the Wayback on Wednesday: Chatting about Heyer
Chatting About Heyer– a column from May 1, 2000
Something wonderful happens when you mention Georgette Heyer to writers and readers. They start to smile (you can feel it in e-mails). They can’t wait to tell you how they first discovered her books, where they were, which ones they read first. This is an author that changes people’s lives because she is responsible for inspiring so many of the best romance writers writing today.
How do I know this? I’ve spent the last few weeks reading Georgette Heyer, reading about her, in Jane Hodge’s wonderful biography The Private World of Georgette Heyer, and in discussions with readers and romance writers. Readers love her, have loved her, for decades but for romance writers Georgette Heyer takes on a more fundamental role. Laurie and I asked a number of writers how Georgette Heyer influenced them. Judith McNaught, for instance, sent me this fascinating story which I am passing on to you in its entirety:
“Georgette Heyer? Did Georgette Heyer have any effect on me as a writer? I think you could say she did. In fact, the simple mention of her name invariably makes me pause to marvel at Fate’s bizarre sense of humor…”In late 1976 – 2 years before I ever imagined writing a book – I had a lunch date with an executive who worked for the same corporation I did. I arrived at the restaurant late, and as the waiter led me toward her table, I noticed she was laughing softly at a paperback she was reading – a book which she promptly slid into her Gucci purse as soon as I sat down. We’d both been working long hours on a company project, and we were both exhausted, so I was naturally curious about the identity of a small book that could make this brilliant, sophisticated, dedicated businesswoman feel refreshed enough to laugh. As soon as I sat down, I asked what she’d been reading. Instead of answering, she reached into her purse, removed the book, and then handed it to me across the table.
“The book was Faro’s Daughter by Georgette Heyer.
“Since I’d never even been in the romance section of any bookstore, I had to turn the paperback over and read the back cover in order to conclude that it was some sort of ‘silly little historical novel’ set in England, with a seemingly ‘infantile’ plot-line that involved a romance between the impoverished young female relative of a gambler and an English nobleman. When I handed the book back to her, I’m sure I looked as incredulous and amused as I felt, but this was not the sort of woman to be concerned with, or feel diminished by, anyone else’s opinion of anything she did. (In retrospect, my life has been enriched and blessed by chance associations with women just like her.) Anyway, instead of making excuses for her reading tastes, or denigrating the book she was reading (as some of us have felt compelled to do when we’re caught reading romantic novels), this woman looked at me across the table with a knowing smile. ‘Have you ever read Georgette Heyer?’ she inquired politely.
” ‘No,’ I said, and I suddenly felt a little ashamed and uneasy for belittling a book and author I hadn’t even read. (That same justifiable sense of shame, you will note, does not afflict many of the ‘journalists’ who interview romance novelists and comment on their books.) ‘My favorite Heyer novel is The Grand Sophy,’ my luncheon companion announced. ‘I will loan it to you, and you can tell me what you think.’
“The following day, she walked into my office and handed me a tattered copy of a book I had absolutely no desire to read, ever. By way of an explanation about the book’s bad condition, she said, ‘I re-read this one whenever I need a “lift”.’ She stopped in my doorway and added, ‘Please don’t lose it. Heyer’s novels have gone out of print and they’re very hard to find.’
“I slid it into my desk drawer and left it there. That way it wouldn’t get lost. And maybe I wouldn’t have to read it. A week later, she phoned to asked how I’d liked the book. I made an excuse. The week after, she phoned again. I made another excuse, but because I liked and admired her, I realized I was going to have to read the thing, so I could at least express an opinion. I took it home that night and opened it during The Tonight Show. Feeling like a martyr to my own sense of fairness, I opened it and sighed so loudly that my husband jokingly remarked that the book couldn’t possibly be any duller than the annual reports I’d been bringing home from the office.
“I finished The Grand Sophy that same night. I could have finished it in two hours, but it took me three hours because I laughed so hard I cried, and then I had to get Kleenex, and then I naturally had to re-read the part that had made me laugh – to see if it could make me do it again.
“The following day, I borrowed Faro’s Daughter, and then all the others from my friend.
“Two years later, in 1978, I went to work on my first manuscript that would later become Whitney, My Love. Heyer’s incomparable novels had taught me that humor made historical novels sparkle, and so I used humor in every appropriate available place in my own historical novels.
“In 1990, twelve years later, I received a call from a woman who identified herself as an editor with a publisher (not my own publisher) and who said she had an unusual request. She said she had recently acquired the rights to publish a body of work by a deceased author whose books had been out of print for many years. The editor said they were marvelous books, unknown to a whole generation of readers, but she needed a writer of my ‘caliber and popularity’ to help launch them so that they wouldn’t disappear, unnoticed on bookshelves crowded with other short regency historicals. To accomplish that goal, the editor wanted to use a small picture of me on the front covers of the re-published novels, along with my name and a short quote to advise my ‘legions of readers’ that these were really good books that they’d enjoy.
“I asked who the author was.
” ‘Georgette Heyer.’ the editor replied. ‘By any chance are you familiar with any of her work?’
“A year later, a box was delivered to my house. In it was a full set of the works of Georgette Heyer, with their new, updated covers. On the front cover, in the upper right hand corner of each book, there was a picture of me with my quote beneath it, promising my readers that they would also enjoy Ms. Heyer’s books. For several years, I kept those re-issued books by Georgette Heyer in my office, face-out where I could see them-brilliant books by an incomparable author I was never foolish enough to even try to emulate. Her books. My picture and quote.
“As I said earlier, I think Fate has a bizarre sense of humor.”
Wow. Now that’s what I call an influence.
When I started reading romance a year and half ago I started with Regency Romances. Why? Well probably because I was under the mistaken impression that regencies were based on Jane Austen. It didn’t take me long however to discover that Jane Austen’s world of country gentility and the traditional Regency Romance world of debutantes, the London “Season,” rakes and rogues are very different. Also the language was different. Characters in Regency Romances kept using odd expressions. A heroine wondered it she would “make a cake” of herself. A hero warned a heroine that they would be in “scandalbroth” if they did not marry. And there was so much more respect for titles, station and rules. Austen’s hilarious Mr. Collins and his beloved “Lady Catherine deBurugh” had no place with these people who sometimes showed signs of being “natural aristocrats.” Where did this stuff come from?
The short answer is that an awful lot of it, arguably most of it, comes from the prolific pen of Georgette Heyer. As Mary Jo Putney writes in her introduction to the recently reissued The Nonesuch, “Very few authors create a whole new genre, but Georgette Heyer did and discovering the modern regencies inspired by her books was the first step on my path to authordom.” Laurie asked Mary Jo about Heyer’s influence on her life and here is what she wrote:
“I always enjoyed stories with romantic threads, even if they were mystery or science fiction or fantasy. I also read more than my share of both historical and contemporary Gothics. Remember all those paperbacks where a girl in a Victorian gown with about three yards of blowing-in-the-wind hair stood in front of a threatening mansion? Probably on a cliff.”Georgette Heyer was probably the first ‘romance’ author I read, though perhaps it’s unfair to call her that since she invented a genre instead of following it. I discovered her in college and loved the wit, the humor, the subtle characterizations, and the sheer Englishness of her books. She had a gimlet eye for social pretensions and class, yet there was always great compassion for her characters. Some of the plot devices she came up with are still being recycled, and they still work.
“I read all her books many times, and that very British voice shaped my own Regency voice. (Looking at the first part of my first Regency, The Diabolical Baron, I can see Heyer in every sentence, though I never consciously copied her.) It would be impossible to over-emphasize her influence on my haphazard path to authordom.
“Her books reward rereading even now because of the sheer quality of her writing – I’ll still pull out one of my favorites when I’m in need of a comfort read. There is nothing like gathering several Regency authors together and getting us to talking about our favorite Heyers! (Traditional Regency isn’t a genre, it’s a cult.)”
Okay, you’re saying that’s nice and everything but I don’t really care for traditional Regency Romances. So what has this to do with my romance favorites?
