The Botanical Prints of Pierre-Joseph Redouté (1759-1840)

Pierre-Joseph Redouté’s flower prints are so lush and detailed that you can almost pick the flowers off the page. In the famous rose print below, a single drop of water rests exquisitely on a rose petal of the top rose. Born in a family of artists*, Pierre-Joseph became known as the premier botanical illustrator of his day (indeed, to this day). His influence spread far and wide and can be still felt in illustrations on cards, decorative boxes, books, wallpapers and prints, and calendars.

The watercolor images in this post were taken from his famous book of prints, Les Roses. Redouté, known as the “Raphael of flowers, mastered the technique of stipple engraving- in which he uses tiny dots, rather than lines, to create engraved copies of his watercolor illustrations. This new technique allowed him to make subtle variations in coloring (see the detail of the magnolia in the last image below).

The four faces (and ages) of Pierre-Joseph Redouté

Redouté completed the three volumes of Les Roses, his best known work, between 1817 and 1824. His most popular illustrations are assembled in Les Liliacées (486 watercolors); and Les Roses (169 watercolors). Hand-colored stipple engravings, such as the magnolia sitting at the bottom of this post, were made from these watercolors. – Discovery Editions

Josephine, wife of Napoleon Bonaparte, was known for her spectacular garden at Chateau de Malmaison, where exotic plants were cultivated. The plants, acquired from around the world, were documented by France’s leading horticulturists and botanists, and painted by Pierre-Joseph Redouté.

Detail of the magnolia engraving below.

More on this topic

• The Floral Art of Pierre Joseph Redoute by Marianne Roland Michel, Peter C. Sutton, Carolyn Rose Rebbert, 2002
• George Glazer Gallery
• Illustration in book
• Trouvais
• Rose Prints
• A Picture of Roses
• Dictionary of painters and Engravers, 1889 By Michael Bryan, Robert Edmund Graves
• Les Liliacees, Cincinnati Historical Society Library

* Redoute’s family:

An Interview With Jane Odiwe, Author of Willoughby’s Return

Three years after Miss Marianne Dashwood marries Colonel Brandon, Willoughby returns. She is thrown into a tizzy of painful memories and exquisite feelings of uncertainty, for she is hurt and jealous over the Colonel’s attentions towards Eliza, his ward. Willoughby is as charming, as roguish, and as much in love with Marianne as ever. And the timing couldn’t be worse—with Colonel Brandon away and Willoughby determined to win her back ….

Jane, I have thoroughly enjoyed ‘Willoughby’s Return’. Your writing style is lovely and has matured since your first book. Was it easier to write a second novel?

Jane: Thank you Vic for inviting me onto your blog, and for your lovely comments; I am so thrilled that you enjoyed my novel. I did find it easier in some ways, yet I feel I still have so much to learn. Writing the first one teaches you so much, and I was able to draw on those experiences. Feeling confident to experiment a bit more was very helpful, I wasn’t so afraid to write the book as I wanted to – I’m always conscious that people are constantly comparing what I write to Jane Austen. It isn’t possible to emulate Jane, of course, but I try to retain the tone and flavour of her books, bearing in mind that I am writing for a modern audience.

How were you inspired to write this book? How did you come up with the plot? It was a stroke of genius to make Margaret Dashwood the heroine of your story and yet retain Marianne. They shared center stage much in the way that Elinor and Marianne did in Sense and Sensibility. Was this done on purpose?

Jane: Like a lot of people who have read Sense and Sensibility, I never felt completely convinced at the end of the book that Marianne would have fallen in love so easily with Colonel Brandon as we are told in the two paragraphs that Jane devotes to their courtship and marriage. I wanted to believe that they were right for one another, and this is what started me thinking about how he might have won her over, and about their relationship in general. Marianne is a passionate romantic, a little self-centred, and a firebrand. I imagined that although she might love the Colonel as much as she had Willoughby, it would have been quite a different courtship, and a complicated relationship, especially as they have both loved and lost in the past. The fact that Brandon is guardian to the daughter of his first love who is also tied to Willoughby as the father of her child, I felt would cause big problems. Marianne thinks only of others in terms of herself, I think she would be very jealous of Brandon’s relationship with his ward and her child. Starting with these ideas as a background, I wondered what might happen if Willoughby returned, and how he could be worked into the plot so that Marianne could not avoid him.

Jane Odiwe, left front, at the Reform Club, London. Dominique Raccah, publisher with Sourcebooks, sits in back looking down, with her husband beside her.

I wanted to introduce an older Margaret, who we are told has a character very similar to her sister. The relationship between the sisters is an important part of the book – would Marianne be able to chaperone Margaret as Elinor might or would she indulge her sister, encouraging her to fall head over heels with the first love that comes along? Would Margaret make the same mistakes as her sister?

Finally, I’ve always wondered about Brandon’s sister that we hear Mrs Jennings mention in S&S. Why was she in France? I decided to bring her and her family back to Whitwell, and this gave me an opportunity to introduce one of the young men central to the story. I love all the twists and turns in the plots of Jane Austen’s books, and I spent a long time thinking about how I could achieve a few of my own. I had a lot of fun with the plot, which changed several times before I got to the end!

Mr. Wickham and Willoughby are central to the plots of your two novels. Do you have a penchant for bad boys? Or do you think they are more complex characters than Edmund Bertram or a Henry Tilney, let’s say?

Jane: I don’t have a penchant for bad boys as such, but I understand how such characters have a certain appeal for most women – I think most of us have probably come across a Willoughby at some stage when we were growing up – I am convinced Jane knew of one or two! Bad boys are central to Austen’s plots also, and what fascinates me is that these characters are always introduced as handsome, dashing young men on first acquaintance. But, I think what’s important about Jane’s writing is that even when it is found that they are far from the good characters they are initially painted, they are not caricatures, never wholly bad. Willoughby, for instance, does realise his mistakes by the end of the book even if he doesn’t suffer forever. The development of a character like Willoughby was something I wanted to bear in mind with my book. I love the fact that Marianne is his ‘secret standard of perfection in woman’ – wouldn’t it be wonderful if all Willoughbys spent the rest of their lives in such secret regret?

Photograph taken in the area of Efford House on the Flete Estate where Sense and Sensibility (1995) was filmed.

I also enjoyed the historic touches that you managed to weave into your plot. It is evident that you know the countryside well and that you are familiar with Regency customs. Tell me a little about your research. I know you have visited many of the places you describe.

Jane: Research is a favourite part of writing these books – I probably spend far too much time on it, and always end up with more than I need, but England at this time is so interesting. My book starts off in Devon and Dorset, counties I’ve known and enjoyed since I was a little girl. My father used to take cine films of us when we were little – I have film of me in Lyme when I am about seven, and I have very fond memories of holidays taken in the area. I had to include Lyme in the book for these associations and for those that Jane wrote about in Persuasion.

I also spent a lot of time wandering around London finding all the places where the characters spend the season, and deciding where Marianne and her Colonel might have their house. As you know, Vic, there is still so much to see of Georgian London!

Oh, yes! I envy your living so close to the places that I research and your proximity to London. You write, paint, oversee at least three blogs and a twitter account, and have a family. How do you find time for it all? I am curious how you still manage to paint, for I always found that to be the most time consuming of my talents and the easiest to drop when my schedule is hectic.

Jane: The truth is that I find it difficult to find time for it all, but I am an early riser, and get a lot done when everyone is still asleep. We always come together for meals in my family, that’s most important and, we spend time together in the evenings – sometimes we paint together. There are several artists in the family; I love it if we are all working round the table. My own painting has taken a back seat at present, but that’s more to do with the fact that writing has taken me over for the moment.

Holbeton is the nearest village to the Flete Estate in South Devon, an area rich in natural beauty.

Any other thoughts about your book that you would like to share with our readers?

Jane: One of the themes in the book concerns that of love, lost and found. Both the Colonel and Marianne have been in love before, and their relationship is a second attachment. I wonder what your readers think of second attachments – and have they ever encountered or suffered at the hands of a Mr Willoughby?

Thank you so much for this interview and for the photos you supplied. I can’t recommend ‘Willoughby’s Return’ highly enough to people who love to read Jane Austen sequels.

Jane: Thank you for inviting me to talk to you about my book and for a fantastic interview with such thought provoking questions!

Want to talk to Jane or Dominique? Join Twitter!

• Dominique Raccah on Twitter
• Jane Odiwe on Twitter

Find other interviews and reviews of Willoughby’s Return at these sites:

Sourcebooks is holding a blog tour for author Jane Odiwe on other blogs. The schedule is as follows:

• Smexy Books 10/26
• Psychotic State blogspot 10/27
• Book Nerd Extraordinaire, 11/2
• Everything Victorian 11/3
• Savvy, Verse and Wit 11/4
• A Bibliophile’s Bookshelf 11/5
• The Bookworm Blogspot 11/6
• Books Like Breathing 11/9
• Jane Austen’s World 11/10 – this blog
• Love, Romance, Passion, 11/11
• Fresh Fiction 11/12

Follow Jane Odiwe’s adventure as an author on her blog, Jane Austen Sequels. By the way, today is Jane Odiwe’s birthday: Happy Birthday, Jane!

• Order Willoughby’s Return here
• Look for my review of the book soon.

Regency Hairstyles and their Accessories

Everything we now use is made [in] imitation of those models lately discovered in Italy. – Observation by an Englishman

Diana Sackville, 1777

In the late 18th century, hairstyles for women took a dramatic turn from the pouffed-up and constructed hairdos of the earlier Georgian age to the simple hair styles inspired by the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians. Curls now framed the face and chignons replaced the complicated, almost architectural concoctions that took hairdressers hours to create. Ancient statues and works of art brought back as spoils of war or as souvenirs from grand tours revealed classical hairstyles. Women began to wear simpler hairdos with long hair pulled back in chignons or simple pony tails, long curls trailing over the shoulder, and short ringlets framing the face. Hair ornaments consisted of flower wreaths, ribbons, jewelry, tiaras, and combs.

Hairstyles on statues from antiquity

Lady Caroline Lamb (lower left) sported a saucy short bob, whose influence can be seen from the portrait in the Roman mural at the Metropolitan Museum. Madame Recamier, whose hair is longer, achieves a similar effect with ringlets around her face. Her curly hair, gathered in back, allowed the ringlets to fall. At right, the Marchioness of Queenston achieved a very similar style to Madame Recamier’s, but her bandeau sat further back on her head and the ringlets framing her face were thicker.

Longer hair, while not as prevalent as the up-do’s, usually took the form of a long curl draped over the shoulder. At second to right, Mrs. Henry Baring wore a more casual “do”, with her locks streaming around her neck and shoulders.

The long curl

Straight, simple hairstyles with few ringlets and ordinary bangs, or a style simply parted in the middle were worn, but were not drawn or painted by artists or depicted in fashion plates as often as the curlier styles.

Fashion plates of the time show how these hairstyles looked with bonnets and hair ornaments with a (l – r) walking dress, ball gown, afternoon dress, or morning dress.

The hairstyles that Kate Winslet and Emma Thompson wore in Sense and Sensibility seemed to be particularly true to the period (in my opinion). Some of you may have noticed that I use Kate Winslet’s image of Marianne as my avatar.

This image of a Roman statue (a copy of an earlier Greek statue) shows the hairstyle that would become prevalent in the later Regency/early Victorian era (1820’s to 1830’s).

1st C. AD Roman bust

“We wore white crepe dresses trimmed with satin ribbon & the bodices & sleeves spotted with white beads. . . Thursday night, Pearl combs, necklaces, earrings, & brooches. . . Tuesday evening we had sprigged muslin. . . gold ornaments & flowers in our heads & Friday we wore yellow gauze dresses over satin, beads in our heads & pearl ornaments” – Fanny Knight Austen

Fanny Knight wrote a vivid description of how women dressed and what sort of accessories were popular when she was a young woman. The 1811 fronticepiece to The Mirror of Graces (above) shows how simple and elegant the combination of Neoclassical hair, dress, and accessories looked.  Jewelry styles favored smaller, lighter forms of draped chains and classical motifs, which were reflected in hair ornaments. These days jewelry from the Georgian era is difficult to find, for many of the pieces were refitted or redesigned to reflect motifs of the neoclassical period. (Neoclassical Jewellery ). Ebay Guides can be extremely useful in researching information about this era, such as this one entitled,  Georgian and Regency Combs and Hair Accessories – 1800-1814. (Click here for the PDF document.)

Georgian tiara and combs, early 19th c.

