Back to Top

Monthly Archives: December 2008

Well, I did it.

I reread Regency Buck by Georgette Heyer, my first Heyer and first Regency romance ever that I read when I was seventeen. And that was a long, long time ago. I was given a copy as a present by my two aunts who lived in Bath. They lived on Lansdowne Place West, just off Lansdowne Crescent, and probably a couple of houses beyond the left side of this old photo. The field in front of the Crescent is still used for grazing.

My aunts told me they considered it was her best and the only one of them they’d consider reading more than once. Little did they know that I would then devour Heyers to the detriment of my academic pursuits. And I didn’t know then that I’d reap the benefits many years later. But I was afraid to reread Heyer because I suspected I wouldn’t enjoy her so much now and I didn’t want to be disillusioned; or I’d wax sentimental over the passage of time etc. Happily I emerged fairly well entertained and in good (nonphilosophical) spirits.

Anyway, the book: rich heiress and dumb blonde brother (Judith and Perry Taverner) come to town and discover their guardian is a hottie (Lord Worth). Here’s the original 1935 cover (left) and here’s a more modern one that may seem familiar (scroll down). The one I’m reading is a Signet with a truly horrific cover featuring a fair-haired hero with lots of teeth that I haven’t been able to share with you, but I found a couple of others that are very pretty.

So, what did I think? It’s difficult to say. Sometimes it was quite eerie, reading again passages that I’d long forgotten about, rather like seeing a literary ghost. I recognized a scene that seemed to have, uh, influenced Dedication, where a fight is picked at a cockfight, resulting in a duel. I found it at times slow going and despite Heyer’s red herrings and attempts to make the plot a plot, it’s pretty obvious who is the hero and who the baddie (I remember figuring that out the first time I read it). The baddie attempts, in an incompetent sort of way, to kill her brother, intending to force Judith into marriage so he may enjoy her huge tracts o’ land. But never mind that plot business, as I always say.

What I loved were Heyer’s details–clothes, places, objects–they’re quite brilliant, particularly her descriptions of journeys. Here’s the heroine’s first view of London:

As the chaise topped the rise and began the descent upon the southern side, the view spread itself before Miss Taverner’s wondering eyes. There were the spires, the ribbon of the Thames, and the great huddle of buildings of which she had heard so much, lying below her in a haze of sunlight. She could not take her eyes from the sight, nor believe that she was really come at last to the city she had dreamed of for so long.

One thing that didn’t work for me–or worked in a different way–was the characters of hero/heroine. Lord Worth may have got my virginal knickers in a twist decades ago but now, did I find him forbidding, mysterious, demanding? No, I found myself thinking, oh what a sweetie this man is. Even when he’s threatening to do something dastardly like beat the heroine I found myself wanting to coo adoringly at him, poor baby, he’s so out of his depth here.

As for Judith, well.

At first glance one might her down a mere Dresden China miss, but a second glance would inevitably discover the intelligence in her eyes, and the decided air of resolution in the curve of her mouth.

Since she spends most of the book grabbing the wrong end of every stick I really wonder about the intelligence. Why do she and her brother come to London? It’s not stated explicitly–I think it’s a given in Heyer that everyone who is anyone has to be in London for reasons so obvious they don’t need to be stated. Once she’s there she sets herself up as an original, befriending Brummel, driving her own phaeton, and taking snuff. Heyer tells us this is daring etc., but ultimately it seems to send appropriate suitors scurrying for cover, or at least I assumed so since no serious candidates emerge to ask for her hand. Oh, did I tell you that Worth has a hobby? He makes snuff. Isn’t that adorable? Of course it may be the Regency equivalent of watching the History Channel in your underwear while spilling popcorn over the sofa, but it impressed me.

Tell me about books you loved that you’ve reread. How did you react? Were you disappointed? Which Heyer do you think I should try next?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 16 Replies

Bah humbug!

I love cynical characters. Here are some reasons why.

They’re a reminder that we live in an imperfect world where politicians can’t all be trusted, families aren’t always like a greeting card commercial and dreams don’t come true just because we wish them.

