Georgette Heyer Fans discussion
Heyer in General
>
I've created a poll!
Ha! Forgot about this!The results were about what I expected. But (from an idea of Jackie's!) how about your second favourite type of Heyer?
Poll up now.
https://www.goodreads.com/poll/list/1...
Oh this result(so far) is far more interesting! :)
Pre-regency is “Georgian”—that’s what mainstream HR (historical romance) readers call them.I voted for “pre-regency.”
On the poll Pre-regency also includes Beauvallet (and his devil-may-care laugh!)...
I voted for her detective stories because mysteries, particularly historical mysteries, are my favorite genre, and I really enjoy the humor Heyer gives her mysteries! I love a good puzzle, and she provides that, but characters and humor go a long way to making an enjoyable read into a fun, can’t put it down book!
Critterbee❇ wrote: "On the poll Pre-regency also includes Beauvallet (and his devil-may-care laugh!)..."Oh, I completely forgot about that one!
Susan in NC wrote: "I voted for her detective stories because mysteries, particularly historical mysteries, are my favorite genre, and I really enjoy the humor Heyer gives her mysteries! I love a good puzzle, and she ..."I think I have only read one or two of her mysteries. I guess if I read more of them, I might change my mind and move them into 2nd place too.
I'm not a Beauvallet fan (although I like the sound of a devil-may-care laugh!) But I do love These Old Shades very much, so I voted for pre-Regency too.I'm not a fan of the detective stories, or that genre in general. I enjoy a decent police procedural (Wallander, Harry Bosch), but never got into Heyer's, or Agatha Christie et al.
Susan I'm glad you enjoy them so much. Each to her own. I think perhaps that I'm pretty hopeless at solving mysteries, noticing clues etc. I never know whodunnit, and when it's revealed I'm usually... *huh????? It was them??????? Really? Oh yeah. Duh.*
LOL.
Andrea (Catsos Person) is a Compulsive eBook Hoarder wrote: "Susan in NC wrote: "I voted for her detective stories because mysteries, particularly historical mysteries, are my favorite genre, and I really enjoy the humor Heyer gives her mysteries! I love a g..."as I've posted before in this group, I started out really disliking all the mysteries but liked them more the more I read them.
I think at first I just disliked them because they are so unlike her regencies and I came to appreciate them as something unique.
the characters seem so hard-boiled! the slang and habits much more coarse. people flick their cigarette ash on the floor for heaven's sake! that took some getting used to.
Jan wrote: "I'm not a Beauvallet fan (although I like the sound of a devil-may-care laugh!) But I do love These Old Shades very much, so I voted for pre-Regency too.I'm not a fan of the detective stories, or..."
Lol! Oh, I never said I was good at solving the puzzles, or guessing whodunnit, I think I’ve always enjoyed the tidiness of mysteries - something bad happens, usually murder, and the clever detective (private or police) solve it, explain it, get the bad guy, justice served, end of story. I usually like best the stories with interesting characters, humor, not too much gore, and no children or animals harmed for any purposes- that’s an absolute dealbreaker for me. Obviously, I don’t read much modern stuff!
Jackie wrote: "Andrea (Catsos Person) is a Compulsive eBook Hoarder wrote: "Susan in NC wrote: "I voted for her detective stories because mysteries, particularly historical mysteries, are my favorite genre, and I..."Lol, good point- Heyer does an excellent job writing the hard-boiled Bright Young Things of her day - they are usually awful but so over the top it’s funny!
You describe exactly the sort of mystery I love, Susan! Though I will go a little darker if the focus is on character and psychology, as in Louise Penny's books.
Oddly, I have never been able to get into GH's mysteries. While acknowledging that they are well-written, the characters are rounded, and the story lines are nicely done, and I don't MIND reading one here and there, they just don't grab me the was the Regency and pre-Regency romances do.
Abigail wrote: "You describe exactly the sort of mystery I love, Susan! Though I will go a little darker if the focus is on character and psychology, as in Louise Penny's books."Oh, definitely, me, too - if it’s well done and holds my interest, I’m in!
