Georgette Heyer Fans discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Archived
>
For Questions and Such
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Christy B, Admin (In Absentia)
(new)
Oct 10, 2014 10:18PM
Mod
reply
|
flag
Nice to see you!& I can understand not wanting to be bombarded by spam
While you are here :)... I think I put this thread in the wrong forum.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
I meant to put it in the Heyer forum.
& what do you think of having a separate forum for writers like Teresa?
Mod
***Carol*** wrote: "& what do you think of having a separate forum for writers like Teresa? "
If we get more authors on here then I'll set up a forum for it. The General Discussion forum should be fine for now.
HiI discovered this site and as a lover of GH was excited
I did not appreciate that others felt like me about her books.
I have done some posts but have not really got a handle on the site
What are the protocols or rules for posts. I think I have violated some of these
And I can across a thread which would not let me join in because I was not a friend. How do I do this?
Any help or advice on the site would be most appreciated
Hi TinaAre you from Dunedin, New Zealand? :)
Goodreads isn't the easiest site for new people. If one of my sisters hadn't been helping me when I started I would have given up! & at the moment they are making a lot of changes to the appearance of the site.
I've found a help section here. https://www.goodreads.com/help
It may answer some of your questions about Goodreads as a whole.
For our group - if you click on Group Home (look up the top right here under Georgette Heyer's picture) Once there you can click on
Group Info and get some information about our rules. We really only have one at the moment - maybe I should expand it a bit.
I should mention for all our new people that ChristyB is the creator of this group but she no longer reads Heyer. She is still happy to help out if ever I need a hand though.
Tina wrote: "...And I can across a thread which would not let me join in because I was not a friend. How do I do this?..."I wonder if this was perhaps in another Group? Some groups have stricter rules about who can see and who can participate, and you need to be a member of the Group to be able to do so.
If you look at the top right of the page you see a tab "Explore". Click on the drop-down arrow next to it and you will see near the bottom "Groups". Click on that and you can start finding Groups which you want to join. Some you can just join, others want to approve you. I found Groups by searching my favourite authors' names.
Once you've joined a few groups the Home button on the top left of the page is your friend. It sorts your Groups in order of recent activity, with the newest posts marked in red. Of course it will all be new to you. but once you've clicked on a red number it takes you to the thread, and whether you read all the posts or not that red number is then gone until there is a new post. You can go to the last page i.e. the most recent one by clicking on the last page number shown.
Enjoy!
HJ, I was wondering if Tina was trying to comment on someone's review.Some people don't accept comments at all or only from friends. Variety of reasons for this.
Yes I think that was itI appreciate the comments made
Thank you for the advice
Yeah, I was confused by that myself a time or 2. I thought if a person put a review out there it was open to comment, but not always, it seems.
Ladies and Gentlemen, may I tap into the Heyer hive mind here? Not sure if this is the appropriate forum, but I need some sage counsel about dinner party seating. Let's take some of "The Quiet Gentleman" cast as our examples (sans Gervase, for the moment). Say you had the Dowager Countess, Mr. Clowne, Drusilla, her parents, Marianne and *her* parents, and Theo and Martin. Who would escort whom in to dinner, and how do you think the seating arrangement would go? Trying to work out protocol with regard to host/hostess, precedence, etc. If this isn't the right spot for this, Carol and ChristyB, I apologize!
What a delightful puzzle! As far as I can figure, probably Drusilla’s father (old family if not noble) would escort in the Dowager Countess, Martin would escort Drusilla’s mother, Theo would get Marianne’s mother, Marianne’s father would get Drusilla, and that would leave Mr. Clowne with Marianne. I’m betting she would be pretty annoyed about that!! But I can’t imagine her taking precedence over Drusilla.
Well, let's not forget that Marianne's father is Sir Thomas Bolderwood. That means he has a title, and therefore takes precedence over Mr. Morville no matter the age of their respective families. So Sir Thomas would have the dubious honor of escorting his hostess, and his family would move up too: Martin gets Lady Bolderwood, Theo gets Mrs. Morville, Mr. Morville gets Marianne (I'm sure she'd be thrilled ;) ), and Mr. Clowne escorts Drusilla.Mr. Morville may actually outrank Theo, but he wouldn't be paired with his own wife in any case.