Maybe quite a bit. Its amazing the writers who cite Georgette Heyer as an influence. Since I learned of Heyer, but before I read her, I have thought of her as a rather staid influence – a talented author who specialized in civilized comedies of manners. An influence, yes, but one who was important for regency writers and writers of regency historicals. Imagine my surprise to see the introduction to the newly reissued Frederica by none other than Nora Roberts.
An even bigger surprise came when Laurie pointed out to me that Catherine Coulter had cited Heyer as an influence in an interview they’d done in 1996. I knew that Catherine Coulter had begun her writing career as a writer of Regency Romances, but somehow I couldn’t quite reconcile my idea of her, as the author of books like The Cove, with my view of Heyer. I knew that Catherine Coulter had rewritten a number of her early books and I wondered if part of the reason was to take out any of the “Heyerisms.” Never one to shy away from a question, I wrote and asked her. Here is Catherine’s reply:
“Georgette Heyer: I was raised on her. I own every book she ever wrote, some of them that have been repackaged/reprinted, at least two copies. When I said she influenced me, that doesn’t mean that I write like her. To be honest, I couldn’t write like her even if I dedicated my life to it. Just like no one can write like Dick Francis. She’s unique. I hope I’m unique as well. No, she made me love the period. My master’s degree is in early 19th century history, so probably because my love of Heyer and the Regency period, I simply kept reading/studying/degreeing. I rewrote my own six early Regency Romances because I wanted to make them bigger and more fun. I wanted to ‘evolve’ them. I turned them from Regencies to historical romances, and of course, that meant removing all “stylization” (all the Regency cant, all the convoluted ways of saying things, etc).”
Shame on me. Catherine Coulter is of course, absolutely correct. When a writer is inspired you never know where the inspiration will take her.
I couldn’t help wondering who Georgette Heyer was, how she came to write and what her audience had been when she had originally written her books. I was lucky enough to find many of the answers to this question in The Private World of Georgette Heyer by Jane Hodge. This book is virtually the only secondary source available for biographical information on Georgette Heyer. All of the biographical information included in this column comes from this wonderful, and insightful biography which I highly recommend.
According to Hodge, Georgette Heyer was born in 1902 to an upper class family. She appears to have been strongly influenced by her father and like many women of the day, got the bulk of her education at home. Her father being a college instructor, that education was excellent and, when she was seventeen, as a way to entertain her brother, who was ill, she began to tell a story which became her first historical novel, The Black Moth.
Hodge makes it pretty clear that The Black Moth is not the best of Heyer, but as the first effort of a nineteen year old girl it must have been quite remarkable. What is even more remarkable is the speed at which Heyer’s career took off. Hodge tells us that between 1921 and 1975, Heyer wrote fifty-seven books.
Heyer wrote contemporary (for her time) novels, historical novels, historical romances, and mysteries. Heyer’s mysteries had respectable sales but never touched the popularity of her historicals. What was interesting to me about these historicals is that even though Heyer name is synonymous with the regency period, you can easily her identify her influence in today’s crop of Georgian historicals and historicals that take place in other swashbuckling periods.
During the 1920’s and following the publication of her first book, Georgette Heyer wrote three contemporary novels including: Instead of the Thorn (1923), Helen (1928), and Pastel (1929). But what really excites romance authors was the emergence of Heyer’s historicals. Heyer loved swashbuckling romance. In 1923 she published Powder and Patch which was originally published as The Transformation of Phillip Jettan. In this novel a handsome young man Phillip transforms himself into a Paris “exquisite” to impress his lady love who only cares for men who are “fashionable.” In Jo Beverley’s Desert Isle Keeper review for AAR, she described her fascination for the novel as follows: “I instantly fell in love with the whole idea of these men who spent so much time on their silk and lace, and who then minced off in high-heeled shoes to challenge someone to a duel to the death.”
Georgette Heyer wrote a number of historicals in the twenties including The Great Roxhthyne (1923) and Simon the Coldheart (1925), but her real breakthough book came in 1926 with These Old Shades. This novel was something of a breakthough, and Hodge describes it as “an instant success that established Heyer with the public and with her publisher.” Indeed, it sold 190,000 copies at the first printing. There was virtually no publicity done on the book and Hodge speculates that Heyer may have decided at that point that her previous decision to avoid interviews, booksignings and all other types of publicity was the right one.
Many readers and romance authors alike remember These Old Shades fondly to this day. In the book, Heyer brings back the Duke of Avon from The Black Moth. Hodge describes the book as follows: “An old saturnine hero with a past, he rescues a rid-haired girl in boys clothes from the Paris gutter, sets her up as his page, finally proves her aristocratic birth, and marries her.” Hodge goes on to point out that the heroine’s aristocratic birth is no accident. Heyer had strong feelings in favor of the class system and they figure largely into her books. Of course the incidence of the “stolen aristocratic baby” did not begin with Heyer, but it’s interesting to see how she continued the tradition. This tradition has even continued among American authors, whom, one would expect to question it.
In These Old Shades, Heyer uses one of her favorite situations – the heroine dressed as a boy. This is a device that is still loved by romance authors and readers, so much so that AAR has devoted a Special Title Listing to romances featuring Cross-Dressing & In-Disguise. The author Leigh Greenwood, who wrote a DIK Review of the book, Leigh credits it with beginning his career as a romance novelist. Speaking of how his wife had goaded him into reading the book, he wrote:
“The book was Georgette Heyer’s These Old Shades. I loved it. I immediately started searching until I found every book Georgette Heyer had ever written, including the mysteries. After I’d read everything about three or four times, I started reading other writers. Later, I began writing. I’m starting on my 24th book, and I owe it all to Mrs. Heyer.”
These Old Shades came up at an interesting time as I was asking romance authors about how and when they had read Heyer. It was no surprise to me to discover that Mary Jo Putney, Jo Beverley and Carla Kelly had read Georgette Heyer. I was, however, very surprised to get this note from Robin Schone, author of the very unHeyerlike, The Lover:
“I read These Old Shades when I was twelve years old. It was my very first romance novel, and I will never forget it. There’s a poem in the beginning that to this day I remember: ‘Whereas with these old shades of mine, their ways and dress delight me / but should I trip by word or line, they cannot well indict me.’In the story, a girl masquerades as a boy and becomes the page of a duke. The sharp contrast of grim poverty that the girl came from and the glittering wealth that the duke possessed was incredible. Georgette Heyer brought the early nineteenth century alive in a way that no text book did, and from that day onward I have had an insatiable curiosity about personal historical details – not the broad overview that we’re taught in school – but the little things that shaped the lives of those who lived in times past, whether they be rich or poor – vernacular, fashion, hygiene, diet, modes of travel . . . Not a bad lesson for a twelve year old to learn. Of course, Ms. Heyer also gave me a love of elegant, jaded, aristocratic rakes and blue sapphire jewelry. And a lasting belief in happy endings.”
In 1929 Heyer published Beauvallet, another historical romance that is beloved by many people. AAR Editor Nora Armstrong counts Beauvallet as one of her favorite books. It is a rousing pirate story. As Nora tells it, “Dona Dominica de Rada y Silva, returning with her father from the Spanish West Indies in 1586, has the misfortune to be sailing on a ship that’s waylaid by the infamous English pirate, Nicholas Beauvallet” Sigh.
During the 1930’s Georgette Heyer began writing mysteries. These were the days when Agatha Christie was in top form and people were reading them avidly. But Heyer’s mysteries, which were published one a year at the same rate as her historicals, never came close to the sales and popularity of her historicals.
In 1932, Heyer published Devil’s Cub. This was another break-through book and Hodge says that it is the first of Heyer’s books where the comedy of manners was almost as important as the story. In this book, the Duke of Avon’s son, Dominic Vidal, abducts the heroine after mistaking her for her sister. Of course she is compromised but refuses to marry him for quite a large number of pages before eventually marrying him in the end.
Hodge describes this period of Heyer’s life as one in which she completely immersed herself in research on the Regency period. She amassed a large library and kept files on Regency slang. Much of the Regency jargon that we read today – slow-top, hubble-bubble, pishery pashery -comes from this extensive research.
