Rating: 
Summary: What a great time to have lived and loved!
Review: I just don't understand why the customer comments on this book have been so mixed: some people seem to hate, others to love it. Why does it arouse such strong reactions? I liked it very much indeed - but then that is because I like reading about the way people of a different time actually spent their days and how they lived: my husband always said that I was the kind of person who would want to know Who Did the Catering for the Last Supper! He was quite right! I'm fascinated by menus,and babies and medicines and cooking and all the mundane, eternal things of life.When you add duels and gambling and fete champetres and dandies and crinolines,and Lady Caroline Lamb stabbing herself at a ball for love of Byron - I'm hooked. This book is refeshingly un-academic; but it is also funny, clever, full of fascinating details and endlessly evocative - of a wonderful time to have been alive. [Just so long as you were rich, that is! Also, preferably, aristocratic, witty, beautiful and highly educated!. The so-called 'jet set' and 'Beautiful People' of today seem like suburban Puritans in comparison to the glitterati of the Regency!]
Rating:
Summary: Fun and Light Reading
Review: I loved this book. A perfect "lightweight" history book for reading on the subway or at the beach. It is very fun to read, and it focuses on the nobility instead of the general culture at large, which I liked very much. Most of her conclusions are drawn from primary sources, so although the historiography may be heavily weighted on a few select sources, there is no reason why other reviewers should attack the book by claiming it is innacurate. History is an interperative discipline, and Ms. Murray's book is one more interpretation of the Regency Period. If you enjoy English History you will probably enjoy this book.
Rating:
Summary: Fun and Light Reading
Review: I loved this book. A perfect "lightweight" history book for reading on the subway or at the beach. It is very fun to read, and it focuses on the nobility instead of the general culture at large, which I liked very much. Most of her conclusions are drawn from primary sources, so although the historiography may be heavily weighted on a few select sources, there is no reason why other reviewers should attack the book by claiming it is innacurate. History is an interperative discipline, and Ms. Murray's book is one more interpretation of the Regency Period. If you enjoy English History you will probably enjoy this book.
Rating:
Summary: Fun and Light Reading
Review: I loved this book. A perfect "lightweight" history book for reading on the subway or at the beach. It is very fun to read, and it focuses on the nobility instead of the general culture at large, which I liked very much. Most of her conclusions are drawn from primary sources, so although the historiography may be heavily weighted on a few select sources, there is no reason why other reviewers should attack the book by claiming it is innacurate. History is an interperative discipline, and Ms. Murray's book is one more interpretation of the Regency Period. If you enjoy English History you will probably enjoy this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Trivia should be correct
Review: I was so disappointed with this book. It might be gossipy but has all the accuracy of gossip. You know there have been so many more high-profile fakes sold to the breathless press and public as authentic - just think of the Hitler diaries which were reprinted. It is much easier to pull a swifty on the public and reviewers when the subject is more obscure. The information Murray used is easily available in the public sphere. Christopher Hibbert has done a great job editing Gronow's works, it is easily available too, Lesley Blanch did a wonderful job on both Julia Jones and Harriette Wilson's memoirs. There are endless copies of the Creevey papers too. All these books are marvellously gossipy, have great detail- they also have editors that understand their subjects and are able to shed light on their lives which Murray is incapable of doing.
Rating: 
Summary: Try it for yourself
Review: I've been curious about this book ever since reading all these hot-tempered reviews on Amazon. I'm a university student with a researching streak, and found an older copy of this book in the stacks. Finals, you know -- what better time to research something completely unrelated to your work. Now: The Good: witty, anecdotal, and really brings across a real love of the period. The Bad: the schizophrenic indexing, the unprofessional mistakes. Now, you have to ask yourself, what's more important to you: accuracy or readability? I've read any Regency England history book I can get my hands on at my university library. Many of them, quite frankly, are written in a torpid, dull manner that completely fails to do homage to the spirit of the Regency period. This book has been criticized for being inaccurate. True. Now get over it. It has also been criticized for depicting unpleasant people. Because apparently the Regency was a time of sweetness and light? Because those were the Good Olde Days? Please. The sinners at least have more fun, and had better clothes. Murray's book is bright, sharp, smart, effervescent, and ironic, just like the period it depicts. I'm usually a stickler for accuracy in historical novels, but Murray's voice makes up for it. She comes across as an intelligent witness, winking at the reader before she dashes off to relate another wonderfully gossipy tale. This book is not 100% correct, yes, but any true afficionado would probably read other books in the same vein as well as go over some primary resources. And for the novice or visitor, they are still going to come away with a clear understanding of the era and a small percentage of its people. In the end, you'll enjoy and you'll learn, and if you want more (and it's hard to imagine anyone not wanting more), you can go read the very accurate, very dry stuff and derive the gossip on your own. All in all an interesting work. Don't let the critics get ya down.
