What do you think?
Rate this book
Why Shoot a Butler?
A New York Times and USA Today Bestseller! "Miss Heyer's characters and dialogue are an abiding delight to me." ―Dorothy L. Sayers Every family has secrets, but the Fountains' are turning deadly? On a dark night, along a lonely country road, barrister Frank Amberley stops to help a young lady in distress and discovers a sports car with a corpse behind the wheel. The girl protests her innocence, and Amberley believes her?at least until he gets drawn into the mystery and the clues incriminating Shirley Brown begin to add up? In an English country-house murder mystery with a twist, it's the butler who's the victim, every clue complicates the puzzle, and the bumbling police are well-meaning but completely baffled. Fortunately, in ferreting out a desperate killer, amateur sleuth Amberley is as brilliant as he is arrogant, but this time he's not sure he wants to know the truth? PRAISE FOR WHY SHOOT A BUTLER? "If genteel mysteries are your cup of tea, you have here a steaming teapot just waiting to be poured."― Bestsellers "Georgette Heyer is second to none."― Sunday Times "Heyer is an author to read ? this means you!"― New York Herald Tribune "Sharp, clear, and witty"― New Yorker
329 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1933
447 people are currently reading
2858 people want to read
About the author
Georgette Heyer
245 books5,500 followersGeorgette Heyer was a prolific historical romance and detective fiction novelist. Her writing career began in 1921, when she turned a story for her younger brother into the novel The Black Moth.
In 1925 she married George Ronald Rougier, a mining engineer. Rougier later became a barrister and he often provided basic plot outlines for her thrillers. Beginning in 1932, Heyer released one romance novel and one thriller each year.
Heyer was an intensely private person who remained a best selling author all her life without the aid of publicity. She made no appearances, never gave an interview and only answered fan letters herself if they made an interesting historical point. She wrote one novel using the pseudonym Stella Martin.
Her Georgian and Regencies romances were inspired by Jane Austen. While some critics thought her novels were too detailed, others considered the level of detail to be Heyer's greatest asset.
Heyer remains a popular and much-loved author, known for essentially establishing the historical romance genre and its subgenre Regency romance.
In 1925 she married George Ronald Rougier, a mining engineer. Rougier later became a barrister and he often provided basic plot outlines for her thrillers. Beginning in 1932, Heyer released one romance novel and one thriller each year.
Heyer was an intensely private person who remained a best selling author all her life without the aid of publicity. She made no appearances, never gave an interview and only answered fan letters herself if they made an interesting historical point. She wrote one novel using the pseudonym Stella Martin.
Her Georgian and Regencies romances were inspired by Jane Austen. While some critics thought her novels were too detailed, others considered the level of detail to be Heyer's greatest asset.
Heyer remains a popular and much-loved author, known for essentially establishing the historical romance genre and its subgenre Regency romance.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 564 reviews
September 14, 2024
Memories! 🏩
I was fourteen when I read my first regency romance. It was The Nonesuch by Georgette Heyer (which l have read many times, and intend to read it many times, again). It satisfied my burgeoning interest in romance and my personal favorite of anything historical.
I have been a lover of that historical period ever since. Not that I have always been a devoted reader of the material, but I like to return to it time, and again.
Like other books of this genre, Heyer follows the trope that is typical for them. You have your damsel in distress, an uncalled upon hero, whom she “hates,” and an unknown, sinister villain.
There is always a mystery that needs to be solved, sometimes a murder, or two and always a happy ending.
As an addictive lover of bloody horror stories and violent thrillers, l sometimes need a little break and books written during the golden days take me away.
And this regency mystery gives me just the break l need.
Four fabulous stars! 💫💫💫💫
I was fourteen when I read my first regency romance. It was The Nonesuch by Georgette Heyer (which l have read many times, and intend to read it many times, again). It satisfied my burgeoning interest in romance and my personal favorite of anything historical.
I have been a lover of that historical period ever since. Not that I have always been a devoted reader of the material, but I like to return to it time, and again.
Like other books of this genre, Heyer follows the trope that is typical for them. You have your damsel in distress, an uncalled upon hero, whom she “hates,” and an unknown, sinister villain.
There is always a mystery that needs to be solved, sometimes a murder, or two and always a happy ending.
As an addictive lover of bloody horror stories and violent thrillers, l sometimes need a little break and books written during the golden days take me away.
And this regency mystery gives me just the break l need.
Four fabulous stars! 💫💫💫💫
September 13, 2024
Part way through this book, someone says: “After all, why shoot a butler? Where’s the point?”
The title Why Shoot a Butler? pinpoints in four short words, just who this book will appeal to. It is clearly a crime novel, and a mystery, but to understand the title at all, presupposes a basic familiarity with the social mores and incipient arrogance of the English gentry in a time gone by. Moreover to find it funny, it helps to know the old chestnut: “The Butler did it!” The clever title establishes the novel’s credentials firmly as an English Golden Age mystery, and one which is set in an English country house. Why Shoot a Butler? was written in 1933 by Georgette Heyer. The blurb describes it as:
“A dramatic tale of upstairs, downstairs and family secrets.”
Georgette Heyer is one of the names I feel as if I’ve known for ever, without actually reading anything by her. When I worked in public libraries, there were nearly two shelves of novels with pale green spines, all of what I thought of (at around age 20) as “old lady’s books”. Library staff were timetabled to sort out sections daily. If you were allocated the part including fiction with authors whose surname began with “H”, Georgette Heyer speeded things up quite a bit, just as “C” was a great straw to draw (Agatha Christie and Catherine Cookson) or “B” (Max Brand). It was easy to rearrange them a bit to put them in order, pull the books to the front, and make a nice tidy section of her works.
Several decades later, I learned there was a little more to Georgette Heyer. She was not just the Queen of Regency Romance, and a prolific writer (as I knew), but had also written some mysteries and historical fiction. In fact she produced eleven novels in the detective genre between 1932 and 1953. I enjoy the odd English Mystery, so looked a little further.
Georgette Heyer wrote her first novel, “The Black Moth”, at the age of seventeen to amuse her convalescent brother. It was published in 1921 and became an instant success. She was to publish 56 books over the next 53 years, until her death in 1974, at the age of 71. There’s no question that she is still best known for her dashing Regency Romances, but I was much more likely to enjoy a mystery story, and this was selected as a group read.
I went in with high hopes, but have to say that Georgette Heyer can’t seem to leave the “Romance” element alone. It is telegraphed right at the start who is going to marry whom, as they can’t stand each other and argue all the time. (Yes, that tired old ploy.) It also takes quite a long time to get going—although the initial premise is a good one.
We begin with the main character, who is gliding along a deserted country road in his Bentley, and not at all sure of his way. He seems remarkably unappealing; at odds with everything and everybody. The first paragraph alone is full of this man’s bad mood and negativity; there was an “unhelpful” signpost with a “blistered” arm on a “dubious-looking lane”. He reflected “savagely” on his cousin’s incompetence in giving directions. He was getting an “acute dislike” for his destination, where he would be late for dinner. The rough road was “bad for his temper” (would we notice any difference if the road had been smooth, I wonder?) and he “swore gently”. What a charmer! This could have been drily amusing but wasn’t. Or not yet. It is too soon, and we are not yet engaged with this character.
We then move on to a sports car, which has stopped on this lonely road, with a terrified young woman standing beside it. The man asks her directions, but proceeds to ignore them, as he sees:
“A man sitting in the driver’s seat, curiously immobile. His head was sunk on his chest. He did not look up or speak.”
He is dead of course. A bullet had penetrated his left lung just below the heart.
“The clothing, a dark lounge suit was disarranged, as though someone had rifled the pockets; the striped shirt was stained with red, and a dark stain ran down the front of the waistcoat.”
And the young woman has an automatic pistol in her pocket.
If you can plough your way through all the distracting and jarring negative adverbs and descriptions: “crowning annoyance”, “impatience”, “underlying agitation”, “curt words”, “ungraciously”, “sardonic gleam”, “surliness”, “rudeness”, you might get past the first couple of pages and on to chapter two. It all feels rather tiresome and overwritten, but the chapters (20 of them) are mercifully short.
Mr. Amberley (we are now given his name) continues his journey to Upper Nettlefold, which is a small country town, ten miles from Carchester. He curses the fact that if he hadn’t taken a wrong turn, he would not have come across the dead man and the “brusque … sulky-looking wench!” Our charmer of a hero, Mr. Amberley, is equally unpleasant to a policeman: a Sergeant Gubbins, who seems to know him of old. For some reason, Mr. Amberley only repeats a carefully edited version of the facts to Sergeant Gubbins—the first clue we have to Mr. Amberley’s casual assumption (as the upper classes all seem to make, in books from this period) that the laws do not apply to them. We move on to “Greythorne”, the country house where Mr. Amberley is expected for dinner. Now we see where Georgette Heyer’s talent lies, in crisp dialogue and the occasional witty remark among the asperity of the cultured classes.
In “Greythorne”, Mr. Frank Amberley is met by his cousin Felicity, “a mischievous damsel of eighteen” (who proves to be as consistently annoying to the reader as Mr. Amberley clearly considers her to be). From the start she seem a bit clueless, but then so does Inspector Gubbins; actually the sparring between him and Mr. Frank Amberley becomes one of the more enjoyable parts of Why Shoot a Butler? (Mr. Amberley has no time at all for the higher ranking Inspector though, and just sends him off on wild goose chases all the time.)