Then in 1935 Heyer published Regency Buck and her career as a Regency writer, the founder of the Regency sub-genre truly began.
In the 1930’s Heyer also wrote some straight historicals which are remembered today. The Infamous Army is remembered as a book in which the battle scene descriptions were so well researched that it was used as a basis for some college lectures. Many readers also remember The Spanish Bride, a historical novel based in fact.
But when I asked writers to talk about the later Heyer regencies that intrigued them it was mostly the books of the forties, fifties and sixties that came to mind. Carla Kelly, a romance writer who has read almost no romance with the exception of Heyer, wrote me this about Arabella:
“How do I love Arabella? Let me count the ways. She’s just sweet enough, and has a social conscience (re: the chimney sweep – if I don’t have the right book, I’m embarrassing myself). And she gets deeper and deeper in trouble with a harmless lie told to an arrogant man, who deserved it. What all this means is that Heyer was so adept with plot, and how character moves that plot in the right direction. Reading Georgette Heyer is a good lesson for all Regency writers. She could pace a story like nobody else.”I think Arabella and Sprig Muslin are my favorites, following closely by Frederica. Is there a better animal in all of light fiction than Lufra, the Baluchistan hound? I laugh just thinking about him.
“Here’s a personal aside about Heyer. My older sister read her, too, during one perfectly awful winter when her youngest child was born quite premature at 2.3 pounds, and dipped down to 1.9 before surgery. Jyoti was 100 miles away in the hospital in Spokane, and Karen said she (Karen) just died regularly every time the phone rang. The only thing that kept Karen going was Heyer novels. I get choked up every time I think about Karen and Jyoti and Georgette Heyer. The story does have a happy ending. Jyoti graduates from high school next month with honors and will be attending the U of Florida with a music/math double major.
“Yeah, I like Georgette Heyer. She does great things for me as a writer, and helped my sis through a rough patch.”
Heyer next published The Grand Sophy, a Cinderella type story. Jean Ross Ewing, author of a number of Regencies and regency-set historicals, was delighted to tell me her memories of it:
“The Grand Sophy was the first romance I ever read – I received it as a Xmas present when I was a teenager and was instantly hooked. Many, many years before I began writing myself! I think I was influenced for life by Heyer’s humor and the way she created a totally believable Regency world.”In TGS, Heyer gives us a classic romance mix, the independent-minded, strong heroine and the cool, elegant hero who’s beset with problems. I love this contrast. You can see something similar in my last Regency, Love’s Reward, where the heroine is very unusual for her time, but still constrained by the rules of her Regency world, and the hero is very cool, but carrying a dreadful inner torment. OTOH, Heyer’s hero’s problems in TGS are mostly domestic ones, whereas my hero’s problems are rooted in his more wide-spread experiences in the world. In LR, the hero was seen to have allowed his first wife to be killed in Spain to save his own life – not something Heyer would have used.”
Reader April Dancer also loved The Grand Sophy, remarking:
“I remember The Grand Sophy with such fondness. I haven’t read Heyer since the early 1970s when I was a high school student, but every time I pick up a Regency I can’t help but to think of her. There is the ubiquitous references to Almack’s, the strict manners, the fashions and hair. It all started with Heyer I think, because there’s little of it in the literature of the Regency period itself. I think the characteristics of today’s romances that are attributable to Heyer include The Rake, The Fop and the ubiquitous dukes. And also the heroines who are TSTL, blue stockings, and modern women who seem to be the fish out of water in the Regency.”
In the late 1950s, Heyer published Sylvester, or the Wicked Uncle. Stanislava Ivanova, a frequent AAR visitor, loved this book and was kind enough to provide me with this description:
“Sylvester is the quintessential catch – rich, handsome, titled, cynical. In order to marry he has compiled a list of the most eligible debutantes. Miss Marlowe is nowhere near his requirements – too plain, timid, not rich enough, but daughter to his mother’s deceased friend he promised to visit. A twist: she secretly wrote a Gothic novel, where, because he once snubbed her at Almack’s he features as the villain. A lot of misunderstandings, plot twists, etc. throw them together and they gradually discover they are attracted. The climax comes when, because he has compromised her in the eyes of society, he has to offer marriage and she refuses – a real eye opener for him. A very rich and satisfying story – he gets his comeuppance and they find love.”
Next came Venetia, a book which Hodge tells us had one of the most liberated of Regency heroines and apparently a realist about men. Hodge quotes her as saying that she does not wish the hero to promise faithfulness as that is not realistic. One wonders what would happen to a romance author who dared such a statement today?
The Unknown Ajax was published in 1959. For Sheri Cobb South, author of The Weaver Takes a Wife and Miss Darby’s Duenna, this Heyer release is the one that made the difference for her. She wrote, “I think Georgette Heyer is probably the greatest single influence on my writing. I collect her books (including the hard-to-find contemporary novels she wrote in the 1920s), but if my house caught on fire and I only had time to save one, I’d grab The Unknown Ajax on my way out. The humor is unsurpassed, and Hugo Darracott is such a wonderful hero!”
A Civil Contract was published in 1961. Stanislava Ivanova once again provides the description:
“Young nobleman returns from the Peninsular Wars to find his father dead, estate on the verge of bankruptcy. The only way out is to marry for money a rich merchant’s daughter and forget the lovely, vivacious but not very rich society girl. The story goes from there. His wife – secretly in love with him – is plump, has no sense of style or polish, but manages to create a wonderful and warm home for him and his younger siblings. Although for most (2/3s of the story) he is in love with another, he gradually comes to understand that she would have made his life hell with her dramatics and by the end, with the birth of his son he begins to appreciate and value and love, his wife. Maybe not so romantic, but immensely warm and satisfying. Very realistic too, no sudden changes of heart but gradual and very subtle shifts of emotion.”
The next book is The Nonesuch. I have to admit that this book will always hold a special place for me because it is my first Georgette Heyer book. One of the things that impressed me about it was the variety of characters in the book. As in Jane Austen, Heyer describes an entire community of people. EP, another long-time AAR visitor, wrote of The Nonesuch:
“. . . regarding the book having a ‘larger,’ less ‘claustrophobic’ quality to it, taking time to get to know a whole neighborhood of characters, and time with the hero and heroine so that we really understand their romance, how and why the characters fall in love. This is pretty much what I mean about the better romances of the past that I have liked so much.”When I talk about a book being character-driven, this is the kind of book I mean, a book that presents and develops characters so that you understand what makes them tick, see how and why they fall in love, and really believe that they are in love (and not just lust). I often see the term ‘character-driven’ applied merely to a book where characters’ thoughts are emphasized over plot. I don’t particularly like this any more than readers who like a lot more ‘plot’ do.”
Upon finishing The Nonesuch, I immediately wrote a DIK Review of it. What amazed me was that so many people then wrote to me to congratulate me for having found Heyer. I felt like I’d just been given the secret handshake for a special club about which I previously knew nothing but had been lucky enough to gain entry! EP’s musings on the book articulated many of my own first thoughts.
I could go on and on about individual books such as Frederica and Cousin Kate, but I’d rather mention a few more things about Heyer herself.
Jo Beverley, who wrote the introduction to the recently reissued A Convenient Marriage, had an interest point to ponder and one that I think will make for interesting discussion. She wrote:
“I haven’t studied Heyer’s writing contemporaries, but I think perhaps she developed the modern style of opposites attract. Even Jane Austen does not use contrasting characters in the way Heyer does.”I was playing with some titles that came first to mind – my favorites.
- The maiden and the rake – Venetia, Devils Cub, These Old Shades
- The innocent and the jaded sophisticate – Arabella, Sylvester, Corinthian, April Lady
- The lively lady and the stuffed shirt – The Grand Sophy
- The lady of quality and the outsider – Black Sheep, Lady of Quality
- Guardian/Ward – Regency Buck
- Sensible woman and the grand catch – Frederica, Sprig Muslin, Reluctant Widow
“This is, in effect, the ‘arsonist and the firefighter’ which Nora Roberts advocates. We see it clearly in her JD Robb books where we have the cop and the criminal, the billionaire and the woman who has no time for frills, etc.
