Well, I want to say that everyone who offered suggestions for my “real Regency heroines” list are winners simply by being generous people who participated and expanded everyone’s knowledge of the period by doing so. But I did promise specifically to give away a free ebook or two, and since the response was so wonderful, I gave away four!!
The winners were chosen at random and they are: Sharon Farrell, Queen PoohBear, Harriet Robinson, and author Kim Lambert (who posted on FB). I included several people who posted on FB because I know not everyone finds it easy to post comments on the blog. Congratulations to all four winners! And thanks again to everyone for helping to create a most interesting roster of admirable women!
Before we get into the lace-talk, I just wanted to alert those of you on Facebook to a new Regency group (I know, another one!) that has formed. Last week I was featured at Regency Kisses: Lady Catherine’s Salon (no, not THAT Lady Catherine!) and we went on a virtual/pictorial tour of England based on the settings in my books. Fun!
It’s an open group, although you have to join. We feature a different author each week, with giveaways and other entertaining activities. If you like this sort of thing, please consider checking us out. The “home” group of eight authors write “sweet with sizzle” Regencies, so if you like all heat levels, you might find some new-to-you authors to check out. Type the group name into the FB search bar and it should come up. Or, huh, I suppose I could be helpful and give you a link, eh? LOL. https://www.facebook.com/groups/LadyCatherinesSalon/
Please don’t go right now! We still want you to keep on being loyal readers of the Risky Regencies blog. We keep considering changing to some other format, maybe even a FB group, but many of you aren’t on FB and don’t want to be, either, and we respect that….
So, my most recent research rabbit hole has been lace. This time it wasn’t for a story, though. I thought I was going to need a new Regency gown. The Beau Monde Chapter of the Romance Writers of America is 25 years old this year, and we are celebrating at our conference in NYC in July! A gown for the Soiree is optional, but I’ve always worn a gown when attending such events, and since I am a founding member, this seems an unlikely year to suddenly stop doing so.
Through a friend, I recently acquired an entire bolt of
beautiful lace, and another large chunk of a different lace, also beautiful.
How pretty either one would be incorporated into a new
Regency dress! I knew that the machines to produce English net dated to even
before our period, and such net is often the base for lace designs, but when
did they begin to be able to mimic hand-made lace with repeating patterns over
a large area? I scoured through Ackermann’s prints, looking for dresses with
full lace overskirts, and I quite naturally looked up the history of lace.
The introduction of machine-made net is quite well reflected
in the styles of Regency gowns you can see in the fashion prints: net
overdresses, sheer sleeves, etc. The machines, once refined, could even create
patterns of intersecting strands and “spots” or stripes.
Ah, but actual patterned lace? That is a different thing altogether.
In our period, patterned lace was still made by hand, either
using bobbins or various kinds of needlework techniques such as appliqué. You
can find plenty of lace embellishment on gowns, but it is generally quite
narrow, in bands or ruffled edges, because of the way it was made. Both needle
and bobbin lace seem to have developed in Italy
and Flanders during the early 16th
century. Prior to that time, open-work decorative trims were made by cutting
away and embroidering existing fabric. The new techniques created the openwork
from threads, which could be linen, silk, gold or silver-bound silk, or much
later, cotton.
Black spotted net overdress
The first machine lace was introduced in 1769, but the mesh
raveled when cut. John Heathcoat developed a machine by 1809 that solved that
issue and could produce “wide bobbin net”. But it wasn’t until 1837 that Heathcoat’s
existing machine technology was successfully adapted (by Samuel Ferguson) to be
able to produce a repeating pattern, as the jacquard machine looms could do.
That is how the Victorians were able to have lovely lace curtains for their windows,
and also makes sense of why they would, since it was a new and fashionable
thing to have!
I could make a very pretty Regency gown using one of those laces I was given, but it wouldn’t be accurate, and that would always bother me. How would you feel? Even if I pretended the lace was all hand-done, I wouldn’t be comfortable, thinking of the huge amount of hours of poorly-paid labor that would have had to go into the making of it, if it were real. (I don’t think I know how to think like a super-wealthy aristocrat. Wouldn’t the lace-maker be grateful for my custom order and all that work?). Have any great alternative ideas for me to use all that lace?
In the meantime, it looks like I may be able to squeeze into my old dress, after all, with a few alterations. Here is a picture of me wearing it with Risky Elena, at the Beau Monde soiree back in 2003. (I do pretend the embroidery was hand-done. There’s a lot less of it!) I’ve worn it more recently than this photo, but not in years. I may not be able to move very much, LOL! Losing 25lbs would solve the problem, but I know that’s not going to happen! J
Needlelace: https://youtu.be/bNxdoB9dpkI and https://youtu.be/KXfR81nMlTU
Bobbin lace: https://youtu.be/YWQ-KZoePIo and https://youtu.be/E6kfb6FNVp8
Today I’ll continue the dance series I began on July 6, with some notes about the cotillion and the quadrille, dances which were common in the early Regency and the late Regency, respectively. While there is a great deal of overlap in some characteristics of these dances, their prevalence in the ballroom does not seem to have overlapped much at all.
