=The Gentlewoman.=—‘Mr. Norris is a practised hand at his craft. He can write bright dialogue and clear English, too.’
=The Literary World.=—‘His last novel, _The Countess Radna_, is an excellent sample of his style. The plot is simple enough. But the story holds the attention and insists upon being read; and it is scarcely possible to say anything more favourable of a work of fiction.’
=The Scotsman.=—‘The story, in which there is more than a spice of modern life romance, is an excellent study of the problem of mixed marriage. The book is one of good healthy reading, and reveals a fine broad view of life and human nature.’
=The Glasgow Herald.=—‘This is an unusually fresh and well-written story. The tone is thoroughly healthy; and Mr. Norris, without being in the least old-fashioned, manages to get along without the aid of pessimism, psychology, naturalism, or what is known as frank treatment of the relations between the sexes.’
=The Westminster Gazette.=—‘Mr. Norris writes throughout with much liveliness and force, saying now and then something that is worth remembering. And he sketches his minor characters with a firm touch.’
LONDON: WILLIAM HEINEMANN, 21 BEDFORD STREET, W.C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=The Speaker.=—‘_A Victim of Good Luck_ is one of those breezy stories of his in which the reader finds himself moving in good society, among men or women who are neither better nor worse than average humanity, but who always show good manners and good breeding.... Suffice it to say that the story is as readable as any we have yet had from the same pen.’
=The Daily Telegraph.=—‘_A Victim of Good Luck_ is one of the brightest novels of the year, which cannot but enhance its gifted author’s well-deserved fame and popularity.’
=The World.=—‘Here is Mr. Norris in his best form again, giving us an impossible story with such imperturbable composure, such quiet humour, easy polish, and irresistible persuasiveness, that he makes us read _A Victim of Good Luck_ right through with eager interest and unflagging amusement without being aware, until we regretfully reach the end, that it is just a farcical comedy in two delightful volumes.’