What would you like to know about life in Regency England?

[Susana]

I'm doing a series of "interviews" with a Regency character in one of my stories, and I was wondering what sort of topics would be of interest to readers.

For example, if you had a Regency lady staying with you in your home, what sort of things would you like to ask her?

What sort of things would SHE want to know?

A future episode will deal with shopping for fabric at Joanne's (the linen-draper's). My mother is going to be Lady P (for Pendleton) and she is busy making all sorts of Regency hats to make her look more eccentric than she really is.

Lady P did yesterday's episode by herself because Susana (me) was at a doctor's appointment. She talked a bit about Pride and Prejudice, although she got a bit distracted at times.

What I want to do with this is give my readers a bit of fun commentary along with small doses of historical information.

So…do you have any suggestions? I'd love to hear them!

Susana's Parlour is at susanaellisauthor.wordpress.com.

And while you're at it, why not enter the Treasuring Theresa contest on www.susanaellis.com/pub? A $20 Amazon Gift Card awarded each week this month!

[Steelwhisper]

As no one seems to make a start--yes, I'd love hearing about a variety of things. For example about life apart from the "ton" and apart from the Napoleonic wars themselves.

The preoccupation with the high society of that time in books, in fact a narrow slice of the upper class only, feels to me a bit like the negation of the whole populace in favour of the Paris Hiltons and Michael Jacksons of the Regency era. That can't have been what the Regency period was about or what it has to offer on the level of a historical book.

A lot more on the morals, ethics, mores and behaviour of the normal people. Lately we get inundated with authors claiming how open and forward the Regency was compared to the Victorian era. Alas, I don't buy that. Ethics, morals and mores do not consist only of those displayed by a very very narrow slice of a populace. Whether during the late or the early 19th century, I don't for a second believe that accepted/tolerated behaviour was the same for the working class, middle class or aristocrats. Or in other words, what a duchess might do in her townhouse after she popped out a heir or two is most likely very different from what a maid or a merchant's wife could do and not be ostracised.

Politics and real-life problems of the time. There was shortage and famine going on. Industrialisation was on the rise, there were major inventions and a marked change of overall life happening in that century. Not everyone could have been as airheaded as so often described, not even the nobs.

In short--I'd like more history and less Austen (and I don't think that's a sacrilege either!) ;)

[Susana]

Hmm…that gives me food for thought. As a noblewoman, I have to wonder what Lady P would have known about in that period. Most of the upper classes tended to be tightly insulated against the darker side of life, such as the war and poverty, etc. Reminds me (in a way) of the situation in America, what with so many people suffering from economic distress, constant wars that we don't really think much about in our daily lives, etc.

In current projects, I do explore some of the darker sides of life in that period, especially as pertains to women.

There is a difference, however, between historical fiction and historical romance, particularly Regency romance. In the latter, there are often problems, such as a family member gambling away the family fortune and then expecting the daughter to marry a wealthy old man, heroes returning damaged from war, etc., but the primary focus is the romance and how the protagonists managed to resolve the obstacles keeping them apart.

Historical fiction, on the other hand, deals with real people and real events, with scenes created by the author, using historical sources for guidance. The romance—if there is any—plays a lesser role to the actual historical events, which are not always so pretty as seen in the typical Regency romance.

Frankly, I enjoy both. Elizabeth Chadwick writes wonderful historical fiction. I read a lot and some books fade quickly in my mind. Hers do not. I recommend everything she has written, but especially "For the King's Favor."

While I find history fascinating and love to learn more about it, I consider myself more of a romance writer than a historian. But I like my romances to seem realistic to the reader, which is why I am constantly doing research as I write. The blog with Lady P gives me the opportunity to consider many aspects of life in the Regency era, although it is written in a fairly humorous, chatty manner.

Monday's blog deals with gambling, which was a much bigger problem than most people realize. It is estimated that Georgiana Cavendish, the Duchess of Devonshire, one of the richest women in England, lost about a million pounds overall before she died. A million pounds in Regency England works out to over a billion dollars today, putting her at the top of the list of gambling-addicted aristocrats of the period.

Thank you for your suggestions. I'll be channeling Lady P before writing the next post and trying to find out what she knew of poverty and war and the darker side of life.

[Steelwhisper]

Heh. Well, I doubt that all noblemen and women of that era--because to me "Regency" signifies an era (either just 1811-1820 or 1811-1837), not a specific modern romance formula--were part of the ton or were the same kind of airheads so often depicted.

Many of them had an extensive and varied education after all, a lot of them had travelled, had witnessed the effects of famine and poverty and also the French Revolution. That had made a lasting impression on quite a few and influenced internal politics right up into the early 20th century. We have lots of texts, diaries and essays contemplating such topics.

We also see a considerable amount of inventions and scientific research taking off just then, not all of it done by the upper middleclass either. Augusta Ada King, Countess of Lovelace, for instance, who is the daughter of Lord Byron, was a mathematician and more or less invented the computer. I really doubt "the ton" or gambling figured much in her life. ;) She can't have been the only one, particularly being a woman. Enough gentlemen would have needed to be so engaged for her not to be regarded as a complete oddity.

Additionally, as I stated, to me "Regency" describes an era, not a romance formula. It was an era first and foremost. So when I think "historical romance" (yes I do, I wasn't talking historical fiction here), I would love to read romance of that era which deals with average people, the middleclass, or working class. Maybe Pavee/travellers or Roma, or for that matter gentlefolk disgusted or shunned by the ton, because both had to have existed and they surely also had lovelives. In short, I really would love to see more era in the term Regency, by all means filled with lots of romance (heh, I write romance as well, so there XD).

[Susana]

I believe Carla Kelly writes Regency romances that don't strictly follow the formula, and there are others as well.

At the moment, what I write is more lighthearted, although the characters face difficult situations. In my current project, the heroine is a schoolmaster's daughter who must choose to marry a man she despises or see her family ruined. In another project, my heroine is a prostitute seeking her long-lost child (NOT so lighthearted).

In Treasuring Theresa, the heroine despises the ton and the hero despises the country, and they both learn first impressions can be deceiving. Touches on serious things, but still more of a formula Regency romance. And Lady P is the hero's eccentric aunt, so the tone of the blog series will be more amusing than serious.

But you have given me a lot to think about. Thanks for that! And I'd love to read some of your books, if you have any out at the moment. I'm still more of a reader than an author!

[Steelwhisper]

I do, but I don't want to connect pen names and use the erotica/kinky books one most on GR ;) However, if you ever get to read historical gay romances you'll come across one of my books, surely ;)

I think I read one of Carla Kelly's a while ago, but I'll check her out again. I like fluff and lighthearted as well, by the way! I was more reacting to the question "what would you like to know about life in Regency England" than meaning a discussion of Regency Romances as in the modern writing formula. Actually I think that knowing some societal background should add a lot even to those? At the very least it would be interesting info. :)

[Susana]

I LOVE Samantha Kane's "Brothers in Arms" menage series, Regency all the way! And Gabaldon's Lord John series. But I tend to prefer a female protagonist in there somewhere.

Thanks for the chat! It's been fun and thought-provoking!