In addition to gold and silver hair ornaments, such as tiaras and diadems, young women wore silk ribbons, strands of pearls, feathers and other fancy hair ornaments in their hair, most notably for balls and formal occasions. These hair jewels were a visible sign of a family’s or husband’s wealth. Bonnets, hats, or turbans were also worn on social outings. The second image from the right (above) is of a George III silver comb, 1807.  ”Silver combs of this type appear to have been a speciality of Birmingham, where they were produced in a small quantity and in a collectable variety of forms.” (Cinoa)

As the Regency era progressed long hair became increasingly popular and full ringlets began to appear near the side of the face. Hair ornaments for balls included jewellery, bandeaux, turbans and wreaths of grapes and towards the latter end of the Regency era flowers, turbans and ostrich feathers were seen to adorn the hair. (Overseale House)

These days we achieve curls and ringlets with a hot curling iron. The use of hot irons in the 19th century was tricky, for hair could easily be singed. Back then, curls were made with pomade, a hair gel, and curling papers. The lost art of the paper curl describes how a person today can make a similar curl using old-fashioned techniques.

Perdita Weeks as Lydia Bennet in Lost in Austen

The transition from the structured hairstyles of the mid-18th Century to the Regency period was not achieved without its own set of complications, as this James Gillray cartoon shows. The cartoon was drawn in the earlier Neoclassical period, when round gowns were still worn.

A lady putting on her cap, Gillray, 1795

The fashion plate below shows how charming and uncomplicated, yet classic, the combination of the 1802 hairstyles and afternoon dresses are together, whereas the 1811 fronticepiece showed how rich both hair and fabric can be made to look using similar principles of fashion design.

Afternoon Dress 1802 Lady's Monthly Museum

More links on this topic:

• The History of the Curl from Every Woman’s Encyclopedia offers a short discussion about hairstyles in early 1800. While the discussion is quite informative, please note that the drawings are Edwardian interpretations of Regency paintings.
• Read more: http://haircare.suite101.com/article.cfm/how_to_copy_pride_and_prejudice_hairstyles#ixzz0Vcw73tTj
• Ebay Guides can be extremely useful in researching information about a certain era, such as this one entitled, Georgian and Regency Combs and Hair Accessories – 1800-1814, Click here for the PDF document.
• Encyclopedia of hair: a cultural history by Victoria Sherrow
• Jessamyn’s Regency Costume Companion Hairstyles
• Regency Hairstyle Tutorial
• Regency hairstyles on Ups and Downs
• Vintage Styling: Regency Hair
• Barbara Anne’s Hair Comb Blog: EBay
• Her Crowning Glory: Nineteen Teen
• We Make History by Lord Scott: Series of paintings showing Regency hairstyles
• Period Hairstyles: Crowning Glory
• Victorian Hair Combs

London’s Street Noises: “The Enraged Musician” by William Hogarth

Vendors of fruit and flowers, of milk and muffins are not agreeable visitors when they roar for a living, and the poor organ-grinder little knows, let us hope, the anguish he inflicts upon sensitive nerves. – Street Noises, The Illustrated London News, 1882

William Hogarth’s famous 1741 etched engraving of ” The Enraged Musician” visually described the cacophony of sounds heard all over the city of London: the shouts of vendors, clattering of wagon wheels and clopping of horses’ hooves, impromptu concerts from street musicians, clackety-clack of ladies’ pattens (which protected delicate shoes from mud), and the clapping of hooves and bleeting of animals as drovers guided them to Smithfield Market. Laws were enacted to control these noises, but the change did not occur overnight, nor did these laws completely eliminate all irritating sounds for city dwellers. In 1841, 100 years after Hogarth engraved his famous scene, Charles Knight described London’s noises (London, Vol 1, Charles Knight, 1841):

In this extraordinary gathering together of the producers of the most discordant sounds we have a representation which may fairly match the dramatist’s description of street noises …

Here we have the milk maid’s scream, the mackerel seller’s shout, the sweep upon the house top, to match the fish wives and orange women; the broom men and costar mongers …

The smith, who was ominous, had no longer his forge in the busy streets of Hogarth’s time, the armourer was obsolete, but Hogarth can rival their noises with the pavior’s hammer, the sow gelder’s horn, and the knife grinder’s wheel…

The waits of the city had a pension not to come near Morose’s ward, but it was out of the power of the Enraged Musician to avert the terrible discord of the blind hautboy player.

The bellman who frightened the sleepers at midnight was extinct, but modern London had acquired the dustman’s bell. The bear-ward no longer came down the street with the dogs of four parishes, nor did the fencer march with a drum to his prize …

…but there was the ballad singer with her squalling child, roaring worse than bear or dog, and the drum of the little boy playing at soldiers was a more abiding nuisance than the fencer Morose, and the Enraged Musician had each the church bells to fill up the measure of discord…

In our own days there has been legislation for the benefit of tender ears, and there are now penalties with police constables to enforce them against all persons blowing any horn or using any other noisy instrument for the purpose of calling persons together, or of announcing any show or entertainment, or for the purpose of hawking selling distributing, or collecting any article or of obtaining money or alms…

These are the words of the Police Act of 1839, and they are stringent enough to have banished from our streets all those uncommon noises, which did something to relieve the monotony of the one endless roar of the tread of feet and the rush of wheels…

The street noise now is deafening when we are in the midst of it, but in some secluded place, such as Lincoln’s Inn Gardens, it is the ever present sullen sound of angry waves dashing upon the shingles. The horn that proclaimed extraordinary news running to and fro among peaceful squares and secluded courts was sometimes a relief…

The bell of the dustman was not altogether unpleasant. In the twilight hour, when the shutters were not yet closed and the candles were not yet burnin,g the tinkle of the muffin man had something in it very soothing…

It is gone, but the legislators have still left us our street music…

There was talk of its abolition, but they have satisfied themselves with enacting that musicians on being warned to depart from the neighbourhood of the house of any householder by the occupier, or his servant, or by a police constable, incur a penalty of forty shillings by refusal. De la Serre, who came to England with Mary de Medici when she visited the Queen of Charles I, is enthusiastic in his praises of the street music of London In all public places … - London, Vol 1, Charles Knight, 1841

Addendum: Compared to the noises of the City, the West End’s new neighborhoods were comparatively quiet.

An interesting aside: To add insult to injury, one closeup of Hogarth’s etching shows a young boy relieving himself in the middle of the street. The sour smells of London added greatly to the din as well.

More on the topic:

• The enraged musician: Hogarth’s musical imagery By Jeremy Barlow, 2005
• Wikipedia: Hogarth, the Enraged musician
• Street Cries of London, Jane Austen’s World
• Old London street cries and the cries of to-day: with heaps of quaint cuts, By Field & Tuer, 1887
• Full text of the cries of London, 1893
• A history of the cries of London, ancient and modern, By Charles Hindley, 1881
• The Bell Man: Book of Days

Teacup Patrol! China Used in Pride and Prejudice 2005

A reader is desperate to find the porcelain set used for this scene in Pride and Prejudice 2005. This was the best image she could pull from the film.

The scene is where Jane and her family discuss whether or not she will be allowed to use the carriage for her travels to dine with Miss Bingley and Mrs. Bennet’s refusal to allow her to do so. Any help you might be able to offer in this matter is highly appreciated.

• Pride and Prejudice 1995: China at Netherfield Park
• Pride and Prejudice 1995: China at Longbourn
• Jane Austen and Mud. Pride and Prejudice 2005,  British Realism and the Heritage Film, Carol M. Dole

The Viscount and the Toll Keeper’s Daughter: How Thomas Thynne Never Became the Marquess of Bath

Historical romances abound with tales of aristocrats falling in love with beautiful women outside of their own class and marrying them. Several years ago in The Dairy Maid and the Master of Uppark, I wrote about Sir Harry Fetherstonhaugh, who married his milkmaid.  These exceptions prove the rule, for  Society frowned severely upon those who married downward. Thomas Thynne, 5th Viscount Weymouth, who made the mistake of falling in love with the tollgate keeper’s daughter, was never to become the 3rd Marquess of Bath.  He first eloped to Paris with his pretty bride, then lived in Italy, where he waited to claim his inheritance. No matter how hard his father (the 2nd Marquess) tried, he could not get around the legalities of the entail and disinherit his son. So the Marquess dug in his heels, willing himself to live longer than the Viscount …

The first Marquess of Bath was said to have been a great womanizer, gambler, and dissipator. His biggest contribution to posterity was in hiring Capability Brown to landscape his estate at Longleat, a former priory, changing the gardens from formal parterres to a more natural design.  After his death in 1792, his son, Thomas Thynne, the second Marquess of Bath, rebuilt the outdated portions of the old priory. By 1815, he had spent over£100,000 on improvements. In 1820, the second Marquess opened the grounds to the public once a week and free of charge, encouraging picknics and similar leisurely pursuits. One would think that by setting such a sober example, his children would live equally responsible lives, but this was not to be the case for all.

The 2nd Marquess and his plumb intellectual wife, Isabella, had eleven children. Two daughers married well, but three of his sons caused them no end of trouble. Without consulting his parents, Thomas, the 24-year-old heir, eloped with beautiful, raven-haired Harriet Robbins, the daughter of a humble local toll-keeper named Thomas Robbins. Up to that point, the young Viscount had not led an exemplary life and had a reputation for drinking and gambling. The Marquess was furious with his son’s marriage.  He must have made his extreme displeasure known, for after two months of silence young Thomas replied in a letter from Italy:

You know the remorse I feel for having given so many miseries to so good a father … a sort of fate hurried us on … I saw myself surrounded by misfortunes which I find at last were of my own making … My mind was in a state of confusion and despair, and I am ashamed to say I tried to attach the blame on you. I did not dare open the last letter from you for a long time, but when I did, I flew to anything to drive away reflection…

The young Viscount was smitten by “the artful charms of a country girl, then hurled [his] fortune to the wind in hasty flight“.  The letter did not assuage the Marquess, who set about to disinherit his heir. He attempted to “bribe” Thomas by offering money in exchange for his inheritance, but the Viscount rejected the offer, opting to live in Italy while literally waiting for his father to die.

Weymouth was not the only child to disappoint the Marquess, for two of his other three sons, Charles and Edward, lived lives of such extravagance and mounted such enormous debts, that the Marquess fired off a letter to The Times “disclaiming all responsibility for their behaviour” and any liability for their debts. Charles and Edward had expected their father to bail them out. When this did not occur, they moved from England. It is thought that Charles ended up in Canada and Edward in Australia, but the records are not clear on this topic.   Thomas’s mother, Isabella, was the only member of the family to travel to Paris to visit the Viscount and his wife. Seeing that they were reasonably happy, she forgave them for their unkindness and misconduct, but she was never able to arbitrate a truce between her husband and son. Before her death in 1830, she wrote in a letter to her husband:

Accept my grateful thanks for all the kindness and happiness you have bestowed on me for so many years, which has been returned by the warmest affection that one mortal is capable of for another…Talk to our children of your interests, of your affairs, and try to get reacquainted with theirs. Be their friend, as well as their respected father …

Despite his wife’s wishes, the Marquess remained obdurate. After Isabella’s death, any hope of reconciliation vanished, and both he and his son were determined to outlive the other. In January of 1837, the Viscount died at the age of 41 without an heir. He shrugged off his mortal coil a scant five weeks before his father, who died at the age of 74.  Harriet, only a few years younger than her husband, was now a widow.

“So the family now awaited with bated breath to hear if she were pregnant. Insensitive suggestions were made about getting her to submit to an official examination so as to preclude the possibility of her turning up at Longleat in years to come, having acquired a son of approximately the right age, to claim the inheritance retrospectively.

Yet such cynicism proved unwarranted. Harriet went on to marry an Italian nobleman and never did have any children. But in any case, she did not attempt, nor wish, to give any further trouble to the Thynne family. –  Strictly Private

As for the title and the inheritance, they passed to Henry Thynne, a captain in the Royal Navy, who died soon afterwards. A Pyrrhic victory, indeed.

Facts about Harriet Matilda Robbins - Born:18 Nov 1800. Died: 18 June 1873. Daughter of Thomas Robbins. She married, Thomas Thynne, Viscount Weymouth, son of Sir Thomas Thynne, 2nd Marquess of Bath and Hon. Isabella Elizabeth Byng, on 11 May 1820. Her married name became Thynne. She married, secondly, Count unknown Inghirami after 1837, and died on 18 June 1873 at Florence, Italy. From 1837 on her married name became Inghirami.

