Georgette Heyer Fans discussion
This topic is about
False Colours
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Group Reads
>
False Colours Sept 2015 Group Read Chapters 12-22
message 1:
by
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Aug 31, 2015 10:54PM
So how is the read going for you?
reply
|
flag
I wolfed it down in less than 24 hours!Just some pictures for everyone of gentle amusements enjoyed in Regency times.
Battledore & Shuttlecock
Billiards. Apparently they used ivory balls :(
Nice pictures! The lower one is rather risqué.I do enjoy Sir Bonamy Ripple, especially in his interactions with Kit. And the whole bit about there not being scarlet fever in the village!
Abigail wrote: "Nice pictures! The lower one is rather risqué."
I think a lot of the Regency women's clothing would look risque - even to us - all those damped muslins! This is a detail from an 1807 painting
On that subject, has anyone seen the movie Desiree? Remember the scene in which the young Desiree sees Napoleon with Josephine for the first time? In her pre-Revolutionary style dress, she's shocked by the skimpy, nightgown-like dresses the other women at the gathering are wearing--and especially by the ring one of them is wearing on her toe!
MaryC wrote: "On that subject, has anyone seen the movie Desiree? Remember the scene in which the young Desiree sees Napoleon with Josephine for the first time? In her pre-Revolutionary style dress, she's sho..."haven't seen the movie, but
was a favourite in my teens - one of the few fiction books in diary form that works.
I laughed all the way through the scene of Sir Bonamy’s undoing! “His countenance would not have led anyone to suppose that he was deriving much comfort from this reflection [that he need not grow old alone], but he replied heroically: ‘You have made me the happiest man on earth, my beautiful!’”Question for those readers who have an Arrow edition plus another version of the text: Near the bottom of page 288, there are a few lines that seem garbled. Does anyone know how this passage ought to read? “If the Dowager was brought to own that, despite his perfidy, she would be very well pleased to see her granddaughter married to Kit, only that hitherto pattern of superior sense and propriety herself maintained, in what the Dowager did not scruple to inform her was an unbecomingly highty-tighty manner, her unshakeable indifference to public opinion.”
We have had a lot of Georgette Heyer's turn up at work. When I go back in next Wednesday, I'm going to see if False Colours is one of them & go through for the typos. I grabbed an old These Old Shades for that exact reason.
Groovy! I discarded my old copy of False Colours before I noticed this problem.
Okay, I finished it by the end of Tuesday but held off commenting until others had finished the book. As I said in the 1-11 segment, I had to suspend disbelief that a career minded diplomat would enter into anything so risky and potentially damaging to his career as the impersonation of his twin brother in those particular circumstances. Once that was done, I was able to simply enjoy the superb plotting, wonderful descriptions and superior characterisation and thoroughly enjoy this book which despite my earlier thoughts, I had never read before. Cressy is a much more worldly and attractive character than some Heyer heroines and Kit is just delightful! I found Amabel really irritating but recognise that GH wrote this book at a time when it was perfectly okay to depict a woman as a stupid ninnyhammer!! Her manipulation of Bonamy is undoubtedly funny - but I felt guilty for laughing! Some wonderful surprises (the redoubt of the blackmailer by Cressy is a delight!) Not in my top ranking Heyer list but deifinitely a 4 star read!
Abigail wrote: "Groovy! I discarded my old copy of False Colours before I noticed this problem."The idea when I bought that set of Arrows was that I would discard my old copies, but the typos in most of them have made that impossible!
The False Colours we had was a Penguin. Can't find a picture of it online (it was a b/w drawing of Kit & Evelyn) but it must have been quite an honour for GH to have one of her books selected by them.
☆ Ｃａｒｏｌ ☆ wrote: "Billiards. Apparently they used ivory balls ..."
I remember listening to Garrison Keillor when he was at Mark Twain's house, when he picked up a pool ball, and squeezing it, broke it. It was an *old* ivory ball.
Abigail, I'm probably going nutty but I can't find where we were talking about brooch/broach.I went to the library & found my definition. It's here online as well.
http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dict...
Also found a snootier one that basically said some dictionaries have given up & are using broach for the item of jewellry.
The ones that always make me nutty (but then, I’m a copy editor, so I’m nutty by definition) are candelabra used as a singular and mantle used where mantel should be!
☆ Ｃａｒｏｌ ☆ wrote: "Abigail, I'm probably going nutty but I can't find where we were talking about brooch/broach.I went to the library & found my definition. It's here online as well.
http://www.collinsdictionary.c..."
Have you ever heard anyone pronounce "brooch" the way it's spelled--rhyming with "hooch"?