So back to the residents of “Greythorne”, and we meet the star of the show, Mr. Amberley’s aunt, Lady Matthews, who is a delight! Rather vague on a first impression, and a little eccentric, she is very kind. After a while it becomes clear that Lady Matthews is actually quite astute with her insights, in the Miss Marple tradition. In my opinion, Frank Amberley’s aunt is by far the best of the bunch of these landed gentry. Her husband, Sir Humphrey, is the standard stuffy minor aristocrat. Another wealthy acquaintance, Basil Fountain, lives nearby in Norton Manor. He seems rather pompous and belligerent. We also meet the obligatory silly young ass in this type of novel, a rather dim friend of Frank Amberley and Joan Fountain, Anthony Corcoran. (Or is the dimness merely a pretence?)
There is the butler, Dawson, who had been stabbed at the start, and a rather secretive valet, plus another innocuous butler who later on in the story replaces the first. Two more important characters are the permanently inebriated and peevish Mark Brown, and his sister Shirley, who live in a nearby isolated cottage. Shirley is struggling to make a living as an assistant to a female novelist, and is renting the cottage. It is near the village of Upper Nettlefold, which in turn is near both Norton Manor and the Greythorne estate, where Amberley’s aunt and uncle reside. One has to wonder if all this is mere coincidence.
This novel takes an inordinately long time to get started. The initially attention-grabbing idea of an unknown, blood-soaked body in a car, with a young woman standing beside it, protesting she knows nothing, seems to fizzle out. The promising beginning then just meanders for several more chapters, as nobody seems at all bothered about why Dawson, the former butler at Norton Lodge, had been murdered. They are more concerned with their day-to-day squabbles, and the burgeoning “will-they, won’t-they” romance.
In the middle, we do have some intriguing plot development, and a masquerade ball seems tailor-made for a dramatic scene—although in fact all we are privy to is some antagonism from the two main characters. We learn much later that quite a lot of information is missing from this scene. Surely Georgette Heyer could have let us in on some of Frank Amberley’s thoughts? Or even those of the masked female he discovers loitering by a piece of furniture? But no. So much is kept close to Mr. Amberley’s chest that it feels like a case of the author being unfair to her readers. Quite a few major clues are revealed very close to the end, although a couple of facts have been known for some time by Frank Amberley.
The convention that all the facts are there, if you can only select and piece them together correctly, does not apply in this novel. This is disappointing for anyone who likes the puzzle-solving aspect of whodunnits.
Most of the story takes place in the two country houses named, although later on Frank Amberley takes off to a small fishing village for the final tense and dramatic sequence. How Mr. Amberley knew exactly where to go seems to have been divine inspiration. At least, it is never explained. The local fisherman, predictably enough, is another “local yokel”, of much the same mould as Sergeant Gubbins, whose main function seems to be as a foil to the arrogant and patronising Frank Amberley, allowing him to display his skill at detection.
What comes across very strongly is the trope that amateur detectives from the privileged class of English society were de facto more intelligent than the police, and find it quite natural to order the police around. For their part, the police would not only consult Mr. Amberley but also kow-tow to him. I wonder how much basis this has in fact in the England of the time, or whether it is merely a fictional convention of the Golden Age mystery. Certainly now aristocrats and minor Royals do have to obey the Law (e.g. Princess Anne and her parking tickets) but in Why Shoot a Butler? Frank Amberly lies to the police without a second thought, uses them as assistants to his enquiry, and keeps vital facts to himself, so that he can pull the rabbit out of the hat in a brilliant Poirot-like performance for everyone at the end, to show off his masterly skills at detection.
If we assume this class recognition to be authentic, then the middle of the novel has some nicely complicated plot elements. We have suspicious deaths, blackmail, and murder. People who are not what they seem. There is kidnapping, greed, drunkenness, impersonation, and some genteel violence: there are no dark psychological motives here. Two characters are … and it all hinges on one of the favourite country house tropes .
However there are problems. A “hero” does not have to be likeable of course, but Mr. Amberley is not merely caustic and full of his own cleverness, but unpleasantly rude to everyone. There is little humour in his remarks; they are merely insulting. In fact this novel seems full of brittle characters, or cardboard characters picked out of a standard box and slotted in where they will fit. The only true individuals are Lady Matthews, and Shirley’s faithful dog Bill, the bull terrier. Whenever either of them were in a scene, my interest was piqued.
Nevertheless, it is easy to see that Georgette Heyer’s first love is Regency Romance, as Why Shoot a Butler? is largely written like a romantic novel. The tiresome playing out of the old story: hate and bickering gradually turning to a grudging respect and finally love, is given far more time and attention than the mystery angle. Then the novel seems to have reached the end, and certainly reaches the climax, but no, we have a couple more chapters, when Mr. Amberley explains the whys and wherefores of another murder. And in the process, he treats Sergeant Gubbins with genial contempt, and makes him look ridiculous.
The conversation is well written though, and once we have been let in on a few more facts near the end, the plot largely works. I have a feeling that this would be an enjoyable fast read, perhaps a comfort one-day read when ill. It certainly didn’t work listened to for about 20 minutes a day over several weeks.
Interestingly Georgette Heyer was married to a George Ronald Rougier, who was a barrister. Mr. Frank Amberley is also a rising young barrister. Perhaps she recalled some of her husband’s colleagues’ peccadillos in Mr. Frank Amberley’s manner.
Would I read another novel by this author? Perhaps, if another mystery came my way. Some moments were genuinely tense, for instance:
“The wood seemed all at once, to her overwrought nerves, to be alive with tiny, nameless sounds. The fallen leaves rustled, perhaps a rabbit stirred amongst them; a twig cracked; the shadow of a tree seemed to move.”
Also, I appreciated some of the witty repartee, even though the balance of the novel is wrong. Most readers seem to agree that Why Shoot a Butler? is not Georgette Heyer’s best—although some readers love this one. My default is three stars: the mean average. Contemporary mysteries with significant faults have a 2 star rating from me. It does not mean they are not enjoyable on their own terms, but they do little more than pass the time. To rate a novel higher, just because it is from an earlier time, would not be applying the same criteria. Just because something is old, does not make it a classic, in my view.
Therefore this one stays at a solid 2 stars. Great title though!
The title Why Shoot a Butler? pinpoints in four short words, just who this book will appeal to. It is clearly a crime novel, and a mystery, but to understand the title at all, presupposes a basic familiarity with the social mores and incipient arrogance of the English gentry in a time gone by. Moreover to find it funny, it helps to know the old chestnut: “The Butler did it!” The clever title establishes the novel’s credentials firmly as an English Golden Age mystery, and one which is set in an English country house. Why Shoot a Butler? was written in 1933 by Georgette Heyer. The blurb describes it as:
“A dramatic tale of upstairs, downstairs and family secrets.”
Georgette Heyer is one of the names I feel as if I’ve known for ever, without actually reading anything by her. When I worked in public libraries, there were nearly two shelves of novels with pale green spines, all of what I thought of (at around age 20) as “old lady’s books”. Library staff were timetabled to sort out sections daily. If you were allocated the part including fiction with authors whose surname began with “H”, Georgette Heyer speeded things up quite a bit, just as “C” was a great straw to draw (Agatha Christie and Catherine Cookson) or “B” (Max Brand). It was easy to rearrange them a bit to put them in order, pull the books to the front, and make a nice tidy section of her works.
Several decades later, I learned there was a little more to Georgette Heyer. She was not just the Queen of Regency Romance, and a prolific writer (as I knew), but had also written some mysteries and historical fiction. In fact she produced eleven novels in the detective genre between 1932 and 1953. I enjoy the odd English Mystery, so looked a little further.
Georgette Heyer wrote her first novel, “The Black Moth”, at the age of seventeen to amuse her convalescent brother. It was published in 1921 and became an instant success. She was to publish 56 books over the next 53 years, until her death in 1974, at the age of 71. There’s no question that she is still best known for her dashing Regency Romances, but I was much more likely to enjoy a mystery story, and this was selected as a group read.
I went in with high hopes, but have to say that Georgette Heyer can’t seem to leave the “Romance” element alone. It is telegraphed right at the start who is going to marry whom, as they can’t stand each other and argue all the time. (Yes, that tired old ploy.) It also takes quite a long time to get going—although the initial premise is a good one.
We begin with the main character, who is gliding along a deserted country road in his Bentley, and not at all sure of his way. He seems remarkably unappealing; at odds with everything and everybody. The first paragraph alone is full of this man’s bad mood and negativity; there was an “unhelpful” signpost with a “blistered” arm on a “dubious-looking lane”. He reflected “savagely” on his cousin’s incompetence in giving directions. He was getting an “acute dislike” for his destination, where he would be late for dinner. The rough road was “bad for his temper” (would we notice any difference if the road had been smooth, I wonder?) and he “swore gently”. What a charmer! This could have been drily amusing but wasn’t. Or not yet. It is too soon, and we are not yet engaged with this character.
