Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

daily.jstor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 93 posts

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#21

Post by lucozade »

naringas wrote: post #10
naringas wrote: post #7

because 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.

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…

You alleged that Georgian romances are part of a conspiracy to control the future. That's a surprising allegation that you made no attempt to justify nor explain, cogent or otherwise.

Under those circumstances, it's perfectly coherent for strangers to dismiss the allegation if it doesn't conform to their preconceived view. It is also perfectly coherent for strangers to agree with it if it does.

Now, if you wish for strangers to come to agree with your world view then you'll have to make some effort to convince them. Whether or not you can be arsed to do that is, of course, up to you.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#22

Post by minikites »

silicon2401 wrote: post #16
seneca wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've only been coming to this site for maybe 5 years now (not under this account in case people do the lame reddit thing of checking your account history at the drop of a hat), but I feel like even in that time things have become noticeably more echo-y here.

Hacker News is just Reddit plus a thesaurus.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#23

Post by FearNotDaniel »

heavenlyblue wrote: post #20
travisgriggs wrote: post #15

Today 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 supposedly enlightened democracy is currently heavily polarised and the British society back then was not.

The reason the article is found wanting is that the answer to the question is not really in anything to do with the Regency era per se. It's mostly because Jane Austen was really good at writing romantic comedies, and so set a template that everyone wants to follow in much the same way that nearly all modern era Hollywood romcoms are pale imitations of Nora Ephron's work (When Harry Met Sally, Sleepless in Seattle, You've Got Mail - which was itself a remake anyway but with the Ephron formula liberally applied).

Ephron's genius, as with Austen's, was not simply the fact that she seemed to have come up with a winning formula, there was also an enormous amount of craft, wit, originality and compassion involved.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#24

Post by monadic3 »

heavenlyblue wrote: post #20
travisgriggs wrote: post #15

Today 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 supposedly enlightened democracy is currently heavily polarised and the British society back then was not.

How do you figure the time was not polarizing? This reeks of nostalgia. Jane Austen's time, for instance, was an incredibly volatile time in the labor market. She just doesn't acknowledge contemporary issues because they weren't relevant to the stories she wanted to tell.

Meanwhile if you watch "You've Got Mail", the fact that it does touch on contemporary issues sours the whole film.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#25

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

naringas wrote: post #7

because 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.

#BLM has challenged that period in the UK and US. And it was a terrible period, with those vast idyllic country estates being built on the backs of slavery abroad and Enclosure of common land at home.

Slavery is being acknowledged now, but the Enclosures still don't figure in the national narrative.

But Regency Romance has been a money spinning genre for a very long time, and it's not more popular now than it used to be.

Nor is there any evidence of conscious narrative control by editors and publishers. There's far more evidence of that elsewhere - for example in both the mytho-feminist and techno-dystopian ends of contemporary SF.

But it's actually most obvious in period and class-specific movies and soaps, which the UK specialises in, and which are a very different genre to romantic fiction.

Here's the creator of Downton Abbey. He's now working on a US equivalent called - unsurprisingly - The Gilded Age. Could he possibly have an angle to sell?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Fellowes

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#26

Post by Mizza »

travisgriggs wrote: post #15

Today 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…

That literally just happened, and democracy was the process by which it occurred.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#27

Post by arbitrage »

Planktonne wrote: post #8
jacobolus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Georgette Heyer was explicitly inspired by Austen, and presumably many of her readers were Austen fans hungry for more stories from the same era. In a similar way we might say that Tolkien was the progenitor of a line of pulp fantasy novels, even though they have a significantly different character.

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, popularity, or a combination of both) and b) regimented enough to hold themselves to a dictionary-style definition of what the author is supposed to be writing about.

you're using a definition of fantasy that is frankly not supported by the reality of how we consume and produce said literary works.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#28

Post by jcranmer »

naringas wrote: post #10
naringas wrote: post #7

because 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.

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 explanation as cogent but instead an assertion that doesn't even fully explain what is asserting. You're promoting a conspiracy theory--a shadowy "They" who are conspiring to do something--without explaining what the conspiracy actually is. What are the myths being enforced? Why are "They" doing this? Who even is "They"?

> But how does one gather a reputation such that whatever I say will be read mindfully and not just dismissed right out when I start to make reasoning leaps all around? the most direct way is to simply repeat what other people with a reputation have said; to preach to the choir.

In my experience on HN, that reputation is gathered mostly by being seen to speak authoritatively on topics. The highest upvote comments I have gathered are generally when I can put together thorough, concise explanations quickly. It doesn't have to agree with the current zeitgeist, but you do generally want to provide stronger argumentation for your viewpoints in that situation.

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#29

Post by arethuza »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #25
naringas wrote: post #7

because 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.

#BLM has challenged that period in the UK and US. And it was a terrible period, with those vast idyllic country estates being built on the backs of slavery abroad and Enclosure of common land at home. Slavery is being acknowledged now, but the Enclosures still don't figure in the national narrative. But Regency Romance has been a money spinning genre for a very long time, and it's not more popular now than it used to…

The Highland Clearances are certainly remembered in Scotland - one of the reasons why there is a lot of support for community buy outs of estates:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances

Re: Why Are So Many Romances Set in the Regency Period?

#30

Post by arbitrage »

lkbm wrote: post #17
naringas wrote: post #7

because 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?

because the constituencies involved (of both the characters in the book, and the modern audience that consumes them) prefer the absence of a strong federating remote figure, to the ability of being able to imprint/insert themselves as participatory observers of the events.

lack of a strong central nexus gives fantasy writers and readers the opportunity to engage with the story and period on their own terms, instead of being subjugated to what some accidental monarch wants the era to have been.

Post reply on HN