Back to Top

Author Archives: Janet Mullany

I’ve just read a very odd little book–recommended to me by Pam Rosenthal–of children’s stories by Mary Lamb.

Of the ten stories, three are written by Mary’s brother Charles, and they form a collection of stories told in the voices of young girls who have just arrived at a boarding school. The describe who they are, who their families are, and why they were sent to school.

Some of them are quite charming–one of them prattles on and on about a visit to the country (ooh! pretty sheep! pretty cows! more pretty sheep!) until the tactful Mrs. Leicester intervenes, stopping her in mid flow: I thought I perceived some ladies were rather weary of hearing so much of the visit to grandmamma. Some of them have a macabre air: there’s a girl who learns to read from studying the letters on her mother’s tombstone; and a very odd tale about two girls, one born to a noble family and the other a commoner, who are exchanged at birth. They yearn for, and sometimes lose their parents, and often are sent on unexpected visits to distant relatives; now all of them have been parted from their families to attend the school.

It’s an interesting venture into the world of Georgian childhood, but even more interesting in light of Mary Lamb’s life. She suffered from bipolar disorder and when she was twenty-two, murdered her mother. She was in and out of mental asylums for the rest of her life, and cared for by her brother and official guardian Charles, whom, sadly, she outlived. So when I read these stories, I was thinking of what I knew of Mary, particularly from reading Kathy Watson’s biography of Mary, The Devil Kissed Her.

Has anyone read either of these books or anything by Charles Lamb? Or do you have any favorite books that evoke childhood for you?

This is a follow-up to Cara’s post the other day about the movie Amazing Grace. Why, you may ask, did the movie industry glom onto what is still (and unjustly) a rather obscure bit of history? Because this year is the two-hundredth anniversary of the Slave Trade Act that came into law on March 25, 1807 (and we’re nearly there and it’s my turn to blog). This, by the way is Sir Thomas Lawrence’s portrait of William Wilberforce.

I first became interested in this topic by reading Adam Hochschild’s wonderful book Bury The Chains, which made me aware of what a burning issue abolition was for late Georgian society (and inspired me to write my October 2007 release, Forbidden Shores). Hochschild points out that it was possibly the first time that people cared passionately enough about a cause–something that would benefit strangers thousands of miles away who they would never meet–to make sacrifices themselves. Ropemakers in Bristol, one of the cities that thrived on the trade, petitioned to end the slave trade, knowing full well that their own livelihood would be threatened.

It was also a movement that cut through divisions of class and gender; ordinary housewives boycotted sugar. Wedgwood produced this plaque (it reads Am I not a man and a brother?) that appeared on many artefacts.

The abolitionists introduced the tactics of the modern political campaign–slogans, investigative journalism, slogans, and powerful visuals like this depiction of a slave ship.

Of course, the major question is why did this happen? What made ordinary–and not so ordinary people–care so passionately about this cause? Hochschild’s answer is rather interesting, and one that made me think entirely differently about the Gerogian and Regency periods. Georgian England was seen, and saw itself, surprisingly, as a fairminded and democratic sort of place–the monarchy was mostly benign, and the concept of Magna Carta operated as a sort of unofficial constitution. Few could vote, but ordinary men had the power of the petition. The country had a great infrastructure, because of the Royal Mail, a high level of literacy, and dozens of newspapers. The dealbreaker of the 1807 act was a new petition bearing several thousand signatures, collected in the north of England and delivered to Westminster in a matter of hours. Hochschild suggests, too, that people in England felt an affinity with the Africans whose communities were devastated by slaver raids, because something similar happened in their own ports–the press gang, which enforced men to serve in the Navy.

As I said, Hochschild’s book made me rethink the Regency, and I’m wondering if you have come across something, a book or movie, that revealed an unusual facet or layer to your understanding of the period.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 18 Replies

[She] is the person with whom, in a room full of silly, boastful people, you will exchange a silent, speaking glance that becomes a smile; the person to whom you never need to explain yourself laboriously; the person you will not compete with.

[She] is that person you realize, deep down and at once, will be your friend.

This wonderful definition of female friendship is surprisingly written by a man in his book Indiscretion, a tribute to Jane Austen–Austen with balls (and not the waltzing kind), if you like–a truly fabulous read. Austen didn’t write many strong female friendships–the whole area seems to be full of pitfalls for her. Many of the friendships she depicts are skin deep–Marianne Dashwood cultivating Lucy Steele to find out the truth about Edward, for instance; or Catherine Morland’s flighty friendship with the flighty Isabella Thorpe. I’ve never really been sure whether Elizabeth Bennett’s friendship with Charlotte Lucas is deep enough, or shallow enough, to survive Charlotte’s marriage to Mr. Collins.

Austen’s relationships between sisters are much stronger and more subtle, and I think that’s a convention romance has adopted. Jude Morgan’s Indiscretion is the only romance I’ve read (and I’m very poorly read in romance, I’m the first to admit it) where a female friendship rings true.

Who are your favorite fictional sets of friends or sisters, and which would you rather read about?

“Oh! Miss Woodhouse, the comfort of being sometimes alone!”

I sometimes think that one of the greatest and most subtle difference between our time and the Regency period is that now we take privacy and the right to time alone for granted. Then, it wasn’t so clear cut. Very few people lived alone, and “living alone” then might well mean a household with a servant or two. If you were an unmarried woman, you’d live with your family. I ran into an interesting fact somewhere that a household of three or more unrelated women was considered a brothel under the law in London (oh, how I wish I could give a source and a time period for this–I believe it was Georgian).

Living alone for a woman would be particularly difficult since she’d need someone to lace her into her stays. I’ve seen mid nineteenth-century front-lacing stays of linen for a working-class woman, and I’m sure they existed in our period. Yet, if you were a lady, you’d have back-lacing stays because that’s what ladies wore–and a maid, or sister or other female relative had to lace you into them every morning and out every night. And even at night you wouldn’t be alone–chances are a sister would share the bed.

Even if poets could wander lonely as a cloud, it wasn’t encouraged for women. Your activities would be tied into those of your family and you would be busy, busy, busy–there was a prevailing belief that women were weak and inconsistent creatures who would get into trouble morally if left to their own devices. Finding time “for yourself” was an alien concept; even Jane Austen had to snatch time to write, pretending she was producing something of little consequence.

How do you think you’d cope?

That’s one of the traditional sayings in England (and a lot of other places too) for the first day of the month. I have no idea why or what it means. Another tradition is to sidle up to someone and say, with appropriate gestures, A pinch and a punch for the first of the month–very popular among children–and then run before they can retaliate with A pinch and a kick for being so quick. Again, other than the opportunity for random violence, I have no idea of the origins.

Today, March 1, is also the feast day of St. David, the patron saint of Wales–and here’s the Regency connection–he was responsible for creating the warm springs of Bath! Apparently he also liked dancing with large rams while wearing an eyepatch.

March 1 is also the day on which William Caxton, a former wool merchant, began his translation into English of The Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye for Margaret of Burgundy, sister of the King of England. Caxton set up a printing press in Bruges and printed his translation, the first book in the English language, in 1475. He moved his printing business to London, where his books included two editions of The Canterbury Tales.

And in other literary news, the first edition of The Spectator was published on March 1, 1711.

Do you have any first of the month rituals? Do you have any particular goals for this month, writing or personal, you’d like to share? Mine are to finish revisions on one book, update my website, and, oh, all the usual stuff about not eating so much etc.

Janet, Noodler of the Month at www.wetnoodleposse.com

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