We then move on to a sports car, which has stopped on this lonely road, with a terrified young woman standing beside it. The man asks her directions, but proceeds to ignore them, as he sees:
“A man sitting in the driver’s seat, curiously immobile. His head was sunk on his chest. He did not look up or speak.”
He is dead of course. A bullet had penetrated his left lung just below the heart.
“The clothing, a dark lounge suit was disarranged, as though someone had rifled the pockets; the striped shirt was stained with red, and a dark stain ran down the front of the waistcoat.”
And the young woman has an automatic pistol in her pocket.
If you can plough your way through all the distracting and jarring negative adverbs and descriptions: “crowning annoyance”, “impatience”, “underlying agitation”, “curt words”, “ungraciously”, “sardonic gleam”, “surliness”, “rudeness”, you might get past the first couple of pages and on to chapter two. It all feels rather tiresome and overwritten, but the chapters (20 of them) are mercifully short.
Mr. Amberley (we are now given his name) continues his journey to Upper Nettlefold, which is a small country town, ten miles from Carchester. He curses the fact that if he hadn’t taken a wrong turn, he would not have come across the dead man and the “brusque … sulky-looking wench!” Our charmer of a hero, Mr. Amberley, is equally unpleasant to a policeman: a Sergeant Gubbins, who seems to know him of old. For some reason, Mr. Amberley only repeats a carefully edited version of the facts to Sergeant Gubbins—the first clue we have to Mr. Amberley’s casual assumption (as the upper classes all seem to make, in books from this period) that the laws do not apply to them. We move on to “Greythorne”, the country house where Mr. Amberley is expected for dinner. Now we see where Georgette Heyer’s talent lies, in crisp dialogue and the occasional witty remark among the asperity of the cultured classes.
In “Greythorne”, Mr. Frank Amberley is met by his cousin Felicity, “a mischievous damsel of eighteen” (who proves to be as consistently annoying to the reader as Mr. Amberley clearly considers her to be). From the start she seem a bit clueless, but then so does Inspector Gubbins; actually the sparring between him and Mr. Frank Amberley becomes one of the more enjoyable parts of Why Shoot a Butler? (Mr. Amberley has no time at all for the higher ranking Inspector though, and just sends him off on wild goose chases all the time.)
So back to the residents of “Greythorne”, and we meet the star of the show, Mr. Amberley’s aunt, Lady Matthews, who is a delight! Rather vague on a first impression, and a little eccentric, she is very kind. After a while it becomes clear that Lady Matthews is actually quite astute with her insights, in the Miss Marple tradition. In my opinion, Frank Amberley’s aunt is by far the best of the bunch of these landed gentry. Her husband, Sir Humphrey, is the standard stuffy minor aristocrat. Another wealthy acquaintance, Basil Fountain, lives nearby in Norton Manor. He seems rather pompous and belligerent. We also meet the obligatory silly young ass in this type of novel, a rather dim friend of Frank Amberley and Joan Fountain, Anthony Corcoran. (Or is the dimness merely a pretence?)
There is the butler, Dawson, who had been stabbed at the start, and a rather secretive valet, plus another innocuous butler who later on in the story replaces the first. Two more important characters are the permanently inebriated and peevish Mark Brown, and his sister Shirley, who live in a nearby isolated cottage. Shirley is struggling to make a living as an assistant to a female novelist, and is renting the cottage. It is near the village of Upper Nettlefold, which in turn is near both Norton Manor and the Greythorne estate, where Amberley’s aunt and uncle reside. One has to wonder if all this is mere coincidence.
This novel takes an inordinately long time to get started. The initially attention-grabbing idea of an unknown, blood-soaked body in a car, with a young woman standing beside it, protesting she knows nothing, seems to fizzle out. The promising beginning then just meanders for several more chapters, as nobody seems at all bothered about why Dawson, the former butler at Norton Lodge, had been murdered. They are more concerned with their day-to-day squabbles, and the burgeoning “will-they, won’t-they” romance.
In the middle, we do have some intriguing plot development, and a masquerade ball seems tailor-made for a dramatic scene—although in fact all we are privy to is some antagonism from the two main characters. We learn much later that quite a lot of information is missing from this scene. Surely Georgette Heyer could have let us in on some of Frank Amberley’s thoughts? Or even those of the masked female he discovers loitering by a piece of furniture? But no. So much is kept close to Mr. Amberley’s chest that it feels like a case of the author being unfair to her readers. Quite a few major clues are revealed very close to the end, although a couple of facts have been known for some time by Frank Amberley.
The convention that all the facts are there, if you can only select and piece them together correctly, does not apply in this novel. This is disappointing for anyone who likes the puzzle-solving aspect of whodunnits.
Most of the story takes place in the two country houses named, although later on Frank Amberley takes off to a small fishing village for the final tense and dramatic sequence. How Mr. Amberley knew exactly where to go seems to have been divine inspiration. At least, it is never explained. The local fisherman, predictably enough, is another “local yokel”, of much the same mould as Sergeant Gubbins, whose main function seems to be as a foil to the arrogant and patronising Frank Amberley, allowing him to display his skill at detection.
What comes across very strongly is the trope that amateur detectives from the privileged class of English society were de facto more intelligent than the police, and find it quite natural to order the police around. For their part, the police would not only consult Mr. Amberley but also kow-tow to him. I wonder how much basis this has in fact in the England of the time, or whether it is merely a fictional convention of the Golden Age mystery. Certainly now aristocrats and minor Royals do have to obey the Law (e.g. Princess Anne and her parking tickets) but in Why Shoot a Butler? Frank Amberly lies to the police without a second thought, uses them as assistants to his enquiry, and keeps vital facts to himself, so that he can pull the rabbit out of the hat in a brilliant Poirot-like performance for everyone at the end, to show off his masterly skills at detection.
If we assume this class recognition to be authentic, then the middle of the novel has some nicely complicated plot elements. We have suspicious deaths, blackmail, and murder. People who are not what they seem. There is kidnapping, greed, drunkenness, impersonation, and some genteel violence: there are no dark psychological motives here. Two characters are … and it all hinges on one of the favourite country house tropes .
However there are problems. A “hero” does not have to be likeable of course, but Mr. Amberley is not merely caustic and full of his own cleverness, but unpleasantly rude to everyone. There is little humour in his remarks; they are merely insulting. In fact this novel seems full of brittle characters, or cardboard characters picked out of a standard box and slotted in where they will fit. The only true individuals are Lady Matthews, and Shirley’s faithful dog Bill, the bull terrier. Whenever either of them were in a scene, my interest was piqued.
Nevertheless, it is easy to see that Georgette Heyer’s first love is Regency Romance, as Why Shoot a Butler? is largely written like a romantic novel. The tiresome playing out of the old story: hate and bickering gradually turning to a grudging respect and finally love, is given far more time and attention than the mystery angle. Then the novel seems to have reached the end, and certainly reaches the climax, but no, we have a couple more chapters, when Mr. Amberley explains the whys and wherefores of another murder. And in the process, he treats Sergeant Gubbins with genial contempt, and makes him look ridiculous.
The conversation is well written though, and once we have been let in on a few more facts near the end, the plot largely works. I have a feeling that this would be an enjoyable fast read, perhaps a comfort one-day read when ill. It certainly didn’t work listened to for about 20 minutes a day over several weeks.
Interestingly Georgette Heyer was married to a George Ronald Rougier, who was a barrister. Mr. Frank Amberley is also a rising young barrister. Perhaps she recalled some of her husband’s colleagues’ peccadillos in Mr. Frank Amberley’s manner.
Would I read another novel by this author? Perhaps, if another mystery came my way. Some moments were genuinely tense, for instance:
“The wood seemed all at once, to her overwrought nerves, to be alive with tiny, nameless sounds. The fallen leaves rustled, perhaps a rabbit stirred amongst them; a twig cracked; the shadow of a tree seemed to move.”
Also, I appreciated some of the witty repartee, even though the balance of the novel is wrong. Most readers seem to agree that Why Shoot a Butler? is not Georgette Heyer’s best—although some readers love this one. My default is three stars: the mean average. Contemporary mysteries with significant faults have a 2 star rating from me. It does not mean they are not enjoyable on their own terms, but they do little more than pass the time. To rate a novel higher, just because it is from an earlier time, would not be applying the same criteria. Just because something is old, does not make it a classic, in my view.
Therefore this one stays at a solid 2 stars. Great title though!
April 26, 2021
The case for Why Shoot a Butler? is far from airtight. The cons: overly long and at times rather dull, a surprising amount of flat characters, disorganized characterization for one key character (are they or are they not phobic about death? depends on which part of the story they appear), and the annoyance of a cover that includes false advertising - there are no actual murders in a country house in this book.
But the pros pushed this into 3 star territory, if but barely. First and foremost, the author presents a protagonist in the vein of a number of other Heyer heroes, but ratcheted up several notches: namely, an arrogant jerk. Youngish barrister Frank Amberley is one of the most condescending, insulting, offensively self-assured leads in a book that I've ever read, and he gets away with it, time and again. He was a joy to read about! His horrid snideness is denigrated by others but celebrated by the author. And had me constantly smiling. I also liked the throway line about him, repeated maybe twice and which of course made me like him even more: "but at least he's kind to animals" - said to excuse the insulting peremptory quality of nearly all of his comments.
