Gossip Girls . . . and Boys

Cara/Andrea here, getting back to research now that the lazy days of summer are just about over . . .

Prinny  These days, it’s hard to read a publication or watch television without getting bombarded with stories about a movie star’s misbehavior or a politician’s sexual shenanigans. But our current fascination with gossip and scandal is nothing new. Regency England reveled in ‘tittletattle,’ and had its own colorful scandalsheets and “paparazzi.” Newspapers and pamphlets reported in lurid detail on the celebrity bad boys—and bad girls—of high society. Like today, sex, money and politics were hot topics.

As for pictures, there were, of course, no cameras to capture candid snapshots and personal transgressions. But the artists of the Regency could be even more cutting than modern-day photographers, and their sharp wit make them famous in their own right. (Prinny, shown at left,  was a popular target, and you can see why. This print by George Cruikshank carries the clever title of "A View of the R-g-t's Bomb.)

The first book in my new trilogy for Grand Central Forever (To Sin With a Scoundrel, coming in March ’10) features a hero and heroine who both find themselves the subject of graphic ridicule. So naturally, I decided to do a little research into the subject. I’m lucky enough to live close to the British Art Center at Yale, which has an amazing collection of vintage Regency prints in its study room.
Dandies
You can make an appointment, sort through the card catalogues to decided what you want to see—and voila! The boxes are brought to your work table. The chance to study originals was a wonderful experience. (Not to speak of getting to sort through a whole box of J. M. W. Turner’s watercolor sketches of his trip through the Alps with my hot little hands—well-washed of course. They make you scrub!) To see the actual colors and richness of detail is, well, eye-opening. (Don't you just love this parody by Cruikshank of dandies and their delicate sensibilities!)

Jamesgillray-feetThe art of satire was honed to a fine edge by London’s top printmakers, who were masters at creating caricatures of famous figures of the day—anyone from leading politicians to notorious courtesans—as well as crafting commentaries on current events. The prints were widely available at printshops all over Town, and were wildly popular with the public, who ate them up, gleeful at seeing their betters—or their peers— exposed to ridicule. (One of my favorites, this wickedly wonderful image by James Gillray is complemented by an equally creative title: Fashionable Contrasts, Or the Duchess;s Little Shoe Yielding to the Magnitude of the Duke's Foot.)

Mincing soldier  As for politics, the printmakers captured public sentiment on war, taxes, and other controversies. Often irreverent, sardonic and scathingly funny, their work provides a wonderful mirror of the social and cultural temper of the times. ("A March on the Bank" by Gillray shows an impossibly arrogant officer of the Guards strutting over the common man . . .and woman.)

According to Vic Gatrell in his book City of Laughter, 20,000 satirical prints were published in London between 1770-1830. He calls those years the Golden Age of Graphic Satire, for after 1830, new printing technologies made hand-colored engravings obsolete as a means of social commentary. Three of the most famous print artists from the Regency were James Gillray, Thomas Rowlandson and George Cruikshank, who all followed in the tradition of William Hogarth, one of the great English satirists of the 18th century.

James Gillray (shown at right) was born in Chelsea and trained as an engraver of letters. He grew bored and left to spend several years with a troop of strolling players (which may be where he developed his humor.)

Jamesgillray Returning to art, he was admitted as a student to the Royal Academy, and began supporting himself by creating caricatures. His publisher and printseller was Miss Hannah Humphrey—and she was also his mistress. Gillray lived with her throughout his career.

 Some of his most scathing satire was directed at King George III, who once said, “I don’t understand these caricatures.” Like the king, Gillray descended into madness and died in 1815.

Rowlandson A good friend of Gillray, Thomas Rowlandson (shown at left) was from a well-to-do family and attended Eton. From there, he became a student at the Royal Academy and spent two years in Paris honing his drawing skills. In 1777, he set up his own studio in Wardour Street, where he worked as a portrait artist, as well as a chronicler of daily life. A keen traveler, he also recorded his impression of his trips to the Continent.

Rowlandson didn’t prosper as a painter and so sought employment as an engraver at Ackermann’s print shop. In 1808, he collaborated with Randolph Ackermann on a series of books on London life. He was a heavy gambler, and in his later life, he often paid his debts with drawings.

Gcruikshank George Cruikshank (shown at right)  had art in his blood—his father was the well-known Scottish painter and caricaturist, Isaac Cruikshank. He earned fame for his comic illustrations for “Life in London,” a landmark Regency satirical book that followed three young men through the the city, where they experience the highs and lows of its pleasures.

The Regency artists were all greatly influenced by William Hogarth, who was one of the most important print artists of the 18th century. His observations of the world around him were gritty and unflinching, and by portraying reality, warts and all, he inspired the new generation of artists to add even more color to their era.

Much as I loved perusing the prints and laughing at their mocking—and sometimes malicious—humor, I am heartily glad that I don’t live in a time where I have to fear their basilisk eye. We have our modern day equivalent in editorial cartoonists, who can still create a stir. (Remember the Danish cartoon about Islam that provoked outrage in the Muslim world) But for the most part, satirical art has faded from the forefront of everyday life.

