Category: Regency

How much does accuracy matter?

Updated on January 29, 2013 by Cara King

How much does historical accuracy matter to you?

I ranted a bit on the subject yesterday…but now I’m calmer, and I’d like to know what everyone else thinks.

At the Austen movie exhibition at the Museum of Costume in Bath, they argued about the EMMA costume shown here, “Gwyneth Paltrow’s green and white dress, with its large, chocolate bow on the bodice, has none of the subtlety of the fabrics that other designers have used… In a way, the pattern looks more like a textile design from the 1970’s… This is just what Hollywood requires: simple dresses, simple messages.” So: does this dress bother you? Is it too anachronistic, or do you like the way it captures Emma’s “princess” role in her community? How accurate do you think fabric and cut need to be? Is having an accurate outline enough?

Or how about hair, and bonnets? Does it bother you that Emma goes outside throughout the movie with the hairstyle shown above, and no hat or bonnet? Or how about Keira Knightley’s Elizabeth Bennet, who skips a bonnet, and also has her hair down? Is that too ahistorical for you?

How about Greer Garson, in the 1940 PRIDE AND PREJUDICE movie? It is commonly said that in this film, they gave the men Regency styles, and the women the styles of a decade or two later….but doesn’t this dress also look very 20th century? Does it bother you that the women aren’t wearing dresses that are remotely Regency? And does Garson’s non-period hair bother you?

Here we have two shots of Embeth Davidtz playing Mary Crawford in the recent movie of MANSFIELD PARK. This, in my opinion, is the most anachronistic dress of all, but it does convey Mary Crawford’s slinkiness, and sophistication. Does this dress drive you bats? (I wish I could also find a photo of Miss Bingley’s sleeveless dress — I don’t believe one exists on the internet! But here’s her other dress, which is less wrong, but still odd.)

How about accuracy in books? When Heyer talks about the Little Season during the Regency, though it didn’t yet exist, does that annoy you? When another author’s hero runs away at eighteen and purchases a commission in the navy, do you shout at the book? When Sir William is also Sir Barton, and Lord Brighton is also Lord George, do you throw the book against the wall? Or are all of these annoyances minor to you (if indeed you notice them at all)?

What kind of inaccuracies bother you most? Easily checked facts, such as title, distances between towns, how fast a carriage could go? Or the mindset of the times? Or the rules of society?

Please share!

Cara
Cara King, www.caraking.com
MY LADY GAMESTER — Signet Regency, out now!!!

Posted in Reading, Regency, Writing | Tagged Austen, historical accuracy, movies | 13 Replies

Just What Was Regency Dress?

Updated on January 29, 2013 by Laurie Bishop

Having opened that nutshell, I don’t have the room for too many details. But as I was perusing two books this morning–one being REGENCY ETIQUETTE, The Mirror of Graces (1811) and THE FEMALE INSTRUCTOR (1831) it came home to me that there were prissy attitudes in dress and other attitudes in dress.

Regency affectionados sometimes believe there was just one way that things were–but most of us know that wasn’t so. Not to repeat myself (I may have said something along these lines before) but in the 60’s we did not wear Jackie Kennedy’s neat jacketed suits and pillbox hats, any more than we all wore mini-dresses in huge geometric prints. Or prairie dresses with flowers in our hair.

The lady (I assume both were ladies) author of REGENCY ETTIQUETTE had some amusing comments (not intending to be amusing, naturally). Here is one, regarding stays and corsets:

A vile taste in the contriver, and as stupid an approval by a large majority of women, have brought this monstrous distortion into a kind of fashion; and in consequence we see, in eight women out of ten, the hips squeezed into a circumference little more than the waist; and the bosom shoved up to the chin, making a sort of fleshy shelf, disgusting to the beholders, and certainly most incommodious to the bearer.

