Coincidentally, started "Bridgerton" on Netflix just yesterday. Mills and Boon brought to the screen basically so bound to be a ratings winner, a lot of fun but with clever contemporary twists like a completely multi-ethnic aristocracy at which no character turns a hair.
Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
41–50 of 93 posts
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
so I expand: but of course, this is not an answer; it's an explanation in the style of the surreal way in which I have chosen to make sense of the larger world around me. however, who am I to chose how to make sense of the world? who am I to say that mytholgy-engineering has anything to do with the reason for the creation lots and lots of romances set in the british pre-victorian era? in order to be taken seriously I…
> in order to be taken seriously I must provide sources, backing, it is not enough to explain my thoughts cogently. I must show other ideas that support what I say. I must acquire a reputation and then, only then, I can say whatever I want. No one here is actually asking for your sources, so far as I can see. The people who are taking umbrage at your comment are most likely (like me) those who do not see your explana…
There doesn't need to be a shadowy "they" for this to be true. It can be purely the result of a dynamic in the system that results due to certain feedback loops and hierarchies in the organisation of media institutions. This is essentially the thesis of Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" -- that the only media that gets put in front of you has been selected by a process which is emergent and not controlled by some "cabal" but nevertheless results in a form of, essentially, propaganda which supports the power structures of the system.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
so I expand: but of course, this is not an answer; it's an explanation in the style of the surreal way in which I have chosen to make sense of the larger world around me. however, who am I to chose how to make sense of the world? who am I to say that mytholgy-engineering has anything to do with the reason for the creation lots and lots of romances set in the british pre-victorian era? in order to be taken seriously I…
HN, for all of its claims of intellectualism, is pretty unforgiving to any thoughts that don't fit one of a couple of echo chamber themes. I hang around because I think it's important for people (including me) to hear other ideas, but you should expect to be downvoted.
It takes long, hard work to accumulate the knowledge and experience to be able to consistently say things that matter. It’s impossible to fake, and an astute crowd will always spot it.
The Luke-in-Yoda’s-hut scene pops to mind.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#44Today I learned there was a short period of history called Regency and I demured on the fact that British society could put a psycho executive in restraint while my country, a supposed enlightened democracy (the US), can not. I actually found the article wanting. I could not turn to a colleague after reading it and explain why this period was an ideal setting for romances. I learned who some of sources of romance in…
> the fact that British society could put a psycho executive in restraint while my country, a supposed enlightened democracy (the US), can not.
That "psycho executive"—George III—reigned during the period of the American War of Independence, which, if you recall, he lost, so it seems both nations managed to restrain his power.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#45because this period of history is being rewrriten in the public culture to reifnorce myths about the present and so influence (softly control) the future edit: the first sentence gets downvoted. I both expected and felt bad about it.
That explains nothing whatsoever as to what's so special about the Regency period? As the article notes, it's nine years . Why not when George III was still in command? Why not during Victoria's reign?
Definitions vary. The formal Regency period was nine years. But, from Wikipedia: "The term Regency (or Regency era) can refer to various stretches of time; some are longer than the decade of the formal Regency, which lasted from 1811 to 1820. The period from 1795 to 1837, which includes the latter part of George III's reign and the reigns of his sons George IV and William IV, is sometimes regarded as the Regency era, characterised by distinctive trends in British architecture, literature, fashions, politics, and culture."
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I think you have to draw a line somewhere between proximal and ultimate inspirations; modern Regency romances are very like Heyer (albeit generally much more explicit) and rather unlike Austen. We subdivide modern fantasy into 'epic', 'sword and sorcery', 'low', and so on, even though they have common ancestors.
> We subdivide modern fantasy into 'epic', 'sword and sorcery', 'low', and so on, even though they have common ancestors. that's news to me. i personally consider that meticulous categorization of fiction to be tedious and childish. Consider that there are no good definitions of "high" vs "low" fantasy, and that there a few books that are both a) successful (whether you measure this in terms of profitability, popular…
>"high" vs "low" fantasy
Thought distinction (originally at least) was whether fantasy happening on imagined realm or here on Earth?
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was surprised this article didn't mention British colonialism at all.
Why would it be worth emphasizing in a very home island bound setting which doesn't even address the middle class residents of the isle. Colonialism went on for over a century before and after. It would be like emphasizing that Edgar Allen Poe married his thirteen year old cousin when discussing his horror influence. Terrible but hardly germane to the topic.
"Le bon ton" likely had a very direct hand in shaping colonialism, given that they were aristocrats and landed gentry, and given the "season" spent in London was shaped around political networking.
However, I also meant that it was a sort of cultural neo-colonialism: that the British are allowed to present the history of this period as a romantic drama.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but I think you have to draw a line somewhere between proximal and ultimate inspirations; modern Regency romances are very like Heyer (albeit generally much more explicit) and rather unlike Austen. We subdivide modern fantasy into 'epic', 'sword and sorcery', 'low', and so on, even though they have common ancestors.
> We subdivide modern fantasy into 'epic', 'sword and sorcery', 'low', and so on, even though they have common ancestors. that's news to me. i personally consider that meticulous categorization of fiction to be tedious and childish. Consider that there are no good definitions of "high" vs "low" fantasy, and that there a few books that are both a) successful (whether you measure this in terms of profitability, popular…
>i personally consider that meticulous categorization of fiction to be tedious and childish
When you read several hundred books a year, categorization goes from being tedious and childish to being necessary and useful.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#49because this period of history is being rewrriten in the public culture to reifnorce myths about the present and so influence (softly control) the future edit: the first sentence gets downvoted. I both expected and felt bad about it.
Indeed. It's startling how much entertainment is actually social engineering. It's worth reading Propaganda by Edward Bernaise if you're interested in better understanding these coordinated approaches. I'm not sure how much I'd say that's why so much romance is set in a particular era, but I'd buy that's why they are promoted so much and heavily influences their tone and themes. "Who control the past controls the fut…
You can take anything and try to claim it is social engineering if it differs from your viewpoint. That sort of tripe has been applied to boring uncontroversial dry Newtonian physics textbooks being called "cultural imperialism".
It is absurd black and white thinking to declare that anything which reflects its source culture is propaganda even if it embeds the bullshit influnces of propaganda of the day like the classics obsession of the Enlightenment.
Calling a work propaganda merely because it reflects a source culture is propaganda in itself. Used to justify suppression of anything not actively promoting their world view as actively in service of evil. That has been used by amongst many others evangelical fundamentalists and the Party in basically every nation which called themselves Communists.
Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We subdivide modern fantasy into 'epic', 'sword and sorcery', 'low', and so on, even though they have common ancestors. that's news to me. i personally consider that meticulous categorization of fiction to be tedious and childish. Consider that there are no good definitions of "high" vs "low" fantasy, and that there a few books that are both a) successful (whether you measure this in terms of profitability, popular…
>i personally consider that meticulous categorization of fiction to be tedious and childish When you read several hundred books a year, categorization goes from being tedious and childish to being necessary and useful.
I don't read much fantasy but I do read a fair bit of science fiction and categories like cyberpunk, soft, hard, space opera, etc. while fuzzy are something I tend to find somewhat useful (as is the distinction between SF and fantasy). There are probably books in every category I like but I generally favor some categories over others.