Georgette Heyer Fans discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Group Reads
>
Regency Buck Group Read Jan 2018 - Spoilers Thread
Good observation! Maybe Sylvester is equally long, but I can’t think of any others at this moment. Maybe the fighting couples need longer to get over themselves?Here’s my review (just brief notes) from this time around: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
When I first read this, I was not sure who the 'Hero' was until the very end. At times, I thought that Charles might be the hero, or Worth and even sometimes Bertrand. Of the three, I really only liked Charles.I enjoyed the mystery. Judith and Peregrine were not my favorite, either.
It is interesting to read this as GH's first journey into regency times as a writer.
I had forgotten that there was a mystery. Maybe I'll give RB another try! :)
Well, I'm done!I liked: all the regency details! Sometimes feels like reading a history book - and there are moments when I read something and I'm sure it must lifted from real life somewhere eg. when she says someone is a terrible houseguest because he snuffs his candle by stuffing it under his pillow! It's so specific and ridiculous, it must be true!
- I liked Perry - boisterous and good-hearted. Heyer does know how to do teenage boys well and generously!
- I liked that Perry and Harriet were a solid couple - too often young love is sent up as being just ridiculous. I hope they're happy, because they are awfully young though!
Didn't like:
- Worth. So rude and overbearing. Almost all the drama between him and Judith is down to: him sexually assaulting her; him hiding the truth from her or straight up lying to her; him trying to manipulate her.
- Judith. I actually have a lot of sympathy for her temper. I'd be furious with Worth all the time too, if I was her. But I didn't like the cold way that she schemed to gain her place in society - it felt a bit 'high-school' at times. E.g.: if you like snuff then take snuff - but don't take it just to look cool!
I finished it! It was okay. Full of everything that characterises a good Heyer but perhaps not quite in the right proportions. Far too much showing off the research. Great long, detailed expositions that interrupted rather than supported the story. If I had read another detailed description of clothing, or a boxing match, or how to make snuff, or another real historical character - none of which actually added anything to the story - I would have screamed! I love that GH learns from this and in future books, she shows her historical knowledge and research skills subtly and unobtrusively- but in ways that support the story - not hold it up.
When I think of my favourite GH heroines: Venetia, Sophy, Frederica, Arabella, et al - then Judith is just a tiresome, tetchy and rather arrogant figure. She not nearly as bright as she thinks she is. Her determination that she would have the room in the hotel because she had written ‘a week ago’ to reserve it sounded simply spoilt and entitled - not assertive. She didn’t care if someone else was thrown out of the room. Her tendency to plough on regardless in spite of every piece of wise advice does not make her feisty, simply foolish. On the other hand, I do like Worth. I don’t find him overbearing or bullying but he is somewhat manipulative. Personally,I would not describe him kissing a girl in 1811 as ‘sexual assault’ and I don’t think Judith would either. It would be seen as such today but not then. I try really hard not to impose my 21st century perspectives and reality on something taking place 200 years ago.
Long before this incident, Judith determines to dislike Worth despite him doing nothing to deserve it. It just makes her look childish. She shows not one iota of self awareness for the first half of the book. The unsubtle handling of who is the villain in the book is in stark contrast to some of her other books and again, I think this just shows she is still learning her trade! Perry is the usual heedless younger brother. I wonder if Heyer’s own trials with her brothers influenced her depictions of brothers in some of her books? I enjoyed reading RB again this time round in spite of the criticisms I have voiced here - but I don’t think I will be returning to it anytime soon.
Susan in Perthshire wrote: "Personally,I would not describe him kissing a girl in 1811 as ‘sexual assault’ and I don’t think Judith would either. It would be seen as such today but not then. I try really hard not to impose my 21st century perspectives and reality on something taking place 200 years ago."It's an interesting dilemma, but I do judge by my own values, although I try to be charitable to different eras and cultures.
But I do think the kiss was very wrong both now and then - actually more wrong then than it is now, seeing as the modesty of girls was so much more important then. Can you see Darcy, Wentworth or Knightley behaving that way? No - this is Wickham behaviour!
And Judith is very upset by it, and she makes that clear. So even if he thought that forced-kissing was ok in general, he should know that he missed his mark with this one and apologise!
I'm especially annoyed at Worth because he forces his kiss on Judith at the start, he never apologises for it, and then he has the audacity to blame her when Prinny tries to do the same! Why does he think that she'd be able to stop the Prince Regent when she couldn't stop him?
Although, I agree Judith would never use the phrase 'sexual assault'. I seem to remember reading about bold young men who would rush into the boxes at Vauxhall and 'insult the ladies'. That's probably how Judith would think about it.
