historical classic it is easy to see why it inspired such love and loyalty in the 1900s.
troglodata's review
2.0
A grotesque product of its time. Fascinating and appalling in turns for modern readers.
durantedianne's review
1.0
This dates to the same period as several novels by Henry Kitchell Webster, whose works I enjoy very much. I was curious to see whether this author had the same sense of life and ability to write. Short answer: nope. Long answer: too much description (especially of the heroine's feelings), too little dialog & action. Descriptions of persons & scenery are often cliches. Point of view switches distractingly and without warning from one character to another.
It's conceivable that the famous movie of the same title with Rudolph Valentino is better, because these flaws would be impossible. I'm planning to watch it one of these days and see.
It's conceivable that the famous movie of the same title with Rudolph Valentino is better, because these flaws would be impossible. I'm planning to watch it one of these days and see.
mstufail19's review against another edition
2.0
SO you have to take into context the time this book was written (Number 5 in my self-imposed history of romance curriculum, written in 1919) because it was problematic AF.
For starters, they refer to all the Arabs around them as "Orientals". There are a lot of references to pretty ugly stereotypes.
The main character is a feisty and adventurous young woman and of course, her persistence in going out into the desert without an appropriate male chaperone is the reason she was kidnapped. She was traveling with a full-on caravan of guards, supplies, and a guide, but they were all Arabs and sold her to the Sheik, which of course would never have happened if there had been even one white male chaperone to protect her (eye roll emoji).
There is off-page, but heavily implied, rape. Which is indicative of the time, when it was believed rape was the only way a woman would accept premarital sex and of course she eventually falls in love with her rapist (puke emoji).
I was optimistic that the main characters were of different races. It's not often in 1919 historical romances you see a white woman and a non-white man together. However, it turns out The Sheik is actually a white man who had been adopted by an Arab sheik.
There were some suspenseful and entertaining parts. If you can ignore or take the problematicness within context it was an entertaining read.
For starters, they refer to all the Arabs around them as "Orientals". There are a lot of references to pretty ugly stereotypes.
The main character is a feisty and adventurous young woman and of course, her persistence in going out into the desert without an appropriate male chaperone is the reason she was kidnapped. She was traveling with a full-on caravan of guards, supplies, and a guide, but they were all Arabs and sold her to the Sheik, which of course would never have happened if there had been even one white male chaperone to protect her (eye roll emoji).
There is off-page, but heavily implied, rape. Which is indicative of the time, when it was believed rape was the only way a woman would accept premarital sex and of course she eventually falls in love with her rapist (puke emoji).
I was optimistic that the main characters were of different races. It's not often in 1919 historical romances you see a white woman and a non-white man together. However, it turns out The Sheik is actually a white man who had been adopted by an Arab sheik.
There were some suspenseful and entertaining parts. If you can ignore or take the problematicness within context it was an entertaining read.
annarose96's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
0.25