girlyswot: (imaginary men)
[livejournal.com profile] callmemadam wonders why Georgette Heyer novels have not made it to the silver screen here. In point of strict fact, I feel obliged to note that The Reluctant Widow was apparently filmed in 1950 but sank without trace (Has anyone seen it? Is it as awful as it is made out to be? The IMDB entry suggests it bore little resemblance to the book.) Still, the field appears to be wide open and since TV and film producers aren't getting round to it, I feel that it is time for my trusty flist to spring into action.

Which Heyers would you most like to see filmed? And what would be your ideal cast?
girlyswot: (curiouser and)
Since [livejournal.com profile] megan29 is just discovering the joys of Heyer for the first time, and also since reading this ridiculous article (HT: [livejournal.com profile] coughingbear) about her, I have been pondering the merits of Heyer a lot this week. Inevitably the comparison always comes, 'But of course, she's no Jane Austen.'

It seems to me that there are two important pragmatic reasons why Heyer's writing is different from Austen's. First, Austen wrote contemporary novels while Heyer is best known for her historicals. That Heyer's historical period often coincides with Austen's lifetime does not make this point any less significant. Austen wrote her world from the inside, as she lived and breathed it, for a readership who also lived at that time and in that social circle. Heyer has to create that historical reality for herself and her readers. There is a necessary consciousness of this in her work. I'm never certain with Heyer how far her depictions of various historical settings are accurate. What matters to me as a reader is that they are internally consistent and externally plausible.

And second, Heyer wrote to earn a living. I don't know how much Jane Austen earned from her books during her lifetime, but I'm fairly sure it wasn't a lot. Certainly she did not depend on them to keep a roof over her head or food on her table. Heyer wrote to support herself and her family. She had to keep to strict deadlines and to produce books that would sell. This seems to have been increasingly the case, so that her later novels are a mixed bag indeed. She matured as a writer, producing some of her most accomplished work later in life, but she also learned the tricks of writing potboilers at speed to pay the bills. For many years she wrote one romance and one detective novel every year. Other similarly prolific authors (yes, Barbara Cartland, I'm looking at you) paid for their quantity of output by sacrificing all pretensions to quality.

And yet, given these constraints, Heyer's achievements were extraordinary. She established, practically single-handedly, the genre of Regency romance (and more widely, the genre of historical romance) and the associated vocabulary (some of which she literally invented and some of which was the fruit of her research). Her books have been continually reprinted for almost 90 years with only one (The Great Roxhythe) having fallen into complete obscurity.

She's not Jane Austen, it's true. But she is Georgette Heyer and that is no mean achievement.
girlyswot: (Ros writes)
Inspired by a comment here, I have attempted to compose a list of Heyer novels for each of Ronald Tobias's plots:

1. Quest: The Talisman Ring
2. Adventure: The Corinthian, The Reluctant Widow
3. Pursuit: The Foundling, Friday's Child
4. Rescue: Charity Girl, Beauvallet
Read more... )

Profile

girlyswot: (Default)
girlyswot

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags