Shirley

No. The performance was poor. I expect the best from J. Krentz and have for years. The narrator made the male character sound like a teenage boy. The tone, voice and inflections were a total disappointment. It made it difficult to actually rate the book fairly so I'm going to have to buy the book and read it myself.

Change the narrator.

No.

Probably, just because it's J. Krentz.

Usually I don't care for dual narrations, but this may be one instance when having a female and male narrator could have improved the performance and made the listen easier to follow.

This book would have received a 5 if it hadn't been for the narrator. Personally, I'm not sure a male is the best choice for narrating romances. They are almost always derived from the female perspective and should be read by a female. He would have been better if he had just read the book rather than trying to "be" a female voice.

I've been reading historical romances for over 40 years and Julie Garwood has always been a favorite. Yes, they are somewhat predictable but that goes along with historical romances. I always enjoy Anne Flosnik's performances of romances set in feudal and victorian England. Even though it's slow in a few places, when placed in context, the slowing is appropriate. I don't expect a female narrator to portray a solid male voice as long as I can tell the difference, and in that respect, she does well. Her British accent adds authenticity to the read.

This book is in my box of "keepers" from A. Quick. I've read it many times and this time, enjoyed both the book and narration. Anne Flosnik's British accent is ideal for historical romances set in feudal and victorian England. She adds an element of authenticity to the read.