Taking its place is the sneaky snapshot—you know, the ones you see on the cover of People magazine of celebrities not at their best. And of course, gossip is more rampant than ever. I find all this obsession with other people’s lives a little strange, and in truth I feel a little sorry for the celebrities who are constantly stalked by photographers looking to capture some small misstep or indiscretion for eternity.

So, what do you feel about gossip? Do you enjoy reading about the foibles of others? Is everyone fair game for the press, or should there be limits on how intrusive journalists should be in their coverage? (And for a look at more Regency prints, visit my website at www.caraelliott.com and click on the Diversions page.)

100 thoughts on “Gossip Girls . . . and Boys”

  1. I’m with you, Andrea. Gossip doesn’t interest me. Good grief, why should I be interested in what breakfast cereal the president eats?
    I don’t much care what other people do as long as they don’t bother me.
    Gossip usually seems to have a malicious component. I would prefer that these gossips find something useful to do with themselves rather than tear people down.

    Reply
  2. I’m with you, Andrea. Gossip doesn’t interest me. Good grief, why should I be interested in what breakfast cereal the president eats?
    I don’t much care what other people do as long as they don’t bother me.
    Gossip usually seems to have a malicious component. I would prefer that these gossips find something useful to do with themselves rather than tear people down.

    Reply
  3. I’m with you, Andrea. Gossip doesn’t interest me. Good grief, why should I be interested in what breakfast cereal the president eats?
    I don’t much care what other people do as long as they don’t bother me.
    Gossip usually seems to have a malicious component. I would prefer that these gossips find something useful to do with themselves rather than tear people down.

    Reply
  4. I’m with you, Andrea. Gossip doesn’t interest me. Good grief, why should I be interested in what breakfast cereal the president eats?
    I don’t much care what other people do as long as they don’t bother me.
    Gossip usually seems to have a malicious component. I would prefer that these gossips find something useful to do with themselves rather than tear people down.

    Reply
  5. I’m with you, Andrea. Gossip doesn’t interest me. Good grief, why should I be interested in what breakfast cereal the president eats?
    I don’t much care what other people do as long as they don’t bother me.
    Gossip usually seems to have a malicious component. I would prefer that these gossips find something useful to do with themselves rather than tear people down.

    Reply
  6. Linda, I’m always amazed at how people are so interested in complete strangers. Baffling. I’d rather spend my free time connecting to real friends. Reality TV strikes me as even stranger! Give me a good PBS documentary or BBC P&P any day!

    Reply
  7. Linda, I’m always amazed at how people are so interested in complete strangers. Baffling. I’d rather spend my free time connecting to real friends. Reality TV strikes me as even stranger! Give me a good PBS documentary or BBC P&P any day!

    Reply
  8. Linda, I’m always amazed at how people are so interested in complete strangers. Baffling. I’d rather spend my free time connecting to real friends. Reality TV strikes me as even stranger! Give me a good PBS documentary or BBC P&P any day!

    Reply
  9. Linda, I’m always amazed at how people are so interested in complete strangers. Baffling. I’d rather spend my free time connecting to real friends. Reality TV strikes me as even stranger! Give me a good PBS documentary or BBC P&P any day!

    Reply
  10. Linda, I’m always amazed at how people are so interested in complete strangers. Baffling. I’d rather spend my free time connecting to real friends. Reality TV strikes me as even stranger! Give me a good PBS documentary or BBC P&P any day!

    Reply
  11. Sherrie, here.
    Common gossip in newstand magazines bores me to death. But I’m ashamed to admit that a bit of local gossip on a more personal level can sometimes be titillating. *blush* I couldn’t care less about what Celebrity-X did when he was 18, or the reasons behind Celebrity-Y’s divorce. But whisper in my ear that my Neighbor-Z was seen mowing his lawn in the heat of summer wearing a complete Santa Claus suit (true, by the way) and I’m all aghast fascination.
    I think most of us have a secret little place where salacious gossip has a morbid appeal, no matter how high we wish to hold ourselves above such things. *g* Otherwise, why has it endured for so long as a form of popular entertainment–from the unflattering charicatures posted in shop windows during the Regency, to the National Enquirer magazine at grocery store checkstands?
    And reality TV? Bah! I’m with you, Andrea. I’d rather watch a National Geographic docudrama on a pride of lions. Yet we’re all familiar with modern cartoons of rapacious TV reporters in a feeding frenzy over sensationalistic news, to the point of rudeness and invasion of privacy.
    I guess gossip is here to stay, like it or not. *g*

    Reply
  12. Sherrie, here.
    Common gossip in newstand magazines bores me to death. But I’m ashamed to admit that a bit of local gossip on a more personal level can sometimes be titillating. *blush* I couldn’t care less about what Celebrity-X did when he was 18, or the reasons behind Celebrity-Y’s divorce. But whisper in my ear that my Neighbor-Z was seen mowing his lawn in the heat of summer wearing a complete Santa Claus suit (true, by the way) and I’m all aghast fascination.
    I think most of us have a secret little place where salacious gossip has a morbid appeal, no matter how high we wish to hold ourselves above such things. *g* Otherwise, why has it endured for so long as a form of popular entertainment–from the unflattering charicatures posted in shop windows during the Regency, to the National Enquirer magazine at grocery store checkstands?
    And reality TV? Bah! I’m with you, Andrea. I’d rather watch a National Geographic docudrama on a pride of lions. Yet we’re all familiar with modern cartoons of rapacious TV reporters in a feeding frenzy over sensationalistic news, to the point of rudeness and invasion of privacy.
    I guess gossip is here to stay, like it or not. *g*

