The Royal Image
Posted by SuzanneR on September 15, 1998 at 11:25:13:
In response to "Taking" the image of the monarchy--risky!, written by ElaineL on September 15, 1998 at 09:40:21
] I saw pictures of the Prince Regent, I think in the same book you reference, and he was tall, trim and fairly dashing. It was clearly a commisioned portrait. However, in another book the image of a short, fat and slovenly gentleman was also labeled as that of the Prince. This drawing was decidely not a commisioned taking of his image. Was the discrepency due to the passage of time? Or the freedom of the latter artist to render the Prince more true-to-life? Perhaps the real image is to be found in between, but my sense from the one author is that the less complimentary picture was the more accurate rendering.
As I recall (speaking off the top of my head), the Prince Regent was a rather fine figure of a man in his youth, but his various over indulgences gradually nibbled away at his good looks--until he became the fat, sickly, peevish figure the press loved to ridicule.
] Princess C. was described as wearing gowns not at all flattering to her size because they fit too closely and her anatomy hung out most inappropriately. I have a feeling she would have been rendered more graciously than she actually appeared.
You may be right. I believe she was very popular with the people and was viewed as the hope of a country increasingly disgusted by her father's excesses. (But wasn't she herself rather a crudely boisterous puppy? I'm remember hearing some anecdote about her that slips my mind right now.)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