She has much to say on the subject of corsets, and also on the subject of a lady who, “of her own choice, ‘unveils her beauties to the sun and the moon.'” All of this suggests that there were ladies who wore stays and those who didn’t, and ladies who bared themselves in one way or the other–by means of low necklines or filmy material–and those who did not. Also, interestingly enough, the pictures published in this volume did not show examples of those you normally saw in women’s fashion publications in that year. The waistlines, for one, were almost at the normal waist and not high at all. (See the b & w scan above).

The authoress of the 1834 volume has a similar opinion as the first. Immodesty and excess of dress are to be avoided, in her opinion, and “…do not be fools in order to be belles. Above all things consider decency and ease; never expose nor torture nature.” She also reiterated the first authoress’ opinion that one should dress appropriately to one’s station. It seems that even in 1811 there were concerns about girls of “plebian classes” dressing above their station.

The second scan is from Costume Parisienne of 1811.

The third is from Ackerman’s of that year (a mourning gown); the fourth is from Acerman’s, 1810, a ball gown.

Finally, the last lady is from Ackerman’s of 1812. I could not tell you which are the cit’s daughters and which are the peers!

Laurie

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged clothing, Regency clothing, Regency Etiquette, The Female Instructor, The Mirror of Graces | 5 Replies

Regency Haikus

Updated on January 29, 2013 by megan

Each year, the romance review website All About Romance runs a Purple Prose Parody where readers are invited to submit entries mocking, I mean, paying tribute to their favorite romance authors. I entered this past year, a time travel Regency where Tony Soprano traveled back and ended up in the body of a Regency debutante, all told in the style of Carla Kelly (My favorite part was the title, Mr. Soprano Takes A Trip). High-concept, not always as funny execution.

But it got me to thinking about our books, and how they could be distilled into, say, 17 words or so.

Haikus.

Therefore, without further ado, I present some of my modest Regency haikus, and invite you to add more.

Can We Talk?*
Debutante meets Lord
A big misunderstanding
It will all work out
*contributed by my husband

A Truth Universally Acknowledged
A poor young beauty
Meets a wealthy, handsome duke
Inevitable.

Mea Culpa
I am a writer!
Historically accurate?
Um, no, not so much.

Regency Oxymoron*
A virgin widow
How the hell does that happen?
Incongruity.
*Also my husband’s.

It’s Party Time!
Pelisse, reticule
Invitation to the ball
Say he will be there.

This one is R-rated–put your cursor over the white space to reveal the words.
Accessibility
My regency cock
Yearns to enter her–soft, wet
Yay! No underwear.

Time Of The Season
Spring is here at last!
It’s time to make my debut
Married in the fall.

Regency Buck
Pluck to the backbone
A devil with the ladies
Must be married soon.

This exercise, I must say, is loads of fun to do on the subway. Time for you to post your haikus–And thanks for playing!

Megan

Posted in Frivolity, Regency | Tagged Regency haiku | 9 Replies

Nunquam ubi sub ubi

Updated on January 29, 2013 by Janet Mullany

With the deepest of apologies to Mr. St. James, today I want to talk about…unmentionables. However, as Mr. St. James probably knows, in his time there were none. Right. Another rude shock of 21st centurly life. Because–and I’m sure Mr. St. James has no idea of this, he is such a very polite gentleman–for a long time it was thought nice girls did not wear underwear; putting something on that divided the legs was a big no-no (like riding astride). But not so nice girls might for the frisson it would give their paying customers.
It always makes me hoot with laughter in a regency or regency-set when the hero removes the heroine’s non-existent undies. Particularly if he has to untie them. Good lord. The only thing he might encounter, and this would be fairly late, in the late teens I believe, would be pantelettes, when hemlines hovered at high ankle level (control yourself, sir), and gentlemen might not be terribly gentlemanly about the fact that a woman’s legs were available. And the funny thing is that pantelettes look, well, sort of rude to our eyes. Here’s a fairly polite sketch thereof from a pattern at Jessamyn’s Regency Costume Companion,
http://www.songsmyth.com/patternsunderthings.html.