Rating:
Summary: Try it for yourself
Review: I've been curious about this book ever since reading all these hot-tempered reviews on Amazon. I'm a university student with a researching streak, and found an older copy of this book in the stacks. Finals, you know -- what better time to research something completely unrelated to your work. Now: The Good: witty, anecdotal, and really brings across a real love of the period. The Bad: the schizophrenic indexing, the unprofessional mistakes. Now, you have to ask yourself, what's more important to you: accuracy or readability? I've read any Regency England history book I can get my hands on at my university library. Many of them, quite frankly, are written in a torpid, dull manner that completely fails to do homage to the spirit of the Regency period. This book has been criticized for being inaccurate. True. Now get over it. It has also been criticized for depicting unpleasant people. Because apparently the Regency was a time of sweetness and light? Because those were the Good Olde Days? Please. The sinners at least have more fun, and had better clothes. Murray's book is bright, sharp, smart, effervescent, and ironic, just like the period it depicts. I'm usually a stickler for accuracy in historical novels, but Murray's voice makes up for it. She comes across as an intelligent witness, winking at the reader before she dashes off to relate another wonderfully gossipy tale. This book is not 100% correct, yes, but any true afficionado would probably read other books in the same vein as well as go over some primary resources. And for the novice or visitor, they are still going to come away with a clear understanding of the era and a small percentage of its people. In the end, you'll enjoy and you'll learn, and if you want more (and it's hard to imagine anyone not wanting more), you can go read the very accurate, very dry stuff and derive the gossip on your own. All in all an interesting work. Don't let the critics get ya down.
Rating:
Summary: Shoddy Fluff
Review: If it were possible to give this book half a star I would. The book is fluff. It would be an enjoyable time waster if it were not supposed to be fact. The chapters are littered with errors of fact, misidentified people,mistaken identies,and misdated events. There is a general absent of dates. None of these deficinecies would matter if this were a work of fiction. Unfortunately the book is promoted as non-fiction. If all you want is a cotton candy introduction to a fascinating period of English history, this book will do as well as any other novel; however, if you want a solid meal of fact, look elsewhere. It is a shame for the book is easy to read.
Rating:
Summary: There are so many good books on the Regency - not this one
Review: If people want a good book on the life and times of the Regency I would strongly suggest something like Amanda Foreman's excellent book 'Georgiana' or Stella Margeton's 'Regency London' or Priestly's "Prince of Pleasure". But don't read this book. Venetia Murray is clearly cashing in on the popularity of the Regency Market. She doesn't seem to know or understand the period so while the book might sparkle with good prose it is flat on fact. Now shouldn't that be what a non-fiction book should have as its primary concern? Fact? Sure make them nice to read, but they should be factual. I see someone in a previous review has suggested that people who have written negative reviews must have some kind of agenda - or be amateur historians. Well there is that. I mean how do you know what reviewers backgrounds really are? Well, unless you know the period well I would suggest that Murray's book is quite convincing. But it is her attention to detail that lets her down - and has caused her to make so many mistakes and to misinterpret events. I would suggest that the easiest way to confirm this for yourselves is a quick look through the index at the back of An Elegant Madness. There are people that she hasn't fully named - they are just surnames - if she knows who these people are, why hasn't she fully named them. Check an index on a Hibbert book, or Amanda Foreman or any other reputable author and you will see a full name entry - with title and often with dates of birth and death. Murray hasn't even bothered to match the correct pages in numerous cases - so looking for 'Hazlitt' she claims in the index that he is mentioned on pages 19, 24, 112, 128, and 277. Well a check through the book only shows him appearing on page 19. For the Earl of Barrymore she has two pages noted - but the Earl doesn't turn up on page '52' as she says - but I stumbled across him on page 42. For one entry in her index where she mentions two pages - on one page the person is said to be the Duke of Wellington's nephew - on another he is the Duke's brother. Well he wasn't both...they are in fact two different people she is referring too. Yes, I know, everyone is saying 'but this is a readable why worry about the index?' Well the index is so bad....so very very bad....it is an easily demonstrable indication of just how terrible Murray's standards really are. This standard of workmanship and attention to detail is evident throughout her whole book and reflects the level of attention she gave to her own research. I just think there are so many really good Regency Books out there that there is no need to waste reading time on something that is just going to mislead. Another excellent read apart from the one's mentioned above is Christopher Hibbert's "George III". Read something else - not this. I have left my email address on this message and people are welcome to contact me further if they have any questions - or wish to discuss with me the plethora of errors that litter this book.
Rating:
Summary: Get this book - I couldn't put it down!
Review: My daughter sent me this book from America for my birthday - and how right she was! I'm no highbrow intellectual but I love the kind of history that tells you the reality behind the facts; the daily life and problems of another world. This is it: beautifully written, funny,dramatic, and so much better than most books of social history which fall between two stools - either too academic or too low brow for anyone of ordinary intelligence. I don't usually bother to write about books but 'An Elegant Madness' kept me awake all night! Oh, how I wish I had been born in the Regency..So long as I was rich, of course, and preferably pretty! I'd have had a ball...Bucks and Beaux, duels and dances, glamour and gossip, revolutionaries and reform...And such gorgeous clothes! Ah well, we live in a kinder world, at least. If you like pure glittering escapism this is the nright read for you. And Thanks, Gemma, for sending it.
| 