I am tending toward the second grouping, because of the "Sir Thomas" quotient...but I really wasn't sure! So, who's at the head of the table? I'm guessing it's the Dowager Countess... ; )
From what I understand, precedence and seating order were not so much of an issue in the Regency era as they were later on in the Victorian period, when it became a huge deal. I expect the host and hostess would escort the guests of honor (if there were any) or, that being absent, the highest ranking guests, and there might be a scramble (a polite one!) for the rest. I expect too that it depends on the formality of the meal--a special occasion versus just dinner.
Marissa wrote: "From what I understand, precedence and seating order were not so much of an issue in the Regency era as they were later on in the Victorian period, when it became a huge deal. I expect the host and..."It must have had a certain amount of importance though. Remember Lydia from P&P triumphantly saying she now preceded Jane because she was a married woman?
Yes--I said, "not so much" , not "none." ;) I'll have a look through my research books later and see what I can find.
I think Sir Thomas’s title is no more than an honorary knighthood—which makes him gentry but not noble—or did they say somewhere he was made a baronet?
At least in early Regency I think they used to sit females on one side and males on the other side of the table rather than male next to female etc. And I think they used to go into the dining room in order of rank - females led by the wife of the host who would sit at the end opposite her husband; males led by the host in similar fashion.That's the idea I've always had in my mind from many years ago, so would probably have been formed from what I read in books set in the Regency period.
I got the feeling the male/female arrangement didn't come until a later time, and for some reason I remember an older female in a story thinking that seating style was not good - promiscuous seating she referred to it as I seem to recall. I just wish I could recall what book/s I remember this from!
Might it have been from Tea and Scandal by Joan Smith, Ella's Gran?
Kim wrote: "Might it have been from Tea and Scandal by Joan Smith, Ella's Gran?"Could be Kim, though I feel it was more like in the late 1960s/70s I might have read these books. It is so annoying when I can't remember the story line, yet can clearly recall snippets of information like that!! Quite odd.
Actually IIRC Sir Thomas inherited his title from his deceased elder brother, and it's therefore a baronetcy (since knighthoods are not heritable). You're right that knights and baronets are upper gentry, not technically nobility, but they still outrank untitled persons.
Elliot wrote: "Ladies and Gentlemen, may I tap into the Heyer hive mind here? Not sure if this is the appropriate forum, but I need some sage counsel about dinner party seating. Let's take some of "The Quiet Gent..."It's always been my understanding that the lady and gentleman of honor (I. e. probably the oldest or most important man and woman present) are seated at the right of the host and hostess, respectively. Then, wouldn't the host escort the lady to be seated on his right into the dining room? And I suppose the man to be on the hostess's right would escort *her*. The Dowager Countess would be the hostess, but if Gervase weren't there, I don't know who would play the role of host. Putting Mr. Clowne there would give the table a good balance, but I don't know whether doing so would be appropriate. Still, if he played that role, the mothers of the two girls would be on either side of him. The question then becomes which couple goes on the host and hostess's right and which on the left. I'm sure Marianne's parents are a bit younger than Drusilla's, but I also seem to recall that they're a knight or baronet and his lady, while the Morvilles are just Mr. and Mrs. Then each young lady would probably be seated beside the male guest who isn't her father, Martin next to the "lady of honor," and Theo next to the lady on Mr. Clowne's left. Of course Martin, as a Hon., outranks Mr. Clowne, but once he realizes that sitting in the host's position puts him between two middle-aged ladies, whereas sitting along one side may put him next to Marianne, he'll probably be glad to defer to age and the Church.
Carol ♪ Blinded by the Light ♪ GR Background wrote: "Marissa wrote: "It [precedence] must have had a certain amount of importance though. Remember Lydia from P&P triumphantly saying she now preceded Jane because she was a married woman?"Yes, and in Persuasion there's a petty but low-key conflict between Mary Musgrave and her mother-in-law because Mary feels that, as a baronet's daughter, she should have precedence over Mrs. Musgrave, and the Musgrave girls quietly ask Anne whether she could try to persuade Mary to yield it out or respect for the older woman who happens to be her husband's mother.
Mod
GH's dinner parties always alternate male and female wherever possible, so I don't think we've got that set-up at this period. Her hostesses occasionally worry about the organisation of the table, which shows the rules weren't necessarily clear-cut - you were allowed to switch people round so you didn't have people who were going to quarrel next to each other!
