This RITA® Reader Challenge 2017 review was written by Phyllis L. This story was nominated for the RITA® in the Short Historical category.
The summary:
Welcome to Two-Time Texas:
Where tempers burn hot
Love runs deep
And a single marriage can unite a feuding town
…or tear it apart for good
In the wild and untamed West, time is set by the local jeweler…but Two-Time Texas has two: two feuding jewelers and two wildly conflicting time zones. Meg Lockwood’s marriage was supposed to unite the families and finally bring peace. But when she’s left at the altar by her no-good fiancé, Meg’s dreams of dragging her quarrelsome neighbors into a ceasefire are dashed.
No wedding bells? No one-time town.
Hired to defend the groom against a breach of promise lawsuit, Grant Garrison quickly realizes that the only thing worse than small-town trouble is falling for the jilted bride. But there’s something about Meg’s sweet smile and determined grit that draws him in…even as the whole crazy town seems set on keeping them apart.
Who knew being Left at the Altar could be such sweet, clean, madcap fun?
Here is Phyllis L.'s review:
I did enjoy this, but I fear I will forget it quickly. I LOVED the aspect of Two-Time, Texas, being called that because there are two feuding jewelers/clockmakers who set their clocks differently. That the feud doesn’t just cause trouble inside the town, but causes the trains to not run on time, makes it more crucial that the feud be solved.
No spoilers, but “What Time Is It?” used to be a bigger headache than jet lag or adapting to Daylight Savings.
Meg, the daughter of one of the clockmakers, is supposed to marry her longtime friend, the son of the rival, and solve the feud. She’s a bit too understanding when the groom talks to her in the graveyard, saying he’d rather travel to the Pacific Islands. A handsome stranger overhears them and says if he had a woman like her, he wouldn’t throw her over.
Meg hides out at home and in her dad’s store/workshop, nursing bruised pride until her dad sues the non-groom for a huge amount of money for breach of promise. So now she’s been jilted AND everyone thinks she’s horrible.
It was at this point that I wondered if she has any friends outside her sisters and the guy she was supposed to marry.
Grant, the handsome stranger, is an East Coast lawyer who moved to town to be near his sister, but she died right before he got there. He opened a law office anyway, but has approximately zero business because the town is insular. The ex hires him to defend him, which throws him into company with Meg, but as he’s on the other side of the lawsuit, he can’t pursue her. There are a few secret kisses, but nothing can really happen.
They don’t spend enough time together, getting to know each other, to make me fully believe in the love.
The trial was….a trial. It was comic, but like some of the other comedic moments in the story, it felt like they were trying too hard to be goofy.
My main problem with the story was that by about halfway through I wanted them to admit their love to each other. Because they don’t, the Big Misunderstanding drags on, each one thinking the other isn’t really interested. The Black Moment would have been more intense if they admitted their feelings before being pulled apart.
This is listed on Amazon as “Clean and Wholesome” and….well, I won’t go into my reaction to the implication that sex is “dirty.” I also like sexy books, so this one was a metaphorical cigarette between bouts of good lovin’; there are a couple of kisses, lots of longing, but nothing graphic.
As I mentioned earlier, I’m going to forget a lot about this book. Meg lets everyone else dictate her life and ends up being fairly bland. Grant was more interesting as a fish out of water who observed and then absorbed into the quirkiness of the townsfolk.
I kept wondering just how big this town was. There seemed to be a lot of strangers around AND everyone knew everyone’s business AND there were enough people to support two clockmakers AND multiple lawyers AND a newspaper – or two?
The two time zones will stick with me. So will some of the characters, like the heroine’s sister, a suffragette who wears enormous, bizarre hats and keeps getting tossed in jail for causing trouble. Her book, the second in the series, is out next month and yeah, I’m tempted. According to the blurb, she gets elected sheriff and falls in love with an accused thief. So there’s that.
There’s also – and correct me if I’m wrong – that this is the only non-British-Isles book in the Short Historical category. USA! USA!
I give it a B-. But I’m a harsh grader.
This book is available from:
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
We also may use affiliate links in our posts, as well. Thanks!