Abigail wrote: "The ones that always make me nutty (but then, I’m a copy editor, so I’m nutty by definition) are candelabra used as a singular and mantle used where mantel should be!"Well I don't talk about candlabra much, but it's all mantle to me!
*off to check dictionary*
@MaryC - nope, but I honestly don't remember seeing it spelt any way but broach over here. Obviously when reading American books I've just skimmed over the word!
& again... good old Collins!http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dict...
Some of this might be the difference between American English & English English of course.
MaryC wrote, “Have you ever heard anyone pronounce "brooch" the way it's spelled--rhyming with "hooch"?”Yes, that seems to be a popular pronunciation in some regions of the USA. But the pronunciation that sounds like “broach” is preferred, which may be how the two became conflated.
Our standard dictionary for the U.S. publishing industry, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate, 11th ed., allows the spelling of broach to mean “brooch”—but I’ve always felt that dictionaries were more descriptive than prescriptive, reflecting the usages that are out in the real world, rather than telling us what the usages ought to be (according to some arbitrary historical standard, of course!).
Brooch - piece of jewellery. ; broach - to initiate. I don't care what the U.S. Dictionaries allow. I'll stick to what the words mean here in the UK.
Susan wrote: "Brooch - piece of jewellery. ; broach - to initiate. I don't care what the U.S. Dictionaries allow. I'll stick to what the words mean here in the UK."This is what I was taught (here in the U.S.). I haven't seen anyone use "broach" for a piece of jewelry & if I did, I would assume it to be the type of error that mistakes "their" with "they're" and "there". I wonder if these homonym errors are more common now that voice recognition software is more in use...
Leslie wrote: "Susan wrote: "Brooch - piece of jewellery. ; broach - to initiate. I don't care what the U.S. Dictionaries allow. I'll stick to what the words mean here in the UK."This is what I was taught (he..."
I think this may have a lot to do with it. A great boon but unfortunately capable of that kind of error.
Calling in the heavy artillery, I turned to the OED, and guess what! They're related! A broach (yes, it's also a noun) is any of quite a few long, pointed things, such as a spit; and a brooch is a rather ornate pin, although Dr. Johnson used the word in a broader sense, to refer to other pieces of jewelry. According to the OED, the "brooch" spelling is a fairly recent development meant to distinguish the two. Of course, what was fairly recent when the original OED was being compiled and the compilers hadn't even reached the letter c would be over 100 years ago now.
I just finished Chapter 14, and I was hornswaggled at the idea of dear Mama's debt: 20,000 pounds. Seriously?!
Worth between three quarters of a million to a million today!
Karlyne wrote: "I just finished Chapter 14, and I was hornswaggled at the idea of dear Mama's debt: 20,000 pounds. Seriously?!"The National Archive provides a currency converter. They have stopped updating but in 2005 Amabel's debts would have been the equivalent of 838,400 pounds
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cu...
I'll put this in The Really Useful folder as well - will be helpful when reading Jane Austen.
Susan wrote: "Worth between three quarters of a million to a million today!"I simply cannot fathom that kind of frivolous debt. Her sons have to be commended for continuing to love that kind of ... idiocy!
☆ Ｃａｒｏｌ ☆ wrote: "Karlyne wrote: "I just finished Chapter 14, and I was hornswaggled at the idea of dear Mama's debt: 20,000 pounds. Seriously?!"The National Archive provides a currency converter. They have stopp..."
Good idea! My mind is still boggling, by the way...
I so agree Karlyne!
Especially since her husband settled what he knew (view spoiler) & I'm assuming when she had her fits of housewifely economy that her husband or Evelyn settled those as well.
Amabel puzzles me. On the one hand, she's very important to the plot line and she can be kind and caring (she takes great care of Cressy's Grandmama, for instance, even though she doesn't particularly like her), but, in real life, I'd have a hard, very hard, time finding her charming. Her only claims to likability are her prettiness and sweetness; she hasn't got much wit about her at all. She might be fun to laugh at, but other than that I'm afraid that I'd find her awfully boring. And if I had to either pay her debts or have her indebted to me, well, shudder...
It struck me that in a way, Amabel is almost a macguffin--she's there to more or less drive the plot...
Marissa wrote: "It struck me that in a way, Amabel is almost a macguffin--she's there to more or less drive the plot..."I looked up macguffin - I've never heard the term before.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin
Although Amabel remains important right the way through the story.
Also (view spoiler)
Without Amabel, there isn't a plot. But, even so, she's not a central character. I'm going to have to pay more attention to characters like her!
Abigail wrote: "I do enjoy Sir Bonamy Ripple, especially in his interactions with Kit. And the whole bit about there not being scarlet fever in the village! I laughed all the way through the scene of Sir Bonamy’s undoing!
