Beth's Reviews > Sorcery & Cecelia: or The Enchanted Chocolate Pot

Sorcery & Cecelia by Patricia C. Wrede
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
6074441
's review

liked it
bookshelves: young-adult, 1980s-sff-by-women

This is an epistolary novel (novel in letter form) whose two correspondents are two young girls in 1817 in England. One, Cecilia, is at home in Essex, and the other, her cousin Kate, has gone to London with her beautiful sister Georgina for their first social season.

Now, I knew from the beginning, from reading a review or two, that the novel was written in actual letter form between its two authors. That was all the background I had for it. But after reading a few letters, and knowing from its cover that it had two authors, I probably could have guessed that. And also, somewhat unfortunately, that there wasn't a lot of planning put into it, that it was done for fun.

You have two very similar sets of characters in Essex and London: plucky young lass/correspondent; mysterious, inexplicably irritating and blindingly obvious future love interest; restrictive aunt (who is suddenly indulgent or unobservant whenever it's necessary to get hero and heroine together in private); villainous sorceror; beautiful belle. They could have mixed things up more in that respect.

I could see where Ms. Wrede and Ms. Stevermer dropped plot crumbs for the other to pick up, or shuffled a character off to the other setting to give her partner a novelty to play with. Some of the mysteries ended up being interesting, like the reason Aunt Elizabeth objects to magic. But some plot crumbs are swept under the rug, like horrible Hollydean and his tutor, and could have been excised without weakening the story.

I had no trouble following which character or item was where at any given time, even when magical portals were involved, but individual events didn't stick out much because there wasn't a lot of tension. Our real-life correspondent-authors seemed to want to set things up for the other more than to actually move things forward. As a result, you have a book that wanders around with not a whole lot happening for 3/4 of its length. Then they agree "Hmm, we'd better wrap this up," dispose of the villains, get the heroines hooked up with their beaux, the end.

The voices of the girls are charming, if surprisingly homogenous. Knowing which author is which, I prefer Wrede's heroine for her "we have to do something" and the fact that her boyfriend is the clumsy and ineffectual one who has to be saved a couple times. I also like the low-key level of magic, particularly the protective magic, which I believe was introduced into the narrative by Wrede in the form of the charm bags.

I have a collected book of Wrede's in the backlog, and this one has made me curious to see what her writing is like solo.

In summary? Inoffensive, forgettable fluff. Nothing wrong with it, has some good points, caused a chuckle now and then, but nothing to write home about. So to speak.
6 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Sorcery & Cecelia.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

August 5, 2013 – Shelved as: to-read
August 5, 2013 – Shelved
August 7, 2013 – Started Reading
August 9, 2013 –
5.0% "If all the fictional young ladies who ever got vouchers for Almack's actually existed, the place would have been a convention center rather than an elite assembly hall.

Not particularly connected to this book, just an absurd thought I had reading one of the London-based segments of it."
August 14, 2013 –
40.0% "Kate calls Thomas the Marquis "odious" but I'm not seeing enough evidence in her letters to support that opinion. It seems more a nod to romance novel convention than something that really fits him.

But if this were an adult romance novel, convention would also dictate that she be attracted to him and/or already have had sex with him by this point."
August 17, 2013 –
81.0%
August 17, 2013 – Finished Reading
February 29, 2016 – Shelved as: young-adult
June 3, 2016 – Shelved as: 1980s-sff-by-women

Comments Showing 1-4 of 4 (4 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

carol. (not getting notifications) Ha! Too true. Look forward to your review--it didn't work for me, but I think that was genre more than writing.


carol. (not getting notifications) Very nice review! I think you captured a number of the reasons I had trouble enjoying it.

Regarding her other works, I really liked her Enchanted Forest Chronicles--they were sweet, plucky and funny. The Raven Ring is a much loved book that made it to my shelves. Unfortunately, not all of her writing works for me.


Beth Carol wrote: "Very nice review! I think you captured a number of the reasons I had trouble enjoying it.

Regarding her other works, I really liked her Enchanted Forest Chronicles--they were sweet, plucky and fu..."


You mentioned in your review it seems Victorian--if you throw a dart at the 19th century you're likely to hit the Victorian era :) but this is actually set during George IV's Regency, a couple of decades earlier. The time of Austen (she died in 1817, thanks Wikipedia!) and a sea's worth of historical romances.

The letter style, I think it's entirely possible to make it work. But in this case it wasn't 100% successful. Maybe an extra beta run would have tightened it up a bit more.

Enchanted Forest Chronicles... what, no Kindle edition? Scandalous! But seriously, the first book of that series has been on my wish list for a while. Maybe I'll avail myself of this mysterious "library" place you keep talking about.


carol. (not getting notifications) Beth, I fully admit to being history challenged. "Victorian" to me is anything with carriages and elaborate button-down dresses, servants and sexual repression (I know, that's extremely non-specific. Basically 'steampunk' without the 'punk'). I'll have to be careful about tossing that term around :)

I highly recommend the library. They are sometimes guarded by dragons librarians, but the rewards are great. I happen to be friends with a few librarians, and they aren't nearly as scary as they seem.


back to top