More on this topic:

• Turtle Bunbury: The Cuffe Family, Earls of Desart
• Strictly Private To Public Exposure,  Series 1: A Plateful of Privilege, Book1, The Early Years, Alexander Thynn, Marquess of Bath, 2002
• The Essential Guide to Paris for the Early Traveler
• Turnpikes.org
• Understanding the Laws of British Primogeniture With Humor

Place of Execution: PBS Masterpiece Contemporary

Hold on to your thinking caps as you watch this tense and suspenseful psychological mystery to be shown on PBS November 1 & 8 at 9 PM. Juliet Stevenson stars in this excellent production, which kept me guessing almost all the way to the end. In this story, based on a book by Scottish novelist Val McDermit, Julia plays Catherine Heathcote, a workaholic filmmaker who is making a documentary about a murder case that is 45 years old. Thirteen-year-old Alison Carter disappeared walking her dog and was presumed murdered, but her body was never found and the case remains unsolved.

Catherine stirs up disturbing facts as she digs deep to uncover this story’s secrets. The fast-paced plot switches from modern day investigative work to events that occurred in 1963. Lee Ingleby plays a young Bennet, the police official who seemingly solved the case in 1963; Greg Wise plays Alison’s haughty stepfather; and Elizabeth Day plays Catherine’s rebellious teenage daughter. All the characters add depth to the story, and all the actors are superb in their roles. I wonder, did any of the viewers guess the ending?

If you would like to see the episode again, PBS will be showing it online starting Nov 2.

• Interview with Juliet Stevenson
• Greg Wise interview
• LA Times Review
• Order the DVD here

The Sale of Hyde Park Corner Tollgate

“The last time! a going! gone.”
“Auctioneer.

“Down! down! derry down!”
“Public.

A toll-gate was moved in 1721 from Piccadilly, near Berkeley Street and the present location of the Ritz Hotel, to the west end of Hyde Park in London. It was a real barrier, its gates stretching across the road, and the area was illuminated by a dozen oil lamps before the age of gas. (London, Vol 1, Charles Knight) After passing through the toll, the first building travelers encountered was “Number One”, London, or Apsley House. The residence was named after Baron Apsley, who built the house in 1771. Its most famous and recognizable resident was The Duke Of Wellington. Hyde Park Corner tollgate was one of the busiest tollgates in London, and remained active until 1825, when it was dismantled piece by piece and sold.

Sir,
I have taken the liberty of enclosing you a representation of a scene which took place at Hyde-park-corner last Tuesday, October 4th, being no less than the public sale of the toll-house, and all the materials enumerated in the accompanying catalogue. If you were not present, the drawing I have sent may interest you as a view of the old toll-house and the last scene of its eventful history. You are at liberty to make what use of it you please. The sale commenced at one o’clock, the auctioneer stood under the arch before the door of the house one the north side of Piccadilly. Several carriage folks and equestrians, unconscious of the removal of the toll, stopped to pay, whilst the drivers of others passed through knowingly, with a look of satisfaction at their liberation from the accustomed restriction at that place. The poor dismantled house without a turnpike man, seemed “almost afraid to know itself”—”Othello’s occupation was gone.” By this time, if the conditions of the auction have been attended to, not a vestige is left on the spot. I have thought this event would interest a mind like yours, which permits not any change in the history of improvement, or of places full of old associations, to take place without record.

I remain, sir,
Yours, &c.
A CONSTANT READER.

These entries come from the October 4th Every-Day Book by William Hone, 1825-26,. The following account relates the dismantling of the property:

The sale by auction of the “toll-houses” on the north and south side of the road, with the “weighing machine,” and lamp-posts at Hyde-park-corner, was effected by Mr. Abbott, the estate agent and appraiser, by order of the trustees of the roads. They were sold for building materials; the north toll-house was in five lots, the south in five other lots; the gates, rails posts, and inscription boards were in five more lots; and the engine-house was also in five lots. At the same time, the weighing machine and toll-houses at Jenny’s Whim bridge were sold in seven lots; and the toll-house near the bun-house at Chelsea, with lamp posts on the road, were likewise sold in seven lots. The whole are entirely cleared away, to the relief of thousands of persons resident in these neighbourhoods. It is too much to expect every thing vexatious to disappear at once; this is a very good beginning, and if there be truth in the old saying, we may expect “a good ending.”

More on the Topic

• Flickr: Tollhouses
• And So to Bath, Cecil Roberts, 1940
• Lovely images of Lancastershire county tollhouses
• Turnpike Roads in England
• Plan of London’s Turnpike Gates 1801

A Jane Austen’s World Celebration

Inquiring readers,

Your visits and loyalty will soon drive this blog’s bean counter over the million mark. My, oh, my! When I began blogging about Jane Austen in 2006, I only meant to provide information for my Jane Austen book group. Over three years later I have had the pleasure of meeting Jane lovers from around the world, and getting to know a few of you closely.

To celebrate, I will be giving away a box of Jane Austen sequels or Regency books (some of which I have reviewed, so they are technically considered “used”.) All you need to do is leave a comment on why you visit this blog and what your favorite topics are. I can only send the box of book to someone who lives in the Continental U.S. I will, however, send one book to anywhere in the world, so ALL are eligible to leave a comment.

Let the celebrations begin! And thank you for visiting. Contest ends the moment this blog’s counter hits a million, which I estimate will be two or three weeks. UPDATE: The Comment section is closed for the contest. The winner is Heather Carrol! Thank you ALL for participating and visiting this blog.

Emma 2009, Episode 4: What Did You Think of the Film and the Actors?

The incident at Box Hill loomed large in this episode. What did you think of the series as a whole? How did it stack up against other Emma film adaptations? Vote here.

More polls sit below asking you how well the actors fit in their roles. To save you from fatigue, not all the show’s actors are listed.

Endgame: PBS Masterpiece Contemporary

“Trust no one, confide in no one …” This memorable line in Endgame, PBS’s latest presentation from Masterpiece Contemporary, is the essence of a plot that includes secret talks and negotiations between Afrikaners and the African National Congress (ANC) that ended apartheid. If you missed the show or want to see it again, you can watch it online from October 26th – November 8th. For those who aren’t familiar with the characters in this story or the story itself, I recommend that you read a short biography of the characters in this PBS link. Photographs of the historical people involved are placed next to the images of the actors who portray them.

William Hurt portrays Willie Esterhuyse, an Afrikaner professor, who secretly met with Thabo Mbeki (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a member of the ANC. The two men grew to respect and trust each other, much through the efforts of negotiator Michael Young (Jonny Lee Miller), who worked for Consolidated Goldfields, the firm that sponsored the secluded talks in England. Young was smuggled across guarded checkpoints in undercover forays to Soweto, where he approached representatives of the ANC. His presence was not necessarily wanted in this hostile territory, and the scenes showed how dangerous his mission was.  There are suspenseful moments throughout the film, and I found myself riveted by the excellence of the actors and script. My only complaint about this production is that at times the pace slowed to a crawl and the scenes seemed a tad long, but overall I found it one of the best docu-dramas I have seen in a long time. PBS feels so strongly about this production, that the film will be shown in theaters after its introduction on television:

The traditional feature-film release cycle is to start on movie screens and then move to television via DVDs, cable or network broadcasts.

A different approach has been plotted for “Endgame,” which airs tonight on the PBS series “Masterpiece Contemporary” and then will have a theatrical run.

Rebecca Eaton, “Masterpiece Contemporary” executive producer, says the original plan was to open “Endgame” in theaters first to earn Oscar attention. Because the movie aired on British TV, it’s no longer eligible for Oscar consideration. Now Eaton wants to see the film’s message get to the largest audience possible.

“We’re not going to make a ton of money from this even if it is a hit. But we want to make sure that everybody knows about it and can see it wherever, preferably on ‘Masterpiece,’ then possibly screening in the movie theaters, buy the DVD,” Eaton says. – San Luis Obispo The Tribune

The negotiations culminated in Nelson Mandela’s (Clarke Peters) release from prison, but it would take four more years before apartheid disappeared. Click here to read the synopsis of the film.

Watch an interview with Chiwetel Ejiofor about the film in this YouTube clip.

More Links

• Chicago Now: PBS Masterfully Tells Small Apartheid Tale in Endgame
• New York Times Review

Trailer for the film:

Persuasion: Fashion in the Age of Jane Austen

The National Gallery of Victoria

Inquiring Reader: Emma, the author of this post, lives in Melbourne, Australia. After she interviewed me for a class assignment, I asked her if she would give us her impressions of the the fabulous fashion show at the National Gallery of Victoria. Happily, she said yes. Click here to read an article on Jane Austen Today and for more images from the exhibit. I first featured this post on Jane Austen Today and decided to embellish it a little, adding more images of the museum and items in the exhibit. New links have been added, as well as additional comments about the dresses. About 50 costumes were shown in the exhibit. If you click on all the links to view images on other sites, you will see about 20% of the outfits and a few of the Regency items that accompanied them.

Entrance arch to the National Gallery of Victoria

Entrance to exhibit

The National Gallery of Victoria has a permanent space for textile exhibits that is often overlooked by visitors. So, you can imagine my surprise when I entered the Persuasion space and found it far from empty. There were young children, middle aged couples, elderly couples and a selection of tourists, all gathered in the rooms openly admiring the clothing and documents behind their glass cases.

Exhibits with dresses, drawings and artifacts

The collection was set up beautifully in their cases, decorated to become rooms – painted blue, with pianofortes, writing desks and sitting chairs.

It was interesting listening to the thoughts of those around me, with many observing the “heaviness of the walking dress” and the “gorgeous detailing on that white muslin.” Of course every woman in the room stopped to admire the outfit worn by Colin Firth in the BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, no doubt reliving the lake scene.

Detail, cotton muslin dress, 1815

Regency chair "throne"

With so many pieces to choose from I had no idea how I was going to pick one or two to write about, but finally I have settled on the ball and the walking dress.

Having read many ball scenes in Austen’s works it what inevitable that I would love the ball dress. The dress was an empire line, with a skirt that went outwards into a cone shape, and the sleeves were puffed with lace detailing. It was interesting to read the plaque which revealed just how complicated the ball dress actually was – with there being gauze, embroidery with silk floss, lace, satin, piping and some sort of plants vine used in its construction.

And then there was the walking dress, a dress that I’m not sure I’d like to go for a walk in myself. I’d expected something lighter so I was very surprised by the heavy bronze satin dress in the case. It appeared very restrictive – fitted, long tight sleeves – but was incredibly beautiful and well made.

The bronze walking dress is at right

The exhibit closes at the gallery on November 8, 2009. I encourage anyone that can make it to go. It’s free of charge and definitely a collection not be to missed.

This 1802 round gown is similar to one that Jane Austen would have worn

Click here for an audio tour of the exhibit. In it you will learn that this exhibit shows the more provincial, country dresses that were designed for walking and outdoor activities. Empire dresses allowed for a greater freedom of movement than in previous eras. The thin cotton, often low-cut gowns also revealed more of a woman’s figure than before, prompting Jane Austen to write about a vicar’s wife that she was “nakedly and expensively dressed.”

Pelisse and dress, 1818

More links to images:

• Link to images of jewelry from the show
• All things Austen
• Carriage dress
• Style Melbourne
• Melbourne on Melbourne
• August Street: Persuasion – with pictures of exhibit
• Vogue.com
• Jane Austen Pod Novel: See an image of the museum
• Jane Austen: Film and Fashion at the Fashion Museum Bath

Carriage dress, silk gros de naples, 1830

Photos NVG

Pride and Prejudice, the Pachyderm and Feline Versions

During the 2007-2008 holidays, artist and cartoonist Paula J. Becker watched Pride and Prejudice movies nonstop, from the 1940’s version, to the 1980’s and the mammoth 1995 Colin Firth adaptation.  When she finished viewing P&P 2005, she was inspired to draw Mr. Darcy and Lizzy at a ball. What fun she must have had! You will recognize Ms Becker’s style, for you have most likely seen her cartoons in greeting cards and her artwork in children’s books.

Mr. Darcy makes a most handsome bow to his Lizzy. The revel rousers in the background seem to be having a great deal of fun.

These Georgian Kitties could easily be Caroline Bingley and her sister, Mrs. Hurst.

Cartoons reproduced with Ms. Becker’s permission.

Emma 2009: Episode Three

Emily Hill of the Evening Standard isn’t thrilled with this adaptation of Emma:

The tension of the series comes not from the characters being marooned in stuffy Regency England, but from the bizarre twenty-first-century dating psychobabble. At some point, whoever created this very pretty 9 pm drama seems to have thrown the actual novel aside and adapted the work with exclusive reference to other Jane Austen adaptations and what they think middle-aged women want to down with their end-of-Sabbath Chardonnay. Even the actors seem to be stuck in synthetic Austen-land.

