Name: The Duke Is Mine
ISBN: 9780062021281

Eloisa James

When Olivia Lytton, who is engaged to the Duke of Canterwick, and Tarquin, her sister's intended, fall in love, they embark on a scandalous affair and risk losing everything, in a Regency-era retelling of "The Princess and the Pea".

The Duke Is Mine

Elizabeth Clement

Just okay. It doesn’t normally take me 3 weeks to finish an Eloisa James book, but I really had to push through the last half. I’m not sure, I just found the pacing of the story to be weird. The characters were okay but I didn’t feel a lot of chemistry between the two lead characters.

“Eloisa James is extraordinary.” —Lisa Kleypas In the capable hands of USA Today and New York Times bestselling author Eloisa James, the fairy tales we loved as children take on vibrant—and sensuous—new life. With The Duke is Mine, the beloved author of A Kiss at Midnight and When Beauty Tamed the Beast gives the classic tale of the Princess and the Pea a delightfully romantic Regency spin. Fans of Victoria Alexander and Julia Quinn will simply adore this historical romance gem about a lady reluctantly betrothed to one duke but pursued by another; a tantalizing tale of love, lies, and one very uncomfortable mattress.

Natalie

** spoiler alert **
           I am not sure what I think about this book. 

I think James intended Rupert to be a positive portrayal of a person with a cognitive disability (in fact, I have a family member with the same sort of brain injury), however, I am annoyed that she chose to kill him off. That lets Olivia and Quin off the hook with regards to Olivia's betrothal to Rupert and that just doesn't feel right to me. There should have been some consequences for the violation of the betrothal contract, I think.

I did like that Rupert was characterized as a kind and honorable person with a talent for honesty and poetry. Olivia was, in many ways, unworthy of him (and I really wanted to love Olivia, as she is one of the rare fat heroines).

Connor 

this cover is extremely misleading (yes, more so than usual romance covers), but the book was fun!

Francesca G

Kate

Update April 2018: Changing my rating from three stars to one because I have learned a lot about disability politics in the three years since I read this book and I don't know how I didn't realize that it is so extremely fucking ableist. I think I was uncomfortable with the portrayal of Rupert when I read this book but enjoyed the rest of the story - now I'm like, how could I possibly have done that? 

The heroine is betrothed to a man who is mentally disabled, and, to the best of my memory, she refers to him with cruel nicknames and treats him with contempt until she has a change of heart, decides she needs to "protect" him (which is astoundingly patronizing), and he eventually dies in "noble sacrifice" to facilitate the happy ending. His lack of knowledge about and disinterest in sex is also played for comedy when he is in fact in an extremely vulnerable and violent situation. Basically, every possible ableist trope is used in his depiction. Even most of the reviews criticizing this book use ableist language of some kind to refer to him. He is, at best, an object of pity, and at worst, exposed to sexual violence and eventually killed off to get him out of the abled protagonists' way.

Now let's talk about the reviews defending Eloisa James and her portrayal of this character. They are all extremely. fucking. ableist. One argues Rupert's depiction cannot be problematic because the heroine is "amazingly kind and respectful" to him. First of all, there is a difference between kindness/respect and pity, or even affection. Second of all, it is not "amazing" to treat a disabled person with kindness and respect!!! Most of the reviews defending James and the heroine predicate their defense on the Exceptional Act of Kindness that is "not being actively cruel to a mentally disabled person" (and that's ignoring the first part of the book where she is, in fact, actively cruel, at least behind his back). WHOO BOY IS THAT ABLEIST in just a whole layer cake of ways!!! (For example: the infantilizing way his defining/"redeeming" characteristics are his "sweetness" and "innocence". Also that he has to have these "redeeming" characteristics to make him worthy of respect and kindness.) 

The other common defense is that Rupert "ends up being more of an actual 'hero' than the other duke." Let me remind you, the way he does this is literally to die (framed as sacrificing himself) so that he is no longer an obstacle to the HEA. I can't even coherently express how many harmful things this reinforces. Suffice it to say Rupert's narrative arc is essentially an Ableism Checklist. Yep, ticked off "mockery," ticked off "infantilization," ticked off "abled character is so amazing for eventually exhibiting a modicum of decency," what are we missing? Oh right, "burden" and "death as plot device to serve abled characters." Check and check. Take a minute to think about how this narrative sanctions and excuses caregiver murder. And then shove "Rupert's heroism" up your ass. Lmao.