Rebecca wrote: "Oddly, I have never been able to get into GH's mysteries. While acknowledging that they are well-written, the characters are rounded, and the story lines are nicely done, and I don't MIND reading o..."It took me a few reads to appreciate her style, and some I found off putting, because there wasn’t a single likable (to me) character. I mean, I’m not five, I know people can be annoying but still deserving of our sympathy and understanding, but I simply lose interest in the book as an entertainment, I don’t care how it turns out.
I really enjoyed some of the mysteriesNo Wind of Blame
Footsteps in the Dark
They Found Him Dead
Behold, Here's Poison
and really did not care for others:
A Blunt Instrument Penhallow
There are a few I have not read yet, and I am looking forward to the group reading of The Unfinished Clue later this year.
I think of The Unfinished Clue as maybe the best. it's sure in the top 3 for mysteries.
Looking forward to that one as well, it’s been years and I only read it once.
I see ‘pre-Regency’ as Georgian, and Beauvallet as ‘Historical’. I love all her Georgian books especially TOS and Devil’s Cub and I loathe Beauvallet; but I’ve had to vote for pre-Regency even though I don’t agree with the definition. I like Heyer’s Georgian and Regency equally and would not normally put one of these categories into a second place. The poll does not allow me to vote according to my preferences.
Ooh, love TOS and Devils Cub - feel like a heathen, I’ve only read them once...
I'm not so fond of These Old Shades and rarely read it, but I do have an affection for Devil's Cub. I suspect I would hate Vidal in real life, but he makes for a good story!
TOS and Devil's Cub - those are two of my faves! Purely fantastical and very re-readable.
Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁
Karlyne wrote: "Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁"A Civil Contract is the September read, just a few months away.
Critterbee❇ wrote: "Karlyne wrote: "Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁"A Civil Contract is the Septembe..."
Whew! I'm so looking forward to it!
Karlyne wrote: "Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁"😁Don't worry Karlyne - I wouldn't dare cancel A Civil Contract read on you! We aren't reading the mysteries in order - but The Unfinished Clue is coming up at the end of the year.
I already blotted my copybook postponing a The Unknown Ajax reading on Abigail ! 😉
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "Karlyne wrote: "Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁"😁Don't worry Karlyne - I wouldn'..."
I'm glad that Abigail and I have such clout!😄
😄 We are mainly reading the Fahnstock Thomas now because a couple of the short stories are in Snowdrift. & because I had been hunting for this book for 5 years, so couldn't wait to read it!
That's okay, I'm big on delayed gratification!
Ooh goody. I haven't read A Civil Contract in a while. Looking forward to September for that. I will have to dust off my old PB copy. For some unknown reason, that one isn't available on kindle in Australia (even though the other books are.)
Karlyne wrote: "Critterbee❇ wrote: "Karlyne wrote: "Silly question here: are we not going to finish reading the Regencies (and mysteries) in order of publication? I have A Civil Contract waiting...😁"A Civil Cont..."
Me, too, we’ve had some great discussions about this one!
I've never liked it--it makes me sad. For that reason I haven't read it in many years. Maybe I'll like it better this time!
Just spotted this thread. Do you think the Talisman Ring falls into the Georgian/Pre-Regency, as I think it's set in the 1790s, isn't it? Ditto for another fave of mine, Faro's Daughter.At the opposite end of the spectrum, which novel is set the latest, do you think (barring the modern/contemporary detective novels). I think it might be Frederica, as I believe she describes things that are dateable to 1817, but I may be out there?
She doesn't seem to set anything in the first decade of the nineteenth century I think (Spanish Bride possibly, but even that I assume is after Corunna in, I think, 1809?)
I seem to recall Regency Buck is set in about 1811, but no earlier?
