Posted by The Mysterious H.C. on July 12, 1998 at 23:14:18:
In response to silly times, written by mishel on July 12, 1998 at 22:28:27
I don't think that "flirtatious" is necessarily all that useful an adjective to apply as a broad-brush characterization of an entire historical era.
What was true is that Regency England differed from Victorian England in having a more openly rakish aristocratic/London high society, in not yet having the particular Victorian brand of self-righteous narrow religiosity as any kind of social norm, and in having slightly less strict social customs in some respects (for example the Regency requirements of chaperonage were a little looser than Victorian ones).
However, this does not mean that many people didn't still have a strong moral code, or that Lydia's behavior would be not viewed as a social scandal and a religious sin by most genteel rural inhabitants, or that we would consider regency etiquette to be "casual" in our own terms...
- yes and... P. Bingham 22:18:13 7/14/98 (0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.