“In Heyer’s world – mostly the regency – a structured society is a crucial component because something has to bring about a meeting of these unlikely people. Or, if they are not so unlikely, try to split them up.
“It seems to me that the attraction of opposites is different to the other style of mid-twentieth-century romances where the conflict to the love relationship was often based on misunderstandings or the other woman – the red-fingernailed lady. The latter seems to have lingered longer in contemporaries, whereas the former has had more to do with historicals. This could be because most contemporary situations lack a social structure that will bring the opposites together in a believable manner.”
While I would not compare Heyer with Austen, I do think Jo’s comments are intriguing. How about you? Please be sure to share your thoughts when it’s time to post to the message board. and had fun with the story.”
On What They All Said (by Laurie Likes Books):
I hope you all have enjoyed Robin’s in-depth look at the works and influence of Georgette Heyer. The genesis of this column began in March, when we looked at the influence of the “bodice-rippers” of the 1970’s and early 1980’s.
Based on posts made to the ATBF message board, Robin and I began to talk about the idea of a romance time-line – how far back could it go, and what would be included on it? Further discussion revealed perhaps less of a time-line than a romance family tree with several branches. One branch was indeed those bodice-rippers while yet another was the Gothic. During message board discussions on the Gothic, we began to be intrigued by another couple of branches – one for Georgette Heyer, and another for authors of historical novels, such as Anya Seton, Elswyth Thane, and Susan Howatch. When Mary Jo Putney and I talked, she suggested adding branches for Dorothy Dunnett and Mary Stewart.
As I began to go through my roledex of author contacts, I remembered which authors had mentioned Heyer (or the Regency Romance), Seton, or other historical authors. Janet Evanovich, for instance, indicated a couple of years ago that, “the hero/heroine formula of Joe and Stephanie is straight out of a regency.” Though she’s never read Heyer, she recently told me she was influenced both by Mary Jo Putney and Amanda Quick.
One author directly influenced by Heyer is Merline Lovelace, whom I first interviewed in 1996. As she remarked during that interview, “After discovering Georgette Heyer in college, I spent the next summer driving to the libraries all over New England to hunt down her books. Years later, my husband walked 20 blocks with me through the pouring rain in London to a bookstore, so I could track down the only book of hers I didn’t own.”
Merline added to her comments on Heyer just last week, and mentioned Seton as well:
“Oooooh, you’ve just hit on two of my all-time favorite authors. I love the work of both authors, Heyer for her wonderful characterization and humor, Seton for her ability to drop you right in the middle of sweeping historical events and carry you along with them.”I consciously try to emulate Heyer’s subtlty and shading when it comes to crafting my characters. An example is Isabella Chessington – the heroine in Mismatched Hearts, part of an upcoming Harlequin Historicals Regency Romance anthology with Mary Jo Putney and Gayle Wilson.
“Belle comes from a background similar to that of my favorite Georgette Heyer heroine, Sophie, in The Grand Sophy. Both traveled extensively with eccentric fathers, although Belle’s travels took her to rather more exotic lands. Both return to Regency England to find love. Belle’s unconventional upbringing has given her a breezy self-confidence and shrewd grasp of the realities of life, yet underneath her sophisticated exterior lurks a heart every bit as vulnerable as any sheltered young miss’s to that elusive emotion called love.
Mismatched Hearts is my first actual Regency Romance, and I’ll admit I was nervous about writing a Regency. With so many devoted Heyer fans out there (myself included!), it’s important to get the details right. I did a tons and tons of research, then just dove in and had fun with the story.”
Robin and I hope that those of you who do not read Regency Romance and/or have not read Georgette Heyer were not put off by this column. Because the Heyer branch of the romance family tree has been such a significant influence, both directly and indirectly, on authors of historical and contemporary romance, we wanted to share with you the excitement that mention of her name elicits in both readers and authors such as McNaught, Putney, Coulter, Roberts, and Evanovich.
In the coming months, we will continue to work on the romance family tree and hope that many of you will want to work on it with us. Feel free to use our ATBF message board, to join the Old Romance Novels discussion list Robin has been moderating in recent weeks, and/or to email either Robin or myself.
We leave you today with words from innovative Regency Romance author Karen Harbaugh, an author we believe is definitely a buried treasure:
“The first romance novel that I remember reading was by Georgette Heyer. I was about fifteen or so, an avid reader, deeply into science fiction and fantasy novels, and generally known as an ‘egghead’ because of all the books I carried with me. My friends told me Id never get a boyfriend with all those books I carried. I said I didnt care.”In other words, I was brainy and extremely shy. However, that didnt mean I didnt surreptitiously glance at boys from the corner of my eyes while pretending to read. My friend, Patricia, who read romances by the ton (and was writing one herself), and no doubt thinking it was the way to introduce me to the concept of boys, gave me a book by Georgette Heyer – Venetia, I believe.
“I was totally entranced. I began scarfing up every book by Georgette Heyer as if they were cordial-filled chocolates. I bugged my parents to take me to libraries for miles around just in case there was a copy I had overlooked. I read her books over and over again. Then I searched for more books set during the Regency. When I couldnt find those, I began to research the Regency period with all the passionate obsession of a teen. I read Regency period history, I drew Regency period costumes, I fantasized Regency, and thanked God on my knees that I lived in the 1970s and that long skirted Empire waist dresses were in, and I could pretend all day that I was a Regency miss. My parents never suspected my obsession – they thought I was doing a history report. I didnt enlighten them.
My friend Patricia didnt know what she started. I think she gave up on her matchmaking efforts when I took my book on the Duke of Wellington to school dances, content to lean against the wall and read. Callow teenaged boys could not compete with Wellington. Besides, none of them could fill out a pair of breeches and tailcoats the way a real Regency hero might.
“And yet, as my teen years progressed, I learned how to haughtily stare down those who teased me until they were silenced. I learned how to laugh at myself. And when at last I had my heart broken, I picked up a Georgette Heyer Regency Romance and remembered that there were, indeed, men out there who where as good and honorable as my brothers and my father.
“In the history of the Romance genre, Georgette Heyer looms large as one of the Founding Mothers. While we can point to various influences on such subgenres as the Gothic and the sexy historical romance, Heyer is the starting point of the Regency Romance subgenre. While there are Regency authors who are heavily influenced by Jane Austen, and no doubt Heyer was as well, I think we can say that there was no Regency subgenre as such until Heyer wrote her books.
“Theres something about Georgette Heyers books that produced similar obsessiveness in her readers to the point that it gave rise to a whole subgenre called the Regency Romance whose influence spread beyond the romance genre. Theres the Friends of the English Regency, and even Science Fiction and Fantasy conventions have Regency cotillions.
“Filled with memorable characters, humor, and fast-paced and adventurous plotting, Heyers books have been read and loved the world over. Her attention to historical detail has built a Regency world in which many Regency authors since then have happily played and relied on. Heyers Regency is so real to many of her readers, and readers are so focused on the details of this world, that Regency authors have had to contend with an interesting dilemma: Do we stick to the world she created, even if it means including historically inaccurate sentiments and facts, or do we go for the accuracy and risk readers contention that what weve written is not accurate – that is, accurate according to Heyers Regency? (And yes, she has been inaccurate – sometimes on purpose.)
“That is the power of Heyers writing, her stories, and her world-building. Her stories are so memorable, inviting, and compelling that you believe. You believe in what shes created to the point that you feel in your heart it has to be real. And when youre done living in that world for that space of time it takes to read one of her books, you want it to go on.
“Readership for Regency Romances – and I mean Regency Romances, not the longer Regency-set historicals – has fallen off over the years, despite a strong and persistent core of fans. Aside from problems with distribution, the reasons for the falling off are myriad. Sometimes I wonder if its because no Regency Romance can be anything but a pale copy of Heyers. Ive long abandoned the idea of trying to imitate what she has accomplished, and have settled for a solid Regency tone and being grateful for having the chance to play in Heyers world. No daughter can be a complete duplicate of her mother, or should be, and as a Regency ‘daughter,’ I love and respect Heyer as the Mother of the Regency Romance, and know that I will naturally write differently. However, whatever else I might write, my work will always have her touch in some way. How can I not?
