I agree about The Corinthian; The Foundling struck me the same way.
They both illustrate a point I frequently try to make to people who haven't read Heyer: these are not "romance novels". It's unfortunate in a way that the Regency genre she created has become "Regency Romance" (leaving aside the fact that a bunch of the books are really Georgian, which frequently seems to escape people). The love stories aren't the point, any more than they are the point in a Jane Austen novel. Heyer was just the first person to do Regency historical fiction. As my aunt puts it, she's the first "non-resident" to write extensively about the era.
I completely forgot about Fredericka last comment, which is ridiculous. That is one of my all-time favorites, mostly because of the secondary characters.
Moving Talisman Ring to the top of my Heyer TBR list.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-10-15 02:04 pm (UTC)They both illustrate a point I frequently try to make to people who haven't read Heyer: these are not "romance novels". It's unfortunate in a way that the Regency genre she created has become "Regency Romance" (leaving aside the fact that a bunch of the books are really Georgian, which frequently seems to escape people). The love stories aren't the point, any more than they are the point in a Jane Austen novel. Heyer was just the first person to do Regency historical fiction. As my aunt puts it, she's the first "non-resident" to write extensively about the era.
I completely forgot about Fredericka last comment, which is ridiculous. That is one of my all-time favorites, mostly because of the secondary characters.
Moving Talisman Ring to the top of my Heyer TBR list.