Skip to content

Regency Romance: The Grandmother of Guilty Pleasures

  • by
Average Everygirl #46, Average Genres: Regency Everygirl, Part 1 | Panel 1: The narrator says, "Welcome to Regency England, Average!" Average, looking the same as always, says, "What are you talking about? Nothing about this scene says Regency." | Panel 2: The narrator says, "Pshh. The modern reader won't know the difference." Average arches a brow and says, "Shame on you. Do you job and fit the scene properly." | Panel 3: She is now wearing an empire-waisted gown with puff sleeves and her hair in a bun. The narrator, disgruntled, says, "Fine. Welcome to Regency England, Average." Average, smiling, says, "You have my thanks, kind narrator." | Panel 4: The narrator says, "Ooh! I like this meeker, gentler Average!" to which Average replies, "I see we've confused manners with meekness. What a trial it must be to have such lightness between the ears."

When it comes to Regency Romance, there is one name that stands out as the paragon of the genre, at whose altar all other Regency authors and readers should bend in grateful homage. That one name is the intelligent, the prolific, the unparalleled…

Georgette Heyer.

And I sincerely hope you weren’t expecting me to say Jane Austen, because she didn’t even write Regency romance. She wrote contemporary social satire. (Chew on that one for a minute, if you please.)

Heyer single-handedly established the Regency subgenre of historical romance. Her heavy research of that fascinating era shows in her books, from her in-depth descriptions of lace and textiles to her era-inspired slang, to her casual mentions of assembly rooms, gaming clubs, and horse auctioneers. Jane Austen, in contrast, never so much as referenced the ton, let alone Almack’s, White’s, or Tattersall’s. She didn’t need to. She was writing to and about her peers, not recreating an era that none of her readers had ever witnessed.

Regency Genre Background

The term “Regency” refers to a period in the early 1800s, when Mad King George III of England was as nutty as a fruitcake and his son, also George, ruled as the Prince Regent in his stead. George III died in 1820, at which point the Prince Regent George became George IV and the Regency era ended. (And all of this occurred in a greater “Georgian” period, so named thanks to the Georges I – IV ruling consecutively.)

International events of note: the United States had already won its war for independence and established a constitutional republic. There was bad blood between England and the U.S. during this period (War of 1812, anyone?), so you’re not likely to find Americans hanging around London. The French, meanwhile, had Napoleon at their helm. The Napoleonic Wars ended in 1815 with the Battle of Waterloo and the French dictator’s exile to Saint Helena, but its repercussions echoed into the years that followed.

The iconic fashion of this era, for women, was the empire waist so popularized by scores of Jane Austen film adaptations. Society behaved according to a very strict set of rules, and a decided caste system existed between the upper and lower classes.

And Georgette Heyer set the definitive benchmark for all of these elements in literature.

Drifting by Degrees

It seems like the further we get from Heyer’s writing, the further the Regency genre strays from its roots. Modern characters with their modern values creep into more recent works, spouting off anachronistic opinions that would likely boggle the early 19th-century minds they’re intended to represent.

And that’s to be expected, to some extent. Heyer’s main characters were fish out of water in the Regency era too. She wrote more than a century after that era’s close, recreating the bygone world as best she could, but in the end, her creations are still counterfeits; and counterfeits, by their very nature, bear smudges of the age and environment in which they emerge.

Perhaps that’s why many more recent works lack that “Regency” feeling for me—they lack Georgette’s distinctive touch. Sometimes, when I open a newer Regency novel, I feel as though I’ve stepped into a dark room, with only a spotlight on characters and no sense of any space that might exist beyond the boundaries of their meager setting. They don’t live in an entire world, but rather within a bubble, a Regency-themed island floating around in a nebulous ether.

And sometimes, that “Regency” theme only exists because the book jacket claims that title in its summary blurb.

Languishing in Austen’s Shadow

I adore Jane Austen. Persuasion is my favorite, but of course I love all her works. She deserves every accolade we pour upon her head.

For some reason that I cannot fathom, though, after 50+ novels and millions of books sold, Georgette Heyer still gets back-burner treatment in comparison. It seems like many Regency authors readily attribute their inspiration to Austen and only mention Heyer in passing, if at all, as though she’s the guilty pleasure that no one wants to admit they love.

And I’m not sure that she would care. She was happy to write and sell books.

As the pioneer of the genre, though, she deserve some credit. So hat’s off to you, Georgette. Your imagination sparked tens of thousands to follow.

Whether they acknowledge you or not.

PS—Heyer also deserves a couple dozen film adaptations. The rights have been sold, but the production companies that own them are, apparently, content to sit on them.

The jerks.

8 thoughts on “Regency Romance: The Grandmother of Guilty Pleasures”

  1. Oh oh oh oh!

    *brain explodes*


    Seriously, tho, the Hubby gets very wary when I get on my soapbox about this…

    Honestly, the covers are usually not even as bad as the characterisation! Grrrrr!

    As for Georgette Heyer- her style is still unparalleled, IMHO. It’s light and funny and really very elegant. Her situations and characters are just hilarious, and her plot lines…!

    And I’m still waiting for a film adaptation of Cotillion, The Talisman Ring, The Grand Sophy, False Colours…oh heck, ALL of ’em! Seriously, what are film makers about? I love Jane Austen and Jane Austen films, but I want Georgette Heyer films too!

    1. The Reluctant Widow got a film adaptation back in 1950 (under the title of The Inheritance, apparently). You can find it on Youtube with Greek subtitles, but the sound quality is abysmal. There was a petition in 2012 calling for film adaptations of Heyer’s books, but even though it surpassed its goal for signatures, it apparently hasn’t gotten any traction. 🙁

      1. I saw that one! Hilarious, but not QUITE Heyer. Sis either found it on a cheap dvd or on Youtube, not quite sure which one.

        And shame on those film-makers, ignoring petitioners!! Apparently when I start writing screenplays for real, I’ll have to do some Heyer books 😀

        1. Someone in the comments of the petition claims that Heyer’s will stipulated that her books were not to be made into films. Don’t know if that’s true or not, but everyone seems to agree that a couple companies own the rights. In addition to The Reluctant Widow, there’s a German version of Arabella from the 50’s. Heyer was still alive back then; maybe she didn’t like how the two movies turned out. *shrugs*

    1. She’s a fun read. Wordy at times, but fun. Unfortunately, someone in the publishing business thinks it’s a good idea to market her eBooks at $10-11 each, and the paperbacks for even more. You can find her in plenty of used book stores, though. Happy hunting!

Comments are closed.