They work wonderfully in stories. As the adage says, scratch a cynic and you find a disappointed romantic (or idealist, depending on the version). There’s so much room there for character growth (or renewal, perhaps).

Pairing cynical characters with idealistic ones creates instant tension (think Luke Skywalker and Han Solo). In romances we often see the cynical hero with the idealistic heroine though I love it when that gets reversed, as in Laura Kinsale’s FOR MY LADY’S HEART or Judith Ivory’s SLEEPING BEAUTY.

When don’t I care for cynical characters?

When they remind me of real life cynics I don’t admire. An older relative of mine, who if you tell him you enjoyed a book or a movie or a bottle of wine, will always tell you why it was really crap. People who don’t vote because it’s a waste of time (hopefully there are fewer of those now). People who complain but never take action. Kids who are too cool to sing in the school chorus and make fun of those who do (yeah, this one’s personal).

In romance, it could be the hero or heroine who has checked out of life due to past wounds. Unless those wounds are inflicted on a Kinsalean order, the character comes across as weak and self-pitying. It’s a fine line.

Or how about the hero who says all women are gold-diggers? Until he falls in love with the heroine, of course, at which point he decides she is the one woman in England (or the world) not after his fortune. I can sort of buy this if he’s rather young and still reeling from his first love’s betrayal, but generally I prefer characters with a less simplistic view of life.

I like cynical characters who aren’t totally blind in their cynicism, but recognize that there are many shades of gray in the world and are willing to deal with them. They may act as the voice of caution to their more idealistic friends, but they don’t needlessly rain on their parades.

Just a few of the cynical romance heroes I love: Alverstoke from Heyer’s FREDERICA, Christian from Kinsale’s FLOWERS FROM THE STORM.

Do you enjoy cynical characters? Do you have any favorites? Any who go too far to be sympathetic?

Elena
www.elenagreene.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 13 Replies

As regular Risky Regencies readers know, on the first Tuesday of every month, we discuss a film or TV adaptation of Jane Austen, or some other Regency-interest film.

We have now run through all the commonly-watched Austen adaptations (and a few less-common ones), plus a smattering of non-Austen flicks. So…what next?

I couldn’t fail to notice that as we moved from the more recent Austen adaptations to the older ones (and the non-Austen ones), the discussions lagged. (The fewest comments came in our discussion of Cranford, and the most from the 1995 Pride & Prejudice.) This makes me leery of doing, say, the 1971 Persuasion or the 1972 Emma…

So after trying to figure out what would stimulate discussion — Scarlet Pimpernel movies? Specific Sharpe or Hornblower movies? — I decided to ask you, our faithful readers.

So let’s have it: which of the following would you have seen & have something to say about, assuming you knew a month ahead of time what would be discussed? (Or are there any you’d like to suggest which aren’t on the list?)

1971 BBC Persuasion
1981 BBC Sense & Sensibility
1983 BBC Mansfield Park
1972 BBC Emma
Installments of the recent Horatio Hornblower series (with Ioan Gruffudd)
Installments of the Sharpe series
Scarlet Pimpernel (please specify which one: Leslie Howard, David Niven, Anthony Andrews, or Richard E. Grant)
Beau Brummel (1954)
Princess Caraboo (1994)
A Royal Scandal (1996 — about the Regent’s marriage)

For purposes of clarity, this is the list of what we’ve already discussed:

JANE AUSTEN ADAPTATIONS:

Pride and Prejudice (1940, 1980, 1995, 2005)
Sense & Sensibility (1995, 2008)
Northanger Abbey (1986, 2007)
Emma (1996, 1997)
Mansfield Park (1999, 2007)
Persuasion (1995, 2007)

MASTER AND COMMANDER
MISS AUSTEN REGRETS
THE DUCHESS
CLUELESS
CRANFORD
BRIDE AND PREJUDICE

Looking forward to hearing your opinions!

Cara
Cara King, whose geek interests range from Regency to SF to movies…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 20 Replies