Title: Devil’s Cub
No. of Pages: 310
First Released: 1932
Synopsis (Courtesy of Goodreads): “In this acclaimed followup to These Old Shades, Dominic Alastair, fiery son of the Duke of Avon, is forced to flee England after a duel. He intends to take and set up as his mistress the young lady whose attentions he’s been courting, but her virtuous sister Mary gets in his way and finds herself carried off to France instead.
Discovering that he has met his match when she shoots him in the arm to protect her virtue, Dominic tries to persuade Mary to marry him, but she’ll have none of it. A chase ensues that in the end embroils the Duke of Avon himself and his passionate and impetuous wife, Leonie, who is forced to admit that Mary might just be the best thing in the world for her beloved son.”
Comments and Critique: I love romances, and I love history. I particularly love when those two come together into one book. Knowing how many people love Georgette Heyer, I was absolutely convinced that any of her Regency romances would be exactly what I love. Alas, it was not meant to be. Before you draw and quarter me, let me explain.
From a purely historical perspective, I thoroughly enjoyed Devil’s Cub. The detail was phenomenal. The pomp and circumstance afforded Dominic, the morals of the society portrayed in the book were foreign to today’s society but understandable given the historical context of the book. Ms. Heyer paints a tremendously vivid picture with her words, so that I knew exactly what each character was wearing, what it felt like to ride in a carriage, what it was like to attend social events in high society and what it was like to travel. From that aspect, I was highly impressed.
My issue with this book was the familiarity of it. My opinion of the book may have been different had I not grown up reading as much historical romantic fiction as I possibly could. It has been said that as creator of the genre, modern authors have sought to copy Ms. Heyer’s style. I believe this to be true because I found Devil’s Cub to be predictable, formulaic and even eye-roll inducing. Another caveat is that I have always avoided Harlequin romances, and this smacked of the Harlequin style. Yes, it is important to remember that this was written before modern romances, including the Harlequin branch of books, but my distaste for that genre was something I really had difficulties overcoming.
Another bone of contention that distracted me from the story was the grammatical errors scattered throughout the book. Much of the book is in dialogue, and I honestly thought that if I read “she don’t” or “he don’t” one more time, I was going to scream. I also found that Dominic’s name was spelled about four different ways throughout the book, including the very feminine way of adding a -que to the end of his name. Again, it bothered me. Perhaps it should not have, but I found it distracting.
Given the popularity of historical romance novels, it is completely understandable why Georgette Heyer ranks up there as one of the most popular romantic authors. I will admit that I did find Devil’s Cub to be charming and witty at times. The characters are so over the top that one cannot help but laugh at their dramatics. I even suspect that because the whole novel is so exaggerated, Ms. Heyer may be slyly mocking the Regency era. However, I believe that this type of novel is just not for me. I prefer my historical romance to be a bit edgier, more suspenseful, saucier with the romance more a backdrop to the overarching story. I am glad I got to experience my first Heyer novel and look forward to reading what others have to say about her works as the tour progresses throughout the rest of March.
This book fits selections for my 100+ Reading Challenge and my Read ‘n Review Challenge. I also purchased this with my own money. Sorry FTC.
var linkwithin_site_id = 125794;
LOL! You paid much closer attention than I did. Little things like that do upset me in other books though.
Holly – It's such a fine line between respecting the origins of the genre and disliking anything in that genre. Also, based on other reviews I've read on the tour, I suspect that Heyer is meant to be read with tongue firmly planted in cheek. That makes a big difference.
I wonder why Leonie is so popular. To me, she was quick to judge, not quick enough to back down, and in all, rather intolerant. I am leaning towards one of her mysteries for a future read. Thanks for your suggestion!
The difference in Dominic's name wasn't consistent though. If his mom constantly used the -que ending, I would have been able to explain it away. However, she alternates between the two, and quite frankly it drove me nuts.
I really liked Mary, but I hated how she constantly felt she needed to run away to avoid burdening anyone. Leonie was annoying the way she jumped to conclusions. I really liked Avon the best in this particular book because he took the time to research the situation before forming an opinion. He was the only one with any sense!
Cotillion, eh? I will have to check it out and see if it changes my opinion of Ms. Heyer! Thanks for the suggestion!
I think you are absolutely correct. The question then becomes just what other books should I pick up to get a true taste of her talent?
I have Arabella on my wish list. I have every intention of trying her work again. I really do think I did not giver her a fair shake.
Rebecca – Like I said, this stuff typically does not bother me. I can even ignore the errors in uncorrected advanced reading copies. Grammatical errors are just there and normally do not detract from the story. This time though, it bugged me every time. Again, I think it was the whole exaggerated feel of the errors. I said the whole book was over-the-top, and that includes the grammar!
Laura – I love romance, so it broke my heart that I was so harsh with Heyer. I definitely want to give her a second chance though. Everyone else seems to love her!
Thanks, Maria! I was not certain what to expect, which makes my reaction that much more surprising. I think I am just going to have to try reading another of her books, now that I know what to expect, to see if my initial reaction was tainted!
Thanks, Laurel Ann! I realize that my reaction was from a modern perspective, and that I was not putting her work into its proper context. Trust me – that is something I very rarely do. I am willing and do plan to give her another try because I was not fair in my initial assessment.
Hi Michelle, thanks for your honest review. In Ms. Heyer's defence, some of the grammar that you found irritating is intensional. That was the useage in Regency times. This can be puzzling to the modern reader, it was to me. I now just take it as colloquialism and laugh.
As far as misspeilling of proper names, that might me a proof reading error? Heyer was maticulous in her research and I can not imagine that this was intensional.
In comparission to modern romance authors, Heyer may seem predictable and Harlquinish, but she was the forerunner of the genre and it was fresh and new at time of publication. I find remembering that helpful when I am reading her novels and just try to enjoy them for their other sparkling elements.
I hope that you will give another of her novels a try. I really enjoyed Friday's Child (her personal favorite) and Grand Sophy (my fav).
Cheers, Laurel Ann
My recent post Winner Announced in the Persuasion (Naxos AudioBooks) Giveaway