Having watched 3/4 of the film, tell us what you thought of Emma, Episode Three

My rambling discourse about hair echoes my thinking about this production of Emma, for I can’t decide whether I like it or not. Count me as one of the viewers who is still sitting on the fence. I understand that the producers wanted to modernize and jazz Emma up, so that a new audience can appreciate her story. But many liberties were taken in the process,  such as with Jane Austen’s dialogue and wit, which are practically nonexistent. Let’s examine the hair styles in this film. Ringlets were in vogue at the time Jane Austen wrote the novel. They peeped out of bonnets and mobcaps. Even when hair was pulled back into a chignon, ringlets would be fashioned around the face and in front of the ears.

In this image, Harriet Smith’s hair style has ringlets aplenty, but is more reminiscent of the updos worn in 1826-1832, when the ringlets resembled poodle ears. Of course, this hairdo did have a certain cinematic effect, for Harriet is a bit silly and naive and the hairdo suits her personality to a tee. If you recall, Mrs. Bennet (Alison Steadman) in 1995’s Pride and Prejudice was given a similar hair do, and every time she spoke, her ringlets shook, making her seem even sillier.

Ballgown 1826

Fashion plate 1832

In the next image, Christina Cole (Augusta Elton), below, demonstrates the sort of hair/bonnet combination I have come to associate with the era. Her loose ringlets peep out from under her straw hat most becomingly.

Emma was published in 1815. Let’s compare Augusta’s hair and cap to fashion plate images of the same year. Close enough, don’t you think? Her bonnet is different, but there were many modish styles to choose from and one can’t quibble with a becoming straw cap.

Jodhi May as Mrs. Weston

Why was such a plain and unflattering hairstyle chosen for beautiful Jodhi May? Was her hair Quakerish on purpose so that she would not compete in beauty with Emma? At this point she is no longer a governess, but the mistress of her own house and can dress herself accordingly. Even poor Miss Bates (sitting at right below) shows more attempt at “styling”.

Miss Fairfax and Miss Bates at Box Hill

This plain upswept chignon was adorned with simple curls in front of the ears, which would have helped Jodhi’s hairstyle immensely, making it seem more “authentic.”

In this image, Blake Ritson wears his hair a la Brutus, a style commonly worn by men in the Regency era. Poor Harriet (Louise Dylan) is stuck with the poodle style for the duration of the film.

In the image below, Blake looks like he’s about to enter Bedlam, which I suppose was his hair stylist’s intention, for Mr. Elton IS a ridiculous character. Still, Blake’s facial ticks should have been enough to clue the viewer in. We didn’t need crazy hair as well.

Did the stylists use 21st century hair gel to accomplish this style?

To be fair, men pomaded their hair and created fantastic styles. Witness Beau Brummel in 1805.

Which begs the question: Why did Jonny Lee Miller fashion his hair a la the 21st century?

Oops, wrong image

I meant to insert this one

Men wore their hair in many styles, some elaborate, and some quite sleek and modern to our eyes. Jonny’s hairstyle is remarkably close to McMurdo’s below, who, from the neck up would not look too out of place in today’s world.

Lieut Colonel Bryce McMurdo, 1800-1810 by Henry Raeburn

Women often wore caps in bed, which they drew over their paper curlers.  Hair was washed only occasionally in those days, and caps prevented pillow cases from being soiled from accumulated oil and dirt.

Ok, we get it. Harriet is SICK. Where is her night cap?

I just had to include the image below. Yes, very young girls at that time wore their hair loose, and, yes, they had to be taught their manners.  (For aren’t we all little savages until our governesses teach us better?) For my finnicky taste, this image shows a woman who is much too modern in hairstyle and facial expression. At the very least, Emma would have been taught to place her hand in front of her mouth when yawning.

Goodness. What would the servants have thought?

I’m still on the fence, waiting to like this film adaptation. It seems that the numbers are tanking and people are not staying with the show (a bad omen for the future of bonnet movies on BBC). Kali at StrangeGirl.com and blog author of Emma Adaptations is still liking this adaptation, although elements are starting to get on her nerves. Please feel free to agree or disagree with anything said in this post.

Pride and Prejudice 1940 Featurettes

First glimpse of Bingley and Darcy

Turner Movie Classics offers a website with trailers and featurettes about its films. Click on this link to hear Ann Rutherford speak in two featurettes about the making of Pride and Prejudice 1940.

Laurence Olivier as Mr. Darcy

Of his part as Mr. Darcy, Laurence Olivier said in his autobiography:  ”I was very unhappy with the picture. It was difficult to make Darcy into anything more than an unattractive-looking prig, and darling Greer seemed to me all wrong as Elizabeth.”

If I may put in my two cents, I agree heartily with Mr. Olivier’s assessment. Considered a classic in the 20th century, the film now seems anachronistic and outdated. Except for a few excellent portrayals, (Mary Boland as Mrs. Bennet, Edna May Oliver as Lady Catherine de Bourgh, Edmund Gwenn as Mr. Bennet, Marsha Hunt as Mary Bennet, and Melville Cooper as Mr. Collins) I would not bother to see the film again.

Lizzy at the window looking like a matron in Little Women

From the notes on the TMC website: “M-G-M took several liberties with Jane Austen’s novel, among them moving the time period of the story forty years ahead. According to modern sources, this was done in order to allow for more ornate costumes.” Anne Rutherford said in a JASNA interview: “But I must say, that when the studio, in its infinite wisdom, when they changed the wardrobe from the wet-nightgown look, that empire look, to the ship-in-full-sail [Victorian] – they did such a wise thing. Because the sight of Mary Boland [Mrs. Bennet] bustling down the street with all of her little goslings behind her in their huge voluminous skirts, and all of them chattering at once – it wouldn’t have been nearly as delightful a sight-gag if we had all been in little, skinny wet-night-gown-type things.”

Again, I beg to differ. Notice the delightful picture these actresses in the 2005 Pride and Prejudice adaptation make in their regency gowns:

Bennet women 2005 Pride and Prejudice

• Over view of Pride and Prejudice, 1940 on TMC website. Images from that site.
• The film’s movie posters on Jane Austen Today

The English Pleasure Garden 1660-1860 by Sarah Jane Downing, A Review

It would be very pleasant to be near Sydney Gardens; we might go into the labyrinth every day. - Jane Austen to Cassandra Wednesday, January 21, 180

The English Pleasure Garden 1660-1860 is a small, slim volume that easily slips into my purse. I was rather skeptical that a mere 63 pages could contain very much information but I was wrong.  Sarah Jane Downing, the author, has assembled a large variety of pleasure garden images that I have not seen before, and written about the topic in a clear and readable style that was loaded with information. This book is a must for history buffs and historical romance authors who wish to write a scene set in Vauxhall or Ranelagh gardens, or perhaps in venue that is less well known, for Ms Downing writes about gardens I had not known existed.

While London’s west end boasted clean and spacious streets, the rabbit warren streets in The City were filthy, overcrowded, and dangerous. The possibility of a few hours of escape to a pleasure garden with its broad walks, decorative shrubbery, hidden bowers, music and entertainments, and fireworks drew a large number of crowds. In the 18th century, London and its environs boasted sixty-four pleasure gardens of various sizes. Aside from their obvious attraction, pleasure gardens attracted a variety of visitors from all walks of life. Aristocrats rubbed elbows with the hoi polloi, who could gain entry to even the most luxurious gardens if they could come up with one shilling for a ticket (no mean feat, for an ordinary day laborer made no more than one shilling per week.)

Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens

There were three kinds of public gardens people could choose from: 1) Bowling greens at pubs or tea gardens with a small but pleasant green space and limited social opportunity, 2) fashionable spa resorts that offered bowling, taking the waters, and pleasant graveled walks, and provided some entertainments, and 3) the great pleasure gardens, which were filled with glamorous and wondrous sights, and acres of lighted paths, music pavilions and private supper boxes, and arranged for a variety of fantastic entertainments, music, and dancing. The best known pleasure gardens were Vauxhall, once known as Spring Gardens, and Ranelagh Gardens, which gave Vauxhall a run for its money. Its spacious Rotunda allowed for large crowds to gather inside. Ranelagh could open in February, whereas other gardens waited until Easter.

View of a lunch party inside Ranelagh garden's famous rotunda

Vauxhall tickets, British Museum

All good things must come to an end and the gardens’ success at attracting large crowds spelled their doom. Eventually it was hard to tell the aristocrats from the poseurs, or a courtesan from a lady. As the gardens attracted an increasingly larger group of dubious people and fewer of the upper classes, their reputations suffered. Rowdy behavior, vandalism, crime, and prostitution all served to keep the “right” people away, but this development didn’t necessarily spell their death knell. They would eventually close due to competition from a distant source. The advent of cheap and rapid transportation allowed people to seek their pleasures along the grand promenades at sea side resorts, and once again the classes separated during leisure hours, each into their own niche.

This lovely little book also describes pleasure gardens outside of London – Sydney Gardens in Bath, Vauxhall Gardens in Birmingham, Tinker’s Garden in Manchester, etc. At $12.95, The English Pleasure Garden 1660-1860, loaded with color images, is a bargain. Read my post about 18th & 19th Century Pleasure and Tea Gardens in London at this link.

These links lead to more information about pleasure gardens, but they do not match the variety of information to be found in this slim volume.

• The Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens
• Vauxhall Gardens: Victoria and Albert Museum
• Canaletto,  Ranelagh Gardens
• Fireworks (and the very useful application of Bishops)
• Heilbrun: Timeline of Art History
• The English Pleasure Garden, History UK
• Libations and Lusty Tempations in Commercial Pleasure Gardens
• 18th Century Pleasure Gardens
• Vauxhall Gardens: Literacy Encyclopedia
• Green and Pleasant, Guardian UK
• Emblems in Commercial Pleasure Gardens

Emma 2009: The Sets of Highbury and Hartfield

Highbury, the large and populous village, almost amounting to a town, to which Hartfield, in spite of its separate lawn, and shrubberies, and name, did really belong, afforded her no equals. The Woodhouses were first in consequence there. All looked up to them. – Emma, Jane Austen, Ch 1

Market Day in Chilham

Village of Chilham: The new adaptation of Emma 2009 starring Romola Garai, uses the village of Chilham as the setting of Highbury. Click on this link to Kent Online to see a short film clip of this picturesque village.

Filming in Chilham Square

Squerryes Court was chosen to represent the Woodhouse’s home, Hartfield. The manor house was built in 1681 and has gone through extensive changes.  I visited the house during my trip to England in the mid-90’s. The guidebook states: “In the early 18th century, three pavilions to the house were built between the house and the lake. They contained the kitchens, larders, pantries, staff quarters and brew house. The distance from the kitchen to the dining-room was about ninety yards.” The pavilions were then pulled down, and wings were built at each end of the house for domestic quarters. After World War II, these wings were demolished, and the house was restored to its original form.”

Jonny and Romola in the drawing room of Squerryes Court

BBC’s Press Office: “The esteemed and impressive cast also includes Michael Gambon (Cranford, Gosford Park) as Emma’s affectionate, neurotic father who unusually allows her to be mistress of their household; Jonny Lee Miller (Byron, Eli Stone, Trainspotting) as Mr Knightley, Emma’s shrewd and attractive neighbour, whose strength of character is in sharp contrast to her father; Jodhi May (Einstein And Eddington, Friends And Crocodiles) as Miss Taylor, Emma’s former governess who marries the good-humoured Mr Weston played by Robert Bathurst (Cold Feet, White Teeth, My Dad’s The Prime Minister); and Tamsin Greig (The Diary Of Anne Frank, Green Wing) as the incessantly chatty, well-meaning Miss Bates whose poverty draws the pity and goodwill of all of Highbury.

Squerryes Court as Hartfield

• About Chilham Village
• Views of Chilham Village from Monica Fairview
• Emma Crew finds Swan a Real Handful
• Historic Homes in the BBC’s New Series: Emma

Illustrated Books About Jane Austen and Her Milieu

Sir Walter Elliot, of Kellynch-hall, in Somersetshire, was a man who, for his own amusement, never took up any book but the Barontage; there he found occupation for an idle hour, and consolation in a distressed one – Persuasion

Gentle reader, it is hard to name my favorite books about Jane Austen and her era. Thankfully, Laurel Ann at Austenprose has already compiled her list to wrap up Jane Austen Sibling Week, so I only need to add in my two cents worth. Where Laurel Ann concentrated on pure biographies, I shall mention the picture books that resemble the intent of this blog in both content and form:

Jane Austen’s World, Maggie Lane. When I named this blog I had no idea this book existed. Maggie, who knows the period so well, writes about Jane’s life and what daily life looked like for her and her family. The illustrations are lush, and the content is presented on two pages, so that one moves from Courtship to Travel to The Royal Navy and The Picturesque seamlessly. The information is just enough for a casual reader to learn more about the era and to steer a more determined Janeite on a world of Regency era discovery.

