This is one of those rollicking, lighthearted Regency romps that requires the reader to leave absolutely all rational thought in a cupboard somewhere and simply roll with it. Sometimes, if the characters are charming enough I can do that, but there was just too much unlikability here for me to manage it.
Here’s the premise: Jane Halsey and sister Belle are living in near destitution with an aunt in an obscure corner of London. The only way to rescue themselves from ever-worsening poverty is for one of them to marry a rich husband, but how can they ever meet a likely candidate, when they know no one and go nowhere? But one day, they have a stroke of luck – they attract the attention of bonkers Lord Romeo, the younger son of a duke, who’s grown up in Greece and become enamoured of all things Greek. He spies Jane and immediately recognises her as Athene, and wants to paint her, naked if possible, and then marry her.
Jane has no interest in Romeo for herself, but he’d suit Belle perfectly, so the sisters fall in with Romeo’s plans. But along with Romeo comes his big brother, the Marquis of Renfrew and heir to the dukedom, who thinks clever, managing Jane is just the wife to keep Romeo under control. He tags along to encourage Romeo’s suit, but ends up attracting the attention of Jane herself, who thinks he’s pursuing her.
Now, this is where I lost patience with our heroine. Jane’s supposed to be a smart cookie, but why on earth does she imagine for one moment that she, the daughter of a mere baronet, currently homeless and virtually dowerless, would be the object of a future duke? She casually calls him Renfrew, as if she’d known him all her life, assuming he’ll dance with her and being thoroughly presumptuous and encroaching and obnoxious. Knowing that Romeo has set his sights on her, she must surely see that his brother can hardly be courting her as well. So I disliked her pretty thoroughly at this point, and cringed every time she made another assumption.
As for Renfrew, even though he suspects that she’s forming an attachment to him, he does nothing about it, and certainly fails to convey to her that his only interest is in fostering Romeo’s suit. He convinces himself he’s mistaken, and carries on quietly falling in love with her himself. And then things get even sillier, and build to one of the most ridiculous finales I’ve ever read.
Now, this wasn’t a bad read, exactly. It’s as well written as Joan Smith’s books always are, and there are certainly moments of laugh-out-loud fun. But the oddball charm of Romeo in Babe palls in its repetition here, where his oblivious straightforwardness turns into something much more devious, the main pairing of Jane and Renfrew entirely lack charm, the humour of comedy sidekick Munch fell flat and the ending was just too unbelievable. Joan Smith is always a bit hit or miss for me, and this one was definitely a miss. Not unreadable, but only three stars. If you like the sound of Romeo, read Babe instead, a much more fun book.

This was a lot of fun, in a riotously confrontational sort of way. The heroine is spirited in the way of children who only have to be told not to do something but they instantly start working out ways to do it anyway. So there are plenty of scrapes to be wriggled out of, and a hero who veers between being furiously angry with her and actively condoning her wilfulness.
A nice traditional read, and mostly set in Bath, which is always fun. Very redolent of Georgette Heyer, but that’s not at all a bad thing.
I loved this book. Yes, it’s old fashioned and short and ends abruptly, but none of that is a problem for me. I loved both the main characters, the villainy was unexpectedly believable and the plot just rolled along seamlessly, without a single jarring moment. I’m on something of a binge-read with this author. She’s no longer around so the catalogue is limited, but I’m delighted that her family is making them available again for those of us who appreciate the traditional Regency style.
This book was first published in 1959, more than sixty years ago – a very different era. It’s wordy in places, there’s a fair amount of head-hopping (jumping from one character’s internal thoughts to another’s without a signal) and the plot veers between implausible and outright incredible, and yet I found it a whole heap of fun. I liked the two main characters, the difficulties between them were believable and the romance was low-key but rather sweet. For modern readers, it might be jarring but for anyone weaned on Georgette Heyer, this is a nice, light read.
After the slightly flat story of Edith and Lionel in A Purloined Portrait, this is an absolute cracker. Hetty in London is a delight. As is inevitable with any Regency novel set during the London season, there are well-worn paths to tread and over-used tropes to drive the plot, but Hetty and her swain are so gloriously different, and the background characters so fascinating, that it’s easy to overlook.
Well, here’s a thing – a Christina Dudley book that didn’t set me on fire. Was it well written? Yes, of course. Did I enjoy the read? Yes, absolutely. But I felt a little like Hetty, who writes impatiently of Edith’s letters that they were 3/4 art and only 1/4 interesting stuff.
This was a book that had so much potential. It could have been full of five-star-awesomeness, but instead a whole heap of little things kept tripping my fuses, which dragged it down a bit. That’s not to say that I didn’t enjoy it, because I did, but I was sad that it didn’t quite reach the heights it could have done.
I’ve been waiting for this to come out because the premise is so intriguing. And even though I knew how it would have to end, the interesting question was how the author would get to that point and make all the characters sympathetic. Be warned, however, that there is one scene of a sexual nature, and the book contains some serious sexual themes, dealt with in a sympathetic but honest way.
A new Jenny Hambly book is always a treat and this one is no exception. A lady-averse hero, a spinster resigned to her unwedded state and some intriguing mysteries to solve – what’s not to like?