This is the second time the reviews of one book are wildly divergent. Other than mentions of particular aspects, this sounds like a different book.
However, ‘chaste’ books do nothing for me. I prefer my characters to have and to expect healthy sex lives- long before marriage is even considered. It should be a fundamental part of determining overall compatibility. I have no patience with the belief that premarital sex is bad and/or wrong.
I’ve long avoided Inspies because I’m not religious and loathe being preached at, especially when my opinions contradict the message delivered. I’m still not interested even when it’s only the characters talking to God about whatever. So, this looks like another to be added to my ever-growing DBW/WNR list (don’t bother with/will never read).
I have read other books by this author and would be willing to read this book. I read across the sexy times spectrum, so chaste books are like book palate cleansers for me. Thanks for the review!
I’m sure I’ve made this comment before but it is fascinating reading side-by-side reviews of the same book. Even when the reviewers came to more or less the same conclusion, they always highlight different aspects of the story. That’s so interesting about how towns kept time before time zones were standardized. I don’t think I’ve ever heard about that before. And it is fun that this is a historical romance set in the US that doesn’t fall into the cowboys/outlaws category – how unusual is that? I don’t read a ton of historicals but I get the impression they’re usually set outside the US in the Regency or Victorian time period, etc.
Isn’t ‘expecting’ people to have premarital sex just the flip side of expecting them to abstain?
I mean, I sampled. But I think that if you don’t want to, you shouldn’t feel you must.
@Chelle: Absolutely it should be up to each individual to do whatever they feel is best for them. But it should be their choice and their choice only. Not something they feel they must do because it’s been drilled into them as the only “acceptable” path.
I have issues with those who preach abstinence only, who stress that non-virginal women are “less than” or in some way diminished because they no longer possess a membrane. All of which leads back to their religious beliefs which were determined by a group of men centuries ago without access to modern DNA testing.
And actually, what I meant by my comment (typing on my phone therefore unable to emphasize specifically) was that IF they’re having sex they should expect that sex to be satisfying by experimenting with whatever they’re comfortable doing and thereby learning what works best for them. I have no time for slut-shaming nor interest in bad sex.
@kitkat9000 and @Chelle: I also prefer romances in which the characters sleep together before making a profound commitment, because I think sex is an important part of long-term compatibility and also just a fun, lovely thing to engage in safely with a caring partner. It’s the spice that makes a romance more like a gingersnap than a vanilla wafer.
However, I think what most of us have been saying over the last few posts is that we all want to see heroines who base their actions on their own desires, without influence from religion or overbearing men or judgmental women. It’s a huge turnoff to read about a heroine who is reluctantly having sex she doesn’t like because she feels obligated, or not having sex with someone she loves because she’s been brainwashed into believing it will devalue her. Whether the book is G or NC-17, it needs a heroine who pilots her own ship. And vagina.
After all, sex is wrong and dirty, so save it for someone you love.
I second the comment about enjoying two people’s take on the same book. It seems like both reviews picked up the the main problem with the romance part of the plot. I’m a little confused by the B- rating, and I guess how these letter grades are assigned in general. The only positive part of the book according to this review is a side character. Is there a rubric posted somewhere that I haven’t seen yet?
There’s no rubric. I just liked enough pieces of the story to give it about a 7 out of 10. I hesitated between C+ and B-. As I said, I’m going to forget a lot about it (already have) and the second half especially dragged.
And the book itself doesn’t even mention sex before marriage, it’s the author’s website and the category on Amazon that’s “Clean”. But without knowing the author and her intentions and who decided to call it “clean” because sex is obvs filthy, it reads just as a no-sex story with a few kisses and not enough interaction between the H&H.
I also have written several stories with little or no sex, not because I think sex is dirty, but because it didn’t work into the plot, really. There’s even some religion in them even though I’m not religious (they’re set in 17th century France, when Catholicism reigned supreme and the Protestants were being shoved out.)
@Chelle While I certainly think all decisions about sex should be up to the individuals in question, I do truly think committing to a permanent relationship without having sex first is inadvisable. A marriage with a person who is sexually incompatible would be awful and the only way to really know if you are good together is to, well, be together.