Rules of propriety: Regency vs Victorian

Lizzy would not have been allowed to walk alone with Darcy in the Victorian period. Am I right or left? Does it follow, then that she also would not have been allowed to be alone with him in the parlour at Hunsford? And what was the difference between Darcy and Lizzy in the parlour at Hunsford, and Marianne and Willoughby alone at the aunt's house? During about what range of years did these rules change? Had JA lived to age 65, would she have seen it? Amy

Amy I don't really remember much detailed discussion from AUSTEN-L, but if there was, then you could try to retrieve it using the archive "search" explained on http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~churchh/austen-l.html I'm not really an expert on this, but even in Jane Austen's day it might have been considered treading slightly near the edge for Darcy to visit the Hunsford parsonage with the SPECIFIC INTENTION of finding Lizzay alone, and spending time with her. Conversely, I don't think it would have been considered all that scandalous even in Victorian tiles for two young people to accidentally find themselves alone together in a room for a few minutes. However, the Victorian era was somewhat stricter about such things as chaperonage, and I think that Bingley's arranging with Mrs. Bennet for Lizzy and Darcy to take a nice LONG walk ALONE would have read oddly in the 1860's, say... Here's what I have in the AUSTEN-L "Pre-FAQ" at http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~churchh/pre-faq.txt :

Well, that didn't quite work :-( But just follow the link...

I went back over the tapes once when it was mentioned about how improper it was for Darcy to give the letter to Elizabeth at Rosings. The scene where it was apparent that the two of them being alone together was not right was at Lambton Inn. Hannah's concern, I think, arose from more than Lizzie's appearance. Even as she said "At once" and went to fetch the Gardiner's she seemed to hesitate at the thought of leaving Darcy alone with Lizzie. Saman

But she had already brought him in and left him alone with her when he arrived - that would have been a better time for hesitation motivated by concern for leaving them alone together. I have thought that her hesitation at that time was out of concern for whether Lizzie needed some assistance.

For two unmarried unrelated young persons of opposite sexes to exchange letters was actually much more serious than being alone in a room together for a few minutes... That's why Darcy is careful to HAND-DELIVER his letter to Elizabeth.

#1 - Regarding Hanna leaving Lizzie and Darcy alone. Remember she left the door open upon Mr. Darcy's first arrival. When she noticed that Lizzie was very upset did she close the door (for privacy???), at that point is when she hesitated. I assume the presence of a closed door on two unmarried people might be the key here. #2 - Darcy's hand delivered letter. Yes I agree, he never would have been able to send the letter by messenger. But, do you think that someone (maybe a servant) in Kent might have seen this exchange or noticed the letter in Lizzie's room? This may have been where the rumor of their engagement began????

Candace, this is a _movie_, so the details of propriety may not be historically correct -- and in fact it is simply not the case that being thrown together by circumstances alone together in a room for a few minutes would have been a violation of decorum.

] simply not the case that being thrown together by circumstances alone together in a room for a few minutes would have been a violation of decorum. ____________ You know what I guess I don't get? Being alone with someone -- in person -- to me seems much more dangerous that sending somebody a letter? What is the reasoning, if indeed there is ever any rythme or reason to propriety, behind the stricture against letter writing unless one is engaged. My, what would they think of what we do here? Amy

What is the reasoning, if indeed there is ever any rythme or reason to propriety, behind the stricture against letter writing unless one is engaged. Maybe the objection to writing was the documentary evidence resulting. Sweet nothings leave no evidence, but an over-detailed letter could prove embarassing. Now tell me I have a nasty suspicious mind

Remember in S&S when Mrs. Jennings wanted to know what Miss Dashwood and Lucy Steel were discussing so privately and that was between two woman. I think it is rude to ask what two people are discussing but it is also so rude to have a dicussion in front of other people. You can't have such "secretive" conversation either,I guess,or is just because Mrs. Jennngs felt left out of the conversation. A letter something consider so private{in 18th} that you should be engaged to talk of it.In other words what could a man and a woman have to say if it can't be said in public.

