Back to Top

Tag Archives: Regency

It seems puzzling to me that the English Regency period is so neglected in popular culture. Certainly it has been celebrated in the movies based on Jane Austen’s books, and there are also the modern Regency romances to consider. But I can rarely find the English Regency represented in other forms, while the Victorian era is everywhere.

A few years ago I became interested in collecting figurines. I wanted to find porcelain ladies dressed in Regency fashion. I have found a few, but for the most part current collectable “lady figurines” are of the Victorian era. The same goes for collectable dolls. The odd thing is that if a Regency figurine or doll appears on the market there is a high interest in it—if my experiences on eBay are of any significance. Believe me, you need your Big Girl panties on (or Big Boy boxers) if you are going to join the bidding!

Another area that demonstrates the popularity of the English Regency and the French Empire period is old fashion prints. Again, the most sought after seem to be those of the English Regency/French Empire era. There are many listings of Victorian fashion plates, but as far as I have been able to see, it is the Regency era prints that generate the most interest.

But still, the Victorian era rules in promotion. Romantic decorating? Magazines seem to equate romantic with Victorian. If a photo of a room with Empire influences is shown, I usually miss seeing a mention of the era. Often the antiques used in a room otherwise decorated in Victorian style are pieces that were also used in the Regency period—Queen Anne, Hepplewhite, Chippendale, and even Regency style.

I admit that this is all my unstudied opinion, and I know the English Regency was short—but it seems to me that there is more interest in it than marketers realize. It is more than our traditional Regency romance novels that seem to be overlooked by those in the business of deciding what we want to buy and bringing it to market.

Opinions?

Laurie
LORD RYBURN’S APPRENTICE
Signet, January 2006

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged | 3 Replies

I’d like to share why I like this period, and why it’s so rewarding to read-write about.
First, the clothes. Yeah, I know this sounds really superficial, but it was a period of about twenty years when women were not corseted and constricted, and I think that’s very significant. Stays were for support more than shaping. If you look online on costume sites, you can see that some stays were virtually like sports bras. Women could actually move–look how often Jane Austen’s heroines stride across-country. The men’s clothes are a tribute to beautiful, athletic male bodies–hideous on overweight slobs, of course, but then what fashion isn’t–and those tight pants–well, say no more…consider too that women wore no underwear. Oh, the possibilities.
There was so much happening in the early years of the 19c–terrific architecture, music, and literature, the abolitionist movement, and great political change. There were women writers, musicians, and artists, and at least one female astronomer. England was considered a sort of maverick country by the rest of Europe–its monarch, under the control of Parliament, was not a despot; there was a very high level of literacy and many regional newspapers, each issue of which was read by several people, and although a small minority (of men) could vote, the public held the effective and powerful tool of the petition.
And of course the fairy-tale world of the Ton, which I guess I do have to mention. I have to admit a few aristocrats go a long way with me, although I find the concept of great families and their politicking fascinating–one of my favorite books is “The Other Boleyn Girl” by Phillippa Gregory, which is rather like the Sopranos at the Tudor court. And generally my heroes are motivated by family honor and duty to the family name, which leads to some tremendous conflict.
So, what about everyone else?

Posted in Regency | Tagged | 9 Replies