Scan barcode
showell's review against another edition
4.0
Nearly as engrossing as a novel, with a deeply satisfying final line.
alishaforeverev's review against another edition
3.0
The desire to travel back in time just to tell Seymour Fleming that she is indeed 100% that bitch.
bronwynmb's review against another edition
4.0
This was really interesting. The Worsleys were fascinating and kind of horrible people. At the beginning, I sort of felt for them, these difficult situations they’re born into (for rich people, of course). As the book went on they just got worse and worse, though still fascinating. Richard especially got a bit hard to read about at times; Seymour was mostly just frivolous. Fascinating stuff!
maplessence's review against another edition
4.0
Crim. Con. was an expression used in at least one of [a:Georgette Heyer|18067|Georgette Heyer|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1336748892p2/18067.jpg]'s novels.
I've now found out more than I ever thought I would have wanted to know about what that slightly odd expression means. (it is an abbreviation of Criminal Conversations.)
Look at these sumptuous Sir Joshua Reynolds portraits.
Lady Worsley
Her portrait had her dressed to match her husband, Sir Richard Worsley. His likeness was taken a few years earlier.
Unfortunately, the Worsleys weren't married long enough for the portraits to ever hang together.
Worsley, monied himself, wanted a wealthy wife. Seymour (yes, that was Lady Worsley's christian name) was very young, frivolous, fun loving and wanted a normal sex life. That was never going to happen with her hubby. To put it mildly, he was a very strange lad indeed.
Not withstanding this, the couple rubbed along quite happily in a ménage à trois with their mutual friend George Bisset. Seymour's second child was fathered by Bisset, but Worsley acknowledged the little girl as his own. But George & Seymour fell in love, circumstances changed where they could no longer live together and they decided to elope.
And that is where the happy part of the story ended, as it turned out that in spite of his unconventional life style, Richard Worsley put a very high value on the proprieties being observed and showed his true colours as a miserly, vindictive man. To modern eyes, George Bisset was no prize either.But just as I was preparing to be thoroughly depressed by another story on how unfair history was to women
I'd say that Seymour was ahead of her time, but Ms Rubenhold mentions quite a few of Seymour's friends that were also very wild. Georgette Heyer's world this is not!
I wouldn't describe Seymour's life story as a totally happy one, (Sir Richard was determined to have her live in poverty, she was separated from her children & possibly was imprisioned during the French Revolution) but it was certainly more exciting than her mean spirited ex! Sir Richard ended up a recluse.
Ms Rubenhold does a great job with this story, even though almost no correspondence from Seymour survives. She rarely resorts to speculation. There were a couple of minor editing errors, but overall this story was a riot and I am glad to have read it.
I've now found out more than I ever thought I would have wanted to know about what that slightly odd expression means. (it is an abbreviation of Criminal Conversations.)
Look at these sumptuous Sir Joshua Reynolds portraits.
Lady Worsley
Her portrait had her dressed to match her husband, Sir Richard Worsley. His likeness was taken a few years earlier.
Unfortunately, the Worsleys weren't married long enough for the portraits to ever hang together.
Worsley, monied himself, wanted a wealthy wife. Seymour (yes, that was Lady Worsley's christian name) was very young, frivolous, fun loving and wanted a normal sex life. That was never going to happen with her hubby. To put it mildly, he was a very strange lad indeed.
Not withstanding this, the couple rubbed along quite happily in a ménage à trois with their mutual friend George Bisset. Seymour's second child was fathered by Bisset, but Worsley acknowledged the little girl as his own. But George & Seymour fell in love, circumstances changed where they could no longer live together and they decided to elope.
And that is where the happy part of the story ended, as it turned out that in spite of his unconventional life style, Richard Worsley put a very high value on the proprieties being observed and showed his true colours as a miserly, vindictive man. To modern eyes, George Bisset was no prize either.
Spoiler
he eventually deserts Seymour when Worley would only give Seymour a separation, not a divorce.Spoiler
Seymour fought back - & wouldn't back down.I'd say that Seymour was ahead of her time, but Ms Rubenhold mentions quite a few of Seymour's friends that were also very wild. Georgette Heyer's world this is not!
I wouldn't describe Seymour's life story as a totally happy one, (Sir Richard was determined to have her live in poverty, she was separated from her children & possibly was imprisioned during the French Revolution) but it was certainly more exciting than her mean spirited ex! Sir Richard ended up a recluse.
Ms Rubenhold does a great job with this story, even though almost no correspondence from Seymour survives. She rarely resorts to speculation. There were a couple of minor editing errors, but overall this story was a riot and I am glad to have read it.
https://wordpress.com/view/carolshessonovel.wordpress.com
ana3333's review against another edition
3.0
There's certainly a lot of good information in this book, but it's missing Rubenhold's signature flair. This book is quite a bit drier than most of her other books and is missing any sense of narrative. It just sort of plods along in a chronological order, frequently interrupting itself to discuss things like the annual salary of the random dude who talked to the Worsleys for a couple minutes.
That being said, this is still a pretty interesting part of history. Rubenhold included a lot of fascinating details and provided a nice sense of context for the Worsleys' scandal.
Overall, I'd recommend it to anyone researching the Worsleys, but it's not a fun book to read. I ended up just sort of picking it up between other series, reading it for a half hour or so, getting bored, and putting it down for a week or two while I read other books.
That being said, this is still a pretty interesting part of history. Rubenhold included a lot of fascinating details and provided a nice sense of context for the Worsleys' scandal.
Overall, I'd recommend it to anyone researching the Worsleys, but it's not a fun book to read. I ended up just sort of picking it up between other series, reading it for a half hour or so, getting bored, and putting it down for a week or two while I read other books.
bronwynmb's review against another edition
4.0
This was really interesting. The Worsleys were fascinating and kind of horrible people. At the beginning, I sort of felt for them, these difficult situations they’re born into (for rich people, of course). As the book went on they just got worse and worse, though still fascinating. Richard especially got a bit hard to read about at times; Seymour was mostly just frivolous. Fascinating stuff!
lou_1440's review against another edition
Might be great, lost me with a very uninteresting first chapter. Also it was due at the library.