I think I see what you both mean, Donna and Anna. The idea of privacy was so different in that time it is hard to put yourself there.

There are other two rules of propriety I don't see being mentioned here: 1. Under no circumstances may a lady call on a gentleman alone unless she is consulting that gentleman on a professinal or business matter. This is why in P&P1 Lizzy's running to Pemberly tearfully after learning Lydia's elopement is not only out of her character but also violates the basic social etiqutette at the time. 2. A lady never dances more than three dances with the same partner. In P&P book, Mrs. B tells Mr. B how Bingley favored Jane and danced twice at the assembly with her. But in p&P2, Mrs. B implies that Bingley "stood up" with Jane at least 4 times, which is probably historically inaccurate. Zimei

Yes, certainly it's treading a bit near the edge for a young unmarried gentleman OR lady to go anywhere DELIBERATELY INTENDING to find an unrelated member of the opposite sex entirely alone. This is called an "assignation". But in the case you mention, wouldn't Miss Bingley or Georgiana have possibly been alone? I think the conventional upper limit is two SETS of two dances each -- if you go down Mr. Bingley's dance card in chapter 3 of Pride and Prejudice, you'll notice that he dances a set of two dances with each lady, and two sets of two with Jane. I think that for a non-engaged couple to dance three or more sets would have been treading near the edge (showing "particularity" as Jane Austen called it -- see the link above).

Oops -- "wouldn't Miss Bingley or Georgiana have possibly been THERE?"

Amy, I have a wonderful book about Victorian England, as well as the old and new rich in America during that time. It is titled:To Marry an English Lord, Or How Anglomania Really Got started. The author is Gail MacCoil and Carol McD. Wallace. It was published in 1989 by Workman Publishing, New York. ISBN # 0-89480-939-3. It was delightful reading. It also has great pictures. It talks about many of the things you are questioning. If you can't find it, you can E-mail me and you may borrow it. I am sure you are a trustworthy person! I think JA time was more "liberal" than Victorian times. (At least after reading this book). By the way, a short little history of how you all got together would be very nice. A little will suffice. Perhaps you could put it in topic#1. I know you welcome new people into this conference, but how about at Pemberly. Do you all prefer the regulars, or can a newbie jump in? Perhaps the rewards of reflection and observation are better... I am very glad I finally jumped in since I have been a lurker for awhile.

Newbies are also welcome at Pemberly(sic); jump right in if you dare. ;-)

:wouldn't Miss Bingley or Georgiana have possibly been THERE? HC, I scarcely think Miss Bingley the duckface would be the first person Lizzy seeks advice from on such a sensitive matter. Lizzy has just made Georgiana's acquaintance, besides she is a young girl hasn't come out yet, so it's higly impossible Lizzy would visit Pemberly to see georgianna about Lidia's elopement. Zimei

Zimei, especially since Lydia eloped with Wickham - and Lizzie knows about Georgiana's and Wickham's past - I agree it's impossible that Lizzie would have turned to either of the ladies mentioned for advice.

I wasn't suggesting that she would seek advice from either of them!!!!!!!! I was merely pointing out that the fact that they are very possibly at Pemberley exonerates Elizabeth from the charge that she deliberately went to Pemberley with the intention of finding Darcy alone, so that her visit is not a breach of propriety in that sense... (However the movie does seem to be less true to the character of Lizzy at this point...)

Re: A4: Correspondence Would it be acceptable for unmarried, marriageable men and women to correspond is the case of a tragedy; e.g. the death of a close relative?? I wonder because in Chapter 48, Mrs. Gardiner was in half-expectation that they would have been followed by a letter from Elizabeth's Derbyshire friend. Lydia's elopement was certainly a tragedy of sorts. Linda

Yes, there are quasi-exceptions for "business" type letters, especially when it's one off (not a continuing two-way correspondence) -- thus Elinor writing to Edward Ferrars with Col Brandon's offer... But I think when Mrs. Gardiner expects a letter from Darcy to Elizabeth, she's actually expecting a proposal (notice the context in chapter 48 -- Mrs. Gardiner remains in "perplexity" about the state of affairs between Elizabeth and Darcy...