One setting she missed out on, and I would love to have seen her address this, was the Congress of Vienna - it was an amazing event, and I have read about incidents which could be straight out of romantic fiction - including, I think, possibly the Tsar of Russia and someone like Metternich having a 'secret meeting' in someone's apartment that was quite 'humble' by the standards of the time.
I think the closest GH gets to the Congress is Kit coming back from it in False Colours??
I believe you’re right about the Congress of Vienna. My sense is that a number of the books are set in 1816–17, but in some stories there’s a character who has come home from the wars, perhaps while the wars still raged but perhaps at the end. I haven’t studied the current events in all the stories to date them all, but surely someone has done this. Anyone know a link to info on the subject?
I think Venetia is the latest -1818.
That is a brilliant link! Thank you -
Isn't it good?! A lot of work went into it I think, 'decoding' the clues in the various novels. So useful.In a way, I've always found the end of the Regency period a rather sad one - things seemed to go off the boil all round. England was beset by woes such as the year without a summer in 1816, and then there was the loss of Princess Charlotte in 1817, plus of course Jane Austen died too, and then the fiasco of Peterloo in 1819 (quite a lot of bicentennial coverage of that here in the UK, so it's probably become better known than many non-history-enthusiasts had realised). Then I think in the 1820s there was a financial crash as well, plus of course the shenanigans over George IV's disastrous coronation, and the rush of the fat, middle aged dissolute royal princes to marry and get a new heir, etc etc.
Plus the fashions were starting to morph from the fabulously graceful Regency styles (mind you, nightmare to wear if you were fat!!!!!!), into the horrid 1820s/1830s styles of fuller but shorter skirts and those dreadful hairstyles (we see them in the Young Victoria film, and they are SO unflattering!).
Don't forget the post-war years were also plagued by horrid weather even after the year without a summer: excessive rain for two summers and then a summer of drought.
Mod
Harry meets Juana at the siege of Badajoz, which was 1812.
I think Faro's Daughter is 1800s; I remember coming to that conclusion after looking for clues, but I can't now remember my reasoning! I think the tax on hair-powder had something to do with it.
[Ah! Just looked at the linked chronology, which has it as 1790s after all; I expect the compiler of that knows best]
There were taxes on hair powder in the 1790s as well, which started the trend toward shorter, natural hair among men.
Abigail - that reaction to the tax on hair powder is one of the few occasions when we can be glad of a tax methinks! All that powdered hair/wigs was just hideous! (Plus all those horrible stories of how you had to have a long stick to scratch your itching scalp through the huge wig/piled up powdered hair, not to mention the tales of mice nesting in it! Yuk yuk yuk!)
QNPoohBear - gosh, didn't realise it went on so long! If harvests were poor as a result, as I assume they were, no wonder there was so much social unrest for that reason, as well as growing industrialisation (at a time when there was absolutely no regulation of the exploitation of workers etc etc)(and anyone trying to form a union was transported!)
Jenny, my rather ancient paperback of Faro's Daughter has Deb in the fuller skirts and bigger hair of the 1790s, more Poldark than Austen - but of course that may not be entirely reliable an indicator. As you say, best to go by that wonderful chronology listing Abigail found - definitely a GH 'bible'! :)
QNPoohBearthe fashions were starting to morph from the fabulously graceful Regency styles (mind you, nightmare to wear if you were fat!!!!!!), into the horrid 1820s/1830s styles of fuller but shorter skirts and those dreadful hairstyles (we see them in the Young Victoria film, and they are SO unflattering!).."
The sleeves on the dresses also got real big and ridiculous-looking on those later dresses. I always thought the wearer of those big-sleeved dresses would blow away in a strong wind!
Gosh, yes, hideous sleeves too! Don't they reappear at the end of the 19th century as the Mutton Chop Sleeves??As a general question, I wonder if there are fashions in history that are 'always' hideous, as opposed to those which merely look hideous because they are 'old fashioned'?? (ie, each generation dislikes the fashion period that preceded their own youth)
I'm a bit like that with the seventies - because I became fashion aware in the seventies (or perhaps 'unaware'!!!!!), I never realised how dreadful they were until afterwards. At the time I thought them wonderful! But I suspect that NO ONE could actually think seventies fashion had any merits at all - it will always be regarded as dire!