Good points, Nick! I don't think that a kiss constitutes sexual assault, but it most certainly shows a nasty lack of respect. As you say, this is not gentlemanly behavior.
Nick wrote: " I didn't like the cold way that she schemed to gain her place in society - it felt a bit 'high-school' at times. E.g.: if you like snuff then take snuff - but don't take it just to look cool! "I agree, Judith really showed her immaturity with the snuff affectation.
And I guess I never got on the Worth train because he forced his kiss on her right there in the road - who does that? Look, a young woman alone, she must want me to kiss her. Or, I can kiss her now because there is no other man to stop me.
A point about the whole Prince Regent bit--I think GH fell down a bit on that, because Prinny never pursued "girls"--he had thing for older women his whole life (though I suppose, as he aged, that I should say he pursued contemporaries rather than sexy young things.) How much older than he was Mrs. Fitzherbert? And Lady Jersey, another of his amours, was ridiculed as a grandmother by Prinny's critics.
Oh Marissa, that's a good point. Maybe it would've worked better if it had been Clarence.
Nick wrote: "Oh Marissa, that's a good point. Maybe it would've worked better if it had been Clarence."Clarence was taken though. He had a long-term relationship with Mrs. Jordan. They were essentially husband and wife- until he was forced to marry a royal. Last time we read the book, I looked up Mrs. Jordan and the FitzClarences and her story did not have a happy ending.
The whole single woman unchaperoned = she must be a lightskirt is the one really big thing I HATE about Regency society. Social snobbery I can understand in this period just at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution but the disrespect for women I can not handle. It works in Venetia though. Mainly because Ventia didn't DISLIKE the kiss and didn't scream and run away like she should have.
In the Kloestner's biography, she states Heyer made a rare research mistake. The Brighton Pavillion didn't exist as described in 1811! However, she acknowledges Heyer was only as good as her research and there were really only 2 sources for her to draw from. I wonder whether Heyer would have snubbed the Internet or been delighted by how much information was available at her fingertips?
Audley! I forgot to say how much I liked Audley! I wished he'd had some chemistry with Judith - I would've been happy to see them fall in love.I did laugh when he blurted out: 'I'm come home to try my luck with the heiress. Where is she? Does she squint like a bag of mails? Is she hideous? They always are!' And Judith is standing right there! :D
QNPoohBear wrote: "I wonder whether Heyer would have snubbed the Internet or been delighted by how much information was available at her fingertips? "I'm sure she would've loved the internet. It's every research nerds best friend! Even if you insist on reading all the original sources in hardcopy, it's still helpful for finding them!
I think Clarence had been forced to give up Mrs. Jordan by around this time (he and she parted in 1811, and I expect this book is set somewhere in 1811-1812) due to his finances and the heir to the throne situation (which was bad, but not yet dire.)As much as I enjoyed the history of the Battle of Waterloo in An Infamous Army, it always bothered me that GH decided to force Charles and Barbara together. Poor Charles!
Nick wrote: "... I'm especially annoyed at Worth because he forces his kiss on Judith at the start, he never apologises for it, and then he has the audacity to blame her when Prinny tries to do the same! Why does he think that she'd be able to stop the Prince Regent when she couldn't stop him?..."While I agree with your summary Nick, and deplore the mindset, I believe the distinction here was that he believed it ok to accost a young woman who was not of noble birth, which she herself thinks she must look like on the road... but a young woman of birth agreeing to go to a private room with a man at a party was expecting a liaison of some sort. Prinny didn't force her to go with him, he made the mistake of believing she was playing the same game as him.
I remember though that by the Grand Sophy, the sort of person who thought it ok to kiss housemaids was definitely not hero material.
Louise Sparrow wrote: "a young woman of birth agreeing to go to a private room with a man at a party was expecting a liaison of some sort. Prinny didn't force her to go with him, he made the mistake of believing she was playing the same game as him."Hmm, but she hasn't given him any hint that she wants a secret liaison. When he asks her to go with him, she tries to insist that Mrs Scattergood comes too. He brushes it all off: 'She did not know what to say, for how could a mere Miss Taverner, from Yorkshire, presume to rebuff a Prince-Regent who was old enough to be her father? She ought not to go with him , and yet how was she to refuse? It would be to insult him, and that was unthinkable.' When they're in the room together 'he laughed at her evident confusion' and when she says they should go back he says: 'Oh, no hurry for that!'
If Prinny thinks she's playing his game, he has no-one to blame but himself! She's done everything she can to rebuff him politely.