    Reply
  13. Sherrie, here.
    Common gossip in newstand magazines bores me to death. But I’m ashamed to admit that a bit of local gossip on a more personal level can sometimes be titillating. *blush* I couldn’t care less about what Celebrity-X did when he was 18, or the reasons behind Celebrity-Y’s divorce. But whisper in my ear that my Neighbor-Z was seen mowing his lawn in the heat of summer wearing a complete Santa Claus suit (true, by the way) and I’m all aghast fascination.
    I think most of us have a secret little place where salacious gossip has a morbid appeal, no matter how high we wish to hold ourselves above such things. *g* Otherwise, why has it endured for so long as a form of popular entertainment–from the unflattering charicatures posted in shop windows during the Regency, to the National Enquirer magazine at grocery store checkstands?
    And reality TV? Bah! I’m with you, Andrea. I’d rather watch a National Geographic docudrama on a pride of lions. Yet we’re all familiar with modern cartoons of rapacious TV reporters in a feeding frenzy over sensationalistic news, to the point of rudeness and invasion of privacy.
    I guess gossip is here to stay, like it or not. *g*

    Reply
  14. Sherrie, here.
    Common gossip in newstand magazines bores me to death. But I’m ashamed to admit that a bit of local gossip on a more personal level can sometimes be titillating. *blush* I couldn’t care less about what Celebrity-X did when he was 18, or the reasons behind Celebrity-Y’s divorce. But whisper in my ear that my Neighbor-Z was seen mowing his lawn in the heat of summer wearing a complete Santa Claus suit (true, by the way) and I’m all aghast fascination.
    I think most of us have a secret little place where salacious gossip has a morbid appeal, no matter how high we wish to hold ourselves above such things. *g* Otherwise, why has it endured for so long as a form of popular entertainment–from the unflattering charicatures posted in shop windows during the Regency, to the National Enquirer magazine at grocery store checkstands?
    And reality TV? Bah! I’m with you, Andrea. I’d rather watch a National Geographic docudrama on a pride of lions. Yet we’re all familiar with modern cartoons of rapacious TV reporters in a feeding frenzy over sensationalistic news, to the point of rudeness and invasion of privacy.
    I guess gossip is here to stay, like it or not. *g*

    Reply
  15. Sherrie, here.
    Common gossip in newstand magazines bores me to death. But I’m ashamed to admit that a bit of local gossip on a more personal level can sometimes be titillating. *blush* I couldn’t care less about what Celebrity-X did when he was 18, or the reasons behind Celebrity-Y’s divorce. But whisper in my ear that my Neighbor-Z was seen mowing his lawn in the heat of summer wearing a complete Santa Claus suit (true, by the way) and I’m all aghast fascination.
    I think most of us have a secret little place where salacious gossip has a morbid appeal, no matter how high we wish to hold ourselves above such things. *g* Otherwise, why has it endured for so long as a form of popular entertainment–from the unflattering charicatures posted in shop windows during the Regency, to the National Enquirer magazine at grocery store checkstands?
    And reality TV? Bah! I’m with you, Andrea. I’d rather watch a National Geographic docudrama on a pride of lions. Yet we’re all familiar with modern cartoons of rapacious TV reporters in a feeding frenzy over sensationalistic news, to the point of rudeness and invasion of privacy.
    I guess gossip is here to stay, like it or not. *g*

    Reply
  16. I think Sherrie is right that it’s natural for people to be interested in their fellows. (I suspect monkeys do exactly the same thing.)
    But my interest in many so-called “celebrities” is in the minus numbers. I see the tabloids at the supermarket check out and think, “Who are these people?”
    I think the desire to invade the privacy of others has gotten way out of hand–cell phone cameras, the internet–too many things conspire to hack away at human dignity.
    Mary Jo

    Reply
  17. I think Sherrie is right that it’s natural for people to be interested in their fellows. (I suspect monkeys do exactly the same thing.)
    But my interest in many so-called “celebrities” is in the minus numbers. I see the tabloids at the supermarket check out and think, “Who are these people?”
    I think the desire to invade the privacy of others has gotten way out of hand–cell phone cameras, the internet–too many things conspire to hack away at human dignity.
    Mary Jo

    Reply
  18. I think Sherrie is right that it’s natural for people to be interested in their fellows. (I suspect monkeys do exactly the same thing.)
    But my interest in many so-called “celebrities” is in the minus numbers. I see the tabloids at the supermarket check out and think, “Who are these people?”
    I think the desire to invade the privacy of others has gotten way out of hand–cell phone cameras, the internet–too many things conspire to hack away at human dignity.
    Mary Jo

    Reply
  19. I think Sherrie is right that it’s natural for people to be interested in their fellows. (I suspect monkeys do exactly the same thing.)
    But my interest in many so-called “celebrities” is in the minus numbers. I see the tabloids at the supermarket check out and think, “Who are these people?”
    I think the desire to invade the privacy of others has gotten way out of hand–cell phone cameras, the internet–too many things conspire to hack away at human dignity.
    Mary Jo