COTILLIONS
Jane Austen wrote to her niece Fanny in 1816, “Much obliged for the quadrilles, which I am grown to think pretty enough, though of course they are very inferior to the cotillions of my own day.” Jane was past her dancing prime by then and was referring to music sheets, but as so often happens even today, was not a fan of the “new” style of dancing that the younger people loved.
The Cotillion was a French country dance for four couples popular in England in the late 18th century. While it often began with a circling figure and included later small circles, most of the dance was performed in a square, with various “changes”, or figures that moved in and out of that main formation and allowed for changes of partners.
Because the cotillions came from France, many kept their French names.
The only dance Jane Austen ever mentions by name, “La Boulangerie” is a
cotillion. Here is a video so you can see what it was she so enjoyed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLUzvSXguQY
There were many various types of cotillion dances: “waltz cotillions” and “allemande cotillions” for instance. They included some figures also commonly found in English country dances and reels, and later the quadrilles, so there is a shared basis between the types of dances.
For instance, four of the basic quadrille segments are also found in cotillions: Les Pantalons, L’Eté, La Poule and La Pastorale. Many steps are also shared, but in style and music the dances are quite different. Quadrille enthusiasts denounced the cotillion as old-fashioned and “belonging with the ancient minuet.”
The word “cotillion” changed during the 19th century from referring to the specific type of dances to the more modern usage, referring instead to a dance event, even specifically to a dance event for debutantes. Just know that during the Regency era, that was not what it meant!
QUADRILLES
Captain Gronow wrote in his memoirs about the first appearance of the Quadrille at London’s elite social venue, Almack’s: “In 1814, the dances at Almack’s were Scotch reels and the old English country-dance; and the orchestra, being from Edinburgh, was conducted by the then celebrated Neil Gow. It was not until 1815 that Lady Jersey introduced from Paris the favourite quadrille, which has so long remained popular.”
The quadrille became a craze, so popular that it overtook all other forms of dance being done at this time, except for the waltz (topic for Part 3 of this series), introduced at about the same time. Cartoonists of the day, such as Gilroy and Cruikshank, could not be expected to resist ridiculing such a vibrant fad, especially as it required some skill and practice. “Accidents while dancing the Quadrille” was a popular caption.
Like the cotillion, this was a dance form with four couples
arranged in a square. Unlike the cotillion, it consisted of five sections or
movements, each with its own complicated sequence of figures and music, with
differing time signatures. Also unlike the cotillion, in the quadrille, the
couples took turns performing the steps, with the head couples leading and the
side couples resting until their turn. (Given the exertion required and the
length of the dances, this was no doubt a blessing!)
This video gives a good sense of the dance –watch as much as you wish, just know it lasts 11 minutes and 19 seconds! Paine’s First Set of Quadrilles (1815) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSD37PF2_Dw
I hope you are enjoying these dance notes and finding them helpful to visualize Regency dancing for your reading or writing pleasure! Part 3 on the Waltz will be posted on July 25.
Why does the WALTZ (or
French “Valse”) fascinate us? I’m sure it’s partly because it was so
scandalous during the Regency, and partly because we love the potential for
romance when our heroes and heroines share the intimate dance. This is a long
post!! Bear with me –I couldn’t choose what to leave out.
The waltz existed as a form of cotillion and of English
country dances long before the scandalous single couple version of it was
introduced to England
during the Regency. It is those types of waltzing
that Jane Austen references in her writings. Here are links to two examples of
country dance waltzes, which utilize the familiar ¾ time rhythm:
The waltz traces back to German peasant dances as old as the 16th century. Its history is similar to that of other dance types: what shocked the aristocracy and at first seemed beneath them eventually was adopted by them, because, well, why should only the peasants have fun? The turning, close-held waltz took hold in the higher regions of society by the 18th century in Bavaria and Vienna, and spread to France, where post-revolutionary society embraced it.
Why was the waltz so scandalous? The illustration at top, while exaggerated, gives you an idea, but this lovely video clip from the BBC explains most of it quite well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r0dKkkk2jk Besides the intimacy and close hold was the simple fact that the dancers were turning for much of the time, which could lead to ladies becoming dizzy and quite shockingly out of control of themselves!
In 1804 a German visiting Paris wrote, “This love for the waltz
and this adoption of the German dance is quite new and has become one of the
vulgar fashions since the war…” [the French Revolution]. The “new” form of
waltz trickled into England
slowly, scandalizing most of English society when they first saw it. The German
ex-pats who made up the soldiers of the King’s German Legion are credited with
introducing the waltz to residents of Sussex in 1804, but it was slow to catch
hold in England, where moral codes were strict (well, stricter).
