Back to Top

Author Archives: Amanda McCabe/Laurel McKee

About Amanda McCabe/Laurel McKee

Writer (as Amanda McCabe, Laurel McKee, Amanda Carmack), history geek, yoga enthusiast, pet owner!

StrangerAtCastonbury2March 1 marks the release of my book A Stranger at Castonbury, the last book in the Castonbury Park series!!  (it’s up for pre-order at Amazon now…)  I will be giving away a copy to one commenter today…

When I was first asked to participate in a series described as “Downton Abbey in the Regency,” I jumped eagerly at the chance! Like so many other people, I am a Downton fanatic and have avidly followed the series from the beginning. (Mary and Matthew! Sybil and Branson! Bates and Anna! Thomas! The scandal! The clothes!). Mix it with another of my favorite things, the Regency period, and I was completely hooked. Also, I was very, very excited at the chance to work with so many authors whose books I love.

But then the reality set in. There were eight of us, and we had to work closely together to create a world as colorful and complex as that of Downton, with interlocking characters, upstairs/downstairs dynamics, scandal and passion. And I had to write the last story, tying it all together and making sure I stayed true to the world of Castonbury and other authors’ characters. Easy and simple, of course. Not!

Luckily one of the things I love best about Downton is how everyone’s lives interlock and entwine, and having the chance to create the same thing at Castonbury was great fun. (And luckily many of the other authors are much more organized than I am, and created spreadsheets and images that made the place come really alive for us all). Through the other stories, I could easily envision the house and the people in it, and by the time I finished writing Stranger at Castonbury, it felt like home.

For more info on the series, visit my website’s Castonbury Page!  Do you like continuity series?  What are some you have followed?  What did you like/not like about series like Downton??

Posted in Giveaways | Tagged | 13 Replies

I had to have some minor surgery last week, which has it’s low points, but also has the plus-side that people in my family feel sorry for me and thus buy me books. I’ve been on a non-fiction binge lately, and just finished Mad Mary Lamb: Lunacy and Murder in Literary London by Susan Tyler Hitchcock. (Mary Lamb was the sister of poet Charles Lamb, who eventually went on to do some writing, mostly tales from Shakespeare for children, of her own. Her other claim to fame was she murdered her mother in a psychotic fit, and was in and out of hospitals for the rest of her life). This was a very interesting book, encompassing many aspects of Regency life, including the habits of the non-Ton classes, poetry and literary sorts (the Lambs were friends with Wordsworth and Coleridge), and medical care for the mentally ill.

There were two large mental hospitals in London at this time, at least sixteen private madhouses (where the wealthy could be discreetly stashed away), and numerous smaller, unlicensed places. One of the large hospitals was the famous Bethlehem (Bedlam). A family member could put forth a petition to the governor of the hospital certifying that the candidate was indeed a lunatic. Other info required was the age of the patient, how long their senses had been “disordered”, the first instance of such disorder, whether or not “mischief” had been attempted, and the general state of their physical health. The subcomittee met every Saturday at eleven to consider that week’s petitioners.

The building itself was built in 1676, designed by Robert Hooke (who sometimes worked with Wren) on a grand scale. It was 550 feet end to end, located just outside London’s city wall, facing Moorfields (a public green). The entry was flanked by massive statues of Melancholy and Mania. Wings were added in the 1730s for male and female quarters. By 1796, though, it was falling into disrepair, with its foundations sinking.

Another hospital was St. Luke’s, founded in 1751 on the north edge of Moorfields, facing Bethlehem. Its founding physician was William Battie, who believed the treatment of the insane should be guided by knowledge and study (not just tying them up and leaving them to their own devices). He wrote “Treatise on Madness” in 1758, defining madness as “the too lively or too languid perception of things” (I suffer from the second, I think). Battie said that treatment should begin with “the patient’s being removed from all objects that act forcibly upon the nerves.” He was against bleeding, blistering, purges, vomiting, and opium.

James Munro was the Bedlam physician from 1728-52 (and was then succeeded by his son and grandson). In his “Remarks on Dr. Battie’s Treatise” he argued FOR evacuation, vomiting, bleeding, blistering–“why should we endeavor to give the world a shocking opinion of a remedy, that is not only safe but greatly useful?”

Some private hospitals included Whitmore House, “the madhouse for aristocrats,” which cost 1500 pounds a year. Hoxton House, which was one of the largest (486 patients in 1815), and seemed to be a sort of dumping ground for the Admiralty to send their officers and sailors who were “mad.” There was Fisher House in Islington (where Mary Lamb was first sent). It was quiet, in country surroundings, run by a mother and daughter who were more housekeepers than nurses. (Government licensing only required an annual visit by the attending physician, so staff only had to watch over the residentsand rein in their behavior. If the patient needed a doctor or apothecary, the family arranged for it).

This is just a small taste of the information in this book, which I recommend for a different slant on the Regency period (and a does of gratitude for not being in a Regency madhouse!!!).

p.s. Blogger won’t let me post pics today, so just enjoy the wealth of images Cara gave us yesterday. 🙂


Many congratulations to our own Elena Greene! Her Signet Super Regency, Lady Dearing’s Masquerade, has been nominated for the Golden Quill Award, for Best Historical Romance of 2005!!!

As someone who read and LOVED that book, I am delighted that the wonderful Lady Dearing (and the even more wonderful Elena Greene) are getting the recognition they deserve!!!

Well done, Elena!!! The Riskies have triumphed again!!!