Jane Austen’s Town and Country Style, Susan Watkins. I purchased this now well-thumbed book in England when it was first published. The cover is a lush photo of a bedroom in Stoneleigh Abbey, the ancestral seat of Cassandra Austen nee Leigh’s family. Themes covered include etiquette, the country house, architectural themes, fashion, and entertainment. The theme of this novel is the architectural settings and interior environments of the Regency era, and its pages linger over images and information about embroidery, gardens, furniture, wallpaper, architectural styles, fashion, etc.

My Dear Cassandra, The Illustrated Letters of Jane Austen, Selected and introduced by Penelope Hughes-Hallet. Not only do Jane’s own observations come alive, but the letters are arranged in context of her life and images of the era. The format is excellent and very well done. Not all of Jane’s letters are included in this selection, but I would say that for those who have never read Jane’s letters before, this is a great introduction.

Jane Austen, The World of Her Novels by Deirdre Le Faye. I find it remarkable that each of these authors have a different perspective of Jane and her life. Yes, there is an overlap of information, but each author brings her own take on Jane to their book. Deirdre spends little time with Jane and her family, and devotes more pages to the novels, their settings, and images that evoke the era and region in which the books were set. Deirdre’s book contains more text and fewer images than the other books, but it is well organized and the illustrations help the reader to understand the unique places in which the novels are set and how they contribute to the story and characters.

Jane Austen: An Illustrated Treasury by Rebecca Dickson. At first glance this seems like a coffee table book that is filled with illustrations. The book also features removable memorabilia, including handwritten letter, drafts, paintings, and more.  It looks like a fluff piece, because it is so beautifully designed, but the author discusses all of Jane’s novels in context of the age and with images that take your breath away. I found the font in the body of the main text annoying to read, but that is a minor quibble. This is a great gift for a budding Janeite fan in your family.

Obviously, there are many other excellent biographies about Jane Austen that Laurel Ann and I have not mentioned. These are just a few in my collection that the new Jane Austen fan will love. Jane Austen scholars have access to more scholarly works, and there are many new biographies that have been published in recent years. This post ends our Jane Austen Sibling week. Thank you for coming to our blogs to participate in this event. Vic

Our posts in honor of Jane Austen Sibling Week:

• Cassandra Austen: Jane’s Supporter, Confidante, and Helpmate
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. James Austen 1765-1819 – comprehensive information about James Austen on Austenprose
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. Henry Austen – 1771 -1850 – Henry was Jane Austen’s favorite brother
• Edward Austen Knight: A tightwad or a man with heavy responsibilities?
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Charles John Austen -1779-1852
• Sir Francis William Austen: Glimpses of Jane Austen’s brother in letters
• George Austen: Jane Austen’s almost forgotten, invisible brother

George Austen: Jane Austen’s almost forgotten, invisible brother

“We have this comfort, he cannot be a bad or a wicked child,” George Austen writing about his second son, George

George Austen, Jane’s second oldest brother is an enigma, rarely glimpsed and hardly known to the world. No image exists of him, which is why the image I used for this post has no face to speak of. George Austen was thought to be mentally or physically impaired, or suffering from an infirmity. Nearly ten years older than Jane, Claire Tomalin wrote that he still lived in Steventon village in 1776 (See Boris’s comment in the comment section) and that the very young Jane knew him.

“He could walk, and he was not a Down’s Syndrome child, or he would not have lived so long, lacking modern medication. Because Jane knew deaf and dumb sign language as an adult— she mentioned talking “with my fingers” in a letter of 1808— it is thought he may have lacked language; it would not have stopped him joining in the village children’s games.” – Claire Tomalin, Jane Austen, A Biography

The Austens produced remarkably hardy children, for all survived their childhood. At forty-one, Jane was the youngest to die. George, who survived to a ripe old age, was cared for along with his Uncle Thomas (a mentally defective person), by Francis Cullum, who lived in Monk Sherborne, a nearby Hampshire village. Although George was not mentioned in Austen family letters, he was not totally forgotten, for the family contributed to his upkeep. The wildly sentimental film, Becoming Jane, shows George as an active member of the family, walking with Jane in the woods and attending church with them, but an article in JASNA rightly states, “It is not likely that he attended church with the Austens, as depicted in the movie.”

Jane, George, Rev. Austen, Eliza de Feuillide and Cassandra after church service in Becoming Jane.

After Jane’s death, mention of George disappeared from several family sources. John and Edith Hubback in Jane Austen’s Sailor Brothers wrote: “In a family of seven all turned out well, two rose to the top of their profession, and one was—Jane Austen.”  Their math is obviously wrong. In the Memoir of Jane Austen, her nephew James Edward Austen-Leigh mentions that James was the first brother and Edward the second. This historical oversight has outraged some authors, David Nokes in particular, whose reaction is described in a Washington Post review of his book, Jane Austen: A Life:

A second “family secret” hitherto little mentioned is the existence of Jane Austen’s brother George, 10 years older than Jane, who “never learned to speak” and was boarded out for the rest of his life in another Hampshire village along with Thomas Leigh, Mrs. Austen’s mentally defective brother. This George Austen (perhaps the origin of “poor Richard” Musgrave in Persuasion) long survived his sister Jane and lived on into his seventies. David Nokes devotes an indignant last chapter to “poor George” and contrasts the Austen family’s ruthless jettisoning of him — apart from payment of a small, regular fee for his upkeep — with their family’s rather sickening adulation, after Jane’s death, of their “dear angel” Aunt Jane — whose propensity for satire and malice was almost entirely played down, while her simple religious beliefs were elevated into near-canonization.

The Loiterer cautions us about first-hand accounts, saying they can be wildly inaccurate:

“There were eight children in the family and the second brother was George and not Edward who, in fact, was the third brother. George, apparently, was epileptic and may have been deaf and dumb as well. He simply was not allowed to join the family in their home. None of Jane’s existing letters mentions him—not one single time. (In spite of his infirmities, he outlived Jane by at least ten years!) Now, there is something to give one perspective on “first-hand accounts”. – The Loiterer

Another source of outrage for David Nokes was Mrs. Austen, who died in 1823. In her will she had divided the money from her South Sea Annuities equally among the surviving Austen children, with the exception of  George.

“He, as usual, was excluded and forgotten. It was Edward Knight who, as an act of kindness, made over his share of the money ‘for the use of my brother George, being his full share of the £3,350 old South Sea Annuities. – David Nokes, p. 525

Francis Cullum, George caretaker, died in the spring of 1834. After his death, his son George took over the responsibilities of caring for George Austen, who died of dropsy in 1838. Once again, David Nokes writes with melodramatic flourish about the loving way in which Jane’s memory was perpetuated by her family, even as they neglected poor George:

“Less than twenty miles away [from Jane’s grave], Jane’s brother George was laid to rest in an unnamed grave in the churchyard of All Saints church, Monk Sherborne. In death, as in life, he was to be forgotten, his remains unmarked by any stone. Only George Cullum was in attendance at George Austen’s death. It was he who noted for the death certificate that George Austen was ‘a gentleman’. – Nokes, p. 526

I cannot express how much I disagree with David Nokes in this instance. The Austens arranged to have George and Cassandra’s brother, Thomas Leigh, looked after by a caring family, and supported these two family members financially. One imagines that with eight children, a boarding school, a small plot of land to tend to with chickens and a cow, and two livings as a clergyman, that the two elder Austens had their hands full overseeing their burgeoning household. The addition of a special needs child who required constant care would have added a great strain to their living situation.

Bedlam inmate shackled in irons, Bethelehem Royal Hospital, London

This was an age where few asylums for the mentally disabled or the physically disabled existed. People with infirmities were looked upon as defectives and many became sideshows at fairs or carnivals, or as beggars on the streets. It was a custom at this time to visit Bedlam and stare at the people in the lunatic asylum. In fact, there were very few institutions available during this era for people of special needs and very few places that could take them in. Bedlam was the only hospital of its kind in London during Jane’s lifetime. Workhouses and almshouses were the only other places where the physically and mentally handicapped could be deposited, and these were places that people strove to avoid at all cost. In addition, there has been a history since the beginning of time in almost all cultures that looked the other way when parents left their defective babies in the wild to die. (This situation still exists today.) Unlike David Nokes, my conclusion is that, given the era the Austens lived in, the family behaved in a remarkably responsible manner towards George, who lived a quiet life of peace and relative comfort for 72 long years. As for the inaccuracies in later biographies written by Austen family members, one wonders how effectively George had been hidden from view. Out of sight is out of mind, and these mistakes of omittance may well have been the natural result of – as David Nokes accused the Austens of doing – the extended family forgetting that George had ever existed.

Gentle reader: In honor of JASNA’s annual meeting in Philadelphia this week, this blog, Austenprose, and Jane Austen Today have devoted posts to Jane Austen and her siblings. This is the last of seven articles devoted to her brothers and sisters. Tomorrow, Laurel Ann and I will recommend several biographies on Jane Austen.

• Cassandra Austen: Jane’s Supporter, Confidante, and Helpmate
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. James Austen 1765-1819 – comprehensive information about James Austen on Austenprose
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. Henry Austen – 1771 -1850 – Henry was Jane Austen’s favorite brother
• Edward Austen Knight: A tightwad or a man with heavy responsibilities?
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Charles John Austen -1779-1852
• Sir Francis William Austen: Glimpses of Jane Austen’s brother in letters

Sir Francis William Austen: Glimpses of Jane’s sailor brother in letters

My dearest Frank, You will be glad to hear that every copy of  S. and S. is sold, and that it has brought me £140 besides the copyright, if that should ever be of any value.

In 1788,  14 ½ year-old Frank Austen prepared to put out to sea and leave his family. After excelling in his courses at the Portsmouth Naval Academy, the Commissioner of the Dockyards recommended that Frank join the Perserverance under the direction of Cornwallis, who was recently appointed Commander-in-Chief of India. The letter that young Francis received from his father, Rev.  George Austen, upon his departure was one that he would treasure for the rest of his life. In part, the Reverend wrote:

As you have hitherto, my dear Francis, been extremely fortunate in making friends, I trust your future conduct will confirm their good opinion of you; and I have the more confidence of this expectation because the high character you acquired at the Academy for propriety of behaviour and diligence in your studies, when you were so much younger and had so much less experience, seems to promise that riper years and more knowledge of the world will strengthen your naturally good disposition. That this may be the case I sincerely pray, as you will readily believe when you are assured that your good mother, brothers, sisters and myself will all exult in your reputation and rejoice in your happiness …

Ten years later, Jane would write with exultation:

My dear Cassandra, Frank is made. He was yesterday raised to the rank of Commander and appointed to the Petterel sloop, now at Gilbraltar. – Dec 28, 1798

Vice Admiral Sir Francis Austen

By 1800, Frank, was still single, although his captain’s salary would enable him to marry and support a family in reasonable comfort. The letter Jane would write him on January 21, 1805 was heartbreaking:

My dearest Frank

I have melancholy news to relate, & sincerely feel for your feelings under the shock of it.—I wish I could better prepare you for it. But having said so much, your mind will already forestall the sort of event which I have to communicate.—Our dear Father has closed his virtuous & happy life, in a death almost as free from suffering as his Children could have wished. He was taken ill on Saturday morning, exactly in the same way as heretofore, an oppression in the head, with fever, violent tremulousness, & the greatest degree of Feebleness….towards the Evening however he got better, had a tolerable night, & yesterday morning was so greatly amended as to get up & join us at breakfast as usual, & walk about with only the help of a stick, & every symptom was then so favourable that when Bowen saw him at one, he felt sure of his doing perfectly well. But as the day advanced, all these comfortable appearances gradually changed; the fever grew stronger than ever, & when Bowen saw him at ten at night, he pronounc’d his situation to be most alarming. At nine this morning he came again—& by his desire a Physician was called in;—Dr. Gibbs—But it was then absolutely a lost case—. Dr. Gibbs said that nothing but a Miracle could save him, and about twenty minutes after Ten he drew his last gasp…My Mother bears the Shock as well as possible; she was quite prepared for it, & feels all the blessing of his being spared a long Illness. My Uncle & Aunt have been with us, & shew us every imaginable kindness. And tomorrow we shall I dare say have the comfort of James’s presence, as an express has been sent to him. Adieu my dearest Frank. The loss of such a Parent must be felt, or we should be Brutes—. I wish I could have given you better preparation—but it has been impossible. Yours Ever affectly – J A.

The news must have been a great blow to Frank, who sailed the world over and only saw his family sporadically. Perhaps his grief was somewhat ameliorated by Jane’s next letter a little over a week later:

My mother has found among our dear father’s little personal property a small astronomical instrument, which she hopes you will accept for his sake. It is, I believe, a compass and sundial, and is in a black shagreen case…Yours very affecly, JA.