Early caricature of French “Incroyables and Merveilleuses” waltzing
In 1814, neither the waltz nor the quadrille were yet permitted to be danced in Almack’s. Some theorists say attendees at the Congress of Vienna (Sept 1814) first saw the dance there and brought it back to England. But Princess Lieven, wife of the Russian ambassador assigned to England starting in 1812, had been in Berlin prior to that assignment, so it makes sense that she learned the dance while there. She was the first foreign-born patroness of the mighty Almack’s social club and is said to have introduced the waltz there in 1815.
Dance Master Thomas Wilson’s book “A Description of the Correct Method of Waltzing” came out in 1816. His famous illustration of the “nine positions of the waltz” is below (you can see the numbers underneath each one if you look closely). By then, the dance had become prevalent enough to be ridiculed by the cartoonists of the day, and popular with the young who always want the “new” thing.
Thomas Wilson’s “Nine Positions” of the Waltz
The royal courts, generally foremost in setting fashions in
many areas, consistently lagged in the area of dance. In July of 1816, the
waltz was included in a ball given in London
by the Prince Regent. A few days later an editorial in The Times complained: “We
remarked with pain that the indecent foreign dance called the Waltz was
introduced (we believe for the first time) at the English court on Friday last
… it is quite sufficient to cast one’s eyes on the voluptuous intertwining of
the limbs and close compressure on the bodies in their dance, to see that it is
indeed far removed from the modest reserve which has hitherto been considered
distinctive of English females….”
The Regency form of waltz was closely related to other dances: the German Landler, and the French Allemande, and the other dances that drew on these forms. At her Capering and Kickery website (kickery.com) dance historian and teach Susan de Guardiola writes: “The early waltz looked quite different than the modern form. Dancers moved on their toes in a different pattern than what is seen in today’s competitive ballroom dancing, and adopted a wide range of “attitudes” of the arms…. Nor were waltzes choreographed, though Wilson suggested dancing different waltzes in sequence [slow followed by lively and back to slow again]. Entire ballrooms of dancers did not perform identical moves.” [Gail’s note: The name sometimes used for Regency waltz is the “pirouette waltz”.]
This video of five dances performed at the Royal Pavillion
in Brighton is long, but at about 5:40 the
dancers perform “The Allemande a Deux” (1780) which is a French modification of
a German Landler. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17QPpXyCql4
If you compare it to the video of the single couple
performing the Regency waltz (see next link), I think you will see some of the
similarities, and you will also get a sense of how Regency waltzers did not all
do the same figures at the same time. Regency Waltz/Valse 1826: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7B_Qsdnn5E (Video from the
French National Historic Dance Championships –you have to love a country that
holds such a thing!!)
If you are interested to know more, I found a fun video that compares the Regency style “pirouette” waltz to the later versions, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq0QxdsoUzo
Do you think our modern version of the waltz has lost some of the “spice” of this earlier style? Or are you glad that our version is a lot easier to dance?
I hope you’ll cross your fingers for me if you read this post by Saturday evening. My exciting news is that LORD OF MISRULE, my new release from last December, is a finalist for a prestigious 2019 Maggie Award as Best Historical Romance! And Saturday night is when the winners are going to be announced.
I was flabbergasted when I made the finals, but it is so thrilling that my first new book after a 16-year pause in my career has been so well-received. The other thing that makes this honor especially exciting to me is that I write “sweet”, and not only was this book competing with Historical Romances of all sorts of time periods, but it was also up against much hotter reads, which tend to be more popular.
I had the fun exercise of drafting what I’m calling my “fantasy thank you speech” which a friend at the Moonlight and Magnolias Conference in Georgia this weekend will deliver for me in the (rather unlikely) event that my book wins. But in that speech I mentioned that, ” Even though we are all writing about the emotional journeys our characters must take to arrive at deep and lasting love, omitting the explicit sex can make it harder to show the dance of attraction and doubt they go through.”
Thinking about “sweet” versus “hot” has made me think about all the kinds of risks we authors take as we try to do service to our characters’ stories. I tend to write unusual plots, and try to bring something fresh and different to each Regency story I write. Not all readers want that, of course! So it’s often a risk –and that tendency may be how I ended up here in the Risky Regencies sisterhood. Maybe over the coming months, each of us blogging here can talk about what she thinks is “risky” about the writing she does. I admit that I’ve been in a very “ruminative” mood lately, taking stock of where I am and where I’m going now that I am writing again.
What am I working on? Readers wanted more stories from Little Macclow, the Derbyshire village setting of LOM. I hadn’t planned on a series, but it turns out there is enough material there to mine. My current work-in-progress is a prequel to LOM, which I hope to release before or at least by December! It’s the story of Tom & Sally Hepston, who are already married when you meet them in LOM. Is it risky to write a series that wasn’t planned in advance? I guess we’ll find out!!
Do you read both sweet and hot romances? Do you like offbeat stories? What kind of risks do you see authors take, and which ones do you enjoy, or not enjoy?
