Queen Vic
Posted by JW on April 13, 1998 at 17:41:46:
In response to Social Etiquette, written by Jenna on April 13, 1998 at 10:53:29
] Does anyone have an ideas or comments? I personally don't beleive it would have affected the status of women very much at all, but what about social decorum and style (not to mention fashion!) ] I suppose this belongs more on the Ramble board, so if this is out of line, let me know and I'll post it there, too. ] Thanks. JW: You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension aboiut Queen Victoria. She was not a Victorian herself, but the product of a somewhat raffish Regency household. The social constriction which occurred during her reign was rather due to the increasing ascendency of the middle classes and Evangelicanism which imposed a regime which she herself found disttasteful. Before her descent into deep gloom following Albert's death she was quite a lively party, not in the least prudish and fond of a laugh. She was however acutely aware that the madness of George 3, and the bad behaviour of George 4, and her awful uncles had brought the monarchy into deep disrepute, and with Albert's help was determined to rehabilitate it. Any of the males in the line of succession would have done much worse--thwy were a very rum lot indeeed. The monarchy might well have not survuved.
] I was thinking of a 'what if' question propelled by the 'kissing' thread. Given that the Regency period was imminently more lax in social proprieties (men and women w/o chaperones, less constrictive clothing, etc.) where would we be today if the Victorian era had not occured, or if there was a George the V
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