Yes but hasn't he been listening to the rumours about her? He's deluding himself certainly but she has been trying to give the impression of someone who knows everything about that society.I meant it more to comment on why Worth thought she should have refused though, even though she plainly didn't know how.
She didn't have much success convincing Clarence that she wasn't interested in his proposal, either, and ended up sending him to Worth. She definitely had trouble combining tact and resolution.
@QNPoohBear, message 12: I wondered about that! (the description of the Pavilion) He kept changing it, and this story seemed too early for at least some of the rooms she described. Of course, what’s left now is quite different still. Such an irresponsible monarch, spending all that money on display while people starved.
Abigail wrote: "@QNPoohBear, message 12: I wondered about that! (the description of the Pavilion) He kept changing it, and this story seemed too early for at least some of the rooms she described. Of course, what’..."Absolutely agree Abigail! - although of course technically he was not the Monarch yet: just the Regent.. I blame Parliament for continuing to bail him out and vote such ridiculously large sums of money to him - first as Prince of Wales and then as Regent - equivalent to around £30 million per annum in today’s money by 1811. His behaviour whilst his country was at war, his disregard for the people, his extravagance, his treatment of his wife, and his political ineptitude made him one of the most disliked Royals ever.
Perhaps a mistake Heyer made with this story was not bringing in Audley sooner, and not showing enough of Worth and Audley together. In other books she softens her alpha heroes by letting them show a softer side next to nicer characters (including Ulysses in Arabella). Instead, here we see Worth almost exclusively next to Judith and Peregrine, and they are always acting out so he has to be the controlling parent figure. Heyer could have done a better job of showing early on how he is also protective of them.Also, the world of the ton as depicted here is pretty cold. We are told about the existence of friends Judith develops but we don’t really see scenes with them. So everything seems like parade and snark. In that context, both hero and heroine seem calculating and we don’t appreciate their emotions very much.
Just a reminder, this thread is for Regency Buck spoilers, so if you post what might be a spoiler for another book in this thread, please use the spoiler tags. Thanks!
*edited to clarify that this is regarding a previous post including a comment about An Infamous Army. I apologize for not being clear.
Just to understand: did you think my reference to Arabella was a spoiler?
Abigail wrote: "Perhaps a mistake Heyer made with this story was not bringing in Audley sooner, and not showing enough of Worth and Audley together. In other books she softens her alpha heroes by letting them show..."Abigail--very good points.
It is interesting to contrast the writing in RB with her previous novel-The Convenient Marriage. CM seemed to flow smoothly, no excessive descriptions, a good mix of minor characters. In RB, it is almost as if the change to a new time period (neither Georgian --her previous historical romances, nor contemporary--her mysteries) threw her out of her writing rhythm.
Abigail wrote: "Just to understand: did you think my reference to Arabella was a spoiler?"Apologies, Abigail, I was not referring to your post. I am sorry that I was not more specific. I was referring to the Infamous Army post from yesterday.
I suspect that Worth's character depiction suffers from Regency Buck's mystery plot, and the author's feeling it necessary to keep him plausible as a villain for most of the book.As for Judith: the one time I feel real sympathy for her is on the occasion of the race to Brighton. There she is doing something she enjoys and is good at, and the only reason it's considered unacceptable is that she's female. Deeply unfair!
Margaret wrote: "I suspect that Worth's character depiction suffers from Regency Buck's mystery plot, and the author's feeling it necessary to keep him plausible as a villain for most of the book.As for Judith: t..."
That's a good point, Margaret. It would not have been too mysterious if Worth was a perfect hero.
Margaret wrote: "As for Judith: the one time I feel real sympathy for her is on the occasion of the race to Brighton. There she is doing something she enjoys and is good at, and the only reason it's considered unacceptable is that she's female. Deeply unfair!"Yes, I agree. Especially because she's allowed to drive around the park, she's allowed to drive in the country, but for some reason she's not allowed to drive (or even ride in an open carriage) on the main road!
I can half-way get my head around the idea that it's too 'public' and there are too many strangers of different (esp. lower) classes, but even so, it seems like a trivial distinction to the modern reader.
It seems like a whole blame-the-victim thing: it’s your fault if you place yourself in a position to be ogled or harassed by the hoi polloi.It has always mystified me how women are supposed to remain in the private sphere but at the same time their bodies are treated like public property.
Back to Judith's lack of friends - at the Christmas party Mrs. Marley and her daughter, Miss Marley, are also guests and there is a paragraph which has Judith, Miss Fairford and Miss Marley spending a morning together. I've cudgeled my brains to remember just who Miss Marley is, but she's so minor she most certainly can't be called a "friend". Her only friends, of a sort, are Perry, Bernard, and Charles, with an occasional foray into Worth territory - apparently so she can look idiotic periodically. If course, if she'd had an intelligent friend, we probably wouldn't have the book...