There are a couple other characters who were a lot of fun: a poor bumbling sergeant, often the butt of Amberley's derision, and our hero's aunt, who more than matches him in cleverness but is not such a meanie about it, concealing her true nature behind amiable ditheriness. And I loved the eventual marriage proposal: so abrupt, jarringly so. I gasped in surprise when it was announced, it was made in such an unsentimental, high-handed way. Such a Frank Amberley kind of proposal. Swoon, my hero!
But the pros pushed this into 3 star territory, if but barely. First and foremost, the author presents a protagonist in the vein of a number of other Heyer heroes, but ratcheted up several notches: namely, an arrogant jerk. Youngish barrister Frank Amberley is one of the most condescending, insulting, offensively self-assured leads in a book that I've ever read, and he gets away with it, time and again. He was a joy to read about! His horrid snideness is denigrated by others but celebrated by the author. And had me constantly smiling. I also liked the throway line about him, repeated maybe twice and which of course made me like him even more: "but at least he's kind to animals" - said to excuse the insulting peremptory quality of nearly all of his comments.
There are a couple other characters who were a lot of fun: a poor bumbling sergeant, often the butt of Amberley's derision, and our hero's aunt, who more than matches him in cleverness but is not such a meanie about it, concealing her true nature behind amiable ditheriness. And I loved the eventual marriage proposal: so abrupt, jarringly so. I gasped in surprise when it was announced, it was made in such an unsentimental, high-handed way. Such a Frank Amberley kind of proposal. Swoon, my hero!
April 9, 2021
Thoroughly enjoyable whodunnit that kept me guessing what was behind the murders and who committed them until very nearly the end. This is my first Heyer and I love her wickedly dry humour. Normally, the amateur sleuth character is very likeable but Frank Amberley is rude, disparaging towards everyone, pompous, patronising and arrogant. That’s certainly a different approach from the norm!
This is the April English Mysteries Club Golden Age of Crime read. I wouldn’t have read it otherwise but I’m pleased I did as it’s very entertaining.
This is the April English Mysteries Club Golden Age of Crime read. I wouldn’t have read it otherwise but I’m pleased I did as it’s very entertaining.
March 28, 2021
The good news is that this turned out to be a Heyer that I hadn't read before.
The bad news was that it was absolutely terrible.
Three things save this book from a one star rating.
The first is that my personal one stars for GH's books (not on GR, mainly because I have no intention of reading them ever again) are so much worse. WSaB at least has glimpses of Heyer's wonderful wit. Helen (mercifully suppressed contemporary) & My Lord John (leaden historical) don't.
The second is that two of the secondary characters, Lady Matthews & the Sergeant are very entertaining.
The third is that GH yet again reworked characters & placed them in a better book. Frank & Shirley from this effort, become Worth & Judith in GH's first Regency, Regency Buck. I always find this interesting when GH does this -in my opinion a sign she was unhappy with the first effort. I've loaned out my Koestler so I can't check.
I could make a case that alcoholic Mark becomes spoilt Peregrine. So many unsatisfactory brothers in Heyer's books. A subtle sign that she was unhappy with the financial burden her own brothers were to her perhaps?
Minor irritations - another grey eyed hero, another GH detective story where a female character has a bull terrier.
What really bugged me. I'm going to spoiler this.
I'm baffled why the formidable GH, who suppressed quite a few of her weaker early works, didn't suppress this one.
The bad news was that it was absolutely terrible.
Three things save this book from a one star rating.
The first is that my personal one stars for GH's books (not on GR, mainly because I have no intention of reading them ever again) are so much worse. WSaB at least has glimpses of Heyer's wonderful wit. Helen (mercifully suppressed contemporary) & My Lord John (leaden historical) don't.
The second is that two of the secondary characters, Lady Matthews & the Sergeant are very entertaining.
The third is that GH yet again reworked characters & placed them in a better book. Frank & Shirley from this effort, become Worth & Judith in GH's first Regency, Regency Buck. I always find this interesting when GH does this -in my opinion a sign she was unhappy with the first effort. I've loaned out my Koestler so I can't check.
I could make a case that alcoholic Mark becomes spoilt Peregrine. So many unsatisfactory brothers in Heyer's books. A subtle sign that she was unhappy with the financial burden her own brothers were to her perhaps?
Minor irritations - another grey eyed hero, another GH detective story where a female character has a bull terrier.
What really bugged me. I'm going to spoiler this.
I'm baffled why the formidable GH, who suppressed quite a few of her weaker early works, didn't suppress this one.
June 10, 2022
I really hated this book the first time I read it (review here https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...? ) & should have given it 1★. I liked it better this time, but it is still only a 2★ read for me. Easily GH's worst mystery for me - although Footsteps in the Dark is mediocre at best.
I liked Shirley better this time around, but I still can't stand Frank! He was arrogant & often needlessly rude!
There was also
At least this time around I picked up on the reason for (missed on my first read)
I really liked Lady M & the Sergeant. I think GH did as well - they got the best lines!
My second & final read of this one I'm afraid. GH wrote too many good books to waste time on her weaker offerings.
https://wordpress.com/view/carolshess...
I liked Shirley better this time around, but I still can't stand Frank! He was arrogant & often needlessly rude!
There was also
At least this time around I picked up on the reason for (missed on my first read)
I really liked Lady M & the Sergeant. I think GH did as well - they got the best lines!
My second & final read of this one I'm afraid. GH wrote too many good books to waste time on her weaker offerings.
https://wordpress.com/view/carolshess...
March 8, 2016
I am having such mixed feelings and luck with each new mystery that I pick up by this author. Overall, I enjoy these, but there are also bits that keep them from being perfectly satisfying.
This one returns to one of my favorite mystery settings- the country house/village- and had the usual range of quirky, colorful, and secretive characters. However, the characters are introduced and go about their business without being drawn with any depth. The plot is introduced and I loved the creative turn that had the murder in the first scene and a startling choice for victim- hence the title. All was looking good, but I confess that it lost its sparkle and intensity when I worked out out early. I read on because I wanted to get the ongoing story which can be equally as entertaining as the mystery element when it comes to this author.
Frank Amberley is the hero. He has biting wit, keen intelligence, and generally is a good guy, but he is also rather arrogant and wanted smacking now and then. He has it all worked out and it is obvious he does, but he has to wait for the proof. He left things to chance a few times because he chose to go a lone-hand.
But that is also what frustrated me about the heroine who also tries a lone hand, but the difference is the danger is close and she truly is alone. I get it- she's got troubles and can't see her way clear, but she pulls a stupid stubborn thing when she always refuses help and unnecessarily puts herself in danger. I think my biggest frustration was that I didn't see the dire need for her to keep away from Frank. The police- yes because of what she was doing, but she carried on way to long alone. Pretty sure two deaths and some other stuff along with her own near death were avoidable if she would have been a little smart with her choices.. At first, she was interesting the way the author put her at the murder scene, but I got impatient after that because...all that I just said.
The whole story was an exercise in patience because I felt it had the bones of a better story than it was. Still, for all that, it was mildly enjoyable and worth my reading time.
This one returns to one of my favorite mystery settings- the country house/village- and had the usual range of quirky, colorful, and secretive characters. However, the characters are introduced and go about their business without being drawn with any depth. The plot is introduced and I loved the creative turn that had the murder in the first scene and a startling choice for victim- hence the title. All was looking good, but I confess that it lost its sparkle and intensity when I worked out out early. I read on because I wanted to get the ongoing story which can be equally as entertaining as the mystery element when it comes to this author.
Frank Amberley is the hero. He has biting wit, keen intelligence, and generally is a good guy, but he is also rather arrogant and wanted smacking now and then. He has it all worked out and it is obvious he does, but he has to wait for the proof. He left things to chance a few times because he chose to go a lone-hand.
But that is also what frustrated me about the heroine who also tries a lone hand, but the difference is the danger is close and she truly is alone. I get it- she's got troubles and can't see her way clear, but she pulls a stupid stubborn thing when she always refuses help and unnecessarily puts herself in danger. I think my biggest frustration was that I didn't see the dire need for her to keep away from Frank. The police- yes because of what she was doing, but she carried on way to long alone. Pretty sure two deaths and some other stuff along with her own near death were avoidable if she would have been a little smart with her choices.. At first, she was interesting the way the author put her at the murder scene, but I got impatient after that because...all that I just said.
The whole story was an exercise in patience because I felt it had the bones of a better story than it was. Still, for all that, it was mildly enjoyable and worth my reading time.
April 11, 2021
I think that of all Heyer's mysteries, this one is my favorite. I guess it could be classified as a "cozy" since the main 'detective' isn't a professional (he's a barrister, but this case isn't related to his work in any way) but it also has aspects of romantic suspense. Sort of a cross between Mary Stewart and Dorothy Sayers.
One aspect of not being a police procedural that leapt out at me during this latest reread is it allowed Heyer to give free rein to her genius for repartee. Amberley is a modern day (well, contemporary to when this was written in 1936) version of so many of her heros in the Regency historical fiction books -- intelligent, high-handed, somewhat short-tempered and sarcastic, yet reliable & kind.