    Reply
  20. I think Sherrie is right that it’s natural for people to be interested in their fellows. (I suspect monkeys do exactly the same thing.)
    But my interest in many so-called “celebrities” is in the minus numbers. I see the tabloids at the supermarket check out and think, “Who are these people?”
    I think the desire to invade the privacy of others has gotten way out of hand–cell phone cameras, the internet–too many things conspire to hack away at human dignity.
    Mary Jo

    Reply
  21. Pardon my curmudgeonly attitude, but I wish the networks would quit confusing “gossip” with “news”. News is how congress votes, foreign affairs, and natural disasters. Nothing about Jon and Kate Gosselin is news. Nor is what the first lady wears, or anything about Paris Hilton, or fashion week. And it’s my belief that reality TV is just a way for networks to get away without paying actors or writers. I refuse to watch any of it. (grumph,grumph, grumph,mutter,why-in-my-day-we-had-real-news-like-WalterCronkite- modern-times-are-going-to-the-dogs-grumblemutter)

    Reply
  22. Pardon my curmudgeonly attitude, but I wish the networks would quit confusing “gossip” with “news”. News is how congress votes, foreign affairs, and natural disasters. Nothing about Jon and Kate Gosselin is news. Nor is what the first lady wears, or anything about Paris Hilton, or fashion week. And it’s my belief that reality TV is just a way for networks to get away without paying actors or writers. I refuse to watch any of it. (grumph,grumph, grumph,mutter,why-in-my-day-we-had-real-news-like-WalterCronkite- modern-times-are-going-to-the-dogs-grumblemutter)

    Reply
  23. Pardon my curmudgeonly attitude, but I wish the networks would quit confusing “gossip” with “news”. News is how congress votes, foreign affairs, and natural disasters. Nothing about Jon and Kate Gosselin is news. Nor is what the first lady wears, or anything about Paris Hilton, or fashion week. And it’s my belief that reality TV is just a way for networks to get away without paying actors or writers. I refuse to watch any of it. (grumph,grumph, grumph,mutter,why-in-my-day-we-had-real-news-like-WalterCronkite- modern-times-are-going-to-the-dogs-grumblemutter)

    Reply
  24. Pardon my curmudgeonly attitude, but I wish the networks would quit confusing “gossip” with “news”. News is how congress votes, foreign affairs, and natural disasters. Nothing about Jon and Kate Gosselin is news. Nor is what the first lady wears, or anything about Paris Hilton, or fashion week. And it’s my belief that reality TV is just a way for networks to get away without paying actors or writers. I refuse to watch any of it. (grumph,grumph, grumph,mutter,why-in-my-day-we-had-real-news-like-WalterCronkite- modern-times-are-going-to-the-dogs-grumblemutter)

    Reply
  25. Pardon my curmudgeonly attitude, but I wish the networks would quit confusing “gossip” with “news”. News is how congress votes, foreign affairs, and natural disasters. Nothing about Jon and Kate Gosselin is news. Nor is what the first lady wears, or anything about Paris Hilton, or fashion week. And it’s my belief that reality TV is just a way for networks to get away without paying actors or writers. I refuse to watch any of it. (grumph,grumph, grumph,mutter,why-in-my-day-we-had-real-news-like-WalterCronkite- modern-times-are-going-to-the-dogs-grumblemutter)

    Reply
  26. Sherrie, you are so right that we all are titillated by some sort of interest in our fellow beings. Human, are, after all, gregarious creatures and living close together, we can’t help but observe those around us. I think the need to gossip is one of those deep-seated traits . . . maybe like jealousy? Somehow, another person’s travails seems to make many feel better about themselves

    Reply
  27. Sherrie, you are so right that we all are titillated by some sort of interest in our fellow beings. Human, are, after all, gregarious creatures and living close together, we can’t help but observe those around us. I think the need to gossip is one of those deep-seated traits . . . maybe like jealousy? Somehow, another person’s travails seems to make many feel better about themselves

    Reply
  28. Sherrie, you are so right that we all are titillated by some sort of interest in our fellow beings. Human, are, after all, gregarious creatures and living close together, we can’t help but observe those around us. I think the need to gossip is one of those deep-seated traits . . . maybe like jealousy? Somehow, another person’s travails seems to make many feel better about themselves

    Reply
  29. Sherrie, you are so right that we all are titillated by some sort of interest in our fellow beings. Human, are, after all, gregarious creatures and living close together, we can’t help but observe those around us. I think the need to gossip is one of those deep-seated traits . . . maybe like jealousy? Somehow, another person’s travails seems to make many feel better about themselves

    Reply
  30. Sherrie, you are so right that we all are titillated by some sort of interest in our fellow beings. Human, are, after all, gregarious creatures and living close together, we can’t help but observe those around us. I think the need to gossip is one of those deep-seated traits . . . maybe like jealousy? Somehow, another person’s travails seems to make many feel better about themselves

    Reply
  31. Mary Jo, I heartily agree that the “tools” of gossip have become frightening in scope. In the regency you basicaly had word of mouth and paper/ink (newspapers, pamphlets, prints) while today, the array is staggering. Makes me glad I’m just an anonymous face in the crowd!