Yes, and Mrs Scattergood is a poor sort of friend. Although I liked her sayin gthat because she wasn't pretty she had to be odd!
I do like Mrs. Scattergood. She's not nosy or whiny or intrusive!
I liked her, too! So supportive and accepting of Judith.
I've been trying to think of a modern faux pas that Judith could have committed, instead of the race, which would have resulted in the same kind of censure from society. Something gone viral on social media, maybe, but it would have to be more than a race with her brother!
It's really tough, isn't it, Karlyne. We don't really have any modern moral equivalent to the horror of a well-bred woman 'exposing herself' in the way that Judith does. We live in an age where everybody is free to share everything.
The modern equivalent of a Regency faux pax can be found in updates of Jane Austen novels like The Lizzie Bennet Diaries on YouTube. (view spoiler)Despite the faults of this novel, it's impressive as a first Regency set novel and much better than most of the copycats. When Heyer first wrote the story she was convinced it was the best she had ever written. She was so proud of it, she was upset an American publisher refused to publish it and when the story's name was changed. She thought it should become a movie.
It really would be an amazing movie. All of the descriptions turned into film would be gorgeous!
& finished, so I'll put my thoughts here.Some of the language Austenesque. GH still finding her voice.
Lot of background detail. Maybe GH wasn't expecting to become the Regency romance writer. A plus is that we have all that info now. The clothing description was overkill.
I skimmed the prizefight, (I hate boxing) but gritted my teeth & read the cock fight. I wanted to understand how Farnaby forced the duel on Perry.
Loved GH's affectionate portrayal of Brummell.
Loved the humour, especially Worth outmanuevring (sp) Judith over the Brighton rentals & Perry's reaction to being kidnapped & Worth's proposal.
What I didn't like other than the boxing & the cockfight - same as last time Worth threatening to beat Judith.
I think we have even more possible terrible social faux pas - teenaged girls being driven to suicide by their ex-boyfriends sharing explicit photos online or former friends' harassment and bullying in response to some quarrell. And they think they have no options, nowhere to shelter from the social media - it's so much a part of our culture that cutting it off doesn't seem an option. A girl from an older period humiliated publicly might be able to stay with relatives in the country for a while and find a new social circle. And there's the possibility of saying something unacceptable - or even just something that can be twisted to seem unacceptable - on any of the current hot-button issues. That can result is a social media backlash that will ruin a reputation in no time flat, again, in a way that's very difficult to outlive or escape. Especially once the death threats start.
QNPoohBear wrote: "When Heyer first wrote the story she was convinced it was the best she had ever written. She was so proud of it, she was upset an American publisher refused to publish it and when the story's name was changed. She thought it should become a movie."Wow, I had no idea of that. Poor Heyer! I think it's good - it's very well written - but it's not my favourite by a long shot.
Cheryl, you're right about the horrible power of social media. People don't even have to take a false step, but can lose it all through someone else's viciousness.
I loved the ending of this book--charming and romantic and really almost perfect. I just wish she'd come up with a different plot device to turn Judith--temporarily--against Lord Worth. The forced kiss is not my favorite and the excuse so often seems to be--"I didn't realize you were a lady. " (in other words, I thought you were a nobody and fair game. Ugh.) Still, I think Worth is a bit humbled by the end, and Judith is appealing when she finally expresses her gratitude towards him.
Nick wrote: "Louise Sparrow wrote: "a young woman of birth agreeing to go to a private room with a man at a party was expecting a liaison of some sort. Prinny didn't force her to go with him, he made the mistak...""'She did not know what to say, for how could a mere Miss Taverner, from Yorkshire, presume to rebuff a Prince-Regent who was old enough to be her father? She ought not to go with him , and yet how was she to refuse? It would be to insult him, and that was unthinkable.' When they're in the room together 'he laughed at her evident confusion' and when she says they should go back he says: 'Oh, no hurry for that!'"
The previous description of Judith's Dilemma could be a description of the actresses who were invited to Harvey Weinstein's hotel room!
Rebekah wrote: "Nick wrote: "Louise Sparrow wrote: "a young woman of birth agreeing to go to a private room with a man at a party was expecting a liaison of some sort. Prinny didn't force her to go with him, he ma..."I shouldn't be laughing, but I confess that I did.
