Back to Top

Category: Regency

Tom and Jerry

Updated on by

In looking for material I discovered there have been multiple “Tom and Jerrys” over time. Most of us know about the cat and mouse cartoon—probably the first in our awareness. I was looking for information on the Regency cartoonist who drew the “Tom and Jerry” young buck hellraisers. So far I have discovered yet another Tom and Jerry, published in 1932.“Tom and Jerry” was also the original stage name used by Simon and Garfunkel in 1957, and it is also a drink consisting of a beaten egg, Jamaican rum, brandy, powdered sugar, boiling water, and nutmeg. It has been used as the name of a folk/fiddle tune, restaurant(s), and likely many other things, it seems at least.

But the Tom and Jerry I was looking for were British cartoons published in London by R. Ackerman between 1815 and 1821. They were done by Pierce Egan, a chronicler of London low life during the Regency period, in a series called . Life in London, or Days and Nights of Jerry Hawthorne and his elegant friend Corinthian Tom. “Corinthian Tom and Jerry Hawthorn” were the characters he used to show the antics of certain rich young bucks causing mischief. They were two young men with a propensity for enjoying themselves and having “adventures.” I think I might call them “rakehells.”

Tom and Jerry and Corinthian Kate

As with fashion prints, you can find Tom and Jerry prints for sale. I first made their acquaintance on…where else…Ebay.

If you would like to see a nice collection of these prints, go to this site. Kauai Fine Prints is a reseller of old prints, and luckily has a selection of “Life in London” on display. Also, you can view Mr. Egan’s cartoons featuring his “Doctor Syntax” character as well.

http://www.brunias.com/tom-jerry.html

Laurie

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged , , | 4 Replies

Laugh-out-loud Regencies

Updated on by



Which are your favorite laugh-out-loud Regencies?

Here are ten of mine, listed in approximate chronological order of publication:

— PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, by Jane Austen
— NORTHANGER ABBEY, by Jane Austen
— THE CONVENIENT MARRIAGE, by Georgette Heyer
— FRIDAY’S CHILD, by Georgette Heyer
— IMPRUDENT LADY, by Joan Smith
— SWEET AND TWENTY, by Joan Smith
— THE PLAYFUL LADY PENELOPE, by Kasey Michaels
— AN EARLY ENGAGEMENT, by Barbara Metzger
— MINOR INDISCRETIONS, by Barbara Metzger
— THE IDEAL BRIDE, by Nonnie St. George


Which funny Regencies do you like? Which do you think are the funniest?

Which funny Regencies do you think succeed the best as novels (or romances)???

By the way, here are four very different covers for Georgette Heyer’s FRIDAY’S CHILD! (Aren’t covers weird???)

Cara
Cara King, www.caraking.com
MY LADY GAMESTER — in stores now!

Posted in Reading, Regency | Tagged , | 7 Replies

The Right Fabric and Accessories

Updated on by


Continuing my sewing theme from last week, I am going to provide a few links for finding period fabrics and accessories.

Fabrics aren’t that hard if you know what you are looking for. If you know something about period fabrics, you are ahead of the game.

The best way of getting an idea what fabrics of the time were like is to look at real Regency gowns. There are sites on the internet—unfortunately, Cathy Decker’s Regency site is on the fritz again ( http://hal.ucr.edu/~cathy/reg3.html ) but there are others where pictures of real gowns can be found, as the Kent State University Museum:
http://dept.kent.edu/museum/costume/bonc/3timesearch/tsnineteenth/1800-1829/1800-1829.html

There are samples of fabrics also on Jessamyn’s Regency Costume Companion site, which also happens to be an invaluable resource when considering your first costume.
Jessamyn’s Regency Costume Companion on fabric:
http://www.songsmyth.com/fabric.html

You can look for vintage costume sellers on line, if not for clothing to buy, but to peruse for research.
http://www.meg-andrews.com/

Once you have an idea what type of fabric you need, you can find the right kind of cotton print, for instance, in a Joann’s Fabrics. Here are some sources that offer more specialized fabrics including vintage reproductions:

http://www.farmhousefabrics.com/

http://www.reproductionfabrics.com/index.php?

Now, for the trimmings: Accessories

Austentation—hats, reticules, and research too:
http://www.austentation.com/home.html

Ostrichs on Line—feathers, fans, Masks…
http://www.ostrichesonline.com/index.html

A site with a shop for various items including US Civil War and Victorian costume, but many items could be used for the Regency as well, including the ladies’ corsets. Click Victorian clothing, then Ladies (if you are a lady!) to see the choices.
http://www.ushist.com/index.html

Frederick’s of Hollywood for their renaissance corset, which creates the “right line” for a Regency lady (unless you are undressing in public, no one will know it isn’t fully ‘period’!)
http://www.fredericks.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=Holiday2002&category%5Fname=Corsets%2DIntimate+Fashion+Styles&product%5Fid=50640

Check wedding gown suppliers for things like flat shoes (dyeable) and long gloves. Certain flat dance shoes can double for Regency shoes as well. Lastly….you all know this…there is Ebay.

Ebay is where I have found the classic Javamar shawl (NOT in pure cashmere, but close enough, with the woven pattern and length that wealthy Regency Ladies used with their gowns), reproduction Georgian jewelry, vintage hats, vintage fans, long leather gloves and vintage style fabrics. I have also done searches for parasols and walking sticks.

I am stopping here…I am somewhat limited by being on a newer computer, and I have not yet found a way to copy my shortcuts from my old computer onto this one. (Somehow I can’t copy my old, huge favorites file to disk—sigh). But hopefully this helps you on your costume venture.