In respect to manners, can anyone enlighten me on what is meant by essentials. There is a passage between Mr. Wickham and Elizabeth where she says"In essentials, I believe he is very much as he was". It would be much appreciated.

That's Lizzy's polite way of telling Wickham "I know you for what you are now, and I don't believe your lies about Darcy any more"...

"In essentials, I believe he is very much as he was". In his basic character make up, his values, traits, beliefs, etc. he is the same person that he always was, she has just begun to see these traits unhindered by her prejudice and realize that he was always good, she just wouldn't let herself see it. The point, as HC says, is to let Wickham know that she is no longer swayed by Wickham's tale of woe.

Thankyou!

Another example where the propriety rules are cleverly put aside is in Sanditon (dare I mention that I have read this semi-Austen novel and quite enjoyed it too?). Anyway Sidney manages to give a small and very ugly shrine with shells on it to -oh dear me what was her name?- his chosen lady, by first pretending he bought it for his brother, then pretending again that he remembered how this same brother detests this sort of souvenir. And so quite casually he suggests in a letter to his brother that the shrine migth be given to Miss K(?). It is a lovely scene cause neither he nor the lady in question like the shrine, *but* it reminds them of a very special moment when he makes her say she admires it and waits till she simply has to lift her eyes to his. Sigh...

Ann2 -- yes, Dobbs/Telscomb has handled this very well in her Sanditon completion; Sidney parker manages to give a gift to Charlotte Heywood completely above board and in the open, because it's something of little monetary value and aesthetically rather hideous, and he manages to convince everybody that it's a kind of prank joke gift, but at the same time, he has also endowed it with some personal meaning between himself and the lady in question... Jane Austen Sequels list

I've been trying to respond for days and can't edit out that box with X in it! Will try again

Good. I did it. Now I can tell you I've been going through trials and tribulations you would not believe to get on a server that would find you again. Withdrawal was bad until I did :)

Welcome home!

What are the dates assigned to the Regency era?

The regency era was from 1811-1821, when George III was declared mad and his son was named Prince Regent. When George IV finally inherited the kingdom his regency was over.

What was the prior period, 1790's, when I believe JA first wrote P&P?

The 1790's would still have been part of the Georgian era - towards the end of George III's reign (or mental capacity). However, the Georgian era didn't start again when George IV took over in his own right. Since the reigns of Georve IV and William IV (his brother) together only lasted 16 years, they never deserved an "era" so it goes Georgian, Regency, Victorian.

Thanks for clarifying that. Saw a very interesting special on George III on the Discovery Channel -- it seems he attained a kind of nobility in the eyes of England during his last mad days. . .

I thought I would delurk to mention that in the P&P1 scene in which Lizzy runs to Pemberly after Lydia's elopement, she says to Darcy that she came to get her Aunt and Uncle Gardiner. Why they were there without her I know not.

] Why they were there without her I know not. ___ Mr fishing? Mrs admiring the fine woods?

Yes Amy dear, but the most interesting part is there without her. Why did Lizzy not revisit Pemberley that morning? Was there nothing 'worth coming for'? Did she really stay at home to read her letters. Headstrong girl!

As someone had mentioned earlier, the whole prospect of Lizzy running into Pemberley pretty much violated the conventions of the day. To quote an updated Emma: "As if!"

]"...the whole prospect of Lizzy running into Pemberley..." And a distance of about five miles (Pemberley from Lambton)-- I am impressed! An early long distance runner in the making, I do perceive.

Ha! Thought as I recall, in P&P0, she was already on the grounds, and merely ran breathless into the house. So any comparisions to Carl Lewis will have to wait!

