His e-mail is in the normal font, I'll put my explanations in bold..
Okay, some initial comments on your novel. The basic idea is of course
very sound, since it is always interesting to read about a human
relationship as it develops through hopes, doubts, disappointments,
etc.
The style is basically good, albeit with somewhat repetitive emphasis
on the minutiae of daily life. Do we need a description of EVERY cup
of coffee Pierre drinks? There are occasional grammatical lapses:
missing apostrophes, incorrect use of initial capital for common nouns,
misuse of who/whom, errors in the sequence of tenses, confusion of
did/done, lay/lie and sat/sitting, etc.
Right, the guy goes out and makes Coffee because he sometimes doesn't know what to do and say, so his excuse is to disappear off to the kitchen. My sister says that my friend just doesn't know what it's like to live in our houses, our kettles are never cold.
For capitals, I think that's probably due to MS Word always putting capitals for he and she before said after dialogue? With the did and done, I am using a French bloke talking English, except he uses French grammar for English talking ie; we'd say 'Have you done?' whereas he'd say 'You have done?' The other parts I can look over again and again. I do actually know the difference between lay and lie though, I actually looked it up in my Dictionary to make sure of the proper uses.
Most novels require a certain suspension of belief, given that they
relate events which are outwith the reader's direct experience. But
there are moments in your book when the reader is expected to suspend
belief to a ridiculous extent. The frame on which the developing
relationship between Pierre and Samantha hangs is incredible in the
true sense of the word, i.e. totally unbelievable.
What can I say? It's a romance, it's how I see it and how I want it, it's the main basis of the story, and I cannot change the outcome of it, even if it means publishing it as an e-book.
I may think that Pete Docherty is a poor role model and it is highly
unlikely that I should enjoy any time in his company - but I doubt if
I can say that I "loathe him with a passion". Why, at the start of
the novel, does Pierre react so vehemently to a woman whom he has never
met and who has never had any direct impact on his life? It is never
satisfactorily explained.
I can loathe someone I've never met, seeing them on the internet or on the TV screen makes me say yucky things about them, you ought to hear me when I see a pic of Jean Reno and his lollipop headed, internet bride looking wife lol.
There are occasional moments in the story when it is hard to believe
certain facts. How can a man with three sisters have never heard of
Barbie (page 71)? Is it likely that a woman with Samantha's sexual
history "had never done this before in her life" (page 102)? Would a
trained police officer "throw his gun to the floor" (page 87)?
I had Barbie dolls as a kid, and I bet my brother didn't know what they were called back then? Plus, when my female MC mentions Barbie, all she says is. 'I must take after, Barbie.' and the male MC asks 'Who is that?'
With the bit where she has never done this before, well, that's a little on the naughty side so I won't explain it; except to say that this was something to do with what happened to her when she was small and she just used to pretend to her old boyfriends. In other words, she was faking it. believe it or not, this isn't an erotic story, there's only the one scene near the end, which isn't done graphically in any kind of way. But her whole life is there, so anyone who reads it would know where my girl was coming from, excuse the pun.
And then there is the protection provided to Samantha by the French
police. Private individuals cannot normally hire, i.e. for payment,
the services of the police. If the police believe that there is a
credible threat to someone, protection is provided by the State, acting
through the forces of law and order, at the taxpayers' expense. And
if protection is to be provided, it would not be by one person. CPOs
(close protection officers) work as teams; given the resources
apparently allocated to Samantha's home in the south of France, there
would be at least two teams of three men protecting her in Paris.
And if she is at threat, would any CPO allow her to go wandering around
the city on her own?
My male MC used to be a Policeman, but now he works as a freelance bodyguard who does private jobs sometimes for the ministry of the interior. My girl just happens to be a friend of the head of the ministry of the interior's family, which is all explained very early on in the story. She doesn't want a crowd of bodyguards, she likes her privacy too much.
The story becomes even more incredible when it switches to Provence
(which is a region of southeast France, and not a town as suggested on
page 70). Even bumbling Inspector Clouseau ought to be able to track
down an old Transit van in the south of France. How long would it
take the English police to find a Deux-Cheveaux with French plates
pottering around High Wycombe? It's a bit like that episode in one of
Tom Clancy's novels when 14 Irishmen walk into a pub in Hereford and
order pints of Guinness, "without anyone paying them any attention".
Come on! - 14 Irishmen, whispering to one another in a pub in Hereford,
home of the SAS, and nobody notices!
I'm sorry, to me this just seems like nit-picking, and I've changed it to the city of Nice anyway.
Given that Pierre and his bunch of assassins seem decided from the
outset to eliminate Jeffrey, why did they put Samantha at such risk by
allowing her outside the house? Why didn't they just pull him from
the van parked across the road? And indeed, if Pierre can come and
go through the back entrance without being seen, why doesn't he sneak
Samantha out the same way, thus ensuring that there is absolutely no
risk of her coming to any harm?
I explained in the story how Samantha wouldn't want someone to just be killed off. She's already fragile and suffering depression from the guy Jeffrey killing her husband and baby ten years before, she would still have his death on her conscience if he was simply 'disappeared'. She needs to play a part into getting him... But I do know that this is my weak spot in the story.
And after Pierre has been painted as such a loving uncle, kind brother
and sensitive suitor, why does he turn into a vicious thug, beating a
restrained prisoner and ordering his execution. Okay, the DGSE (French
secret service) may have come out of the Greenpeace affair badly, but
there is a difference between a bungled operation and cold-blooded
beating and murder.
Pierre is angry after the bloke describes, in detail, what he wants to do to Samantha, Pierre loves her and goes ape-shit. But it was already decided that justice would be done to Jeffrey this time, so that he could never hurt her or anyone else again.
It's a good story, and both the main characters are described with
enough depth to make the story move forward. But I would suggest
re-writing the Jeffrey part of the story to make the novel as a whole
more credible.
You did a good thing in allowing for someone else's critical eye to go over it. This will help it become a better manuscript in the end. I would suggest you get other eyes to look at it as well, and not rely solely on one person's judgment. Do you have a writer's group that could crit it? (or use the AW one)...
But tomorrow, start thinking over exactly what he said. 