These days, I still re-read my Heyers. One day, my teenaged son came to me, upset that he was being teased by a bully. I looked at him and said in my most aristocratic way, ‘That bully is a coward. You are a Harbaugh and come from a long line of Harbaughs: he is beneath your notice. He is as dust beneath your feet. Pay no attention to him.’
“Interestingly, it worked. The bully stopped bothering my son once my son took this attitude. If you can navigate through the dangerous shoals of Almacks, you can navigate through adolescence. Trust me on this.”
We don’t plan to revisit our romance family tree for another couple of months because we know these columns are not of interest to all our readers. We’ll return to our usual format and content on May 15th.
Time to Post to the Message Board:
Here are some specific questions to think and post about:
Have you read any of Georgette Heyer’s books? What about some Regency Romance? What influence do you see in Heyer and/or Regency Romance in general with the historical and/or contemporary romances you read today? Which books are your favorites by Georgette Heyer?
Which of the authors who spoke with us for this column have you read, do you read, and/or would you like to read based on their comments? If you’ve read any of them for a long period of time, what are some of the differences in their writing now as compared to earlier writings? Of those authors who used to write Regency Romances, which do you prefer – their Regencies, historicals, or their contemporaries (or contemporary romantic suspense)?
Many readers are put off by Regency Romances. If you are not among this group, what titles would you include in a Regency Conversion Kit?
Have you enjoyed our look back into the history of the modern romance nove? Do you find that this romance family tree we are trying to create is useful? When we come back to this topic in the future for a look at the influence of historical novelists, whom would you like us to discuss?
–Robin Nixon Uncapher
I’m slowly reading through all of Heyer’s historical romance and mysteries. I love how witty and sharp they are, and her characterisation is great. It’s pretty interesting to see the origin of some of the tropes we find everywhere today. She definitely did some of those very well, I can see how they inspired generations of readers.
I do notice her anti-semitism though, but that isn’t all. If we are mentioning that, why not also mention her misogyny, classism and xenophobia? Those are definitely present, and much more frequently, in her works too. They do bother me and I think it’s a shame they’re there, but I’m also aware that it was a very different time. It seems to me male authors get away with these revolting opinions much more easily than female authors do. Maybe because they acquire that aura of being “classics” and their sins are then forgiven.
Anyway, I think it’s perfectly possible to enjoy entertainment whilst being aware of its faults. In fact I think it’s good to examine all the entertainment we consume and to be aware of the subtext and messages we receive from it.
Excellent perspective!
I am struck with how both sides of an issue often are convinced that they are right and virtuous, and that the other person is wrong and self-righteous or prejudiced. I am particularly sensitive to any detail about animals that might not be too much for another person. If the book is really good, I might continue to read. I don’t assume that someone else who continues reading doesn’t care about animal abuse and I hope that he/she doesn’t see me as absurd or stupid. We have to stop assuming (as I think we do) that those who won’t read Heyer because her of anti-Semitism are self-righteous jerks and those who continue to read are defensive anti-semites. Until proven otherwise, let’s assume the best about each other, shall we?
I prefer to listen to Heyer and usually give her a C rating because the romance is not intense enough (I’m not talking about sex here). Listening to her books accents the humor, and I rated “Venetia” an A. On the same note, I also can’t read Agatha Christie who has been so imitated, even by writers who have never read her, that she creaks, IMO.
Before “The Flame and the Flower,” there were no “modern romances.” I read Frank Yerby, a popular writer that I later found out was black, who wrote swashbuckling romances between white (naturally, for his time; he wouldn’t have been a best seller, otherwise) characters. Great fun, but now, he’s disappeared. I read most of Barbara Cartland because I wanted to read romances, and hers were of course, ridiculous, but great fun, and most importantly, available.
I respect Heyer because she was a modern founder of the romance genre, one that, even today, is held in contempt by too many people. I respect her, not because I particularly like her, but because so many people love her. They see qualities in her that I don’t. We are both right. She’s not usually my cuppa tea, but she is for millions of other people.
“Until proven otherwise, let’s assume the best about each other, shall we?”
That’s lovely Lynda, and how I wish we all would! As we all know, even Shakespeare presented some ugly anti-Semitic work amidst his genius and we haven’t jettisoned him yet. People still listen to Wagner and no one has destroyed all the prints of Braveheart or the old Lethal Weapon movies because Mel Gibson became a crackpot (for multiple reasons).
Even very modern shows like Friends have been re-examined lately for attitudes that don’t hold up for current audiences but it doesn’t stop it from being an insanely popular streaming show. I think we have to assume people are sophisticated enough to separate the wheat from the chaff and know that while not everything about a person or work is laudable, we can enjoy the good and leave the rest.
I’ve been meaning to read Frank Yerby- hadn’t heard of him until I caught an old black and white adaptation of The Foxes of Harrow. It’s odd he’s been shoved under the rug, considering he was the first black person to sell more than a million copies of a book. Now, those books aren’t easy to find. Odd, isn’t it?
“who wrote swashbuckling romances between white (naturally, for his time; he wouldn’t have been a best seller, otherwise) characters.” I wonder if he wrote about white characters due to an interest in European history and settings as well. He ended up moving to France and later Spain when he got sick of discrimination in the states and lived in Spain the rest of his life.
I had never heard of Heyer until the early 2000s when I learned about her through internet book forums, which seems rather stupendous now considering how influential her books have been on Georgian and Regency set romances. After Sourcebooks reissued many of her books, I bought and read around a dozen or so of them. My mileage has varied, but all of her books are nevertheless entertaining. I loved Venetia, but found the relationship in These Old Shades—which so many seem to love–very cringey. Still in my TBR are Cotillion, Arabella, A Civil Contract and a few others, which I’ve been saving for the right mood. Any time Heyer comes up, it seems readers have highly different opinions about which books they’ve loved and which they haven’t.
My entry into romance reading in my teen years were the usual suspects back in the 70s, starting with gothics and historicals, such as those by Victoria Holt/Philippa Carr/Jean Plaidy, Phyllis Whitney, Mary Stewart, Dorothy Eden, Susan Howatch, and so many more that I don’t remember. I grew up in a small town. The only place to get romance was at the public library, Wal-Mart, or drug store (such as Walgreen’s). Our public library had a paperback rack of used books, which is where I found a lot of the romances I read back then. It was highly variable and hit and miss with what they carried. I do remember reading some of Barbara Cartland’s (my favorite was probably A Hazard of Hearts, and I even remember the made-for-tv movie with a very young Helena Bonham Carter and Diana Rigg), but they quickly became formulaic and I grew out of them rather quickly. My mom subscribed to Good Housekeeping magazine, and I always read the abridged romances (most of them were historical) that were published in that magazine. If I remember correctly, quite a few of them were Barbara Cartland stories.
