Most of the time, I liked Rachel, but her black-and-white view of the world drove me batty. You either were a prostitute for life, or you were lily white, nothing in between.I could understand why Lissa saw her as a hypocrite. At every new development, Rachel seemed to be redefining the way things worked in order to suit her. If she lived purely by the standards she set for herself, there would not have been a single job she could have taken when they first arrived in San Francisco. She justified cleaning and cooking in Johnnie's saloon by defining the saloon only as a hotel during her working hours, and by saying that she refused to be around Carmelita, a former prostitute who still dressed provocatively in order to distract gamblers into losing more money. Technically, the only thing she did during those early days that truly fit her high standards was the work she did caring for Johnnie's trees. Had she really wanted to live a perfectly moral life, she would have married the naturalist.However, that doesn't mean Lissa's behavior didn't drive me crazy, too. What Lissa didn't seem to realize was that the only thing that saved her and Rachel from being treated like common prostitutes was their status as "sunbonnet women." Being a sunbonnet woman meant that some things would be more difficult - she and Rachel would have had to work much harder to earn a living. However, by choosing not to act like a sunbonnet woman, she was opening herself up to a life where, if Sumner chose to, he could have basically acted as her pimp, sharing her with anyone willing to pay. The thing that made him despicable was the joking he did shortly after he and Lissa first slept together, telling Johnnie that he might share her with him if he wished. Gist later tries to make it seem that Sumner may actually be in love with Lissa, but I doubt it. Lissa was an idiot, a fifteen-year-old idiot who had a temper tantrum, smacking Rachel when she had the gall to remind her that Sumner hadn't kept the marriage vows he made to his wife, so how could he be expected to keep any promises to Lissa?In the end, what it came down to was Rachel remembering that Jesus consorted with and forgave lots of prostitutes, and her realization that it's not her job to set the moral standards for everyone - all of that's between individuals and God. All that mortals like her can do is try to give people who want to turn their lives around a place they can go to and people who will help and support them. I can accept that.The historical aspects of this book were very interesting - this is not a period of time I've read a lot about. I knew a bit about the gold rush, but I didn't know about the specifics or what life was like - Gist made that seem very real.As far as the humor goes, that starts at the very beginning, with the first line: "This street is impassable, not even jackassable," which was apparently a real street sign. I'm sure Gist's research was fascinating. There was less and less humor as the book went on and people's lives started to fall apart, but I did like those early humorous bits.Overall, I liked this book enough that I'd read something else by Gist, and I certainly plan on reading Maid to Match.(Original review, with read-alikes, posted on A Library Girl's Familiar Diversions.)
I really had mixed feelings about this one. I guess by the end it all just felt a little too preachy for me. I think I could easily go off on a little tangent, so I’ll skip that and just get to the review. Rachel, Lissa and Michael find themselves in a desperate situation when they arrive in San Francisco. Their father had died on the trip over leaving them alone in the world. While Rachel tries to keep everyone together, her siblings turn their backs on her (repeatedly) and decide to go wild. At one point I really wanted Rachel to just pack up and leave, let them realize how much they’d hurt her and maybe realize how much they actually needed her. I guess I felt like they were so mad at Rachel for judging people that they didn’t stop to notice they were judging her just has harshly.At times I really liked Rachel’s character, even though she was kind of a nerd. What was with her fascination with bugs…oh, I mean insects? Sometimes I liked her, other times not as much. I guess she had a hard time finding a balance between living your standards and allowing others to do their own thing, and not trying to convert everyone to her way of thinking. I actually liked her morals, even if some were a little extreme, I guess it was the way she went about stuff that drove me bonkers. I liked Johnnie probably the most out of everyone. He seemed consistent and the changes he made within himself seemed more sincere and realistic. The relationship and banter between Rachel and Johnnie was fun and probably my favorite parts of the book (except when they were being nerds talking about bugs and trees…).I was really disappointed with Michael and Lissa, I was hoping by the end of the novel both would have learned something, and maybe Michael did a little, but Lissa sure didn’t learn a thing. She was annoying from the first, totally spoiled, self-centered, lazy and judgmental. The truth is the way she was living would never really bring her any happiness and it saddened me that she again didn’t learn any lessons and was still cold (in my opinion) to her sister.This was the second book I read by Gist, and I enjoyed it a lot more than the first. The setting was fun and enlightening, Johnnie was a great leading man and overall I enjoyed the story, even if I didn’t agree with how certain things played out.