Mind if I pose a question? What did Elizabeth call Darcy after their marriage? Did she refer to him as Darcy, Fitzwilliam (ugh), or by a pet name (such as Dear, Darling, etc.) I understand that in the presence of others she would refer to him as Mr. Darcy or, perhaps as Darcy (among family) but she must have called him something else in private. I suggest Darcy at all times, but want to know others' opinions. Margaret

We have discussed this several times at length, but we are of course always willing to do it again. The general concensus, if I recall it accurately, was that she would refer to him as: "Love-Butt". ;-)

" The general concensus, if I recall it accurately, was that she would refer to him as: "Love-Butt". ;-)" See the Firth/Darcy Drooling Topic for a semi-rational explanation! ;-)

I simply cannot believe that this wonderful thread has reserfaced!! Cheryl, I was going to Email you, but I will take this opportunity to tell you now. Upon my last viewing of P&P2, I noticed in the credits that someone who worked on the film's last name is Honeybuns. Isn't that great!

Candace: " Upon my last viewing of P&P2, I noticed in the credits that someone who worked on the film's last name is Honeybuns. Isn't that great!" How wonderful! I wonder if there is any way to verify whether or not the person in question does, in fact, have "honeybuns?"

Maybe this was the Craft Service person who was _dispensing_ the honeybuns!

My, we've certainly gotten away from the notion of propriety, haven't we How about "Fitzie"?

''What did Elizabeth call Darcy after their marriage?'' - Meggin My own personal fantasy has the scene thus..... (Takes place during the conversation the day after they become engaged, on their long ramble). ''My dearest, lovliest Elizabeth.'' he declared softly, looking all the while closely at her, the better to enjoy the flush that always came to her cheeks when he named her thus. She cast her eyes down, and began to speak, but stopped suddenly. He continued to look at her as she hesitated. Finally, she spoke. ''I find that I was about to address as Mr. Darcy, but perhaps you would prefer another form of address...?'' ''Most call me Darcy, of course, and some, friends from school, still call me Fitz, as did my father.'' Here he paused, and then began again, in a tone yet more quiet than even before, ''My mother and sister alone, of all those who know me, have called me William.'' He glanced away, as if the strength of the feelings revealed in his gaze would prompt her to an answer that she might not be prepared to give. She understood the unspoken question, and answered it with a tenderness of heart equal to that which prompted the request. She spoke only the name; '' William'', and smiled as his eyes rose to hers. An answering smile, full of love and tenderness, came to his countenance, and they stood thus bemused for a full minute, before they continued their walk. ....I must leave you now, as I take pleasure in a great many things, and our pizza has arrived.

I wish I had your gift for creative writing, Mari. It was one of the most difficult of the journalism and literary courses I had to complete in college. Well, done.

Re: response 49 - Henry, no Fitzie, I beg of you!! Fitzie is the nickname of the All Black captain (I'd better explain that, hadn't I?) The All Blacks are New Zealand's rugby team and their captain at the moment is Sean Fitzpatrick. I have no doubts as to his ability as a forward (read big bloke) in the game of rugby, but to be confronted with the image of him when thinking of Darcy is, well, insupportable. I'll forgive you Henry - but only because I didn't wish you a happy birthday ;)

Re: Response 50 Oooooo, Mari!! That is excessively romantic!!!! Capital! Capital! It must have happened exactly that way. Linda

How about a simple but elegant "Mister"?

Given marrieds' predilection for calling each other Mr Bennet and Mrs Bennet, etc., one supposes it may have ended up Mr. Darcy and Mrs Darcy after all (until more private moments where he may have addressed her as "my little Boobytrap and she may have replied "my darling Daggykins")

France, you are sooooo bad! ;-)

HC... I rather like Fitzie. I think it is very endearing. Prey tell..."daggykins"!! By the way, is anyone going to the JASNA tour of England in June???

Leslie: By the way, is anyone going to the JASNA tour of England in June??? No, although I certainly looked at it longingly. I have decided to do the 1-week Jane Austen course at Oxford the end of July, however. This is a trip I have thought about for several years, and this year I shall finally get to it! A full week discussing the six novels, much as we do here now that I think about it, but face to face and in Oxford.

Kathleen, tell me more! How does one hear about this course at Oxford, and can anyone join?? I'll probably be in England around that time.

Sounds like heaven. Could I ever manage it, I wonder.

That does sound heavenly! But it's rather a short period of time to discuss SIX NOVELS, isn't it?