My earlier mention of The Unknown Ajax & The Reluctant Widow got me thinking about the theme of false fronts or masquerades or disguises or lies or secrets, and I realized that this theme appears in several variations in many books by Heyer. I think all of these titles have some form of this theme:
Arabella
Cotillion
Devil’s Cub
False Colours
Faro’s Daughter
Frederica
Powder and Patch
Regency Buck
Sprig Muslin
Sylvester, or The Wicked Uncle
The Black Moth
The Corinthian
The Foundling
The Grand Sophy
The Masqueraders
The Nonesuch
The Reluctant Widow
The Toll-Gate
The Unknown Ajax
These Old Shades
I have read Heyer, Cartland, Kelly, Balogh, McNaught,Spencer, Ivory, Beverly and so many more..and still have so many of these authors print books. I wish there were a National Romance Readers Library. To me It is a tragedy that this genre of books is put down by prominent book reviewers when there are so many of us who are entertained by this category of books. JMHO
Years ago I used a number of Heyer titles as examples of genre labels I would like to see. These were my proposed labels:
Heyer, Georgette: The Black Moth (1921): Adventure-Romance – Accepted Georgian England
Heyer, Georgette: These Old Shades (1926): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Georgian England & France
Heyer, Georgette: Devil’s Cub (1934): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Georgian England & France
Heyer, Georgette: The Spanish Bride (1940): Fictionalized Biography-War Story – Hidden Regency Peninsular Campaign
Heyer, Georgette: Regency Buck (1935): Mystery-Historical Fiction – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: An Infamous Army (1937): War Story-Romance-Historical Fiction – Accepted Regency Belgium
Heyer, Georgette: Arabella (1949): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Black Sheep (1966): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England (Bath)
Heyer, Georgette: The Convenient Marriage (1934): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Georgian England
Heyer, Georgette: The Corinthian (1940): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Cotillion (1953): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Cousin Kate (1968): Gothic Historical Mystery – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: False Colours (1963): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Faro’s Daughter (1941): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency London
Heyer, Georgette: The Foundling (1948): Coming of Age-Comedy of Manners-Historical Fiction – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Frederica (1965): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Friday’s Child (1946): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: The Grand Sophy (1950): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Lady of Quality (1972): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England (Bath)
Heyer, Georgette: The Masqueraders (1928): Adventure-Romance – Accepted Georgian England
Heyer, Georgette: The Nonesuch (1962): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Powder and Patch (1923): Comedy of Manners – Accepted Georgian England
Heyer, Georgette: The Quiet Gentleman (1951): Romantic Mystery-Historical Fiction – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: The Reluctant Widow (1946): Comedy of Manners-Romantic Mystery – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Sprig Muslin (1956): Comedy of Manners – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Sylvester (or, the Wicked Uncle) (1957): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England & France
Heyer, Georgette: The Talisman Ring (1936): Comedy of Manners-Mystery-Romance – Accepted Georgian England
Heyer, Georgette: The Toll-Gate (1954): Comedy of Manners-Mystery-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: The Unknown Ajax (1959): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
Heyer, Georgette: Venetia (1958): Comedy of Manners-Romance – Accepted Regency England
As I’ve said before, the first romance book I ever read was by Heyer. I still haven’t read all of her books (mysteries are way down in my reading preferences), but her books have supplied many happy readings.
The Unknown Ajax is two completely different books depending on how you read the hero. The first time I read it, I took the hero at face value for most of the book and it was just so-so. It is MUCH funnier in all rereadings since, now that I know he is playing a role. In fact, I just started another reread of The Unknown Ajax this week.
The Reluctant Widow is the other Heyer I’ve read title that is two books in one. If you take the heroine at face value, it is pretty Gothic. If you assume she is sarcastic or facetious or ironic, it is very funny.
I consider Venetia to be the most romantic Heyer book I’ve read, but it is also one of the more extreme cases of wordiness, with many multi-page paragraphs.
I can’t compare Heyer to Cartland, since I read enough comments about Cartland that I have yet to read anything by her.
These are my most-read Heyer books in descending order of times read:
23 Black Sheep (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2018) ****
17 These Old Shades (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2011) ****
16 Devil’s Cub (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2011) ****
14 The Corinthian (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
13 Frederica (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
13 Venetia (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2014) ***
12 The Unknown Ajax (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
11 Lady of Quality (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2000) ***
11 The Black Moth (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2011) ***
10 Sylvester, or The Wicked Uncle (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2016) ****
10 The Masqueraders (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2001) ****
9 Faro’s Daughter (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2016) ***
9 The Grand Sophy (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
9 The Talisman Ring (r) Heyer, Georgette (1994-2016) ***
9 The Toll-Gate (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
8 False Colours (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ***
8 Regency Buck (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2011) **.5
8 Sprig Muslin (r) Heyer, Georgette (1992-2016) ****
7 The Nonesuch (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ***
7 The Reluctant Widow (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
6 Cotillion (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
6 The Convenient Marriage (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2015) ****
6 The Quiet Gentleman (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2004) ***
5 An Infamous Army (r) Heyer, Georgette (1993-2011) **.5
The two books rated under my three-star threshold to recommend for humor have as many readings as they do because they are tied to the These Old Shades / Devil’s Cub characters, and I’ve read that whole set several times.
I confess — I haven’t read any Heyer yet. Even though I used to shop at a bookstore run by someone named Georgette!
I read a Cartland book in high school, mainly out of curiosity as I had seen her interviewed on a news show. I found Cartland much more interesting than her book. The book was very short and very skimmable. (This was later Cartland, and I’ve read that her earlier ones were better.)
I can barely remember Cartland’s heroine, but I can remember that Cartland stood up for the rights of the Romani people; advocated vitamins before it was popular; and dictated her books to an employee while sitting in bed and holding a fluffy dog. Who wants to be a Cartland heroine when you could be Barbara Cartland instead?
I’ve always gotten a big kick out of Barbara Cartland and think she led a very adventurous “real life” and probably wasn’t as innocent and demure as her heroines! And I have to tip my hat to any lady who could rock that many rhinestones on her outfits.
In 1986 there was a fire at the Los Angeles main branch that destroyed most of the fiction section and later that year some books that were too damaged were either tossed or put out in “free boxes”. My Dad was walking by one afternoon and sorted through some boxes and brought books home for my sister and I as we were coming for the summer. One of the scorched books was Venetia a library edition from 1965 and another was The Grand Sophy. My sister and I fell hard for Georgette Heyer that summer spent at Zuma Beach reading all the Heyers we could get our hands on from the library and the first book I bought with my own money was Frederica which is still my favourite Heyer, though I have great affection for A Civil Contract and The Bath books. Listening to the Naxos audio books is pure pleasure and I’ve been known to queue up the drunken card party scene in The Unknown Ajax when I’m feeling blue, I think it’s one of the funniest bits I’ve ever read. Jane Austen is fine but Heyer is classic.
OK–you’re making me think I should give her another try. I tried Venetia and just couldn’t get through it.
So Heyer is super variable. I have given her a D here for a review, but like Mel said, Ajax is a scream.
One thing that hasn’t come up in this thread yet is the fact that Heyer was wildly anti-Semitic. Felicia Grossman has done a powerful piece on this here: https://www.romancedailynews.com/single-post/2020/01/28/Guest-Post-Georgette-Heyer-was-an-Antisemite-and-Her-Work-is-Not-Foundational-Historical-Romance
Like Grossman, I don’t think “a product of her time” is an acceptable excuse (my God, the woman was alive during the Holocaust!), and if this makes you want to avoid Heyer entirely, I think that’s fair.
I don’t recall anything like that in Ajax, which is really the only Heyer I recall enjoying, but I was younger when I read it and didn’t read as thoughtfully. Since Heyer is not alive to profit off me laughing at a second-hand bookstore copy of her work, I have decided not to feel super guilty about it, but I definitely think whenever her works, quality, and legacy comes up, this needs to be part of the conversation.
I think this review of The Grand Sophie is well done and addresses those issues.
Many authors from the early 20th century wrote racists, stereotypical characters. Agatha Christie, Margaret Mitchell, Lovecraft, and many other best selling novelists depicted people of color, LGBTQ people, Jews, Catholics, Muslims, and people of other nations wretchedly. I wouldn’t argue that we can excuse their biases but I would say that such attitudes were sadly common.
It amazes me how someone always has to bring this up when discussing Georgette Heyer. Always.
I don’t understand. Why shouldn’t it come up? This is not a case of “a dead person felt things but we can ignore them.” This is stuff that is actively embedded in her text (or censored out of some re-releases) and people considering if it’s for them should know they may run into it.
I personally am all for bringing this up. I am also for people say “this doesn’t impact my enjoyment of this book.”
AAR readers can feel both ways.
Absolutely and there are “modern” authors people still vote for like Julie Garwood who put some problematic stuff in books as late as the 1990’s. I recall she has a medieval one that’s quite homophobic if memory serves. I remember being pretty stunned when I pulled out a paper copy from the 90’s and read some of the sentiments. I guess you could try to argue the medieval characters were expressing the “mindset” of the day but when the heroine says it, it’s particularly ugly.