What do You think about The Measure Of A Lady (2006)?
What I liked best about this well written book is the fact that the heroine is uncomfortably flawed, yet still likable. She seems human and real. The author does this in a way that no other author I've read does and I think a lot of Christian women will closely identify with the heroine's struggles. The plot line and conflict developments are interesting throughout and although not all problems come full circle and get a nice tidy bow (I actually kinda like that) there is still a satisfying ending to the book. I highly recommend that every Christian woman read this book. Not to say that nonChristian women wouldn't enjoy it, simply that I think the target audience is probably those who already think of themselves as "Christian".
—Imjustme24kd
I didn't like this Deeanne Gist book as much as the other I've read. Part of the problem with it is the frustrating secondary characters. I can't give too many details without seriously spoiling this, but lets just say there are some characters that make me want to pull my hair out. Another frustrating part to this book was her reactions to certain parts of the society she found herself it. I was annoyed that she was basing so much of her morality on social mores of the time. I know this is very realistic for her character, but it made me rather grumpy. An example is the fact that at one point she is running a cafe. She hangs a sign saying "No Prostitutes." Her reason behind this is a verse in the Bible that tells saints not to keep company with anyone who is sexually immoral, not even to eat with such a person. Sadly she doesn't even consider the fact that the men who were visiting the prostitutes and then eating in her cafe were just as immoral as the prostitutes themselves. Once again, I know that is a very realistic view of the times this book is set in, but it still annoyed me to no end. All the frustrations made me take much longer on this book then I would usually expect to. There were enough things I liked about this book to merit a 3 1/2 star rating. I really enjoyed the character of Johnnie. It was very nice watching him grow and improve. I also liked the end result of all the frustration with a few small exceptions. This has inspired me to try more of Deeanne Gist's books.
—Natalie
this is the second book i have read by this author and i've quite liked her. this story is set in San Fransisco during the Gold Rush. Rachel[18:] and her younger brother and sister are orphaned on the way to San Fransisco and have no way to return home. they find the city filthy - physically and morally. the only other women in town besides Rachel and her sister are prostitutes - or, in Rachel's mind, fallen women. the only buildings in town are saloons and gambling halls, one of which is owned by Jonnie, who shows compassion on the famiy and lets them stay in his shanty. eventually Rachel earns her way by cleaning the saloon then opening her own restaurant. But along the way we see dilemnas. her younger sister, Lissa, enjoys the flirting and attention from all the men and she is drawn to the prostitutes. she finds herself more like them than her 'pious' sister who feels it is her Christian duty to stay away from them. Her brother finds out he has a talent for dealing cards. Rachel reminds her sibings of the right ways they've been taught but they continue to lean towards the 'San Fransisco' way. Rachel, while brought up to be 'proper' has interests that are unconventional- she loves insects and plant life. her knowledge of these things leads to a friendship with Jonnie who has a hothouse. of course a romance develops too and this allows the author to explore some of the strict ideas of the time [and still taught today:] about passion. she was brought up to believe that a lady keeps her feelings in control and is responsible to help the man do the same. however, she feels anything but tame around Jonnie and thinks she is sinful because of it. the author does a very good job of exploring this while not going too far. towards the end of the book Rachel finds she needs the help of the 'fallen women' - the very ones she has banned from her restaurant - during the fire that destroys the city. through out the book the things she's been taught all her life, including some interpretations of the Bible, come into conflict with her life in San Fransisco. she begins to read the scriptures differently and see how often Christ was with the sinners instead of shunning them and she learns to see the sinners [the gamblers and prostitutes:] as people.i liked this book because the author examines the contradictions between what is proper and what is right without getting preachy. a few things end well but not all. the main character really grows - love that. there are some lessons about not judging, and reminders that true Christianity isn't about shunning, it's about looking on the heart.
—Becki