    Reply
  32. Mary Jo, I heartily agree that the “tools” of gossip have become frightening in scope. In the regency you basicaly had word of mouth and paper/ink (newspapers, pamphlets, prints) while today, the array is staggering. Makes me glad I’m just an anonymous face in the crowd!

    Reply
  33. Mary Jo, I heartily agree that the “tools” of gossip have become frightening in scope. In the regency you basicaly had word of mouth and paper/ink (newspapers, pamphlets, prints) while today, the array is staggering. Makes me glad I’m just an anonymous face in the crowd!

    Reply
  34. Mary Jo, I heartily agree that the “tools” of gossip have become frightening in scope. In the regency you basicaly had word of mouth and paper/ink (newspapers, pamphlets, prints) while today, the array is staggering. Makes me glad I’m just an anonymous face in the crowd!

    Reply
  35. Mary Jo, I heartily agree that the “tools” of gossip have become frightening in scope. In the regency you basicaly had word of mouth and paper/ink (newspapers, pamphlets, prints) while today, the array is staggering. Makes me glad I’m just an anonymous face in the crowd!

    Reply
  36. Gretchen, you are so right about how news and gossip has become blurred. It’s frightening, and I fear a lot of people are losing the ability to filter fact from fiction.

    Reply
  37. Gretchen, you are so right about how news and gossip has become blurred. It’s frightening, and I fear a lot of people are losing the ability to filter fact from fiction.

    Reply
  38. Gretchen, you are so right about how news and gossip has become blurred. It’s frightening, and I fear a lot of people are losing the ability to filter fact from fiction.

    Reply
  39. Gretchen, you are so right about how news and gossip has become blurred. It’s frightening, and I fear a lot of people are losing the ability to filter fact from fiction.

    Reply
  40. Gretchen, you are so right about how news and gossip has become blurred. It’s frightening, and I fear a lot of people are losing the ability to filter fact from fiction.

    Reply
  41. Who was it that said something to the effect of “small minds talk about people, great minds talk about topics”? I don’t mind uplifting stories about people who did good things, because I hope that stimulates other to do the same. But too often gossip is simply the malicious slander of petty minds jealous of others. While I enjoy good satire, we seldom see it today.

    Reply
  42. Who was it that said something to the effect of “small minds talk about people, great minds talk about topics”? I don’t mind uplifting stories about people who did good things, because I hope that stimulates other to do the same. But too often gossip is simply the malicious slander of petty minds jealous of others. While I enjoy good satire, we seldom see it today.

    Reply
  43. Who was it that said something to the effect of “small minds talk about people, great minds talk about topics”? I don’t mind uplifting stories about people who did good things, because I hope that stimulates other to do the same. But too often gossip is simply the malicious slander of petty minds jealous of others. While I enjoy good satire, we seldom see it today.

    Reply
  44. Who was it that said something to the effect of “small minds talk about people, great minds talk about topics”? I don’t mind uplifting stories about people who did good things, because I hope that stimulates other to do the same. But too often gossip is simply the malicious slander of petty minds jealous of others. While I enjoy good satire, we seldom see it today.

    Reply
  45. Who was it that said something to the effect of “small minds talk about people, great minds talk about topics”? I don’t mind uplifting stories about people who did good things, because I hope that stimulates other to do the same. But too often gossip is simply the malicious slander of petty minds jealous of others. While I enjoy good satire, we seldom see it today.

    Reply
  46. Good point about satire, Pat. I hope I didn’t sidetrack the discussion with my questions about gossip—I was actually hoping people would comment more on the prints and the artists, who were incredible commentators on society. One really can learn so much about attitudes and the ‘temper of the times” by lloking at them.

    Reply
  47. Good point about satire, Pat. I hope I didn’t sidetrack the discussion with my questions about gossip—I was actually hoping people would comment more on the prints and the artists, who were incredible commentators on society. One really can learn so much about attitudes and the ‘temper of the times” by lloking at them.

    Reply
  48. Good point about satire, Pat. I hope I didn’t sidetrack the discussion with my questions about gossip—I was actually hoping people would comment more on the prints and the artists, who were incredible commentators on society. One really can learn so much about attitudes and the ‘temper of the times” by lloking at them.

    Reply
  49. Good point about satire, Pat. I hope I didn’t sidetrack the discussion with my questions about gossip—I was actually hoping people would comment more on the prints and the artists, who were incredible commentators on society. One really can learn so much about attitudes and the ‘temper of the times” by lloking at them.

    Reply
  50. Good point about satire, Pat. I hope I didn’t sidetrack the discussion with my questions about gossip—I was actually hoping people would comment more on the prints and the artists, who were incredible commentators on society. One really can learn so much about attitudes and the ‘temper of the times” by lloking at them.

    Reply
  51. I don’t have much use for gossip. It is seldom fully truthful and often spread by someone with a grudge. I think the intrusive press has gotten way out of hand. Even celebrities have a right to some privacy and their families are definitely off limits.
    Thanks for an informative and fun post. The prints were delightful.

    Reply
  52. I don’t have much use for gossip. It is seldom fully truthful and often spread by someone with a grudge. I think the intrusive press has gotten way out of hand. Even celebrities have a right to some privacy and their families are definitely off limits.
    Thanks for an informative and fun post. The prints were delightful.

