by LaPatitMort
Nice twist on 'boy meets girl' - but the glaring historical inaccuracies almost ruined it. Rape? Child abuse? Indian guy telling an Indian gal what to do? In public? Without being laughed at for many, many moons? - puh-lease. And the heroine is just plain wrong in so many ways. Next time, start w/an actual Indian/ethnic person when building an Indian/ethnic character. Example: Pocahantas. She lived in the same region as heroine; was taken 'captive' as a pre-teen, 'traded' to another tribe, & was 16 when she led L&C across 'the west.' Pocahantas kicked ass. Quiet Chick she ain't. Please consider taking it down for a thorough re-write, & finding some Indian readers. It's got good bones with great potential - like the bit about her fascination with his curly red chest hair, great touch that rang true - but is not yet good work.
Good story, accurate or not. Pocahontas? No. This was Pocahontas: American Indian; daughter of Powhatan, an Algonquian chief in Virginia. According to John Smith, she rescued him from death at the hands of her father. In 1612, she was seized as a hostage by the English, and she later married colonist John Rolfe.
Let's try Sacagawea as the woman who acted as guide and interpreter for Lewis & Clark.
I really enjoyed this story it kept my attention well and liked the way the view from each main character was shown,
I wasn't looking for historical accuracy just a romantic story which this definetly was.
tartan9
I really liked this story up through the end of the Toulon altercation--when she turned into a spiteful bitch, and come to think, the story never returned to the introductory family history search.
It was a good tale to a point. I would have liked to see a different ending also. I would doubt that a wandering Paiute Band from the Sierra Nevada Mountains would range all of the way to the Great Plains, much less challenge a tribe such as the Cheyenne, Arapaho, or Kiowa by taking one of their children as a captive. But thanks for a good tale otherwise.