I'm pretty sure Martin, as Earl's son, and hostess's son, would count as host in Gervase's absence - Mr Clowne and Theo are employees. In fact I think there's an awkward moment when G first arrives and Martin realises he's been displaced at the dinner table.
This is so awesome, y'all...thanks so much for jumping in on this one!
MaryC wrote: "Elliot wrote: "Ladies and Gentlemen, may I tap into the Heyer hive mind here? Not sure if this is the appropriate forum, but I need some sage counsel about dinner party seating. Let's take some of ..."So, let's see, we'd have Martin at one end of the table and his mother at the other...potentially...I think I'd have to sit down with pencil and paper to figure it out! : )
The documentary Pride and Prejudice: Having a Ball at Chawton House (look it up on YouTube) shows how the seating and table setting would be at a private ball. I think they showed young men and young ladies sitting next to each other informally, eating what they want from the table.
QNPoohBear wrote: "The documentary Pride and Prejudice: Having a Ball at Chawton House (look it up on YouTube) shows how the seating and table setting would be at a private ball. I think they showed young men and you..."Would this be kid appropriate? 11 year old girl specifically?
GoshWhat an interesting discussion thread
It's got my mind twisting and turning
Thank you much better than a crossword
Well, Tina, if you come up with the right arrangement, do let me know! : )
Amy wrote: "QNPoohBear wrote: "The documentary Pride and Prejudice: Having a Ball at Chawton House" ... Amy wrote: "Would this be kid appropriate? 11 year old girl specifically? "More or less. There were children at the ball though they weren't the focus of the documentary. The meal was recreated faithfully from period records so lots of alcohol involved and some drunken flirting at the dinner table but nothing that was a big deal that I can remember. It aired on PBS in the U.S.
I found an answer to the correct way to seat guests. In the novel The Baron's Honorable Daughter, it says the hostess should always consult Debrett's Correct Form . In the country, society was more informal. In Town (London) they had stricter rules. The general rule is: host escorts highest ranking lady and she will be seated by him; highest ranking gentleman escorts hostess and then either by rank or lady-gentleman (promiscuous) seating arrangement, which is preferable to rank (1811). When ranks are equal the oldest title or family name takes precedence.
QNPoohBear wrote: "I found an answer to the correct way to seat guests. In the novel The Baron's Honorable Daughter, it says the hostess should always consult Debrett's Correct Form . I..."Oh, my - you rock! I knew this list had some sharp minds! : )
QNPoohBear wrote: "I found an answer to the correct way to seat guests. In the novel The Baron's Honorable Daughter, it says the hostess should always consult Debrett's Correct Form . I..."Although according to Wikipedia the first Debrett's Correct form was published in 1900.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debrett...
Was this information also in Debrett's Peerage?
Carol ♪ Blinded by the Light ♪ GR Background wrote: "Was this information also in Debrett's Peerage? ."I don't think so. The Peerage listed the people and their background information so the hostess could consult it to find out who was the highest ranking but it wouldn't tell her who escorts whom. The Isabella Bradford) have cited some other similar sources like Manners and Rules of Good Society and books from the Victorian and Edwardian eras. There was also The Mirror of Graces which provided etiquette advice.
Here's a description of the protocol for seating and a diagram.https://sites.google.com/site/whshblj...
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y...
And rules and etiquette in GH's Regency period from the GH website
http://www.georgette-heyer.com/jen/je...
Mod
Probably there were some people who married in from the nouveau riche who needed to consult these sources, especially later on when the American heiresses showed up shopping for the aristocracy. Also, the industrial & commercial magnates daughters married in & may have had less training in the finer points. Even poor Miss No-Name who became the second Mrs DeWinter could have gotten more help from such a book than she got from Mrs Danvers. ;-)
Jenny wrote: "I think it would be terribly nouveau riche to have to consult a book to know how to seat people! A hostess of ton would be brought up knowing these things."Agreed! A proper, gently bred woman should know where to seat an Arch Bishop when entertaining Earls and Viscounts!
I'm curious about the ranking. Ever since Pride and Prejudice showed me that a married younger sister moved ahead of her unmarried older sister I've had that question.And then when Heyer showed that the servants have a similar seating arrangement to their masters.