    Reply
  53. I don’t have much use for gossip. It is seldom fully truthful and often spread by someone with a grudge. I think the intrusive press has gotten way out of hand. Even celebrities have a right to some privacy and their families are definitely off limits.
    Thanks for an informative and fun post. The prints were delightful.

    Reply
  54. I don’t have much use for gossip. It is seldom fully truthful and often spread by someone with a grudge. I think the intrusive press has gotten way out of hand. Even celebrities have a right to some privacy and their families are definitely off limits.
    Thanks for an informative and fun post. The prints were delightful.

    Reply
  55. I don’t have much use for gossip. It is seldom fully truthful and often spread by someone with a grudge. I think the intrusive press has gotten way out of hand. Even celebrities have a right to some privacy and their families are definitely off limits.
    Thanks for an informative and fun post. The prints were delightful.

    Reply
  56. Patricia, I think the loss of prvacy would be just horrible, especially as i’m a bit of an introvert anyway.
    So glad you liked the prints! I find them so fascinating. But I suppose if you were the butt of their satire, you would think them every bit as intrusive as the modern-day press

    Reply
  57. Patricia, I think the loss of prvacy would be just horrible, especially as i’m a bit of an introvert anyway.
    So glad you liked the prints! I find them so fascinating. But I suppose if you were the butt of their satire, you would think them every bit as intrusive as the modern-day press

    Reply
  58. Patricia, I think the loss of prvacy would be just horrible, especially as i’m a bit of an introvert anyway.
    So glad you liked the prints! I find them so fascinating. But I suppose if you were the butt of their satire, you would think them every bit as intrusive as the modern-day press

    Reply
  59. Patricia, I think the loss of prvacy would be just horrible, especially as i’m a bit of an introvert anyway.
    So glad you liked the prints! I find them so fascinating. But I suppose if you were the butt of their satire, you would think them every bit as intrusive as the modern-day press

    Reply
  60. Patricia, I think the loss of prvacy would be just horrible, especially as i’m a bit of an introvert anyway.
    So glad you liked the prints! I find them so fascinating. But I suppose if you were the butt of their satire, you would think them every bit as intrusive as the modern-day press

    Reply
  61. Personally I wish there was more satire. We have all become so dumbed down that a clever poke at a current event or character wouldn’t sell. When we have “funny” men and women being crude rather than clever I find it a sad commentary on our appetite for humour. Thank goodness there are some people who get by with wit and intelligence like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Terry Wogan and Stephen Colbert.

    Reply
  62. Personally I wish there was more satire. We have all become so dumbed down that a clever poke at a current event or character wouldn’t sell. When we have “funny” men and women being crude rather than clever I find it a sad commentary on our appetite for humour. Thank goodness there are some people who get by with wit and intelligence like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Terry Wogan and Stephen Colbert.

    Reply
  63. Personally I wish there was more satire. We have all become so dumbed down that a clever poke at a current event or character wouldn’t sell. When we have “funny” men and women being crude rather than clever I find it a sad commentary on our appetite for humour. Thank goodness there are some people who get by with wit and intelligence like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Terry Wogan and Stephen Colbert.

    Reply
  64. Personally I wish there was more satire. We have all become so dumbed down that a clever poke at a current event or character wouldn’t sell. When we have “funny” men and women being crude rather than clever I find it a sad commentary on our appetite for humour. Thank goodness there are some people who get by with wit and intelligence like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Terry Wogan and Stephen Colbert.

    Reply
  65. Personally I wish there was more satire. We have all become so dumbed down that a clever poke at a current event or character wouldn’t sell. When we have “funny” men and women being crude rather than clever I find it a sad commentary on our appetite for humour. Thank goodness there are some people who get by with wit and intelligence like Jon Stewart, David Letterman, Terry Wogan and Stephen Colbert.

    Reply
  66. Hear, Hear, Sue. Well said. Satire is an art, and done well, as we see in these prints, it provokes us all to think—and laugh at ourselves as well as others.

    Reply
  67. Hear, Hear, Sue. Well said. Satire is an art, and done well, as we see in these prints, it provokes us all to think—and laugh at ourselves as well as others.

    Reply
  68. Hear, Hear, Sue. Well said. Satire is an art, and done well, as we see in these prints, it provokes us all to think—and laugh at ourselves as well as others.

    Reply
  69. Hear, Hear, Sue. Well said. Satire is an art, and done well, as we see in these prints, it provokes us all to think—and laugh at ourselves as well as others.

    Reply
  70. Hear, Hear, Sue. Well said. Satire is an art, and done well, as we see in these prints, it provokes us all to think—and laugh at ourselves as well as others.

    Reply
  71. A fascinating topic, Andrea. Thank you! I would love to see the collection of Regency prints at Yale. Maybe one day!
    I wrote my MA thesis on historical heroes and “celebrities”, and the topic has always fascinated me because of the parallels between the past and our present celebrity culture. There was a wonderful exhibition a few years ago at the National Portrait Gallery in London of celebrated characters from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. When I included some details from my research in one of my books, Lord of Scandal, people didn’t believe that there were such things as Regency “paparazzi” but it was all true! I particularly liked the story of the scandal-mongers who hung about the servants’ hall at Merton Place, picking up tid-bits about Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton for the newspapers!
    I’m looking forward to your new book very much. What an interesting background!

