This book looked interesting when I picked it up, and I'd heard from other readers that it was good. I've never read much about this period, so I was interested to find out what it was like.

I found it mildly entertaing in parts, but in a way repetitve. The book is divided into sections, each dealing with a different aspect of society such as the 'bon ton', london, the seaside, the persuit of pleasure, fashion and manners.

In the end I found that most of the people she was writing about were very self indulgent and mostly came to a bad end. (like any regency novel). I've also since found out that this book is not the best on accuracy which is a dissapointment.

In the end I found I was skim reading this book, because I felt like I was going over the same ground over and over, and it just lost my interest. Some books will do that to you and this one did it to me. Such a shame as I started with high hopes for it.

Serious historians won't find much to peak their interest in this gossip-ladden review of the Regency period, but lay readers will find it an interesting and entertaining read. The research supposedly comes from original sources, including newspaper columns about the foibles and follies of the haute ton. Admist the many amusing anecdotes, the author tries to cover all aspects of daily living in England at the time. Unfortunately, the structure of the book is such that there is a lot of repetition and I had trouble keeping track of (and interested in) the various many members of society that kept reappearing. An amusing read, but not a definitive look at the era.

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.