I think that the mystery is good too, but to be honest, it is hard for me to judge at this point. I have read this several times before and remembered the solution so I was able to pick up clues and hints along the way that I am sure I missed the first time or two I read this.
One aspect of not being a police procedural that leapt out at me during this latest reread is it allowed Heyer to give free rein to her genius for repartee. Amberley is a modern day (well, contemporary to when this was written in 1936) version of so many of her heros in the Regency historical fiction books -- intelligent, high-handed, somewhat short-tempered and sarcastic, yet reliable & kind.
I think that the mystery is good too, but to be honest, it is hard for me to judge at this point. I have read this several times before and remembered the solution so I was able to pick up clues and hints along the way that I am sure I missed the first time or two I read this.
June 6, 2022
I enjoyed this one a lot! It's true the main character Frank Amberley was a royal pain in the butt and was obnoxious most of the time but he was a strong personality throughout.
The mystery was very good with a lot of twists and turns. I had two people in mind for the dastardly deeds but didn't guess who until the very end.
Lady Matthews, Frank's Aunt, while not in it for a lot of time, was a great personality. Her husband was the typical crotchety old devil who just wanted peace and quiet.
The build up was slow but chapters seventeen and eighteen were thrilling!! I was totally absorbed!
I've only read a couple of Heyer's crime novels and only since I joined the Heyer group but I'll definitely be reading more of them.
The mystery was very good with a lot of twists and turns. I had two people in mind for the dastardly deeds but didn't guess who until the very end.
Lady Matthews, Frank's Aunt, while not in it for a lot of time, was a great personality. Her husband was the typical crotchety old devil who just wanted peace and quiet.
The build up was slow but chapters seventeen and eighteen were thrilling!! I was totally absorbed!
I've only read a couple of Heyer's crime novels and only since I joined the Heyer group but I'll definitely be reading more of them.
December 11, 2011
I don't like being sick, but I do like having an entire day to sit in an easy chair with a heating pad and one of those ridiculous blankets-with-sleeves and a 1930s English murder mystery. As far as I can remember, this is the first Georgette Heyer I've read, but I want to read more of her books. Lots of twists and turns, plus expressions that are new to me, such as "Not strictly the clean potato, eh?" I'm still trying to figure that one out.
June 15, 2022
Barrister Frank Amberley tries a shortcut to his uncle's county house and becomes totally lost. He stops to ask a young lady for directions and noticing her distress, he looks carefully and finds a sports car with a corpse behind the wheel. Though the girl has a gun, she maintains her innocence. Frank heads off to the police station to report the murder but leaves the young woman out of it. The police are baffled by the crime and the Sargent, looking for a promotion, enlists Frank's help. Frank feels that the murder is only a small piece of the puzzles and tries to stay one step ahead of the police. As he encounters the young woman again in the most unlikely places, he wishes she would confide in him. Shirley Brown has no good reason to trust Frank. She wants to but she can't. She has a lot to worry about. Besides the murder, there's her brother's predilection for drink and a missing clue to uncover. Meanwhile Frank's cousin Felicity's friend Joan is supposed to be celebrating her engagement but her brother's newly inherited estate feels creepy and strange. Brother Basil feels is too and all eyes are on his valet, Collins, for it was the old family butler Dawson who was killed.
This plot is full of cliches and I thought I had it all figured out right away. Then, as a testament to Georgette Heyer's writing skills, I changed my mind and was dead certain I was wrong. There was no way I could put this book down. I stayed up too late and woke up early because I couldn't sleep without finishing it. The plot gets complicated at the end but in all is great fun. There's a light romance playing out subtly in the background. I suspected it was going to happen but it's not what you would call a traditional courtship!
The absolute best part of this book is the characters. Heyer once again created a memorable cast of characters. My favorite is Lady Matthews who seems as fluffy headed as her daughter but is quite perceptive. I have no idea how she knew what she knew. Frank is a complex character. He's a cool, logical barrister on the outside and inside he's apparently passionate. I didn't really like the way he continually teased and taunted Shirley and the police but the police deserved it. I don't know how many towns have such bumbling police forces but Georgette Heyer takes the cake in creating goofy characters. I enjoyed them all and they provide comic relief. I liked Shirley and felt bad for her. At first I wasn't sure what to make of her but as I got to know her, I liked her spirit. Collins is a sufficiently creepy valet and other characters kept me guessing.
This is Georgette Heyer's best mystery I have read so far.
*****************************Reread June 2022***************************
I had no memory of this book AT ALL and didn't enjoy the second reading as much as the first. It was really slow to start off and perfectly obvious what the murder was about. At least partly. The second half picks up and doesn't let up. I couldn't put the book down. The whodunit was rather a let down. I thought for sure it was someone else more clever. This story is more hard-boiled and not so funny as most of her others. The Inspectors Hannasyde & Hemingway books are more clever and delightful.
None of the characters in this book are likable. Frank is obnoxious, officious and arrogant. Instead of helping the police, he withholds information. He teases bits and pieces to make it seem like the Sergeant had figured it out but Frank delights in being more clever than anyone else. He's incredibly rude and mean to Shirley over and over again. I feel sorry for her because she does have problems, including her alcoholic brother Mark but she acts like a nitwit. They could have avoided some many problems by just growing spines. Also negative points for dressing like an Italian peasant girl at a fancy dress party. Is that even a costume? What does that look like? By the time the story takes place Italian farm girls dressed like everyone else. More negative points for not training her dog properly.
The servants, the unfortunate Dawson the butler and Collins, the sneaky valet are unpleasant characters. They sneak around, listen at doors, lie, cheat and basically behave as badly as they can. Dawson ends up dead before the story starts. Collins may or may not be next. He's creepy and gives everyone else bad feelings.
Basil Fountain has recently inherited a gloomy manor house no one wants. He's too nice or too lazy to sack Collins and too squeamish to kill any living thing. He does enjoy hunting but he's never in for the kill. He's a good host but not always the best of brothers. Joan, Basil's half-sister, is creeped out by the manor and doesn't like staying there. She's about to be married to an old schoolmate of Frank's, Tony Corkran who is dim-witted but cheerful. Corky wants to play Watson to Frank's Sherlock but he's not bright enough to know when he's not wanted. He also enjoys playing the protective male. I think he truly does love Joan and tries to make her happy. Joan is sensitive and easily frightened (not so much a ninny though, more easily spooked) and it didn't really bother me.
The Matthews family, Frank's relatives, are not so enjoyable either. His uncle, Sir Humphrey Matthews, is a cranky homebody who tries to play Lord of the Manor to little success. His one daughter Felicity is as ditzy and silly as they come. Lady Matthews, on the other hand, is delightful. She seems scatterbrained but she's more shrewd and perceptive than anyone thinks. She finally takes matters into her own hands and tries to help Shirley.
Gubbins, the police Sergeant, is not so bright but he trusts Frank will clue him in eventually. He just goes along for the ride.
Some day I will probably read this again, forgetting the first two reads! Perhaps I will think differently a third time?
This plot is full of cliches and I thought I had it all figured out right away. Then, as a testament to Georgette Heyer's writing skills, I changed my mind and was dead certain I was wrong. There was no way I could put this book down. I stayed up too late and woke up early because I couldn't sleep without finishing it. The plot gets complicated at the end but in all is great fun. There's a light romance playing out subtly in the background. I suspected it was going to happen but it's not what you would call a traditional courtship!
The absolute best part of this book is the characters. Heyer once again created a memorable cast of characters. My favorite is Lady Matthews who seems as fluffy headed as her daughter but is quite perceptive. I have no idea how she knew what she knew. Frank is a complex character. He's a cool, logical barrister on the outside and inside he's apparently passionate. I didn't really like the way he continually teased and taunted Shirley and the police but the police deserved it. I don't know how many towns have such bumbling police forces but Georgette Heyer takes the cake in creating goofy characters. I enjoyed them all and they provide comic relief. I liked Shirley and felt bad for her. At first I wasn't sure what to make of her but as I got to know her, I liked her spirit. Collins is a sufficiently creepy valet and other characters kept me guessing.
This is Georgette Heyer's best mystery I have read so far.
*****************************Reread June 2022***************************
I had no memory of this book AT ALL and didn't enjoy the second reading as much as the first. It was really slow to start off and perfectly obvious what the murder was about. At least partly. The second half picks up and doesn't let up. I couldn't put the book down. The whodunit was rather a let down. I thought for sure it was someone else more clever. This story is more hard-boiled and not so funny as most of her others. The Inspectors Hannasyde & Hemingway books are more clever and delightful.
None of the characters in this book are likable. Frank is obnoxious, officious and arrogant. Instead of helping the police, he withholds information. He teases bits and pieces to make it seem like the Sergeant had figured it out but Frank delights in being more clever than anyone else. He's incredibly rude and mean to Shirley over and over again. I feel sorry for her because she does have problems, including her alcoholic brother Mark but she acts like a nitwit. They could have avoided some many problems by just growing spines. Also negative points for dressing like an Italian peasant girl at a fancy dress party. Is that even a costume? What does that look like? By the time the story takes place Italian farm girls dressed like everyone else. More negative points for not training her dog properly.