Now, I remember Elena’s readers have told her that women in regencies didn’t have sex, and doubtless that particular critic believes her heroines should be wearing (metaphorically at the very least) scary pants a la Bridget Jones. Far from it. Women had very little between themselves, the fresh air, and the fresh hero.

No wonder we love this period.

And here is the ultimate costume site with fabulous links:
http://www.costumes.org.
Enjoy,
Janet

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged clothing, undergarments | 5 Replies

What To Wear In Winter

Updated on January 28, 2013 by diane

We’ve just been through a very cold patch of winter here in Northern Virginia, with snow and ice and below freezing temperatures. Parts of the US are seeing even worse. So bundling up and keeping warm have been on my mind these days.

In absence of any other ideas for a Risky Regencies blog topic, I searched “winter” on the Regency Encyclopedia, and came up with What To Wear In Winter in The Regency.

From A Lady of Distinction – Regency Etiquette, the Mirror of Graces (1811)
R.L. Shep Publications (1997)

Satin, Genoa velvet, Indian silks and kerseymere may all be fashioned into as becoming an apparel for the slender figure as for the more en bon point and the warmth they afford is highly needful to preserve health during the cold and damps of winter.

The mantle or cottage-cloak should never be worn by females exceeding a moderate en bon point and we should recommend their winter garbs to be formed of double sarsenet or fine Merina cloth, rather than velvets, which (except black) give an appearance of increased size to the wearer.

Red Morocco, scarlet, and those very vivid hues cannot be worn with any propriety until winter, when the color of the mantle or pelisse may sanction its fullness.

I love the emphasis on looking slim! Some things never change. And look how similar the colors are to what we wear in winter. I love the rich deep colors of winter clothing.

From Buck, Anne M. – Contrib to The Regency Era 1810-1830
The Connoisseur Period Guide (1958)

White muslin was for the whole period pre-eminent for morning wear. Only in the months of mid-winter did the hardy Englishwoman abandon it for silk, poplin or wool.

Nothing sets the dress of 1800-20 so much apart from the style before and the style which followed as the scarcity of the underwear beneath it. A chemise of linen, long, reaching well below the knee; light flexible stays; a petticoat, cotton in warm weather, fine flannel in winter; and then the gown or slip. Many of the muslin gowns were worn over a silk slip.

Straw bonnets were worn during the summer months for walking, Leghorn or fine Dunstable straw, usually plainly trimmed. Fashionable for all the summers of 1815-30, they remained comparatively plain even in the years of excessive trimming. In winter black velvet replaced them.

Black velvet hats sound divine! And note how the lady was supposed to wear as little underwear as possible! Hearty Englishwoman, indeed!

From Cunnington, C. Willett – English Women’s Clothing in the Nineteenth Century
Dover reprint of 1937 original (1990)

The summer pelisse was unlined, the winter pelisse was lined.And more on undergarments by Cunnington, C. Willett & Phillis – The History of Underclothes

And more on undergarments by Cunnington, C. Willett & Phillis – The History of Underclothes Dover (1992)

The petticoat was made of cotton, cambric, linen or for winter, sometimes fine flannel.

The idea of “fine flannel” underwear sounds lovely on this cold, damp day!

De Courtais, Georgine – Women’s Hats, Headdresses and Hairstyles
Dover Publications (2006) says

In winter caps and hats (1800-1810) were often trimmed with fur to match similar edging on robes and coats, but a wide range of materials was used both for the hats and for their trimmings.

I love the fur trimmings. Now we can do this in faux fur and still be animal-friendly!

Gentleman1812

And for the gentleman, from Kelly, Ian – Beau Brummell, The Ultimate Man of Style
Free Press (2006)

Brummell also ordered surtouts or greatcoats from Schweitzer and Davidson for winter wear. They were significantly heavier garments, so much so that they were not

ed in the weighing books at (wine merchants) Berry Brothers. Made out of even heavier worsteds and “Norwich stuff” – another feltlike beaten wool – they were still exquisitely cut and molded.