“I guess you could try to argue the medieval characters were expressing the “mindset” of the day but when the heroine says it, it’s particularly ugly.”
There’s definitely a difficult balance when it comes to creating a historical fiction/HR hero or heroine who is both believable and sympathetic. On the one hand, a protagonist laboring under a particular mindset that is common to the time period is understandable within the cultural context, but it can come across as repugnant to the modern reader. On the other hand, there’s a danger of going so far into a 21st century mindset that the character comes across as a modern person who went back in time just to wear fancy clothes and ride in carriages, which can feel incredibly fake.
“I wouldn’t argue that we can excuse their biases but I would say that such attitudes were sadly common.”
Although I think certain attitudes have evolved overall (thank goodness!), many of those attitudes are still unfortunately here in the 21st century. I think the difference is that certain prejudices are more likely to be declared in whispers among friends or semi-anonymous rants on internet forums than in literature and movies. Or if caricatures and stereotypes do appear in modern media, they are of people who are still *safe* to pick on with few repercussions other than some grumbling, if that.
For example, I read an interesting book about a year ago entitled Better with Books: 500 Diverse Books to Ignite Empathy and Encourage Self-Acceptance in Tweens and Teens . I read it because I thought “Cool topic. I wonder what the recommended reading is for kids these days.” While it definitely has some merit, I definitely noticed a strong strain of anti-Catholic bias among the reading recommendations. Specifically, a lot of the stories featuring Catholic characters played into stereotypes of fanaticism at its worst and, sadly, sexual abuse scandals. All the other religions mentioned (Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc.) were treated with respect. I am certainly glad that stories portraying members of other religions were highlighted in a positive fashion, but I was a bit shocked at how Catholicism got thrown under the bus in a book supposedly about tolerance and empathy. Not one review I’ve ever seen of the Better with Books has ever mentioned this rather blatant hypocritical bias. Maybe it’s one of those things someone from a non-Catholic background wouldn’t even consciously notice. But whether you’re a believer or fallen away, if you have that background, I can almost guarantee you, you *will* notice the difference in treatment. And this book was published in 2019!
As mentioned above, people’s mindsets and tolerance have evolved steadily right through the last few decades as well. What was acceptable to be published a couple decades ago doesn’t fly today. And it’s certainly OK to point out what’s wrong in a work or an author’s point of view. It doesn’t mean anyone is going to start burning books.
“What was acceptable to be published a couple decades ago doesn’t fly today.”
There are definitely two sides to this (at least!). On the one hand, it’s nice to see a variety of characters, settings, and situations that would have been considered unpublishable a few decades ago for shocking mainstream sensibilities, such as queer romances. It really wasn’t that long ago that the romance genre was defined as featuring one man and one woman in a central romance with an HEA in order to qualify.
On the other hand, I do sometimes worry that other narratives commonplace a few decades ago are no longer in vogue for writers to explore. I see this in movies as well, particularly several films from the 1970s. When I watch old films, I sometimes find myself saying, “Holy crap! You could not get away with making this film today.” And then I wonder, why not? And here’s the why not: Many authors are genuinely afraid of catching heat on Twitter, social media, etc. for creating anything that isn’t toe-the-party-line-PC. I don’t want to dig up some of the previous firestorms at AAR that I’ve thrown gasoline on, but I will say that writing from a place of fear can flatten characters rather than imbuing them with nuance and uncomfortable flaws.
“And it’s certainly OK to point out what’s wrong in a work or an author’s point of view.” Absolutely! Thoughtful, respectful, critical analysis is fantastic. But where I draw the line is when I see hordes of the professionally offended going out of their way to demand publishing houses withdraw books that haven’t been published yet and/or call for dropped author contracts on the basis of… being offended. These acts of pillorying authors go way beyond thoughtful criticism and into the realm of threatening someone’s livelihood. Because my attitude toward this all is, “Uh, you could just read something else and move on with your life.”
None of this is *directly* related to Ms. Heyer, by the way, who has been dead for many years. But I think views espoused in books, both classic and modern, is part of a much larger conversation. Is it possible for an HR written in 2020 to have a sympathetic heroine who has period-appropriate unenlightened views? I think this is an interesting question to explore, both as writers and as critics.
I think these are a lot of great points. And it’s hard for writers to straddle both worlds. I always use Downton Abbey as an example as they have the family be incredibly tolerant about things they likely would not have been, such as Barrow’s sexuality (which the show does show was a criminal offense at the time). They use the Earl as a bad example a lot in his old fashioned attitudes towards Catholics, women, and a lot of “others” who aren’t male, white, Anglo Saxon Protestants. But it’s bad “lite” and his wife Cora is practically 21st century in her attitudes and serves to soften him up.
In reality a man of his rank and wealth would often demand his servants not even look him in the face but keep their eyes downcast they were so far “beneath” him.
I was surprised when re-reading a Kleypas novel set in 1850’s England when the hero openly said he believed the man was the head of the household. You would have been hard pressed to find a man of any class at that time, and for a long time after, who didn’t think that way yet it was still a shock to see him say it on the page and not recant it by the end.
It’s one thing for an author to represent an attitude that was realistic in its time, it’s another thing for her to promote that attitude herself, which is what Heyer did in The Grand Sophy. I love some of Heyer’s books, but I do not like this one because it leaves such a bad taste in my mouth. Compare that to Mary Balogh’s The Lady With a Black Umbrella. Daisy, the heroine, sees “The Merchant of Venice” for the first time and thinks poor Shylock has been treated badly so surely he will be treated fairly by the end. Balogh uses this to show Daisy’s kind heart, which rejects cruelty. It’s a minor scene in the book, but telling. Also, if George Eliot could write Daniel Deronda and Charles Dickens make up for Fagin by creating a kindly Jewish character in Our Mutual Friend, then Heyer can be called to task for the moneylender in TGS.
This sure is what we need during a bummer of a time: shaming for enjoying books.
It was different then and we’re better now. Heyer wrote in the past. People reading now can get that and still have a good time with her books.
Move on.
That’s what I said I did – that I don’t see antisemitism in Ajax that I remember, and I read and enjoy it.
And forgive me if, as a Pittsburgher who lost 11 people murdered in an anti-Semitic attack on a synagogue five blocks from my house just eighteen months ago, I don’t fully buy your assertion that “we’re better now.”
If you don’t think prejudice in the UK and the US against Jews is better now than it was in the first two world wars, I have nothing more to say.
I think it’s very easy to call out Heyer for a very nasty scene in an otherwise excellent book. Had she written TGS a decade later it probably would have been edited, but in 1950 prejudice against Jews was unfortunately socially accepted and even promoted by some governments despite the horrific evidence of the Holocaust. It was a despicable time!
Heyer is so at the bottom of the pile of anti-Semitic writers whom are more prominent than she will ever be. It’s disheartening that she had those views and I can see how some readers can’t forgive her, just like those who cannot forgive writers who tolerated slavery and supported the South during the Civil War.
And I’ll say this, discussions about these issues coming up in fiction is a very welcome discussion, but now is not the time. I can’t seem to articulate my feelings, but “it’s like all the family is together and enjoying themselves and then someone “has” to bring up someone’s indiscretion and then everyone is grumpy and all that enjoyment goes out the window”. Am I being naive?
I don’t condone Heyer or excuse her, but when there is a rampant upswing of white nationalism, the Pittsburgh and Christ Church massacres, concentration camps on the U.S. southern border and the daily assassinations of young black men to call out Heyer just seemed so petty (to me) and that is why I made that comment.
I can understand that Heyer feels like a small fry in comparison with murders. From my perspective, though, allowing people to talk about any anti-Semitic works without mentioning that there is anti-Semitism in them is to normalize it, and we’ve seen the sharp upswing in violence and harassment that’s resulted from anti-Semitism being more normalized in the last four years. Heyer’s reputation should always have an asterisk next to it – what you choose do do with that asterisk is up to you, but it should be there. I feel a greater obligation to my community to place the asterisk than I do to stay silent to make sure the conversation is comfortable and doesn’t harsh anybody’s Heyer buzz.