The servants, the unfortunate Dawson the butler and Collins, the sneaky valet are unpleasant characters. They sneak around, listen at doors, lie, cheat and basically behave as badly as they can. Dawson ends up dead before the story starts. Collins may or may not be next. He's creepy and gives everyone else bad feelings.
Basil Fountain has recently inherited a gloomy manor house no one wants. He's too nice or too lazy to sack Collins and too squeamish to kill any living thing. He does enjoy hunting but he's never in for the kill. He's a good host but not always the best of brothers. Joan, Basil's half-sister, is creeped out by the manor and doesn't like staying there. She's about to be married to an old schoolmate of Frank's, Tony Corkran who is dim-witted but cheerful. Corky wants to play Watson to Frank's Sherlock but he's not bright enough to know when he's not wanted. He also enjoys playing the protective male. I think he truly does love Joan and tries to make her happy. Joan is sensitive and easily frightened (not so much a ninny though, more easily spooked) and it didn't really bother me.
The Matthews family, Frank's relatives, are not so enjoyable either. His uncle, Sir Humphrey Matthews, is a cranky homebody who tries to play Lord of the Manor to little success. His one daughter Felicity is as ditzy and silly as they come. Lady Matthews, on the other hand, is delightful. She seems scatterbrained but she's more shrewd and perceptive than anyone thinks. She finally takes matters into her own hands and tries to help Shirley.
Gubbins, the police Sergeant, is not so bright but he trusts Frank will clue him in eventually. He just goes along for the ride.
Some day I will probably read this again, forgetting the first two reads! Perhaps I will think differently a third time?
August 19, 2016
Frank Amberley is on his way to visit relatives when he comes across a still-warm dead body in a car, and a beautiful young woman holding a pistol standing over the body. She refuses to explain herself, and after briefly examining the scene, Frank drives away. He does inform the police of the dead body, but not that he saw Shirley Brown. The dim low class police officers beg Frank to help them solve the case, and he does--while not telling them a single clue that he finds, or informing him of any of his suspicions. Every scene with law enforcement goes like this: they turn up, Frank makes some cuttingly sarcastic comments about how stupid they are which they're too stupid to even get, and then he makes a vague statement about how if they were smarter they'd see the significance of the dusty book/ripped up letter/barking dog/whatever. Not only does he not tell them what he discovers, but he outright conceals evidence from them...and then lambasts them for not solving the case. It infuriated me. This high-handed tendency got particularly bad once the characters start dropping like flies. For example, It's not like Frank even has reason to believe the police have a traitor or villain in their midst; he just doesn't want to work with them or share any information. Heyer's "heroes" have behaved like this before (see: Regency Buck) and I hate it every time.
The romance between Frank and Shirley (of COURSE they fall in love after meeting over a dead body and continually fighting with each other and him calling her a little fool and gripping her wrist so tightly it bruises and all that) is not well written--they fight fight fight and then in the very last chapter get engaged. The mystery is only slightly better. It was obvious from the start that , and there isn't much in the way of clues, just various characters surprising each other at secret meetings. Also, this was published in 1933, and is very much a product of its time. The n word is used, and the narrative is incredibly classist. That said, I did like Frank's aunt, a vague but very perceptive lady, and I liked the put-upon sergeant that has to deal with Frank.
The romance between Frank and Shirley (of COURSE they fall in love after meeting over a dead body and continually fighting with each other and him calling her a little fool and gripping her wrist so tightly it bruises and all that) is not well written--they fight fight fight and then in the very last chapter get engaged. The mystery is only slightly better. It was obvious from the start that , and there isn't much in the way of clues, just various characters surprising each other at secret meetings. Also, this was published in 1933, and is very much a product of its time. The n word is used, and the narrative is incredibly classist. That said, I did like Frank's aunt, a vague but very perceptive lady, and I liked the put-upon sergeant that has to deal with Frank.
February 3, 2017
This is only my second book by Heyer and my first mystery of hers. I honestly can't wait to read more by her and, hopefully, this year I will. I enjoyed this. For the most part, it wasn't so much the mystery that I liked but, rather, the characters. I loved Frank Amberley. He was somewhat of an ass but he appealed to me. As did his family: his aunt, uncle, and cousin--their interactions with each other were very amusing. I found numerous moments to be funny. Especially between Amberley and Shirley!
August 5, 2021
I loved all of Georgette Heyer's mysteries. I loved that Shirley had secrets of her own, and that Frank was so supportive and believed in her from the beginning. A thoroughly enjoyable read and highly recommended!
March 9, 2021
3/2021 - reread with Reading the Detectives group, listening to the audiobook. Overall, I’d still give three stars (barely) as a golden age mystery, since the elements are there, but as a Heyer fan who has read several of her mysteries many times, I’m giving it two stars so I remember this is the inferior one. There are glimpses of her usual humor, but after just finishing a reread of her last mystery, “Duplicate Death” with the Heyer group, it’s a cruel comparison! There, we also have a defensive, secretive heroine like Shirley in this book, but Heyer knows when to stop with the pointless secrets to move the plot along! Here, the pompous, secretive Frank Amberley, super barrister, apparently (I thought they wore wigs, not capes?), is the only one who knows anything, but he won’t share with the bumbling police, or the hapless reader. He and Shirley just keep circling each other warily, it got old. I’ll finish listening to the audiobook on high speed to get through it, and remind me of the ending, which goes on far too long, but this is my fourth read, and it’s probably my last of this one, her other mysteries are much more entertaining!
2014 - Fun read if you're a fan of Golden Age British mysteries - although I enjoy Heyer's Regency romances even more! In this case barrister Frank Amberley is lost taking a bad shortcut to his family's country house when he comes across a sports car pulled to the side of a country road; it's pitch dark, there's a dead man behind the wheel with a gunshot wound, and a mysterious young woman standing beside the car...
Off to a great start, right? I thought so too, but for some reason it took me a while to get through this book; there were flashes of Heyer's bone-dry British humor and a couple of interesting characters providing comic relief (Sgt. Gubbins and Lady Matthews), but I guess I'm a spoiled Heyer fan and expect more likeable, witty and sympathetic characters. Ah well, as I've said before in my reviews of Heyer's books, her middling efforts at mystery and romance are better than most modern writers in those genres writing today, which is why I buy her books whenever I can find them to enjoy over and over again!
2014 - Fun read if you're a fan of Golden Age British mysteries - although I enjoy Heyer's Regency romances even more! In this case barrister Frank Amberley is lost taking a bad shortcut to his family's country house when he comes across a sports car pulled to the side of a country road; it's pitch dark, there's a dead man behind the wheel with a gunshot wound, and a mysterious young woman standing beside the car...
Off to a great start, right? I thought so too, but for some reason it took me a while to get through this book; there were flashes of Heyer's bone-dry British humor and a couple of interesting characters providing comic relief (Sgt. Gubbins and Lady Matthews), but I guess I'm a spoiled Heyer fan and expect more likeable, witty and sympathetic characters. Ah well, as I've said before in my reviews of Heyer's books, her middling efforts at mystery and romance are better than most modern writers in those genres writing today, which is why I buy her books whenever I can find them to enjoy over and over again!
February 25, 2021
I have read a few of Georgette Heyer's mysteries now, but this was one of the weaker ones. Published in 1933, it features Frank Amberley, nephew to Sir Humphrey and Lady Marion Mathews, who he is driving to visit when he sees a woman standing by a car. Although he is late for dinner, he pulls over and the surly young woman, Shirley Brown, says she needs no help. This is particularly ungracious, as there is a dead body in the car...
Although Amberley is a barrister, he covers up Shirley's role in events, when he informs the police. Then, he begins to become interested in Shirley, and her constantly inebriated brother, Mark. Why are they staying in the area and what are they up to? For her part, Shirley seems rather too interested in nearby Norton Manor, now owned by Basil Fountain after the death of his uncle.
There is rather too much melodrama in this one. Amberley is constantly sardonic and the police are considered bumbling fools; belittled and side-lined by Amberley, who is always one step ahead. I know that Heyer was capable of writing excellent mysteries, so will look forward to reading more by her. However, this was not a favourite.
Although Amberley is a barrister, he covers up Shirley's role in events, when he informs the police. Then, he begins to become interested in Shirley, and her constantly inebriated brother, Mark. Why are they staying in the area and what are they up to? For her part, Shirley seems rather too interested in nearby Norton Manor, now owned by Basil Fountain after the death of his uncle.
There is rather too much melodrama in this one. Amberley is constantly sardonic and the police are considered bumbling fools; belittled and side-lined by Amberley, who is always one step ahead. I know that Heyer was capable of writing excellent mysteries, so will look forward to reading more by her. However, this was not a favourite.
December 29, 2015
Heyer has done it again! Why Shoot A Butler? is full of wit, murder, and memorable characters. At times I was giggling hysterically and other times on the edge of my seat with suspense. Literally chapters are devoted to driving around and I found it so suspenseful I couldn't put the book down. Maybe I'm just susceptible 'cause its her.
Amberley is your very typical Heyer Hero, which is to say, caustic and perfectly dressed. I loved him. He was like any of her Regency heroes, just replaced in a 'modern' setting. Shirely was fun too. I like her rudeness and the romance between them. It was out of nowhere, of course, but it added to the plot!
