Why Georgette Heyer Kicks Butt & Takes Names As A Writer
Relatively recently, on August 28, I mentioned Georgette Heyer’s Friday’s Child and also observed that: “I’ve certainly smiled and even laughed outright a good deal when reading Georgette Heyer’s historical romances…possibly more than with any other author…”
In short, although Georgette Heyer will never be recognised as a literary great, I think she rocks as a storyteller and here are a few reasons why:
- Although Heyer’s novels are generally lighthearted fun, her historical research is impeccable and this research grounds her stories in a sense of the real that gives them considerable authenticity.
. - The sort of humour that keeps you smiling as you read and laughing out loud from time to time is a gift that few authors possess—but together with the historical research, it’s the magic ingredient that makes Heyer stand head and shoulders above her many imitators.
. - She has a real gift for dialogue, particularly witty repartee between characters, and uses her research to introduce slang phrases from the era, including thieves’ cant. The former keeps the story spinning along, the latter helps build the authenticity discussed under 1.
. - Heyer always writes great characters, even if quite a few of them are “stock” in type, and even her minor characters come alive on the page: quite an art.
. - Although her books are lighthearted overall and always considerable elements of fun, Heyer also has sufficient depth to her characters and just enough gravitas to ensure there is substance to the read, without weighing the reader down.
So when the going gets tough and it’s time for a comfort read, a Georgette Heyer novel, with one or two exceptions, is always to be relied upon.
Some of my favourites include:
The Masqueraders
The Talisman Ring
These Old Shades
The Corinthian
The Grand Sophy
Faro’s Daughter
Friday’s Child
Cotillion
Sylvester
A Civil Contract
Frederica
The Nonesuch
Great thanks for the recommendation list as I am having to have time off work to have Chemo very boring, so I need some light reading. Now is not the time to reread Ian Banks methinks and I am trying to pace my self to save your books for a full reread just before number four comes out!!!! I am excited but I think I saw June as the release date so I really need to chill.
Oh, no, Jacqui, I am so terribly sorry to hear that. Do take care and look after yourself as best you can. I promise you I shall do my utmost to keep the book happening meanwhile. 1 April is now my delivery date and even that is going to be a demanding call given current progress, but the book won’t be out for at least a year after that. For which I can only offer a litany of mea culpas. π
Oh well something to look forward too,and that means I can reread them all now! Which is what I really wanted to do
“Georgette Heyer will never be recognised as a literary great…” — You must have a very exacting definition of greatness! I think anyone whose books are still widely read decades after her death has achieved that level of recognition. π
Hi Diane, Thanks for commenting. π
To be honest, the observation was included as a statement of fact rather than my opinion—but I suppose it is my opinion that the literary establishment is highly unlikely to bestow such accolades as Nobel Prizes for Literature, Bookers, or Pulitzers, on Georgette Heyer’s work. And having read her biography, I am not sure she would have expected it as she herself did not appear to regard her work as “literary fiction.” (Arguably, it’s far too enjoyable for that. π )
Nonetheless, as indicated in the post, I think Heyer is a great storyteller and I love (most of) her historical novels and am not at all surprised by her longevity. So I guess the point you may be making is how we decide what is literary greatness, i.e. are longevity and decades of reader enjoyment enough or must a book deliver more? And who decides what that “more” should be?