|
Tell me, can a Regency mystery ignore all the conventions of Regency
behavior in order to further the plot? Can the heroine – in pursuit of
a murderer – ignore with impunity all the accepted standards of behavior
without problem or penalty? Can she travel to London alone with a young
man, visit him unchaperoned in his house, attend a party with him and no
female companion, slip out of her house at midnight, and consort with
"ladies of ill repute" at a Pantheon Ball?
Our heroine, Lydia Trevelyan, does all this and more in the company of
one of the ton's most eligible bachelors. If you can accept that an
eighteen year old girl, even one who aspires to spinsterhood, would so
behave, then you might well think more highly of Little Coquette
than I did.
Lydia has decided not to marry. Her parents' marriage has not been such
to instill warm feelings about the possibility of wedded bliss. She
has read Mary Wollstonecraft and has decided to chafe at the
restrictions society (and her mother) place on her behavior. She has
taken up fishing, not because she especially enjoys it, but because it
is a male pursuit. One day, while fishing in the stream that separates
her home from her neighbor, Lord Beaumont's, estate, she finds his
lordship himself, also fishing. Although eight years separate the two,
they had been friendly as children. But now, Lydia is resentful of the
fact that her mother seems to want her to attach the very eligible
Beau.
When Beau hooks a big one, it turns out not to be a fish, but rather a
dead body. The corpse is a woman who clearly was "no better than she
should be." Lydia discovers that the victim was her father's mistress.
She determines to find out who murdered the woman and enlists Beau in
her quest. Thus, all the events and happenings described above.
I have never before read a Joan Smith Regency, although I have been
intrigued by her recent turn to Regency romantic mysteries. I must
assume that she knows about Regency manners and mores. There was very
little truly "Regency" about this book. The heroine was much more a
20th not an early 19th century character. Thus, in my mind, this book
failed as a Regency. There really wasn't a lot of mystery or suspense
either.
However, the romance was nicely done. The plot device of having
two people who have been childhood friends discover that friendship has
become something much more is enjoyable, especially if well done. And
Smith does it well. Lydia is young and inexperienced; like many of the
very young, she has strong if ill-founded opinions. Leaving her
sheltered existence forces her to grow up and to reevaluate her own
ideas about the world and her place in it.
Beau is also young at 26, young enough to find the pursuit of the
murderer a great adventure. But he is also old enough to understand why
Lydia feels as she does and to help her both find the truth and to
accept that the world is often ambiguous. One can believe that Lydia
and Beau are meant for each other.
Since I liked the heroine and hero and enjoyed watching their
relationship develop, I am rating this an acceptable read. But be
warned that if you are at all a Regency purist, Smith does not offer a
very accurate portrayal of that era. I wonder, are her straight
romances as un-Regency-like as this mystery? I've got several on my to-be-read
pile and need to know whether I should in fact read them
--Jean Mason
|