Not a 5 star mystery...things were occasionally either entirely too convenient or too obvious
The characters were fun, though, and the whole story a delightful dalliance into detection.
I'm so pleased to add this one to my collection!
Amberley is your very typical Heyer Hero, which is to say, caustic and perfectly dressed. I loved him. He was like any of her Regency heroes, just replaced in a 'modern' setting. Shirely was fun too. I like her rudeness and the romance between them. It was out of nowhere, of course, but it added to the plot!
Not a 5 star mystery...things were occasionally either entirely too convenient or too obvious
The characters were fun, though, and the whole story a delightful dalliance into detection.
I'm so pleased to add this one to my collection!
January 14, 2022
Review of the audiobook narrated by Ulle Birve
I thought that I had read all of Georgette Heyer's detective stories but stumbled across this one and grabbed it.
Why Shoot a Butler is now my favorite of her mysteries. It’s a complicated plot that I didn’t catch on to until near the end. The hero, Frank Amberley, is a 20th-century version of Ivo Rotherham (Bath Tangle) -- arrogant, rude, and smarter than everybody. He is a young barrister who is condescending to everyone, and they put up with it. I fell a little bit in love with him, as did Heyer I'm sure.
As is typical of Heyer's mysteries, the romance part is minuscule. After mistreating and insulting the heroine throughout, he suddenly proposes at the end. He is no kind of romantic hero, but he's one helluva detective.
The heroine, Shirley Brown, is no pushover. She's keeping secrets that make her look guilty, but since (as we find out later) he fell in love at first sight he looks for ways to find some other culprit.
Fascinating secondary characters abound, and overall I just adored this book.
I thought that I had read all of Georgette Heyer's detective stories but stumbled across this one and grabbed it.
Why Shoot a Butler is now my favorite of her mysteries. It’s a complicated plot that I didn’t catch on to until near the end. The hero, Frank Amberley, is a 20th-century version of Ivo Rotherham (Bath Tangle) -- arrogant, rude, and smarter than everybody. He is a young barrister who is condescending to everyone, and they put up with it. I fell a little bit in love with him, as did Heyer I'm sure.
As is typical of Heyer's mysteries, the romance part is minuscule. After mistreating and insulting the heroine throughout, he suddenly proposes at the end. He is no kind of romantic hero, but he's one helluva detective.
The heroine, Shirley Brown, is no pushover. She's keeping secrets that make her look guilty, but since (as we find out later) he fell in love at first sight he looks for ways to find some other culprit.
Fascinating secondary characters abound, and overall I just adored this book.
August 22, 2020
Steeped in the idyllic atmosphere and culture of country life in 1930’s England, Why Shoot a Butler is for anglophiles who like period pieces only. The mystery isn’t much. A reader who is only half paying attention knows who the main villain is, why the murders occurred, and the big secret right from the beginning. But the romance is one of her best, the wit and humor are tops, and the characters that populate the manor houses, estates, cottages, and villages are a delight. They are all deftly drawn, but my favorite is Lady Matthews, our hero’s aunt, whose delightfully vague and placid manner hides a mind like a steel trap. She reminded me a bit of Harriet in Sprig Muslin
The two principals are the renowned and brilliant barrister cum amateur detective, Frank Amberly, and the Damsel in distress cum possible criminal, Sally Brown. Frank is the perfect combo of Heyer’s Mark I and Mark 2 heroes. He is rude and mocking, with flashes of temper and a hint of danger. But dogs love him. He is straight out of the regency hero playbook but transplanted almost a hundred years forward. He is a mixture of Robert Beaumaris and Lord Worth. Shirley on the other hand is a thoroughly modern girl. I can think of no regency heroine like her. She acts tough, is independent, self-sufficient, and courageous, yet Heyer gives her just enough vulnerability to soften her. I found it a very intriguing match-up. And the suspenseful race towards the end to avoid a tragedy is action-packed, tense, and suspenseful. Combined with Ulli Birve's stellar narration and acting, It is my favorite Heyer mystery, I think. **4 1/2 stars**
The two principals are the renowned and brilliant barrister cum amateur detective, Frank Amberly, and the Damsel in distress cum possible criminal, Sally Brown. Frank is the perfect combo of Heyer’s Mark I and Mark 2 heroes. He is rude and mocking, with flashes of temper and a hint of danger. But dogs love him. He is straight out of the regency hero playbook but transplanted almost a hundred years forward. He is a mixture of Robert Beaumaris and Lord Worth. Shirley on the other hand is a thoroughly modern girl. I can think of no regency heroine like her. She acts tough, is independent, self-sufficient, and courageous, yet Heyer gives her just enough vulnerability to soften her. I found it a very intriguing match-up. And the suspenseful race towards the end to avoid a tragedy is action-packed, tense, and suspenseful. Combined with Ulli Birve's stellar narration and acting, It is my favorite Heyer mystery, I think. **4 1/2 stars**
July 7, 2018
Why shoot a butler, indeed?
Good butlers are hard to come by, and managing a large English manor house circa 1933 calls for a discrete, efficient, capable family servant. Unfortunately, this particular butler is currently behind the wheel of his master's vehicle with a hole through his chest. No more butlering for him, poor chap.
Who killed Dawson, and why, is just the tip of the puzzle for amateur sleuth Frank Amberley. His dinner engagement with his aunt and uncle is interrupted by a wrong turn on a dark and foggy road, where he finds an Austin Seven parked on the side of the road. Further complicating matters is the presence of an attractive yet acerbic young woman named Shirley Brown. Shirley claims she had nothing to do with the mysterious man's death. But why then is Shirley carrying a revolver in her coat pocket?
As the case heats up, author Georgette Heyer takes the reader on a full-out detective adventure that is both mystifying as well as fun (well, as fun as murder can be). I enjoyed this one by Heyer very much. It had a well detailed plot, red herrings, car chases, foggy environs, spirited heroines, stupid police constables, and several more deaths by person or persons unknown. Although Heyer is much more well known for her Regency and Georgian historical romances (I've read a few of them), I'm really liking her mysteries much more, and look forward to reading the next one very soon.
Good butlers are hard to come by, and managing a large English manor house circa 1933 calls for a discrete, efficient, capable family servant. Unfortunately, this particular butler is currently behind the wheel of his master's vehicle with a hole through his chest. No more butlering for him, poor chap.
Who killed Dawson, and why, is just the tip of the puzzle for amateur sleuth Frank Amberley. His dinner engagement with his aunt and uncle is interrupted by a wrong turn on a dark and foggy road, where he finds an Austin Seven parked on the side of the road. Further complicating matters is the presence of an attractive yet acerbic young woman named Shirley Brown. Shirley claims she had nothing to do with the mysterious man's death. But why then is Shirley carrying a revolver in her coat pocket?
As the case heats up, author Georgette Heyer takes the reader on a full-out detective adventure that is both mystifying as well as fun (well, as fun as murder can be). I enjoyed this one by Heyer very much. It had a well detailed plot, red herrings, car chases, foggy environs, spirited heroines, stupid police constables, and several more deaths by person or persons unknown. Although Heyer is much more well known for her Regency and Georgian historical romances (I've read a few of them), I'm really liking her mysteries much more, and look forward to reading the next one very soon.
September 6, 2019
The second of Georgette Heyer's detective novels, this one starts with a barrister coming across a car with a murdered man and a young woman standing by. He reports the death but does not mention the girl, as he then proceeds to investigate .....
Well-written, good plot and cast of characters. Exciting, and with a touch of romance. A good light read.
Well-written, good plot and cast of characters. Exciting, and with a touch of romance. A good light read.
May 24, 2016
Of all Georgette Heyer's mysteries, this is the one I have the most conflicted feelings about.
1. The hero, Frank Amberley, is sarcastic, arrogant and in short, a know-it-all. There isn't much to like about him except his intelligence. 2 stars for him.
2. The heroine, Shirley Fountain aka Shirley Brown, is just as back as Amberley. She is rude and obstinate to the point of stupidity. Amberley made it clear to her that he was not going to turn her in to the police and yet she still refused to trust him and confide in him. In so doing, she put herself in danger and it can be argued that she inadvertently caused - or at least failed to prevent - her brother's murder. IMO, that puts her in TSTL territory. 1 star for her.
3. I quite like Sergeant Gubbins who plays Dr. Watson to Amberley's Holmes. 4 stars for him.
4. I REALLY like Lady Matthews. She was my favorite character in the book. She appears vague and rather flighty, but this facade hides an awareness that notices everything without giving herself away. She would be a wizard poker player. Also, she has the ability to get people to do as she wishes. 5 stars for Lady Matthews!
5. The main premise of the book is an interesting one - two people with opposing interests each are in possession of one-half of a will that would disinherit the presumed heir. Unfortunately, the machinations of the characters rather spoil it for me. 2 stars for the plot.
6. It has a terrific title! 5 stars for the title.
So, 3 stars overall.
1. The hero, Frank Amberley, is sarcastic, arrogant and in short, a know-it-all. There isn't much to like about him except his intelligence. 2 stars for him.