But I know from my own experience that our views on a fashion period can change - because the 'New Look' (big gathered skirts) preceded the mini skirts of the sixties and then the dreaded glam-rock of the seventies, I always preferred the more austere 40s look. (Even though it was only caused by rationing of material - my mother in law, who was a teenager in the war, said how fabulous it was after the war to have the New Look, a glorious escape from the dullness of rationing material).
Now, though, I can see the fifties fashions in a much kinder light. And, too, the 'Jackie Kennedy/Doris Day' look of the very early sixties, not New Look but not miniskirts either - very chic in retrospect! (The furniture remains hideous alas!)
Watching how fashion changes during history, I'd love to see a kind of film that shows it morphing from one look to another, the way you can film a seed growing to flowering, etc, all speeded up. Would be fun to see.
Beth-In-UK wrote: "Gosh, yes, hideous sleeves too! Don't they reappear at the end of the 19th century as the Mutton Chop Sleeves??/i>Some MEN wore mutton-chop WHISKERS. Ladies wore leg o'mutton sleeves. I like the leg o'mutton style but not so much the gigot sleeves of the 1820s but some of the 1820s styles are really nice.
LOL glad you see the 1970s styles were hideous. I can't even bear to look at any of them, including my own baby photos. I think any fashion era after the 1910s is ugly anyway. I prefer Regency and Edwardian fashions.
Leg of mutton sleeves, that's it! I knew mutton had something to do with it. And lordy, yes, those dreadful Victorian whiskers! The Newgate beard was dreadful too - just the beard, no moustache. And the huge long beards too (funny they are fashionable again!) (it all comes round again - but not, I hope, the seventies!) (though I did like smocks - so flattering!) (as in, hides the bulges!!!!)Funny how subjective likes and dislikes are of fashions - I'm not a huge fan of crinolines, but apparently when they were introduced they were a joy to wear because petticoats had been getting more and more and fuller and fuller, to give the wide skirts, and were very heavy to wear, so the simple steel frame of the crinoline made for greater comfort. Sitting down must still have been a tricky business, and I think humourous magazines like Punch had a great time mocking them (acting as balloons and carrying women aloft etc).
Maybe what is 'bad fashion' is any extreme - extreme full skirts (or, in the earlier 18c, those extreme wide to the side skirts - Lucy Worsley dressed up in one for TV in one of her many dressing-up programmes!!!!)(informative and fun, I don't mind them, but she's a bit marmite over here).
I've been watching Downton Abbey reruns (broadcast prior to the new film I suspect), and the twenties fashions could be beautiful (sometimes!), but only, of course, on very thin women. I've read that the 'boy-ish fashion' style of the twenties was as a kind of pitiful consolation for the loss of all the husbands those women would never have, slaughtered in the Great War....another reason for the bobbing of the hair as well.
That said, one can see, just before the war itself, and during it, how fashion was 'thinning down' from the fuller fashions of the Edwardian era.
In the end, it probably just boils down to the fact that every new fashion is both a 'mutation' of the prevailing one at the time, and a rebellion against it.
For myself, young in the 70s, I could never believe that trousers would narrow down again, and hemlines would normalise again at kneelength (we were either minis or midis or maxis - never at the knee!)
Georgette Heyer Fans
Books mentioned in this topic
No Wind of Blame (other topics)Footsteps in the Dark (other topics)
They Found Him Dead (other topics)
Behold, Here's Poison (other topics)
A Blunt Instrument (other topics)
More...
https://www.goodreads.com/poll/list/1...
Critterbee & I are interested in what is your preferred GH genre. Most of the categories are self explanatory, but I made it Pre Regency Romance rather than Georgian Romance so I could include Beauvalet. & Contemporary is GH's suppressed "modern" novels like Helen & Barren Corn.
Let the voting begin!