Oh yes, Amy2, it is far too short a period. But for some of us a lifetime may be too short -- hence my continuing to read this conference, lurk at Austen-L, and reread all the novels. By the way, even if you are merely interested in the programs, this "course" that I am taking is part of University Vacations (U.S. Headquarters) International Building 10461 NW 26 St Miami, FL 33172 1-800-792-0100 They will send you a brochure of this years courses (a wide variety around European universities).

I have another question about manners during the regency, and I am sure there is someone in JA land who can answer. I have just finished watching Volume 6 for who knows how many times! Lydia is so rude to Jane when she told her, NO JANE, I take your place, for I am a married woman. What was rank order in the family during this time? The JASNA SC Chapter is having a tea at the Mills House in Charleston SC. We are all going to wear Regency dress etc.. I just can't wait. I know it is not Oxford, but it is th best I can do for the present with these hideous graduate studies that take me away from JA. My husband said as a graduation present that he will send me on a JA trip of England. I hope is true to his word!

Graduation present : you lucky gal. And lucky to be wearing a period dress too.

Leslie, they had a long discussion of the topic of precedence on AUSTEN-L; there are many possible complicating factors, but the basic rule here is that the daughters of a family take precedence according to seniority (i.e. in order of date of birth), BUT all married daughters take precedence above all unmarried daughters.

Kathleen!! Thanks ever so much for above information. Heavenly as Amy did put it! This University Vacation thing is all around the world then? Maybe I should try to find a European adress instead of the one you so kindly offered. I would not be able to say much, but then I have heard somewhere that the rewards of observing and reflecting are not bad either... Went through tape 1 last nigth -as I can't use home pc(oh how I miss you all from chatroom)- and Lydia's bad manners are all around, and though she gets some reproaches from Lizzy and Mr Bennet, she is only momentarily corrected. She never seems to do any reflecting, unless it involves officers in one way or the other!!

Thankyou HC. What would we do without you. I have just bookmarked Austen-L. I will explore it further.

Re: #66 Ann2 -- the European Headquarters for University Vacations is Brasenose College Oxford, England ON1 4AJ Phone: 01865-277844 There are courses at Florence-Siena, Harvard, Oxford, the Sorbonne, Cambridge, Univ. of Leiden, Univ. of Bologna, Charles Univ. in Prague, and Pontifical Gregorian Univ. in Rome. As I mentioned previously, I have been considering this vacation option (and saving money!) for about 10 years. When I was working in a consulting firm, I did not have enough time (or energy) to do it right. But now that I have extra time off in the summer it just seemed like the perfect vacation. (I shall, of course, spend some additional time in London which is one of my favorite cities.)

I am new here, and have enjoyed reading this conference. (My husband tries and actually watched P&P, but he would NEVER read the book. oh well. I beleive Jane Austen once wrote a line in a letter about sitting next to a splendidly half-dressed lady at a dinner party? Apparently, due to the French Revolution ladies dampened down their underclothes, which left their dresses very clingy! And the men wore such tight breeches that they could not sit at dances or even have a pocket sewn inside! Bottom line: when Price Albert died in 1861, THINGS CHANGED! Jane Austen probably wouldn't have seen the Victorian age and its restrictiveness.

I think the extremes of sheerness and daringness were more or less confined to Paris etc., and didn't have that much of an effect on rural Hampshire gentlewomen (though the fashions from mid 1790's to about 1820 were less confining and cumbersome than later Victorian dress...). The quote you mention is from a letter of January 8th, 1801: ``Martha and I dined yesterday at Deane to meet the Powletts and Tom Chute, which we did not fail to do. Mrs. Powlett was at once expensively and nakedly dressed; we have had the satisfaction of estimating [the value of] her lace and her muslins; and she said too little to afford us much other amusement.'' Click here for a drawing which makes fun of the Classically-inspired styles when they were just coming into fashion (1797).

TMHC Thanks for the drawings! I'm such a novice, I can hardly turn on a computer! But I'm learning...You are right about fashion. But even now, ugly shoes in Paris last month, mean ugly shoes in the USA this month! The studies at Oxford sound wonderful. My elder brother went to one of the Oxford colleges (am I wording this right?) and loved Europe so much he lives there!