2. The heroine, Shirley Fountain aka Shirley Brown, is just as back as Amberley. She is rude and obstinate to the point of stupidity. Amberley made it clear to her that he was not going to turn her in to the police and yet she still refused to trust him and confide in him. In so doing, she put herself in danger and it can be argued that she inadvertently caused - or at least failed to prevent - her brother's murder. IMO, that puts her in TSTL territory. 1 star for her.
3. I quite like Sergeant Gubbins who plays Dr. Watson to Amberley's Holmes. 4 stars for him.
4. I REALLY like Lady Matthews. She was my favorite character in the book. She appears vague and rather flighty, but this facade hides an awareness that notices everything without giving herself away. She would be a wizard poker player. Also, she has the ability to get people to do as she wishes. 5 stars for Lady Matthews!
5. The main premise of the book is an interesting one - two people with opposing interests each are in possession of one-half of a will that would disinherit the presumed heir. Unfortunately, the machinations of the characters rather spoil it for me. 2 stars for the plot.
6. It has a terrific title! 5 stars for the title.
So, 3 stars overall.
September 5, 2016
Frank Amberley is on his way to dinner at his Uncle and Aunt's estate, when he comes across a young woman, Shirley Brown, standing in the road next to a car with a dead man in the driver's seat.
Mr. Amberley is asked by the local police force to lend a hand as he was instrumental in closing a prior case. Between directing the bungling constabulary and keeping the inept inspector busy with wild goose chases, Mr. Amberley solves not only this crime, but several others that occur as a result.
While I didn't think much of Shirley, I found Aunt Marion a hoot and cousin Felicity a joyful little minx. The police sergeant was such a good natured buffoon, you couldn't help like him (and sympathize when he was so often the target of Frank's "attention"). Frank Amberley was laugh out loud funny with his very (did I mention VERY?) dry, sarcastic humor. In addition, he was extremely clever when putting together all the clues.
A criticism would be that there were some clues that the reader wasn't privy to until the big reveal (a la Columbo), but the majority you could get as they emerged or realize after the fact that it had been presented (but missed/overlooked).
Overall, a very enjoyable read that I would recommend.
Rating: 4 Stars
Mr. Amberley is asked by the local police force to lend a hand as he was instrumental in closing a prior case. Between directing the bungling constabulary and keeping the inept inspector busy with wild goose chases, Mr. Amberley solves not only this crime, but several others that occur as a result.
While I didn't think much of Shirley, I found Aunt Marion a hoot and cousin Felicity a joyful little minx. The police sergeant was such a good natured buffoon, you couldn't help like him (and sympathize when he was so often the target of Frank's "attention"). Frank Amberley was laugh out loud funny with his very (did I mention VERY?) dry, sarcastic humor. In addition, he was extremely clever when putting together all the clues.
A criticism would be that there were some clues that the reader wasn't privy to until the big reveal (a la Columbo), but the majority you could get as they emerged or realize after the fact that it had been presented (but missed/overlooked).
Overall, a very enjoyable read that I would recommend.
Rating: 4 Stars
November 21, 2025
Esiste una giustizia se, per una volta, la persona assassinata è il maggiordomo!
Ambientato a Carchester, in Inghilterra, il primo romanzo giallo che leggo della Heyer si intitola, nella sua versione originale, "Perché sparare a un maggiordomo?"
È stata una lettura avvincente, ne sono rimasta piacevolmente sorpresa.
Se nei suoi romanzi Regency spiccano i dialoghi frizzanti qui c'è una storia asciutta e ben strutturata che non annoia mai.
Il personaggio principale, Amberley, è in realtà un avvocato con spiccate doti di investigatore che si ritrova a dover approfondire e sbrogliare un caso di triplice omicidio.
Nonostante la trama del classico giallo la Heyer non riesce a non concludere con un bel lieto fine che, per gli estimatori dell'autrice, ovviamente non guasta.
September 20, 2022
Dated for the time frame it was written in, but a good plot and great, snarky dialogue.
My first book by this author, but I will read more.
My first book by this author, but I will read more.
February 2, 2024
This was a fun read! It had a Tommy and Tuppence feel to it with some hijinks and some Wodehouse-style humor. I guessed the villain quite easily but I didn’t guess any other bits of the mystery so that made it fun still. I liked the mystery around Shirley. I think Frank Amberley is a decent amateur detective though he’s downright arrogant and ruthless to all well-meaning policemen besides Sergeant Gubbins whom I quite enjoyed. He had a fun humorous presence in the story. A bit of romance too, though rather on the silly side. Lady Matthews is, hands down, the best character. She needs to be the star of her own mystery series.
July 8, 2020
A good romp of a read that just went on a little too long.
I loved the country house setting, the mystery and the adventure but it plodded in parts for me.
It also felt much more modern then it was, it could have been the 60's cover on mine that prompted it but I never once pictured the 30's as the setting.
Still a good read and an enjoyable one, but a 3.5 rather than a 3 or 4 star book.
I loved the country house setting, the mystery and the adventure but it plodded in parts for me.
It also felt much more modern then it was, it could have been the 60's cover on mine that prompted it but I never once pictured the 30's as the setting.
Still a good read and an enjoyable one, but a 3.5 rather than a 3 or 4 star book.
July 15, 2019
I enjoyed this very much. There was a very long explanation at the end explaining the complicated plot. It all made sense finally. I like her writing and story much better than Agatha Christie as its more believable.
August 26, 2010
For the fan of Heyer who reads this book because they are entranced with her Regency Romances it will probably be a let down. It is not a badly written book and while the plot is cliched it is not patently ridiculous as is the case with some books written contemporaneously, although it does lack the lightness and wit that readers of the Regency Romances came to expect from the author.
For the fan of Heyer’s detective stories this, her second murder mystery, shows the author still experimenting with a format that will let her bring the strengths of her Regencys to a different and more modern genre.
Readers may also be turned off, or even depending on their own experiences horrified, by the degree to which the they are presumed to empathize with the idea that aggressive and almost abusive behaviour is experienced (when carried out by the right person) as romantic and attractive.
SPOILERS AHEAD
Heyer’s second excursion into the world of the detective story does not, in the opinion of this reviewer, age as well as the first. The “missing will” and “long lost relatives” plots were even at that time overused in English fiction and Heyer goes to the well of local constabulary incompetence with a frequency that rises to the level of constancy as the book unfolds. The talented amateur benefits from knowledge he never shares with the police and indeed withholds information from the police without which there was no chance for them to solve the case.
The opening scene in which the protagonist “meets cute” with the mystery lady over a dead body is in itself a giveaway to the entire plot. Only the most inexperienced reader will not know by the end of this encounter that they will battle with each other through the rest of the book only to realize close to the end they have been in love the whole time. The fact that they find each other intolerable and cannot have a conversation of more than a few minutes duration without a violent argument breaking out does not bode well for their future happiness together.
For the fan of Heyer’s detective stories this, her second murder mystery, shows the author still experimenting with a format that will let her bring the strengths of her Regencys to a different and more modern genre.
Readers may also be turned off, or even depending on their own experiences horrified, by the degree to which the they are presumed to empathize with the idea that aggressive and almost abusive behaviour is experienced (when carried out by the right person) as romantic and attractive.
SPOILERS AHEAD
Heyer’s second excursion into the world of the detective story does not, in the opinion of this reviewer, age as well as the first. The “missing will” and “long lost relatives” plots were even at that time overused in English fiction and Heyer goes to the well of local constabulary incompetence with a frequency that rises to the level of constancy as the book unfolds. The talented amateur benefits from knowledge he never shares with the police and indeed withholds information from the police without which there was no chance for them to solve the case.
The opening scene in which the protagonist “meets cute” with the mystery lady over a dead body is in itself a giveaway to the entire plot. Only the most inexperienced reader will not know by the end of this encounter that they will battle with each other through the rest of the book only to realize close to the end they have been in love the whole time. The fact that they find each other intolerable and cannot have a conversation of more than a few minutes duration without a violent argument breaking out does not bode well for their future happiness together.
May 1, 2015
Georgette Heyer wrote ‘Why Shoot a Butler?’ in 1933 when mystery novel were fairly fashionable. It is an ok English murder mystery story but, unlike Christie’s novel, for example, this book did not withstand the test of time particularly well.
This type of format, over the years, has become formulaic, predictable and a tad repetitive and only genuinely well written novels of this genre are worth a read. Personally, I would not bother with this one!
The plot gets unnecessarily complicated at the end making the story, until then barely acceptable, even less enjoyable. At the end, it left me underwhelmed. Heyer’ lack of experience in this genre is displayed by the overly detailed final summary which was perhaps intended to somewhat make up for the mediocre story, but unfortunately it lowered my marks even further. A mere 'two stars' is what this books deserves.
This type of format, over the years, has become formulaic, predictable and a tad repetitive and only genuinely well written novels of this genre are worth a read. Personally, I would not bother with this one!
The plot gets unnecessarily complicated at the end making the story, until then barely acceptable, even less enjoyable. At the end, it left me underwhelmed. Heyer’ lack of experience in this genre is displayed by the overly detailed final summary which was perhaps intended to somewhat make up for the mediocre story, but unfortunately it lowered my marks even further. A mere 'two stars' is what this books deserves.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 564 reviews