Much to my discomfort, I feel compelled to defend Worth on the charges of sexual assault! I think that Heyer meant the episode of Worth tossing our heroine into his carriage and stealing a "swift kiss" from her was meant as a "meet cute". As far as real sexual assaults go look no further than Damerel accosting Venetia in the woods. Remember that Worth had his tiger with him and so Judith was chaperoned at all times. She would have known that she was in no real danger. I'm pretty sure he could tell she was not some poor vulnerable country girl who would have been powerless against any real attack. Remember it's not the first time he has tangled with the Taverners, and I think he had her measure pretty accurately.
Also he was rescuing Judith, (albeit in spite of herself!). She was stupidly walking on a lonely road where she was at the mercy of any lout or ruffian drawn to the area by the boxing match who wished to really terrorize her.
He was not acting like a perfect gentleman, for sure. Could he have gotten her back to town with a little tact and sensitivity? Ummmm. Maybe. However, Judith's silly behavior would have tried the patience of a saint. Many of Heyer's heroes are far from saints, and many have been known to try to take the heroine down a peg or two. And vice versa for that matter.
Rebekah wrote: "Much to my discomfort, I feel compelled to defend Worth on the charges of sexual assault! I think that Heyer meant the episode of Worth tossing our heroine into his carriage and stealing a "swift k..."You've hit on the main differences between sexual assault and annoyance. Judith had every right to be annoyed, but, as you say, she was never in any danger from Worth and she knew it.
Would it have been "better" for Worth to let her continue down the road and be in actual danger? Hmmmm. That's a problem we still face today; how far should we go to "protect" someone?
I have just finished. It was ok, 3 stars, but not a book I will remember fondly through the years.I disliked the 2 main characters, so I didn't care much for the romance, I must admit. By the way the final declaration was one of the most verbose ever: so much talking and so much explaining the plot to the reader!
Judith: in historical fiction, I don't want characters that are totally unconventional or that anachronistically disregard all social rules and conventions of the time (it's more interesting to me if the writer is skilled enough to re-create a word different than our own), but here it seems too much the opposite, basically Judith worries about little else other than being popular, all the time (having the "good" friends, the "good" clothes, the "good" poses like snuff, etc; yes I get that she's very young, has means, and this is her first time in the city, but all this still doesn't make her very interesting or likeable to the reader).
And strange to say, because this has never been a problem for me in other books of this genre, but I was a little annoyed at the emphasis about the privileged and idle life of the characters. Again, I know this is not meant to be "realistic" fiction, so it must simply have been that the two main characters weren't able to warm my heart at all.
The setting and period details: like some of you, I got a bit tired of the long descriptions of everything in the end. I repeat what I said in another comment: I feel that Heyer didn't feel the need to show off all her research in later books, here it does feel like a "catalogue" of all things Regency at times. But excessive as it may have been a little, I overall enjoyed it. Even the boxing match and the cock fight that were disturbing for some of you (for me, too) were quite unusual glimpses of the diversions of the times.
Also all the royal cameos seemed a bit "too much" (as if Judith had to meet ALL the "Very Important People" of those years for us to see), but they were fun nevertheless.
The mystery plot: much better than the romance. It sort of takes the back-seat in much of the 2nd half of the book, where there's a lot of bickering between Judith and Worth (as if the author thought "hey, I have to write about these 2 too, time is running out!").
I admit I was totally fooled in the 1st half, but then, about halfway through the book, seeing that you don't really read this type of books for the shocking twists, that we knew exactly (in spite of all the attempts of cover up by Heyer :-)) who could NOT be the villain, that the relevant and plausible options were not THAT many to choose from, and that the cousin was beginning to be portrayed as rather obsessive in his dislike for Worth, I began to lose hope and to fear where we were headed.
I am sorry for it, because I thought that Bernard could have been a different (not very wealthy, not of the highest rank) kind of hero in future books, but it seems this will not be.
Margaret wrote: "As for Judith: the one time I feel real sympathy for her is on the occasion of the race to Brighton. There she is doing something she enjoys and is good at, and the only reason it's considered unacceptable is that she's female. Deeply unfair!"True for me as well!
Of course then the book has to make it clear to us that she was 100% wrong and Worth 100% right about that. ;-)
Moloch wrote: "I have just finished. It was ok, 3 stars, but not a book I will remember fondly through the years.I disliked the 2 main characters, so I didn't care much for the romance, I must admit. By the way..."
I agree with all your points - hence my three star rating. Definitely not a favorite for me either!
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
I've been thinking about this book & one thing that has struck me - it is a very long time span for a Heyer romance. Usually whether in London or the country, the time frame is about a season.