THE LEGEND OF VALENTINE, both christian and poorly written

THE LEGEND OF VALENTINE
SHELDON COLLINS
Kindle edition (non-affiliate Amazon link)
$5.99, or free to read on Kindle Unlimited

Rating: 2* of five

The Publisher Says: Rome, 268 AD
In an age of tyranny and turmoil, an eternal love story ignites a revolution.

Valentine, a once-fearsome warrior reborn from the brink of death, sheds his violent past for a new destiny inspired by his blind lover, Agatha. Amidst the ruthless rule of a merciless emperor, Valentine undertakes a clandestine to unite lovers in secret ceremonies, defying imperial decrees that threaten to obliterate the Christian faith.

As Valentine’s covert acts of defiance grow bolder, he challenges the tyrannical order, planting the seeds for a celebration of love that will echo through the ages—becoming the foundation of what we now cherish as Valentine’s Day.

The Legend of Valentine is an epic tale of love, war, faith, and rebellion. Against the backdrop of an empire in chaos, this gripping saga invites readers into a world where love defies all odds, heroes rise from the shadows, and the undying spirit of hope shines through the darkest times.

Discover the man behind the myth, witness the birth of a legend, and experience a love story so profound it promises to live forever.
Are there any limits to what one man will endure for his true love?

I RECEIVED A DRC FROM THE PUBLISHER VIA NETGALLEY. THANK YOU.

My Review: Poorly written apologia for the christian religion's most popular saint (who most likelynever existed because we can't find any sources that agree on his details). None of the Valentines in the different hagiographies are anything like this Valentine, but that's really not the biggest issue...the name was very popular in the third-century Empire, so the author can plausibly make up any Late Imperial male and call him that with impunity.

The biggest issue is the way the author wrote the book. Is this a plot-driven story? If so, is the plot religious development with imperial decline, spiritual awakening of a soldier who's Seen Things, or what? Muddled all together as they are one loses track of why any of this is happening. Or are we meant to cleave to Valentine, invest in the events that led him to christian faith? We're told almost brusquely things happen, but not let in on the reasons we should care, as we could do if we were shown actions occurring.

That really took me down a dark, twisty rabbit hole of trying to find anything reasonably widely agreed upon demonstrating there was A Valentine, not just a bunch of local cult stories syncretized in the Middle Ages and lightly draped over the Late Classical god Cupid and his festival of love millennia later. Being deeply anti-christian, I was cynically amused that there's a big ol' nothin' to indicate the actual existence of one true Valentine but a heap of men named that, as one would expect in that time, who seem to have been smooshed into one guy.

I started out my read hoping for a good story set in 260s Roman days, got a poor story trying to make yet another legend for some guy named the Roman equivalent of Liam, then enduring its gushing christian guff all over the place in wooden prose.

A truly regrettable waste of my ever-dwindling supply of eyeblinks.