TMHC I just got back from that WEB page. I'm speechless. My husband's partner can't get their's launched. I bow to the master! I need to study the HTML page so I can put in someone winking, so just use your imagination! I have to go play Legos now!

My dear HC, Is there anything about JA that you do not know? I think half of my JA bookmarks are from your tidbits! Do you smile too much from all these compliments?? Prey tell...

Am I remembering correctly that it was the fashion in Paris for a time for women to actually go topless in evening dress? Or am I having a St. Tropez flashback?

Re: 44:71 -- Anne, but fashions may not be as extreme in Peoria as they are in Paris. Re:44:74 -- I don't know if they actually went topless, but I think there was a sub-fashion to have tops of the breasts completely bare.

I once wrote an awfully big post which I then lost, and just was too lazzy to rewrite, so let me try this once more : In France, around 1795, this period was called the Directoire and in politics Greek democracy was then a model to follow, the First Consul considered Roman democracy as ideal and its how the greek and roman influences inspired the French woman how to dress. Paris was then the capital of fashion. Men's costume had nothing to do with Antiquity. At this time, it was considered very modern for a woman to carry her wardrobe in only one bag. Until 1797, fabrics became slowly but surely lighter and sheerer.. It as then that tule replaced muslin, being the most transparent. In winter, women wore as undergarment something resembling the stockings of today. The breasts were more and more uncovered and wore very high. Madame Tallien, n�e Cabarrus, was Queen of Fashion around 1795. Knowned as Notre-Dame de Thermidor, mistress of Barras (member of the Directoire and secretary to the Municipal Counsel of Paris), she was the center of attention wherever she went. She possessed all the intellectual and physical qualities, and thus had nothing to conceal. So her dress was nothing more than a piece of silk covering her body. In the Fall, she appeared at a ball at the Op�ra de Paris in a sleeve-less silk tunic and no undergarm nts, rings on her toes and sandals on her feet. At the beginning of the XIXth century, appeared Les Incroyables (incredible) and their feminin counterparts Les Merveilleuses (wonderful), the undergrown rebels of the time (equivalent to the punks of 1979). Their way of dressing was more in the line of caricaturing than being well dress. The men would exagerate English fashion to the point of rendering it absurd. The big white cravate, as big as a small cape, wrapped not only the neck but also the chin. They wore the obligatory blue jacket to short in f ont and dragging in the back. During the Consulat (1799-1804), the too light muslin were now insufficient and did not respond to the parisian climate. For this and for political reason, the Emperor Napol�on forbid all import of Indian muslin, and giving new life to the silk trade of Lyon. Under Napol�on, warmer fabrics came to fashion, like taffetas, velvet and brocades. The low-kneck dress were not so low anymore and long sleeves were in fashion. With short sleeves dress, gloves would be worn. In day-to-day fashion, the dress would b short enough not to drag anymore. The only exception remains for two dresses, one for a ball and one worned as an official court dress. Around 1810, dresses stopped at the ankle so to see the flat shoes. The waistline went slowly downward. Colors came back in fashion but White was predominant. Napol�on wanted to continue some of Versailles traditions and so ordered painters David and Isabey to draw ceremonial dresses, thus sumptuous cape embroided with gold and silver, diamond necklace and rare bird feathers, spanish collar in fine lace. The Emreperor could not stand seeing a woman dressed twice in the same apparel and thought fashion a c nsiderably important commercial export, knowing full well that the eyes of Europe, Eastern-Europe and America was upon Paris.

Thanks, Johanne. This is the first message I have printed out in a long time because I want to read it carefully. You said you studied this stuff?

Thanks Johanne. Often I feel like the Bennett sisters are wearing night gowns! There is so much I would enjoy learning, these sites have whetted my appetite! thanks to TMHC, I'll be reading and not posting for a while...!

Johanne, thanks! Sounds like Izaac Mizrahi would have loved this period!

Oh good. My favorite time of day. I get to watch Amy2 tearing through the topics. She responds quicker almost than I can read.