Why not try listening to the audio, the narrator is wonderful.
Have you read “The Library Book” by Susan Orlean? It’s about libraries and books, with a focus o that fire in the main LA library.
For many years, I was a solely Regency reader (with brief forays into Janet Dailey and Beverly Sommers). I have read pretty much all the Regency writers interviewed, but it reminds me that Love’s Reward, by Jean Ross Ewing, was one of my all-time favorite books for many years. Regency authors from the 80s-90s on my keeper shelf include a few Balogh Signets, Carla Kelly, Edith Layton, Charlotte Louise Dolan, and Jo Beverley.
Regarding Georgette Heyer, I am incredibly basic in that my favorites are The Grand Sophy and Devil’s Cub. My daughter’s name is Sophie, deliberately in honor of Sophy. I read all of Heyer at one point in my teens/early 20s, but I’ve only reread TGS, DC, Faro’s Daughter, and Sylvester in recent years, I should go back and do a full re-read. I re-read Sylvester last month and it was great fun.
I just spent a few minutes looking to see if I still had my copy of Love’s Reward. (I didn’t; I just ordered the digital copy.) You know what might be interesting? To talk about the oldest print books on our romance keeper shelves. That might be an argument for influence.
That would imply we still had print books on our shelves…..
I have gotten rid of so many older books (why did I get rid of my Janet Dailey Americana series? WHY?) but I have glommed a few authors and am proud of my completeness, plus some are just old friends I can’t get rid of. I actually had 2 copies of Manhunting for a while, but I gave away one at one point, and now I have paper and digital. I think I also have two copies of The Grand Sophy. If I weren’t supposed to be grading now, I’d catalog my print books….
You should try Devil’s Cub. Because it’s a sequel to These Old Shades, there are many supporting characters whom Heyer obviously loved (Avon, Leonie, Rupert), and she gives them good scenes in DC.
I had to get rid of so many paper copies of books simply because they yellowed and disintegrated over time-just sitting on a bookshelf. I still have any hard cover or trade paperbacks as they held up but the mass market ones just seemed to self destruct. I do love that that I can fit hundreds or thousands of ebooks on my iPad or phone now and I invested a lot of money in kindles over the years.
Since Dabney and Caz haven’t read both of the authors, I thought I’d weigh in with my romance reading history. I read all of Jane Austen while in high school and somehow (don’t exactly remember) found my first Heyer – I think I was a sophomore in college. I read all of them I could find and didn’t really try any other type of romance until I was stuck with waiting for Ms Heyer to publish her next book. About that time I discovered Cartland and started devouring them. And some time after that I started reading Harlequins.
Looking back, I have no desire to reread any Cartland – I recall them as being super sweet and fluffy. I do occasionally re-read a Heyer. I find that I appreciate some of the less romantic books like The Foundling or The Quiet Gentleman much more than I did when I first read them. I think my favorite is The Nonesuch although I have to agree with Sheri Cobb South about The Unknown Ajax.
What always annoyed me about Cartland was… the… ellipses….
Lol, half of the (very short) novels are…….ellipses..
Have you ever seen any of the made for TV Movies? They are priceless. Helena Bonham Carter starred in the first one and she said in an interview that Barbara Cartland showed her how to “radiate innocence from her solar plexus” too funny! And that she was at a disadvantage because she wasn’t blonde.
Hugh Grant starred in one TV adaptation of her books “called The Lady and The Highwayman” and you know he wishes he could obliterate that TV Movie off the face of the earth. It’s absolutely hilarious with a pretty star studded supporting cast including Claire Bloom and Michael York.
Wait. There are Cartland movies? This has never occured to me. I must investigate.
LOL – I think you might be able to find them on YouTube. A Hazard of Hearts is the one with Helena Bonham Carter. I preferred that one over The Lady and the Highwayman when I was much younger. Good cinema, they are not. But my younger self liked them.
Oh you are in for some laughs! There are a few: A Hazard of Hearts, The Lady and the Highwayman, A Ghost in Monte Carlo, and Duel of Hearts. There is also a really old one made in the late 70’s I think with Linda Purl called “The Flame Is Love” Enjoy!!
The Unknown Ajax is the only Heyer that makes me laugh my face off. The finale scene of that novel with doors slamming and characters in and out is worthy of a Neil Simon play. I’m always amazed it’s not more people’s favorite.
Here’s a funny thing: Before I became an adult romance reader, I confused Heyer with Cartland. #notfakenews
YOU DID NOT JUST SAY THAT!!! Okay, so here’s my confession – I have NEVER read anything by Barbara Cartland!
And I’ve never read anything by Heyer. I think this explains a lot about us.
Hm. That’s an interesting point…
I think I read 50 Cartlands in my early teens. Haven’t read one since. Everytime I try a Heyer, I get… bored. “looks guilty”
I’m starting to worry we were separated at birth. Thank goodness we like different Hathaway novels, lol.
Aw, don’t feel guilty. I’ve never read anything by Heyer OR Cartland, and have no desire to. You’ll recall I was *that* person who used to walk by romance displays of half dressed cover models with an upturned nose. I think traditional romances and “bodice-rippers” were the types of stories I was trying desperately to avoid.
Since we’re free to express controversial opinions at AAR, I feel safe to say that Regency doesn’t do it for me. When I do read anything set in the Regency era it is *despite* the setting rather than *because* of it. Honestly, if romance hadn’t branched out the way it has now into other eras, higher heat levels, queer stories, and cross-genre pieces like romantic thrillers and sci-fi, I probably wouldn’t be a regular commenter here.
I think I read enough Regency or faux Regency rip off novels early on that I don’t particularly care for them now, The only exceptions are Carla Kelly -but I read all her genres whether western or whatever and I guess Kleypas who I don’t think of as Regency at all, but technically has books set in the Regency period. I think it’s that artificial Regency speak that I guess everyone ripped off from Heyer that I am tired of. They all start with a bored Regency hero leaving his club, with his friend who likes to talk too much going on about how they “got foxed” last night and there is some reference to his champagne buffed Hessian boots and his Phaeton and the marriage mart.
Like you I am very glad that romance has so many genres, voices, and tastes now. There really is something for everyone and it’s still expanding.
Should I be ashamed to admit I have never been able to finish a Heyer novel but in my tween years or early teens I read several Cartland novels? I consider them abs Victoria Holt to be “gateway drugs” to romance novels.
NO GUILT!!!!!
…and I’ve never read either one!
LOL.
Well that’s because you are terribly young…..
You made my day with this one Dabney! Certainly both authors were successful and are regularly named for their contributions to the genre. But the writing is so different. I’m having trouble coming up with a good example to compare to. Maybe Nancy Drew mysteries vs. Dorothy Dunnett’s Lymond Chronicles? They’re both successful/well regarded mystery series. But they really aren’t the same reading experience at all.
I read Barbara Cartland’s as a teenager but quickly became bored. I spent many years avoiding romances for that very reason. But I do have a copy of the one Cartland that I considered my favorite from those years, for purely sentimental reasons: No Darkness For Love. (I was also into impressionist painters at the time. :-) I wouldn’t recommend it. It DOES NOT hold up to today’s many and much better YA options.
My introduction to Heyer was The Grand Sophy: it was required reading in a readers’ advisory class in library school. (All titles were assigned, and we had to read one romance, one science fiction, one western and one mystery.) I thought it was cute but it didn’t wow me. (What tipped me into becoming a regular romance reader was Into The Wilderness by Sara Donati and then Outlander by Gabaldon.) But I would go on to read and enjoy many other Heyer’s as I explored the genre(s). I prefer Frederica, Sylvester, Venetia and The Convenient Marriage.
One thing I always liked about the older Cartland novels was the covers. There was one particular artist who used to do all the original artwork for her paperback covers and he had a very individual style. (Of course all the heroines looked alike) but I thought they were very romantic and girly and featured pretty dresses which appealed to me back in my tween and early teen days.