    Reply
  72. A fascinating topic, Andrea. Thank you! I would love to see the collection of Regency prints at Yale. Maybe one day!
    I wrote my MA thesis on historical heroes and “celebrities”, and the topic has always fascinated me because of the parallels between the past and our present celebrity culture. There was a wonderful exhibition a few years ago at the National Portrait Gallery in London of celebrated characters from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. When I included some details from my research in one of my books, Lord of Scandal, people didn’t believe that there were such things as Regency “paparazzi” but it was all true! I particularly liked the story of the scandal-mongers who hung about the servants’ hall at Merton Place, picking up tid-bits about Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton for the newspapers!
    I’m looking forward to your new book very much. What an interesting background!

    Reply
  73. A fascinating topic, Andrea. Thank you! I would love to see the collection of Regency prints at Yale. Maybe one day!
    I wrote my MA thesis on historical heroes and “celebrities”, and the topic has always fascinated me because of the parallels between the past and our present celebrity culture. There was a wonderful exhibition a few years ago at the National Portrait Gallery in London of celebrated characters from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. When I included some details from my research in one of my books, Lord of Scandal, people didn’t believe that there were such things as Regency “paparazzi” but it was all true! I particularly liked the story of the scandal-mongers who hung about the servants’ hall at Merton Place, picking up tid-bits about Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton for the newspapers!
    I’m looking forward to your new book very much. What an interesting background!

    Reply
  74. A fascinating topic, Andrea. Thank you! I would love to see the collection of Regency prints at Yale. Maybe one day!
    I wrote my MA thesis on historical heroes and “celebrities”, and the topic has always fascinated me because of the parallels between the past and our present celebrity culture. There was a wonderful exhibition a few years ago at the National Portrait Gallery in London of celebrated characters from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. When I included some details from my research in one of my books, Lord of Scandal, people didn’t believe that there were such things as Regency “paparazzi” but it was all true! I particularly liked the story of the scandal-mongers who hung about the servants’ hall at Merton Place, picking up tid-bits about Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton for the newspapers!
    I’m looking forward to your new book very much. What an interesting background!

    Reply
  75. A fascinating topic, Andrea. Thank you! I would love to see the collection of Regency prints at Yale. Maybe one day!
    I wrote my MA thesis on historical heroes and “celebrities”, and the topic has always fascinated me because of the parallels between the past and our present celebrity culture. There was a wonderful exhibition a few years ago at the National Portrait Gallery in London of celebrated characters from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. When I included some details from my research in one of my books, Lord of Scandal, people didn’t believe that there were such things as Regency “paparazzi” but it was all true! I particularly liked the story of the scandal-mongers who hung about the servants’ hall at Merton Place, picking up tid-bits about Lord Nelson and Lady Hamilton for the newspapers!
    I’m looking forward to your new book very much. What an interesting background!

    Reply
  76. Glad you liked the topic, Nicola. IMO, one of the wonderful things about historical research is discovering all the similarites between past eras and our own, and then using those details to show and surprise)readers that certain things are universal. But we sometimes run the risk of having people say, “Oh, that can’t possibly be accurate—it’s too modern!”
    You would LOVE the British Art Center at Yale. The study room has an amazing wealth of material. Next time you come to the U.S. we’ll take a trip there. (And BTW, that portrait exhibit came to the BAC and it was wonderful!)

    Reply
  77. Glad you liked the topic, Nicola. IMO, one of the wonderful things about historical research is discovering all the similarites between past eras and our own, and then using those details to show and surprise)readers that certain things are universal. But we sometimes run the risk of having people say, “Oh, that can’t possibly be accurate—it’s too modern!”
    You would LOVE the British Art Center at Yale. The study room has an amazing wealth of material. Next time you come to the U.S. we’ll take a trip there. (And BTW, that portrait exhibit came to the BAC and it was wonderful!)

    Reply
  78. Glad you liked the topic, Nicola. IMO, one of the wonderful things about historical research is discovering all the similarites between past eras and our own, and then using those details to show and surprise)readers that certain things are universal. But we sometimes run the risk of having people say, “Oh, that can’t possibly be accurate—it’s too modern!”
    You would LOVE the British Art Center at Yale. The study room has an amazing wealth of material. Next time you come to the U.S. we’ll take a trip there. (And BTW, that portrait exhibit came to the BAC and it was wonderful!)

    Reply
  79. Glad you liked the topic, Nicola. IMO, one of the wonderful things about historical research is discovering all the similarites between past eras and our own, and then using those details to show and surprise)readers that certain things are universal. But we sometimes run the risk of having people say, “Oh, that can’t possibly be accurate—it’s too modern!”
    You would LOVE the British Art Center at Yale. The study room has an amazing wealth of material. Next time you come to the U.S. we’ll take a trip there. (And BTW, that portrait exhibit came to the BAC and it was wonderful!)