When Frank asked Miss Mary Gibson to marry him, Jane and Cassandra discovered that they liked her extremely well. Their cordial relationship had an opportunity to flourish after Rev. George Austen’s death. Frank invited his mother and sisters to live with him and his bride in Southampton from 1806 to 1808.  It was to be a mutually beneficial arrangement, for Frank did not want his young wife to be alone while he was away on his next voyage. He rented a house in Castle Square  with a fine garden and a view across Southampton Water to the Isle of Wight, which Jane found very much to her liking. The invitation included the Austen women’s close friend, Martha Lloyd, sister to James Austen’s wife Mary.

Sir Francis Austen lived until 1865, well into the age of photography

Unfortunately, like Edward’s wife Elizabeth, Mary did not survive into old age and died after the birth of her 11th child in 1823.  In an ironic turn of events, Frank asked Martha Lloyd to be his second wife in 1828 and she accepted. By any stretch of the imagination, Frank’s career was illustrious. He eventually achieved Knighthood as Sir Francis Austen and rose to the position of Admiral of the Fleet. Jane last saw her brother in the New Year of 1817, when a lull in her fatal illness allowed her to visit Frank and his large rambunctious family in Alton.

Thirty-five years after her death there came also a voice of praise from across the Atlantic. In 1852 the following letter was received by her brother Sir Francis Austen:

Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A., 6th Jan. 1852

Since high critical authority has pronounced the delineations of character in the works of Jane Austen second only to those of Shakspeare, trans-atlantic admiration appears superfluous; yet it may not be uninteresting to her family to receive an assurance that the influence of her genius is extensively recognised in the American Republic, even by the highest judicial authorities. The late Mr Chief Justice Marshall, of the supreme Court of the United States, and his associate Mr Justice Story, highly estimated and admired Miss Austen, and to them we owe our introduction to her society. For many years her talents have brightened our daily path, and her name and those of her characters are familiar to us as ‘household words’. We have long wished to express to some of her family the sentiments of gratitude and affection she has inspired, and request more information relative to her life than is given in the brief memoir prefixed to her works.

Having accidentally heard that a brother of Jane Austen held a high rank in the British navy, we have obtained his address from our friend Admiral Wormley, now resident in Boston, and we trust this expression of our feeling will be received by her relations with the kindness and urbanity characteristic of Admirals of her creation. Sir Francis Austen, or one of his family, would confer a great favour by complying with our request. The autograph of his sister, or a few lines in her handwriting, would be placed among our chief treasures.

The family who delight in the companionship of Jane Austen, and who present this petition, are of English origin. Their ancestor held a high rank among the first emigrants to New England, and his name and character have been ably represented by his descendants in various public stations of trust and responsibility to the present time in the colony and state of Massachusetts. A letter addressed to Miss Quincey, care of the Honble Josiah Quincey, Boston, Massachusetts, would reach its destination.

Sir Francis Austen returned a suitable reply to this application; and sent a long letter of his sister’s, which, no doubt, still occupies the place of honour promised by the Quincey family. – A Memoir of Jane Austen by her nephew, Chapter IX

More links:

• A Note on a Jane Austen Connection with the Massachusetts Historical Society: Justice Story, Admiral Wormeley, and Admiral Francis Austen, Farnell Parsons
• Jane Austen’s letter to her brother Frank about their father’s death, January 21, 1805
• Admiral Sir Francis William Austen
• Another aspect of naval life Extracts from the Log Books of Captain Francis Austen at the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich.
• The Dolphin Hotel in Southampton: Where Jane Austen Danced
• Francis’ daughter, Catherine married John Hubback. Her son, John Henry Hubback co-authored with his daughter, Edith Hubback, Jane Austen’s Sailor Brothers in 1906.

Gentle reader: In honor of JASNA’s annual meeting in Philadelphia this week, this blog, Austenprose, and Jane Austen Today will be devoting posts to Jane Austen and her siblings. Look for new links each day.

• Cassandra Austen: Jane’s Supporter, Confidante, and Helpmate
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. James Austen 1765-1819 – comprehensive information about James Austen on Austenprose
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. Henry Austen – 1771 -1850 – Henry was Jane Austen’s favorite brother
• Edward Austen Knight: A tightwad or a man with heavy responsibilities?
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Charles John Austen -1779-1852

Edward Austen Knight: A tightwad or a man with heavy responsibilities?

[Marianne] “’What have wealth or grandeur to do with happiness?’
‘Grandeur has but little,’ said Elinor, ‘but wealth has much to do with it.’‘Elinor, for shame!’ said Marianne; ‘money can only give happiness where there is nothing else to give it. Beyond a competence, it can afford no real satisfaction as far as mere self is concerned.’

‘Perhaps,’ said Elinor, smiling, ‘we may come to the same point. Your competence and my wealth are very much alike, I dare say; and without them, as the world goes now, we shall both agree that every kind of external comfort must be wanting. Your ideas are only more noble than mine. Come, what is your competence?’

‘About eighteen hundred or two thousand a year; not more than that.’

Elinor laughed. ‘Two thousand a year! One is my wealth! I guessed how it would end.’” – Jane Austen, Sense & Sensibility, volume 1, chapter 17

“To be above vulgar economy” … was one of Jane Austen’s express wishes, yet on the surface it would seem that her rich brother Edward contributed very little to Jane’s and her mother’s and sister’s notions of security. How was it that Edward’s fortunes were so very much above that of his family, and why did he not do more for his sisters and mother than provide them with a roof over their heads and a small annual sum?

Rev. George Austen presents his son, Edward, to Thomas Knight and family

Edward, third son of the family … became the favourite of some wealthy childless relatives of his father, the Thomas Knights. They met him as a 12-year-old when they visited the rectory at Steventon on their wedding journey. When they left, Edward accompanied them for the rest of the trip and subsequently went frequently for holidays at their estate. Eventually, when Edward was 16, they adopted him as their heir. – Janet Todd, Jane Austen in Context”

The Austens must have been thrilled beyond belief when Thomas Knight, George’s rich, childless cousin, took an interest in Edward, his third son. The practice of childless couples in adopting an heir from a less fortunate branch of the family was not an uncommon one for wealthy relatives to take at the time. When Edward inherited his estates from his adopted father, he became richer than Mr. Darcy, earning £15,000 per year from his investments against Mr. Darcy’s £10,000 per year. Multiply this number by 50 and you have an approximate amount of how much income Edward enjoyed in today’s terms.

Godmersham Park

And yet, with such a rich brother, Jane and her sister and mother worried a great deal about money after the sudden death of Rev. George Austen in Bath in 1805. Three of the brothers rallied behind them. Edward’s initial pledge of £100 a year almost doubled his mother’s income of  £122 from a small South Seas fortune, and both Henry and Frank pledged £50 apiece per year to support their mother and sisters. Cassandra received a small income from Tom Fowle’s £1000, which he had bequeathed to her in his will.  Even so, the three women were forced to move in March to more affordable rented living quarters on Gay Street, and then to Southampton in 1806, where they, along with their friend Martha Lloyd, shared a house with Frank Austen and his new bride.

The move to the house in Castle Square, Southampton in 1807 brought much cheer to Jane. The house, she noted, was not in good repair but it had a large garden. Her accounts for 1807 show that from her allowance of £50 she spent £2.13.6 to hire a pianoforte.”- Soft and Loud, JASA

Panorama of Chawton

Edward finally came through for his mother and sisters. Four years after his father’s death, he refurbished Chawton Cottage and invited them to move in. It was in this cottage that Jane was at her most prolific, polishing off earlier versions of Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility and famously writing Mansfield Park, Emma, and Persuasion. In skimming through a variety of biographies, many authors treat Edward’s seeming parsimony with a hint of contempt. The Knights had a history of generosity towards their poorer Austen relatives. Thomas Knight, second cousin to Rev. George Austen, gave him two livings that were valued at £210 the year that Jane was born. At Steventon, the Austens also had land to farm, which was an important factor in their diet and maintaining their self-sufficiency. The Austens also took in boarding pupils, and by the time Rev. Austen retired , he was earning almost  £600 per year, the same amount that his eldest son, James, made towards the end of his life.

Jane, her sister and mother had fallen on hard times. Financially dependend on their families, they are forced to move in March to rented living quarters on Gay Street, and then to Southampton in 1806, where they, along with their friend martha Lloyd shared a house with Frank Austen and his new bride.

“The move to the house in Castle Square, Southampton in 1807 brought much cheer to Jane. The house, she noted, was not in good repair but it had a large garden. Her accounts for 1807 show that from her allowance of £50 she spent £2.13.6 to hire a pianoforte.” JASA Soft and Loud,

http://www.jasa.net.au/l&t/piano.htm

Finally, four years after his father’s death, Edward Austen Knight refurbished Chawton Cottage for his mother and sisters, and had them move in. The walled garden, designed by Edward Austen Knight on the advice of his sisters Jane and Cassandra, is being recreated to provide not only flowers but organically grown fruit, vegetables and herbs, some of which will be used in contemporary recipes to be prepared in the kitchens. The church where Jane’s mother and sister are buried sits halfway up the drive.(from Chawton site)There had always been generostiy from the Knights towards the Austens. .

Jane’s mother, Cassandra, who was related to the Leighs of Stoneleigh Abbey, placed a great hope that her rich childless brother, James Leigh-Perrot, would leave money to her eldest son James. While James Leigh-Perrot provided James with a clerical living and some supplementary cash, his property eventually went  not to James, but to his son, James Edward, who was Jane Austen’s biographer. James Leigh-Perrot left nothing to his sister Cassandra, even knowing that she lived on a small income. He might have supposed that her uber rich son, Edward, would take care of his mother, which, in a fashion he did. Why did Edward not contribute more to his mother and siblings?

This is mere conjecture on my part, but Edward did the best he could under the circumstances. Yes, he was rich beyond imagining, but his responsibilities were many and heavy. He inherited two large estates, which were the physical embodiment of his inheritance. The laws of primogentirue demanded that as the heir, he should keep everything intact, from the land, which provided the income, to the house and all the family heirlooms within it. The heir was merely a “keeper” of the estate and the family name, and his actions were proscribed. Edward was more a tenant than an owner, and he was duty bound to turn over his entire estate to his male heir. – The Country House, JASA.

Chawton Cottage

Running these estates, with their attendant servants and necessary improvements, took an enormous, some would say crippling, amount of resources. In addition, Edward’s family was large. His first wife, Elizabeth, died after giving birth to their eleventh child. Add his seven brothers and sisters, his biological mother and adopted mother and her family, the Knight family, and the ever widening circle of nieces and nephews, and the even larger circle of aunts, uncles and cousins on both the biological and adopted sides, and you can imagine the pressures Edward must have felt all around.  Had he doled out what we would deem as adequate support to all the needy individuals in his extended family, Edward’s estate would soon have been frittered away.

Chawton House

One cannot fault Edward too much for moving prudently and cautiously, for he was obliged first to his immediate family and the need to provide for adequate dowries for his daughters and support for his younger sons. I do fault him for not helping Jane to repurchase her manuscript, Susan (renamed Northanger Abbey), for the measly sum of £10, so that she could pursue its publication, but for all we know she might have never applied to him for help.

I sometimes wonder if the Austen women were as destitute as people today conjecture. Unlike 90% of their countrymen, who rarely traveled outside of their immediate area, the Austens traveled frequently, visiting friends and relatives. They were able to keep two servants and supplement their diet with vegetables from their kitchen garden, and received an endless supply of milk from Edward’s cows. Jane secured a modest but extra income from her writing, and the three women lived off a yearly income of  £500 pounds, which was only  £100 less than Rev. George Austen earned, who had a family of eight to feed, in addition to his boarders. Jane’s eldest brother,  Rev. Frank Austen, managed to keep a carriage for his second wife on an income of  £600 per year. I am not saying that the three women were rich, by any means, for, like Elinor Dashwood, they lived frugally and prudently, but they did dine frequently with Edward and visited him over extensive periods of time at Godmersham Park, which must have been as luxurious an experience as any visit to a high end resort.

