Mia Ferraioli's Reviews > The Gentleman's Guide to Vice and Virtue

Trigger Warnings if needed: Adoption, alcoholism, child abuse, mentioned death, epilepsy, homophobia, prison, racism, seizures, slight gore.

The actual rating is 2.75

I wanted to like this book; I really did. Every review I've seen on Goodreads and the web was positive, with 4-5 stars. Everyone hyped this book, and I wanted to get into the hype. However, at this point in time, I don't think the book is for me. It dragged in the beginning, picked up at the stolen box, and went downhill again. Nothing was egregious, and it was the worst thing ever. I just found it boring and dragging. It was just there for me. Below, I'll go over the characters, plot/ending, and my overall opinion on the first book of the Montague Siblings series.

To start off the characters, we have Henry "Monty" Montague. I didn't like him. His whole personality just rubbed me the wrong way. I think it's because reading a character who's immature, whiny, judgmental, and narcissistic and seems to stay on that note becomes annoying after a while, especially with one extremely impulsive decision that kills it.

The next character is Percy Newton. He's my second favorite character in this novel. I wish he was the main character instead of Monty because I wanted to read his thoughts on everything through the lens of a mixed-race boy with epilepsy in a world that's not diverse and the same throughout. (view spoiler)[I also wanted to know his thoughts about the healing heart and if it was a hard decision to not want it to cure his epilepsy. (hide spoiler)]

Finally, we have Felicity Montague, Monty's younger sister and my number one favorite character. She's intelligent and capable, wants to be a physician, and reads medical journals. As someone who loves science, I can relate to her. I know that her desire to be a physician is central to the second book (If I am wrong about that, forgive me), so I am excited. I didn't hate her relationship with Monty all that much. It's at least a realistic view of how siblings bicker and act around each other

In terms of the plot, I have mixed feelings on the issue. Initially, I wouldn't say I liked the part about the Grand Tour of Eastern Europe. It sounded like fun, but I was bored with it. When it changed to a heist/hijacking, I got interested. I love accidental heists where you must figure out what to do and delve into the mystery. Granted, the fact what was stolen was just lying around at a party where anyone could've taken it was a bit weird. At that point, the box was asking to be stolen, and they assumed Monty had taken it, which was something else. Yes, he did take it, but I don't think they had a basis to go off of other than blaming him. Also, really quickly, we should go out to the pirates, ahem, I mean privateers. They were the real MVPs near the end. I know that not all fiction has to be realistic and make sense. . but in regard to this work, which is historical fiction, some realism can be needed. Example? The fact is that within a week, they run out of everything they need and yet continue on. They do show things being stolen for food, but that was few and far between, and they don't even show suffering from lack of food. They mention they have no money and they'd be starting fresh, but it's never said as if it's a problem. If this was a solely fantasy novel, I could suspend my disbelief. Still, in historical fiction, there is typically a sense of realism, and maybe some elements can be overlooked.

The ending of the book was. . .predictable. At least to me. (view spoiler)[ By the end, I realized what would happen with the heart being destroyed and everything. (hide spoiler)] Predictability isn't necessarily a bad thing. I think I was already bored with how the book was going and predicting it and reading it felt like a chore. I did like the bit about the pirates and Felicity, though. (view spoiler)[Good on her for showing enough skill to be asked to be a surgeon on their ship. I'd have taken it right then and there. (hide spoiler)]

All in all, the book was meh. I feel bad I think this way because everyone was hyping this up and loving it. I think what got me is that I fell for the hype and had high expectations, which ended up disappointing. The book wasn't horrible and the worst thing ever, but it wasn't this astounding and fantastic book, in my opinion. Would I recommend this book to others? Even though I wouldn't say I liked it, I can see an audience who will love it. I liked the queer representation between Monty and Percy and liked the ace rep with Felicity, but all that isn't enough to make me rate the book 5 stars.

This book gets a 2.75 out of 5 stars. I will reluctantly consider reading the second book, But only because I want more Felicity.