I agree that they would know where to seat people - which wouldn't stop them from buying the book!And I expect they wouldn't always agree with the book, which could lead to some interesting conversations.
When I think about P&P, I think Elizabeth and Jane would certainly have paid attention to all the niceties and would have proper seating. Lydia and Kitty were such flibbertigibbets that I doubt they paid attention and might need such a book. There must have been a market for the book as it existed...
A writer can play with this, having characters seating people against the standards for plot and character reasons.
Remember in The Grand Sophy, the first time that Sophy dined with the Ombersleys, silly old Lord Ombersley escorted Sophy into dinner, ignoring Miss Wraxton's superior claim. That underscored both Lord Ombersley's absent-mindedness and lack of respect for social propriety, as well as how charming Sophy was, in causing him to forget about Eugenia.
I think Eugenia's superior precedence was either due to her being an engaged lady, or being the daughter of a Viscount (while Sophy's father was either a knight or a baronet), or being the guest of honor.
Howard wrote: "And then when Heyer showed that the servants have a similar seating arrangement to their masters. .."I think the seating arrangements and hierarchy actually became more strict later on during the Victorian era.
Have you seen Gosford Park? The seating in the servants' hall is done according to their employer's rank. The butler and housekeeper had their own rooms and the upper servants dined together according to rank. The valet of a Duke ranked higher than the valet of a Viscount, etc. etc. The lower servants didn't even associate with the upper servants from what I gather.
The Jane Austen Centre actually has the information on dinner parties and etiquette:
True Politeness: A Handbook of Ettiquette for Ladies offers the following suggestions:
The hostess takes the head of the table; the seat of honor for a gentleman is at her right hand; for a lady, it is to the right of the host.
Jane Austen's World blog also has some good information.
This should answer the question.
In the Georgian era they dined à la française with all courses laid on the table. Diners would choose which dishes to eat, just taking whatever was closest. It was considered polite to offer a dish around. During the Regency period and into our own times, people dine service à la russe - the dishes are set on a sideboard and handed around by servants. When we dine out at a fancy restaurant and eat a multi-course meal served by waiters it's a scaled down version of this. There was a strict way of setting the table. I can explain all that as told by the butler (an actor portrayal) at the Jane Austen festival in Bath.
Critterbee wrote: "Remember in The Grand Sophy, the first time that Sophy dined with the Ombersleys, silly old Lord Ombersley escorted Sophy into dinner, ignoring Miss Wraxton's superior claim. That underscored bot..."
I believe Eugenie's rank via her father, rather than her engaged status, gave her precedence. Additionally, as it was his house and he had the highest rank in the house - he could do what he liked! I know who I would prefer to sit with!!
I remember that in Emma, Mr. Woodhouse says at least once that a bride always takes precedence--i. e. that the awful Mrs. Elton would be the lady of honor at any dinner party held soon after her arrival in the community. Could the same rule have applied to a new guest?A curious thought just popped into my head. In Valerie Anand's King of the Woods (by no means a "novel of manners"), the book that my husband and I were listening to that kept us from starting The TollGate with the group, an 11th- century knight brings home a bride who combines Eugenia's priggish determination to "improve" the household with Mary Musgrave's insistence on taking precedence over her mother-in-law.
Susan wrote: "I believe Eugenie's rank via her father, rather than her engaged status, gave her precedence. Additionally, as it was his house and he had the highest rank in the house - he could do what he liked! I know who I would prefer to sit with!! "
That makes great good sense, Susan. I know who I would want to sit next too as well...
QNPoohBear wrote: "The documentary Pride and Prejudice: Having a Ball at Chawton House (look it up on YouTube) shows how the seating and table setting would be at a private ball. I think they showed young men and you..."That is a wonderful programme. I have it on DVD and have watched it several times, it's absolutely fascinating. It's funny how the professional dance students find themselves absolutely exhausted doing the dancing.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Georgette Heyer Fans
Books mentioned in this topic
Manners and Rules of Good Society (other topics)Regency Etiquette: The Mirror of Graces (other topics)
The Baron's Honourable Daughter (other topics)
Debrett's correct form (other topics)
The Baron's Honourable Daughter (other topics)
More...