Cara


A few days ago, I was having dinner with some friends who are also Janeites, and we talked about the Jane Austen movies. Specifically, the Pride and Prejudices–1995 and 2005. One of my male friends made the comment that the ’95 Lizzy was obviously much prettier than Jane, thereby making the fact that everyone considered Jane the “famous local beauty” puzzling (an argument I’ve heard before). To modern eyes this is probably true–Jennifer Ehle is quite lovely, maybe more obviously so than Susannah Harker. But I do think Ms. Harker was a good choice for the part. She has very “classical” looks that would have appealed in the Regency period (she looks almost like a Grecian statue). Plus I thought she captured Jane’s serenity and sweetness (and slight dimwitedness) well.

In the 2005 P&P, it is more obvious. Rosamund Pike is so angelically pretty that it’s clear why she was so acclaimed in the neighborhood. Keira Knightley is also stunning (she was recently on the cover of Vogue twice within four months!), but in a more contemporary, angular way. It’s easy to see why she would capture Darcy’s fascination, but also why she was slightly overshadowed by her sister.

It’s so fascinating how each period has its own concept of “beauty,” and how and why those ideas change and evolve. I recently read a thesis that said “beautiful” equates with whatever is high maintenance. I.e., in the Renaissance, when food was scare and most people worked outdoors, “zaftig” and pale was In. Now, very slender and tan is in, when it costs money and time to join a gym and buy bronzer to combat our office-bred pallor and softness. Of course, there are always a few women who transcend whatever the fashion is and make their own style of beauty. And there are many (like myself) who will never be happy with their looks, and yet always will be searching the cosmetics counters for that “miracle in a jar.”

Here are a few quotes I found concerning women of the Regency who were renowned, in one way or another, for their style:

Lord Byron on Lady Caroline Lamb (who had a very “modern”, Keira Knightley-style beauty, being very slim and elfin): “The lady had scarcely any personal attractions to recommend her” and her figure “was too thin to be good” (from Benita Eisler’s “Byron: Child of Passion, Fool of Fame”

A Swedish diplomat on Emma Hamilton (seen in the portrait above): “she was the fattest woman I’ve ever laid eyes on, but with the most beautiful head”
And Lord Fitzharris: she is “without exception the most coarse, ill-mannered, disagreeable woman I’ve ever met”
An Anonymous observer: “She is indeed a Whapper: and I think her manner very vulgar”
(from David Howarth’s “Lord Nelson: The Immortal Memory”)

Madame de Remusant on Josephine Bonaparte: “her limbs were supple and delicate, all her movements easy and elegant”
Another Anonymous: “young and charming face, surrounded by a profusion of light hair, with a pair of large dark-blue eyes, and exhibiting altogether the image of the most graceful of sylphs”
(from “Josephine: A Life of the Empress” by Carolly Erickson)
Napoleon about Josephine: “…full of graceful charm–a woman in the fullest meaning of the term” (from Evangeline Bruce’s “Napoleon and Josephine: An Improbable Marriage”)

Mary Tickell (Sheridan’s sister-in-law) on Dora Jordan: “little she is and yet not insignificant in her figure, which, though short, has a certain roundness…which is very graceful”
Harriet Bessborough: “she is terribly Large, but her voice and acting still delightful”
And Leigh Hunt: “she was neither beautiful, nor handsome, nor even pretty, nor accomplished, nor a lady, yet was so pleasant, cordial, so natural…had such a shapely leg withal..that she appeared something superior to all those requirements of acceptability”

And Lady Spencer, her mother, on Georgiana Duchess of Devonshire, one of the most famous beauties of her day: “Without being very handsome or having a single good feature in her face, she is one of the most showy girls I ever saw” (thanks, Mom)
Horace Walpole: “without being a beauty; but her youth, figure, flowing good nature, sense and lively modesty make her a phenomenon.”
(from Amada Foreman’s “Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire”)


Yesterday I read a movie blog entry by Jim Emerson (which can be found on Roger Ebert’s review site) called “101 Movies You Must See Before You Die.” Emerson says they are not necessarily the “best” movies, or even his favorites, but “the movies you just kind of figure everybody ought to have seen in order to have any sort of informed discussion about movies.”

It was a very interesting (and very debatable!) list. I think I’ve seen less than half of them. Some of them are favorites of mine (Bringing Up Baby, The Seven Samurai, Wizard of Oz), some I haven’t seen at all but always kinda mean to (The 400 Blows–which sounds oddly like something from Ellora’s Cave–as well as Aguirre The Wrath of God, Battleship Potemkin, Nosferatu, etc), and some are pretty obvious (Godfather I and II, Persona, Rebel Without a Cause). Now, I enjoy movies very much, but since I haven’t seen so many of these does this mean I should never attempt to discuss them? Does it mean I’m less “worthy” as a movie-goer than someone whose favorite movie is, say Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (as it was with an ex-boyfriend of mine)? And what does it say about me that I am a sucker for these “countdown” lists???

Megan’s post about To Kill a Mockingbird also reminded me of all this. One of my favorite books is War and Peace. For one thing, I’m a sucker for long, sad, navel-gazing Russian novels (I definitely DON’T want to know what that says about me!!!). For another, it shows “our” period from a different viewpoint and culture, which I love. But do I think this is a must-read for everyone, and anyone who hasn’t read it is an incomplete person who should never discuss literature? Well–no. Otherwise, the fact that I have never been able to read Moby-Dick would disqualify me.

All this rambling is just meant to ask–what are your personal “must-see” movies, “must-read” books? How did they affect you, or change your life? I think I need to add to my “must-see before I die” list. 🙂

Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com