Abigail we think alike. I liked this half of the book much better than the first. It was really funny, especially Bonamy. I giggled a lot at the end. Poor Bonamy!
Amabel annoyed me too. I tried to be sympathetic to her because she wasn't brought up to understand debts or money or anything like that, but she just didn't care. I think that's our problem. She doesn't know how she gets into debt or have an idea how to get out. She just keeps making the same mistakes over and over and her son has to pick up the pieces. I felt Evelyn and Kit were way too indulgent of their mother.
I have just finished False ColoursI like Sir Bonamy and how appalled he is over his proposed marriage.
Ammabel is a lovely dimwit but as described by Lady Stavely she has charm. I just accept her for what she is.
The whole plot is light and improbable, it's just a vehicle for developing the characters. As so often in GH novels, the minor characters are so keenly drawn with very recognisable traits and the dry humour underneath keeps me coming back to re read
I have just started to retread Envious Casca. Again it is the characters and the observation of human nature. Maud is wonderful
Tina wrote: "I have just finished False ColoursI like Sir Bonamy and how appalled he is over his proposed marriage.
Ammabel is a lovely dimwit but as described by Lady Stavely she has charm. I just accept her ..."
I love Heyer's mysteries, and Envious Casca is a good one. And I can't think of another character quite like Maud; she really is wonderful.
My very first post on this website and my first responseThankyou
Tina wrote: "The whole plot is light and improbable, it's just a vehicle for developing the characters."I think you hit the nail on the head, Tina. The story exists to give the characters a stage. In another, less skilled, writer's hands, they would have been broadly drawn one-note stereotypes. But Heyer gives depth to almost all of her characters, even the bit players. Amabel is "a lovely dimwit" but that's not all she is. Evelyn is not the man Kit is, but he's not a one-dimensional, hard-partying frat boy, either. We see some maturity and responsibility in him -- to give Amabel her due as a mother. Sir Bonamy is more than just a fat rich guy who cares for nothing but his dinner. That's why we care what happens to them -- all of them.
Tina, your "very first post" is wonderful. Thank you for joining us. I've only been part of the group a couple months but I've learned so much. Hope you enjoy it as much as I do.
I never realised that other people liked GH as much as I. I have always been mocked by my family for reading them but I do find them amazingly well written but the shrewd characterisation is what puts these books above other romances.I have read somewhere that GH was upset at her books being seen as lightweight.
Tina wrote: "I have read somewhere that GH was upset at her books being seen as lightweight."Sadly, I realized in my teens that novels set outside the author's own time are not usually considered serious literature. There are a few exceptions, such as War and Peace, the works of Sir Walter Scott, and A Tale of Two Cities, but otherwise such works tend to be viewed as "popular" fiction--no matter how good the author's powers of plotting, description, characterization, etc.
* * * * * *
Phooey!
reply | flag *
Anyone who suggests that GH was lightweight has clearly never read any of her books. Her use of language is skilful varied; and the reading age of her books is well above the average of the usual 'chick-lit' which fills the airport paperback shelves. Not that there is anything wrong with odd chick-lit tale! But for books you can return to time and again, GH has my vote every time.
And her vocabulary (even when she's not wowing us with the perfect Regency word) is so above average!
Lori wrote: "And her vocabulary (even when she's not wowing us with the perfect Regency word) is so above average!"Definately. I started reading her books while studying for the GRE (graduate entrance exam). The word "odious" was on the practice test in the book I had. I laughed because they didn't have an option for odious to mean "The person I pretend to hate but really love and will end up marrying in the end."
QNPoohBear wrote: "Lori wrote: "And her vocabulary (even when she's not wowing us with the perfect Regency word) is so above average!"Definately. I started reading her books while studying for the GRE (graduate ent..."
Good definition! I'm sure it's in the OED, right?
Love the GH definition of odious
A completely off-topic message from a member who still has trouble with threads:I just received this email from email@onedrive.microsoft.com:
Hi,
We’re emailing you because you’re a member of one or more groups in OneDrive. Groups will no longer be available in OneDrive after October 16, 2015, and all group files and info will be deleted. To see your groups, go to OneDrive.com, sign in, and then look under Groups in the navigation pane. If you want to keep any of the group files, follow the steps in Move files from a group to your own OneDrive. To share the files again after you move them to your own OneDrive, see Share files and folders and change permissions.
Thank you,
The OneDrive team
Does it apply to us? I belong to two other book/author discussion groups, one on Goodreads, one not. Or is this message about something different? I hope there's someone more computer-wise out there who can explain it to me!
Mary
I don't know, Mary, but Carol should be back from vacation any time now, and I'll bet she'll know! (I have no idea what One Drive is!)
I do not understand this. I have just found this group and so excited about it. I would hate to see it go
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