    Reply
  80. Glad you liked the topic, Nicola. IMO, one of the wonderful things about historical research is discovering all the similarites between past eras and our own, and then using those details to show and surprise)readers that certain things are universal. But we sometimes run the risk of having people say, “Oh, that can’t possibly be accurate—it’s too modern!”
    You would LOVE the British Art Center at Yale. The study room has an amazing wealth of material. Next time you come to the U.S. we’ll take a trip there. (And BTW, that portrait exhibit came to the BAC and it was wonderful!)

    Reply
  81. Sherrie, here. Andrea, it’s the wee hours of the morning and I’m putting the finishing touches on the monthly Wench newsletter. At this late date probably no one else will read this comment but you, but I wanted to point out something that I just now noticed. It has to do with the first picture of your post–the charicature of the Prince Regent.
    I just realized that his tailcoat has a pocket in each tail, and the right tail has a handkerchief in it! I’d heard that pockets were scarce during the Regency, and of the few to be had, the tailcoat (of all things!) often had them in the tails. This is the first picture I have ever seen, showing exactly what they looked like.
    I’d been told that the pockets were located on the inside of the tail, not the outside. I’m ridiculously excited to see an actual (and contemporary) example of the real thing!

    Reply
  82. Sherrie, here. Andrea, it’s the wee hours of the morning and I’m putting the finishing touches on the monthly Wench newsletter. At this late date probably no one else will read this comment but you, but I wanted to point out something that I just now noticed. It has to do with the first picture of your post–the charicature of the Prince Regent.
    I just realized that his tailcoat has a pocket in each tail, and the right tail has a handkerchief in it! I’d heard that pockets were scarce during the Regency, and of the few to be had, the tailcoat (of all things!) often had them in the tails. This is the first picture I have ever seen, showing exactly what they looked like.
    I’d been told that the pockets were located on the inside of the tail, not the outside. I’m ridiculously excited to see an actual (and contemporary) example of the real thing!

    Reply
  83. Sherrie, here. Andrea, it’s the wee hours of the morning and I’m putting the finishing touches on the monthly Wench newsletter. At this late date probably no one else will read this comment but you, but I wanted to point out something that I just now noticed. It has to do with the first picture of your post–the charicature of the Prince Regent.
    I just realized that his tailcoat has a pocket in each tail, and the right tail has a handkerchief in it! I’d heard that pockets were scarce during the Regency, and of the few to be had, the tailcoat (of all things!) often had them in the tails. This is the first picture I have ever seen, showing exactly what they looked like.
    I’d been told that the pockets were located on the inside of the tail, not the outside. I’m ridiculously excited to see an actual (and contemporary) example of the real thing!

    Reply
  84. Sherrie, here. Andrea, it’s the wee hours of the morning and I’m putting the finishing touches on the monthly Wench newsletter. At this late date probably no one else will read this comment but you, but I wanted to point out something that I just now noticed. It has to do with the first picture of your post–the charicature of the Prince Regent.
    I just realized that his tailcoat has a pocket in each tail, and the right tail has a handkerchief in it! I’d heard that pockets were scarce during the Regency, and of the few to be had, the tailcoat (of all things!) often had them in the tails. This is the first picture I have ever seen, showing exactly what they looked like.
    I’d been told that the pockets were located on the inside of the tail, not the outside. I’m ridiculously excited to see an actual (and contemporary) example of the real thing!

    Reply
  85. Sherrie, here. Andrea, it’s the wee hours of the morning and I’m putting the finishing touches on the monthly Wench newsletter. At this late date probably no one else will read this comment but you, but I wanted to point out something that I just now noticed. It has to do with the first picture of your post–the charicature of the Prince Regent.
    I just realized that his tailcoat has a pocket in each tail, and the right tail has a handkerchief in it! I’d heard that pockets were scarce during the Regency, and of the few to be had, the tailcoat (of all things!) often had them in the tails. This is the first picture I have ever seen, showing exactly what they looked like.
    I’d been told that the pockets were located on the inside of the tail, not the outside. I’m ridiculously excited to see an actual (and contemporary) example of the real thing!

    Reply
  86. Ohmygawd, you re so observant. I mean, I saw it, but it didn’t quite register . . .I had never envisioned pockets on the outside of the tails, but it seems they did exist! I wish I could take full credit for the the “discovery”but clearly it belongs to you!

    Reply
  87. Ohmygawd, you re so observant. I mean, I saw it, but it didn’t quite register . . .I had never envisioned pockets on the outside of the tails, but it seems they did exist! I wish I could take full credit for the the “discovery”but clearly it belongs to you!

    Reply
  88. Ohmygawd, you re so observant. I mean, I saw it, but it didn’t quite register . . .I had never envisioned pockets on the outside of the tails, but it seems they did exist! I wish I could take full credit for the the “discovery”but clearly it belongs to you!

    Reply
  89. Ohmygawd, you re so observant. I mean, I saw it, but it didn’t quite register . . .I had never envisioned pockets on the outside of the tails, but it seems they did exist! I wish I could take full credit for the the “discovery”but clearly it belongs to you!

    Reply
  90. Ohmygawd, you re so observant. I mean, I saw it, but it didn’t quite register . . .I had never envisioned pockets on the outside of the tails, but it seems they did exist! I wish I could take full credit for the the “discovery”but clearly it belongs to you!

    Reply

Leave a Comment