After Thomas Knight died, his widow, instead of waiting until her own death, handed over the family estates to Edward, who from 1798 lived the life of a country gentleman at Godmersham in Kent. When Mrs Knight herself died in 1812, Edward and his family, as stipulated in her will, took the name of ‘Knight’, prompting his eldest daughter Fanny (a favourite niece of Jane Austen’s) to write in her diary that now ‘we are therefore all Knights instead of dear old Austens How I hate it!!!!!’. Fanny’s aunt Jane wrote more calmly to her friend Martha Lloyd that ‘I must learn to make a better K.” – Janet Todd, Jane Austen in Context

Edward was the Austen's third oldest child

More on the topic:

• Edward Austen Knight’s Godmersham Library and Jane Austen’s Emma.
• The Grand Tour in the 18th-19th century: includes information about Edward’s grand tour, which he undertook at the age of 18.
• Jane Austen’s siblings and cousin Eliza
• The Country House
• The quintessential Georgian parents: George & Cassandra Austen
• Sick and Wicked

Gentle reader: In honor of JASNA’s annual meeting in Philadelphia this week, this blog, Austenprose, and Jane Austen Today will be devoting posts to Jane Austen and her siblings. Look for new links each day.

• Cassandra Austen: Jane’s Supporter, Confidante, and Helpmate
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. James Austen 1765-1819 – comprehensive information about James Austen on Austenprose
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. Henry Austen – 1771 -1850 – Henry was Jane Austen’s favorite brother
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Charles John Austen – 1779- 1852
• Sir Francis William Austen: Glimpses of Jane’s sailor brother in letters
• George Austen: Jane Austen’s almost forgotten, invisible brother

Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters: A Review

Gentle readers, Due to my pressing duties as companion to a terror terrier and my inability to keep my house clean and blog at the same time, I asked my coffee house companion, Kate, to read Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters by Ben H. Winters. The very fact that this book is offered on a site entitled Geeks of Doom speaks volumes. Here then is Kate’s review, which slithers with pithy insights. BEWARE! Those who purchase this fishy book, and who think that it is even remotely connected to Jane Austen’s genteel Regency tale, are bound to be DISAPPOINTED. If you are a sea monster afficionado, however, or a jaded cynic, you will be delighted.

“Mrs. Dashwood grasped a spare oar from its rigging, snapped it in twain upon her knee, and plunged the sharp, broken point into the gleaming, deep-set eye of the beast.”

With my book in hand, my local Starbucks barista, most likely in his late teens, offered the following commentary: “Wow! Is that like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies? I hear that, you know, people who love Jane Austen like really hate these books.” And then he went back to making cappuccinos.

I am a full quarter of the way through Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters, and I feel that it is time to stop. I feel this strongly. During my quarter-length romp with this fascinating adaptation of the classic novel, I have laughed out loud, rolled my eyes so far into the back of my head that it hurt a little, and felt myself transported back into my seventh grade life science class, encountering a phylum of vocabulary I long since forgot.

However, once the novelty of encountering Marianne, Elinor, and Mrs. Dashwood in their new Amazonian personages wore off, so did my desire to finish the book.

This is by no means Austen, but the names are familiar, and the plot vaguely reminds me of a book I once read by Jane Austen. Occasionally, a line from the classic favorite works its way into the prose, but it is hard to continue any kind of comparison to the original when Elinor’s and Marianne’s worth as prospective wives is no longer measured in dowries or feminine accomplishments, but rather in their stamina as swimmers, in their lung capacity, and in the strength of their calves.

Instead of arranging picnics and dinners to encourage courtship, Sir John hosts “tiki dances, crawfish fries, and bonfires,” taking the necessary precautions to ensure the safety of his guests, including “drawing a large quadrangle upon the beach in an admixture of squid ink and whale blood.”

In a cataclysm referred to as the Alteration (the source of which, the book explains, is unknown), the creatures of the deep turn against all land-roving mammals with untiring vengeance. This is the event around which all of Sea Monster society revolves.

A hammerhead shark ate Mr. Dashwood, leaving the widow Mrs. Dashwood and her daughters destitute and thrown into the company of Sir John, his exotic and ominously quiet wife, and the octopus-faced Colonel Brandon. Our beloved Dashwood women live in constant fear of marauding sea mammals (and crustaceans), and all the lovely sensibility of the original novel is gone.

I first found the novel wildly amusing and cleverly written, and then I found it sad, because I didn’t care about the characters whom I had loved in Sense and Sensibility. I’m genuinely happy that they can swim well and that they are strong women, capable of defending themselves from demonic sea creatures, but I miss their unconditional love for each other and their genuine struggles to find happiness in a world not at war with the sea. But most of all, I miss courtships that don’t necessitate a discussion of flipper size and writhing facial tentacles.

While I’ve stopped reading the book for now, there are a few mysteries in the plot (for example, how an octopus ended up on Colonel Brandon’s face) that I dwell on, and they very well could induce me to pick it up again.

My barista’s comment about the reactions of devoted Austen fans may be true. But I cannot find a reason to be upset about this very liberal adaptation. In fact, this book made me appreciate the original even more. But that could be because I’m just not thirteen anymore.

- Review submitted by Kate after ingesting gallons of Mr. Starbucke’s DARKE & Mysterious Caffeinated LIQUIDS.

Incredulous reader: Our rating for this book is five out of eight tentacles. After all, Jane did write 60% of this book, which you can purchase at this link.

Not yet completely horrified? David Itzkoff at Arts Beat points out a few discussion questions suggested in the book, which leave the reader with no small impression that Mr. Winter’s enormous literaSEA effort might well be the result of his quest for the almighty dollar:

2. In “Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters,” painful personal setbacks often occur at the same moment as sea-monster attacks, suggesting a metaphorical linkage of “monsters” with the pains of romantic disappointment; for example, Marianne is rebuffed by Willoughby at Hydra-Z precisely as the giant mutant lobsters are staging their mutiny. Have you ever been “attacked by giant lobsters,” either figuratively or literally?

5. Which would be worse: being eaten by a shark or consumed by the acidic stomach juice of a sand-shambling man-o’-war?

8. Have you ever been romantically involved with someone who turned out to be a sea witch?

10. Is Monsieur Pierre a symbol for something? Name three other well-known works of Western literature that feature orangutan valets. Are those characters also slain by pirates?

Is author Ben Winters into Sushi?

Other monsterly reviews on this blog:

• Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: Review of a High Concept Parody
• Jane Austen’s Legacy: Precious Bits of Ivory Turned into Monsters
• Review of Mr. Darcy Vampyre, Part One
• Review of Mr. Darcy Vampyre, Part Two
• Review of Mr. Darcy Vampyre, Part Three

The Geek Beat: More Sense and Sensibility and Less Sea Monsters

Emma 2009 Poll: What did you think of Part One?

Reading Twitter, some people are turned off by the modern approach to Emma 2009. Curious minds want to know what you thought of the first installment of this new Jane Austen novel adaptation with Romola Garai, Jonny Lee Miller and Michael Gambon. These are your choices:  a yawner, meh, loved it, and will have to wait and see. If you would like to share your thoughts, please leave a comment. Do you love the new film? Do you like it? Or are you sitting on the fence, waiting to see how the series will develop?

• Emma: Behind the Scenes Preview
• Preview of Emma on Austenprose
• Romola Garai Interview: Wales Online
• Romola Garai Emma Stills
• Emma: The Guardian

Cassandra Austen: Jane’ confidante, supporter and helpmate

My dear Cassandra, Where shall I begin? Which of all my important nothings shall I tell you first? – Jane Austen, June 15, 1808

Whenever we catch sight of Jane Austen in recollections and letters, her sister Cassandra is usually not far away. Although the two spinster women were frequently separated by visits to their friends and relatives, they shared a bedroom all their lives and presumably each others’ thoughts and secrets. Cassandra was separated from the family in her crucial formative years as a baby. After her birth, Mrs. Austen breast fed her first daughter for three months before handing her over to a village woman to be cared for until she was 18 months of age. The Austens, it seemed, followed this unusual habit with all their children, which must have worked well for them, for all eight survived in an age when child mortality was high.

Cassandra's silhouette

Two years after Cassandra’s birth, the Austens were blessed with a second daughter, Jane. Wherever Cassandra went, Jane followed. When 10-year-old Cassandra was sent off to boarding school in 1783, 8-year-old Jane demanded to go, refusing to be separated from her older sister…

…not because she was thought old enough to profit much by the instruction there imparted, but because she would have been miserable (at home) without her sister; her mother observing that ‘if Cassandra were going to have her head cut off, Jane would insist on sharing her fate. – Constance Hill, Jane Austen, Her Homes and Her Friends

Visits played an important part of Regency life and we have the frequent separations between Jane and Cassandra – who was often called to Godmarsham Park to help with her widowed brother Edward’s brood of children – to thank for their prolific correspondence. The letters between the two sisters reveal the intimate details of ordinary life, talking of purchasing ribbons and refashioning clothes or sending gifts. The sisters might well have written about more earth shattering events, but we shall never know, for Cassandra burnt or destroyed so much of Jane’s correspondence in 1843. The letters that do remain provide us with a glimpse into their relationship:

I saw some gauzes in a shop in Bath Street yesterday at only 4s. a yard, but they were not so good or so pretty as mine. Flowers are very much worn, and fruit is still more the thing. - 1799

and

I cannot possibly oblige you by not wearing my gown, because I have it made up on purpose to wear it a great deal, and as the discredit will be my own, I feel the less regret. You must learn to like it yourself and make it up at Godmersham. - 1800

Cassandra and Jane in Becoming Jane

After moving to Chawton Cottage, Cassandra and Mrs. Austen took over most of the duties of the house and garden, allowing Jane to capitalize on the most fruitful period of her writing. Once settled in a routine, she polished off earlier drafts of Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice, getting them published, and began to write new novels. The Austen women made do with very little, always economizing. Caroline Austenn, their niece, wrote, “The house was well furnished, and it was altogether a comfortable and ladylike establishment. Tho’ I believe the mean which supported it were but small.” In Chawton Cottage, Cassandra mourned the women’s lack of complete self-sufficiency, noting, “We have not even so much as a cow.” Chawton villagers recorded that “the Austen’s manservant would walk up to Chawton House each day accompanied by Cassandra’s dog “Link”, who would carry home the pail of milk in his mouth.” (Maggie Lane, p. 19). It is evident from the letter Jane sent to Cassandra in 1816, that she was grateful for Cassandra’s housekeeping activities:

It had been a busy week, and I wanted a few days quiet, and exemption from the thought and contrivances which any sort of company gives. I often wonder how you can find time for all you do, in addition to the care of the house; and how good Mrs West could have written such books and collected so many hard words, with all her family cares, is still more a matter of astonishment! Composition seems to me impossible, with a head full of joints of mutton and doses of rhubarb. – Jane Austen, Sept 8

A Times Online article describes Greta Scacchi’s portrayal as Cassandra in Miss Austen Regrets “as a bedraggled bread baker, chicken plucker and general rural dogsbody.” But the fact was that without Cassandra’s physical, mental and emotional support, and her brothers’ contributions to their annual income, Jane would not have had the freedom to actively pursue her career as a writer.

Greta Scacchi as Cassandra reads Jane's letter

An older Cassandra

After Jane died in Cassandra’s arms, one can only imagine how bereft the older sister must have felt for the remaining 28 years of her life. Like Elinor Dashwood, she held her emotions in check. When Cassandra’s short engagement to Thomas Fowle ended in tragedy, Jane worried over her sister’s restraint in grieving.  It is our tragedy that Cassandra chose not to follow a similar restraint in preserving Jane’s letters.  In 1843, Cassandra wrote on a bundle of Jane’s letters: “To be burned.” Of the letters that survived, her niece Caroline noted that a number had “portions cut out“.  How ironic that in the twilight of her life Cassandra destroyed the very letters that must have given her a great deal of comfort and made her laugh or cry, and that, for a very short while, brought her sister back to life during the long evening hours she spent alone.

Francis, Cassandra, Jane, and Charles were the Austen's youngest children.

More links about this topic:

• The Death of a Fiance in Persuasion and The Constant Heart – The story of Cassandra and her fiance Thomas Fowle
• The Destruction of Jane Austen’s Letters
• Cassandra Austen: Jane Austen Centre Magazine
• A Glimpse of Jane Austen at Work – Glimpse of Jane and Cassandra giggling and animated as they edit her novel.
• A Glimpse of Jane Austen - Fanny Knatchbull’s impressions of her aunts Jane and Cassandra.
• Cassandra Elizabeth Austen: Protector or Vandal of Jane Austen’s Legacy
• Cassandra and Jane
• Lane, Maggie. Jane Austen and Food, The Hambledon Press, London, 1995, ISBN 1 85285 124 4

Gentle reader: In honor of JASNA’s annual meeting in Philadelphia this week, this blog, Austenprose, and Jane Austen Today will be devoting posts to Jane Austen and her siblings. Look for new links each day.

• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. James Austen 1765-1819 – comprehensive information about James Austen on Austenprose
• Jane Austen’s Siblings – Rev. Henry Austen – 1771 -1850 – Henry was Jane Austen’s favorite brother
• Sir Francis William Austen: Glimpses of Jane’s sailor brother through letters
• Edward Austen Knight: A tightwad or a man with heavy responsibilities?