Laurie

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged , , | 6 Replies

A Rose By Any Other Name…

Updated on by

My personal book purchases are almost always based on author. Either I buy books by favorite authors, books by intriguing people I’ve met at conferences or by authors recommended by writer friends. So titles and covers don’t play into my purchases much, but I do have some preferences and pet peeves about titles.

One thing that bugs me (and don’t get me wrong, I’ve enjoyed many books with these titles) is the mass repetition of titles in the romance genre. Just a half-hearted search has turned up loads of books with variants of “ideal/perfect” and “bride/wife”:

  • THE IDEAL BRIDE (a fun romp of a trad Regency by Nonnie St. George and a historical by Stephanie Laurens)
  • A/THE PERFECT BRIDE (Samantha James, Jo Ann Ferguson, Sheila Walsh, Eileen Putnam, Jasmine Cresswell)
  • AN IDEAL WIFE (Betty Neels, Mary Balogh)
  • THE PERFECT WIFE (Lynsay Sands, Shari McDonald, Jane Goodger, Victoria Alexander, Mary Burton)

These titles are just so unmemorable (not that the stories are, necessarily). But maybe there’s just something so intriguing about this combination of concepts that keeps these books flying off the shelves. Ditto with all the Regencies with titles including “London Season”. Still, I worry that sameness of titles connotes sameness of stories. I’d rather see more attempts at original titles (while fully recognizing that the authors might not have had a choice in the matter).

Another pet peeve is titles that are misleading. The worst offender I can think of is a book titled CAPTAIN CUPID CALLS THE SHOTS, by Elisabeth Fairchild. Between the cute title and the rather insipid cover, no one could guess that the story involves a hero with post-war traumatic stress!

I rather like Jean Ross Ewing/Julia Ross’s titles, though I find them amusing in a way. THE SEDUCTION, THE WICKED LOVER, NIGHT OF SIN, GAMES OF PLEASURE are titillating titles with their hint of the forbidden, though the stories are more psychological than the titles might imply and the innate message (as in all good sensual romances) is the healing and cleansing power of loving sex. And the covers are so elegant and luscious!

OK, now to titles I’ve loved. Some of Mary Jo Putney’s: THE RAKE AND THE REFORMER, THE ROGUE AND THE RUNAWAY. They just evoke conflict and adventure and have a nice rhythm. “R” is a sexy letter, too, though maybe as a Risky Regency, I’m a sucker for that particular alliteration. 🙂

Loretta Chase’s Regencies had some memorable titles. VISCOUNT VAGABOND and THE DEVIL’S DELILAH. More alliteration (!) but these are also fun, as are her stories. I also like MISS WONDERFUL and MR. IMPOSSIBLE.

I’ve been fairly lucky myself in having some say in my titles. How about the rest of you Riskies? Have you had to give up a favorite title, or fight to keep it?

As readers, what sort of titles turn you off, or compel you to buy the book?

Elena
LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, a Romantic Times Top Pick!
http://www.elenagreene.com/

Posted in Reading, Regency, Writing | Tagged , | 10 Replies

Regency Shakespeare

Updated on by


I find Shakespeare fascinating. Shakespeare has been hugely popular on British stages almost non-stop since his own time, and the Regency was a high point for Shakespeare in many ways. Of course, the Regency Shakespeare wasn’t exactly like our Shakespeare….and certainly it wasn’t Shakespeare’s Shakespeare…


Here we have two pictures of the reconstructed Theatre Royal, Covent Garden — where John Philip Kemble produced and starred in many of Shakespeare’s greatest works. Kemble’s sister, Sarah Siddons, was one of the theatre’s biggest draws, and had a following so passionate it was almost religious. (After the theatre pictures, we have two pictures of Kemble, one of Siddons, and one of Kean.)


What fascinates me most are the differences in the Shakespeare plays in the different periods. When I researched my workshop “The Regency Joy of Sex (Drugs & Gaming Hells)” for this year’s Romance Writers of America national conference, I was most intrigued by the changes made to Shakespeare’s text in the period — and the changes that weren’t made. In other words, what parts of Shakespeare they found taboo (or, in Regency parlance, “indelicate”), and which were acceptable for a theatre audience comprising men, women, and children drawn from all classes.


So what was acceptable? When John Philip Kemble edited Shakespeare’s text, here are some words he left in: virgin, adultery, fornicatress, naked, damned incest, bosom, virgin-violator, bastard, deflowered maid. (However, in one passage, “virginity” was changed — implying the word “virginity” was more shocking than “virgin”, which at the time didn’t necessarily have the purely sexual meaning we attach to it.)


So what was taken out? The most common change I found was the invariable changing of the word “body” to the word “person.” It seems the Regency folk didn’t really mind sex, or talk about sex, but some words they found too gross, too vulgar, too indelicate — and “body” was one of them. (Versions of the Bible in this period also took out the word “body” and similar words.)


In one passage, “virginity” becomes “honour.” The word “lechery” becomes “wenching.” One passage from “Measure for Measure” was cut and rearranged thus:

SHAKESPEARE’S ORIGINAL: Why, what a ruthless thing is this in him, for the rebellion of a codpiece to take away the life of a man!
J. P. KEMBLE’S VERSION: Why, what a ruthless thing is this in him, to take away the life of a man for–

Ah, yes, the telling “trailing off” trick. (Too true!)

Is anyone else fascinated by Regency Shakespeare? Any questions? Comments? Favorite plays? Plays you wish you could see the Regency versions of? Or any comments on the topic of bowdlerism in general? (Though the term did not yet exist, and Bowdler was only getting started in our period…)

Cara
Cara King, MY LADY GAMESTER — out now!!!
for more info on Regency theatre, see http://caraking.com/Theatre.html
for more info on Regency private life, see http://caraking.com/PrivateLife.html

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged , | 11 Replies