Yorkshire Coaching Inns Illustrated by Joseph Appleyard

“Riding Through the Ridings”: Random Sketches of Yorkshire Coaching Inns was written and illustrated in 1947 by Joseph Appleyard. An unpublished book, it has found a home online through his son, David. The illustrations fit so well with my recent posts for post boys and the postal mail, that I was eager to share them with you,with Mr. Appleyard’s kind permission.

The website contains the full transcript and most of the illustrations for “Riding through the Ridings”, whose foreword by Major J. Fairfax-Blakeborough M.C. is telling:

Some of us are old enough to have talked with the last of the drivers of stage coaches, with post-boys and quaint old ostlers, who could recall the music of the fast-trotting horses and the note on the guard’s horn. Such have heard at first hand of all the bustle there was when the four steaming horses were to be speedily changed, relieved by others standing in readiness for the next stage. More there are who remember the long rows of stables, loose-boxes, saddle rooms and post-boy’s quarters — unused and maybe derelict — in the spacious yards of the old coaching inns. These have also lived to see the end of coach-horse breeding in Yorkshire and the passing of the fairs in the country, at which hundreds of animals were yearly bought to horse the coaches in various parts of the country. Later, in pre-motor days, the best carriage-horses were sold in large numbers at these same Yorkshire fairs; to buyers from all over the world. The horse fairs as they declined, were the swan song of the long ranges of stabling, which were an essential adjunct and integral part of every coaching inn. All this formed the last remaining links with the spacious, leisurely, picturesque coaching-days.

Picking up the mail

Major Fairfax-Blakeboroughsums up the illustrations nicely:

The beautifully executed illustrations in this book are marked by their accuracy in technique and detail — no easy achievement in view of the distinctive dress, horse, harness and so forth, which belonged to those days and to a great extent passed with them. Contemporary literature is pregnant with references to the particular care and pride those who played their part in the coaching era took with regard to all these details and how the young sons of patrician families, did not consider their education complete until they could tool a four-in-hand and dress the part with such meticulous exactness that they were mistaken for professional coachmen. The fascinating illustration on the succeeding pages emphasise more than any other of the previous volumes dealing with the epoch, the poetry and romance surrounding it and the important part the old posting houses plated in the life of the nation and as the very hub of their own immediate area.

coach Horse, Joseph Appleyard 1947

The site also offers a short biography of the artist (1908-1960), and contains photographs, published works, sketches, drawings, book illustrations and newspaper articles of his life and career.

Joe Appleyard attended local evening classes at Leeds School of Art where his fondness of animals gave rise to his interest in Romany and Circus life. He worked full time in window display and general advertising, and painted the scenery of Airedale, Wharfedale and Washburn Valleys in his spare time. Appleyard first began showing his paintings at the Leeds City Art Gallery in 1934, and by 1947 had exhibited over two hundred different works. He co-founded Otley Arts Club, and today his sketchbooks are in a permanent collection at Leeds Art Gallery. His St Leger and racehorse portraits and studies are in a permanent collection at Doncaster Art Gallery.

A light post horse, Joseph Appleyard

Joe Appleyard, Self portrait, age 26

David Appleyard writes about designing a website for his father:

The Old Swan Hotel, Harrogate, has three large oil paintings on permanent display, now well restored to remove fifty years of nicotine. The nicotine would not have bothered Joe for he liked his Three Castles cigarettes and as his self-portrait shows political correctness was not an issue in those days! Some twelve years ago I tried to publish “Riding through the Ridings”. My efforts were unsuccessful and the project lay dormant until 1999 when I decided to “publish” it on the Internet. With access to Joe’s remarkably good records the site has grown and showcases more than 200 examples of his work as my tribute to a wonderful father and talented artist.

To see the rest of the illustrations and read the book, click on this link: Joseph Appleyard, Author or type www.josephappleyard.co.uk

• Joseph Appleyard on Artnet
• Antique print room: Mare and Foal, Joseph Appleyard

Royal Lion Inn: A Dorset Public Inn With a Jane Austen Connection

Dorset Public Inns With a Literary Connection showcases a number of inns with connections to John Cowper Powys, Thomas Hardy, Jane Austen,  Robert Louis Stevenson, and John Fowles. Constance Hill, author of Jane Austen: Her Homes and Her Friends, identifies the lodging in Persuasion as the Royal Lion Inn:

Now the inn to which they were bound we fully believe to have been the “Royal Lion,” which stands on the right-hand side about half way up the main street. The circumstances of the story all suggest it rather than the old “Three Cups,” the only other inn of importance in Miss Austen’s day. From the quaint projecting windows of the “Royal Lion” the ladies would be able to see Mr. Elliot’s “curricle coming round from the stable yard to the front door,” and could “all kindly watch” its owner as he drove up the steep hill. This would have been impossible from the windows of the “Three Cups,” which stood at the bottom of the main street and turned slightly away from it. The “Three Cups” was burnt down in 1844, but we have seen its site and have looked at an old print showing the building and its surroundings.

Update: Natalie Manifold, who runs the Jane Austen tours in Lyme Regis, wrote to say that Constance Hill’s information is wrong. The Royal Lion Inn is not the inn described in Persuasion. She has done extensive research on this topic, examining all the town’s old maps and records, and found that the front section of the hotel was a “privately owned cottage up until 1844 when it was scorched in a fire. Subsequently, it was sold and bought by the owner of the inn, which up until that point had been situated right at the back of the hotel’s car park near the river. The bay window is also Victorian as it was added when the front structure was included as part of the hotel.” Natalie concludes: “There is no way that the party would have been able to see up the hill from the hotel’s situation during the Regency period, leaving the old Three Cups as the most likely place of their stay.”

Agreeing with Natalie’s assessment are: John Fowles – the town’s most noted historian and author, Diana Shervington – relation of Austen, and Francis Turner Palgrave – Anthologist. (Thank you for the update, Natalie, which I very much appreciate.)

Chances are that Jane Austen was familiar with the  Inn. In 1804 Jane Austen and her family traveled to Lyme and stayed there in the summer. The Royal Lion Inn, or the Lion as it was known, was built as a coaching inn in 1601. More information about the inn can be found in Dorset Public Inns With a Literary Connection. Over a century later, author and traveler, F. J. Harvey Darton wrote about the two inns:

Nothing could be better than the confrontation of the two chief hotels, the Royal Lion and the Three Cups. The Cups is the older house, and seems to go back to at least Stuart times in name and site. But they are both models of what a country inn of the better sort should appear to be. – The Soul of Dorset, F. J. Harvey Darton , 1922

More Links to Lyme Regis

• Jane Austen’s Lyme Regis
• Three Cups Inn, Jane Austen Sequels
• Lyme Regis Looks Nice, George
• Book Review: Jane Austen and Lyme Regis, Maggie Lane
• Jane Austen in Lyme Regis
• Grand Tours, Taking the Waters at Lyme Regis With Jane Austen

The Labor of Street Orderlies in 19th C. London

When horses drew every imaginable wagon in London, crossing sweepers were a common sight. In some areas of town they were regarded a nuisance, for often young boys would pester a pedestrian and sweep a clear path whether that person wanted their help or not. The practice of using crossing sweepers to clean the streets of horse manure, dust, and clinging mud lasted into the early 20th century. In the mid-19th century, Henry Mayhew chronicled the lives of working people in a series of volumes entitled London Labour and the London Poor. Mayhew described a system of cleaning streets, introduced by Charles Cochrane in 1843, that instituted a more orderly system than crossing sweepers, and in which former paupers were hired so that they could support themselves.

Crossing Sweepers, 1856

The first demonstration or display of the street orderly system took place in Regent street between the Quadrant and the Regent circus and in Oxford street between Vert street and Charles street The streets were thoroughly swept in the morning and then each man or boy provided with a hand broom and dust pan removed any dirt as soon as it was deposited The demonstration was pronounced highly successful and the system effective in the opinion of eighteen influential inhabitants of the locality who acted as a committee and who publicly and with the authority of their names testified their conviction that the most efficient means of keeping streets clean and more especially great thoroughfares was to prevent the accumulation of dirt by removing the manure within a few minutes after it has been deposited by the passing cattle the same having hitherto remained during several days. - London Labour and the London Poor, p. 259

The groups of orderlies not only swept the street and removed dirt in a particular area of London (500 linear yards of a busy street, 2,000 yards of a quieter section, and 9 men in a busy intersection, like Cheapside), but they also acted as “the watchman of house property shop goods, the guardian of reticule,s pocket books, purses and watch pockets, the experienced observer and detector of pickpockets … more, he is always at hand to render assistance to both equestrian and pedestrian.” The report concluded that the street-orderly system would keep the streets of London and Westminster clean in a most satisfactory way. In return, the street-orderlies would earn a wage of 12s. Although this was a lower living wage than other workmen earned, the money lifted them out of their lives of squalor.

The system did not entirely replace the crossing sweepers, many of whom were depicted in caricatures as hounding pedestrians for services rendered. Read my article on Crossing Sweepers at this link.

Emma, 1996: Bucolic Scenes & the Industrial Revolution

Mr. Knightley's Harvest Ball

I prefer Kate Beckinsale’s Emma, written by Andrew Davies, because of the film’s depiction of ordinary life, such as farmers threshing grain before the Harvest Ball. These scenes were not written by Jane Austen, but they added authenticity to the film. When I saw this image, (Detail taken from the New York Public Library’s digital collection of the Costumes of Yorkshire, 1813-1814), I knew that the costumers and the director, Diarmuid Lawrence, had done their research. I loved the quality of the golden light that bathed the workers, lending the scene an antique, painterly feel. There are so many glorious visual moments in this film, which is well worth watching despite the script’s many variations from Jane’s plot.

Detail, Rape Threshing, 1813, The Costume of Yorkshire, New York Public Library

By 1750, British agricultural practices were regarded as among the best in the world. The Industrial Revolution accelerated new practices in agriculture, in which animal power and human labor were aided by newly invented farm machinery. These inventions, as well as the new methods of food production, greatly increased the food supply.

Four-field rotation was practiced in England.  Specific crops were grown in a scientific sequence that managed the different nutrients in the soil. With this method, the continuous use of land was possible; more importantly, additional forage crops for livestock could be grown. This increase in the food supply could support livestock through the winter, which led to an improved diet year round. Even the poor could occasionally augment their bread with meat and dairy products, such as cheese.

While the Enclosure Acts from 1750-1831 drove many subsistence farmers off their small holdings of around 20 acres, the movement combined land into larger tracts for more efficient farming, and allowing portions of the fields to lie fallow. The traditional method of subdividing the land allowed farmers to feed their families, but their holdings were too small to follow the new method of crop rotation.  The larger holdings (which usually favored the richer land owners) applied modern methods of crop production. The unlucky farmer who lost his lands also lost the means to support his family independently. He and his family had no choice but to find work in the industrial north or in London. These burgeoning urban centers required an enormous amount of food to be brought in daily over long distances. One imagines that after Mr. Knightley set aside enough of the harvest for his own consumption, he transported the remainder to cities to be sold for profit.

More on the topic:

• Kate Beckinsale’s Emma: Irrespressible, Outspoken, and Engaging
• Emma: PBS
• Emma: Picknicking on Box Hill
• Agriculture Since the Industrial Revolution

Watch Little Dorrit Online

In celebration of Little Dorrit’s remarkable seven wins at the emmys, PBS will be showing the series online for a limited time. The duration of online availability is through Sept 29, so hurry and click here to watch this well-crafted and outstanding show in its entirety. USA only. So sorry, our other country friends.

Saving Georgian Bath

After many parts of Bath disappeared overnight during a German bombing raid in World War II, efforts to restore the city began – efforts to reconstruct the major landmarks like the Assembly Rooms and The Circus, that is.  Smaller Georgian houses were scheduled for demolition.  In 1970, a horrified James Lees-Milne wrote to the Times:

Your readers may be interested to learn that we are getting on quite nicely with the demolition of the centre of Bath. This year alone we have swept away several acres between Lansdown Road and the Circus. The whole southern end of Walcot Street (including the 19th century burial ground and tombstones) has entirely gone. We are just beginning on Northgate Street and have only knocked down two or three houses in Broad Street this month. But New Bond Street’s turn is imminent. All the houses are (or were) Georgian, every one.

Lees-Milne, who joined the National Trust, “played an active part in the campaign to save Bath.” Click here to read the review of Michael Bloch’s book, James Lees-Milne, The Life: Saving what was left to a Georgian city, which goes on to describe the rest of this fascinating story.