Please welcome author Abigail Reynolds to Hist-Fic Chick today for a guest post on love and marriage during Regency England, titled “The Perils of Writing Historical Fiction”! Abigail is the author of By Force of Instinct, Impulse & Initiative, From Lambton to Longbourn, Without Reserve, and Pemberley by the Sea. Her latest installment in the Pemberley Variation series, Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy: The Last Man in the World was just released by Sourcebooks this month. Abigail is a physician and a lifelong Jane Austen enthusiast. She began writing The Pemberley Variations series in 2001, and encouragement from fellow Austen fans convinced her to continue asking “What if…?” She lives with her husband and two teenage children in Madison, Wisconsin. For more information, please visit: http://pemberleyvariations.com/
Guest post by Abigail Reynolds:
The Perils of Writing Historical Fiction
I don’t mind much if there are historical inaccuracies in books I read, as long as the story is good. But for some reason, when I pick up my pen to write, I feel like the world will end if I show Darcy drinking brandy when he should be drinking port. I can spend hours researching some trivial historical detail, even though no matter how hard I try, I’m still going to miss things because nobody can really know what everyday life was like in 1812. But I try.
Normally this is a matter of picking the right kind of furniture or using the correct terms for different rooms. In Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy: The Last Man in the World, it became a huge dilemma. It’s a variation on Pride & Prejudice where, to avoid scandal, Elizabeth Bennet accepts Mr. Darcy after his insulting proposal at Hunsford. Most Regency women had to marry whoever their father told them to, so it’s a realistic scenario.
Now comes the problem. I live in 2010, and the idea of marrying and sleeping with a man I hate sounds like a nightmare to me. That’s because I was raised in a culture that values a woman’s right to choose her lovers, and I’d consider it a violation to have to submit sexually when I didn’t want to. But there are plenty of other expectations that come with modern marriage that don’t bother me because they seem normal. Most modern women wouldn’t consider it a violation if their new husband expected them to do the laundry, even though it’s an imposition on them. It’s not that women like doing laundry; it’s just an expectation that seems normal to most of us, so we don’t object.
In 1812, a girl could expect that her husband would have sex with her whether she wanted to or not. It was even legal, along with his right to beat her with a stick as long as it wasn’t thicker than his thumb. I’m not saying it was okay, just accepted. Elizabeth Bennet wanted something better from marriage, but still would see that as a normal situation and not as a violation.
It’s one thing to understand that intellectually, but a different matter to put myself in her head for those early days of her forced marriage. In Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy: The Last Man in the World, I ended up skimming over the wedding night because I just couldn’t put myself in her shoes. My Elizabeth didn’t particularly like her wedding night; she was uncomfortable afterwards, but she doesn’t blame Darcy for what he did. In fact, she’s grateful that he was gentle and concerned for her comfort. By her norms, that’s going beyond expectations. She still holds plenty of things against Darcy – his scorn for her family, his pride, and her belief that he cheated Wickham out of his living – but she doesn’t hold it against him that she has to have sex with him. It’s like doing laundry, not particularly pleasant at times but not insulting or damaging.
At the same time, I had to find a way to make both Elizabeth and Darcy appealing to a modern reader. This is a love story between two of the most beloved characters in history, after all! I’ll leave it to you to decide how well I succeeded, but I think this is my most romantic book because it shows how love can triumph even in a difficult situation. Readers tell me that seeing Elizabeth and Darcy triumph together gave them a new faith that it could be done in their own lives.
Of course, whenever I talk about historical accuracy, somebody always points out that in some of my other books, Elizabeth and Darcy have premarital love scenes when everybody knows that wouldn’t have happened then. I was sure of that once myself, before a couple of Regency historians sat down with me after my first book and beat that belief out of me. Regency engagement and marriage had different meanings then than they do now. Engagement was public and legally binding – that’s why a woman could sue for breach of promise – and the wedding was more a celebration. It’s as if engagement then was the equivalent of a modern wedding, and the Regency wedding was more like a modern wedding reception in its meaning. Nobody today would think there was anything immoral about a couple making out or having sex between their wedding and the reception, right? Rude, maybe, but not immoral. Regency women were very careful about staying untouched before engagement, but after that, as long as they were discreet about it, nobody really cared what they did. I’m talking about the upper and lower classes here – the growing middle class saw it somewhat differently, but that’s a different story.
Thanks for inviting me!
MR. FITZWILLIAM DARCY: THE LAST MAN IN THE WORLD—IN STORES JANUARY!
Synopsis: In this sexy Jane Austen sequel, Elizabeth Bennet accepts Mr. Darcy’s first marriage proposal, answering the “What if…?” question fans everywhere have pondered
“I had not known you a month before I felt that you were the last man in the world whom I could ever be prevailed on to marry.”
Famous last words indeed! Elizabeth Bennet’s furious response to Mr. Darcy’s marriage proposal has resonated for generations of readers. But what if she had never said it? Would she have learned to recognize Mr. Darcy’s admirable qualities on her own? Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy follows Elizabeth and Darcy as they struggle to find their way through the maze of their prejudices after Elizabeth, against her better judgment, agrees to marry Darcy instead of refusing his proposal.
Two of the most beloved characters in English literature explore the meaning of true love in a tumultuous and passionate attempt to make a success of their marriage.
Great post, and on a fun subject! As Hist-Fic-Chicks tht many of us are, we like toharp on historical accuracy.. and some others say HEY it's FICTION!!I would never in a million years have caught the port vs. brandy thing.. but some others would.Always a fun subject to talk about Darcy and Lizzy as well.. I love having Darcy be a rogue, moreso than the hero. And Lizzy should buck up and swat at him, but then again.. 1812 is vastly different nowadays. And in reading Abigail's book, I wanted to swat at both of them =)For those who would like to see another Guest Post from Abigail see one at The Burton Review =)Good luck to Abigail with her Pemberley Variations!
You're completely right about how daunting historical fiction can be to write… this is THE reason that I've not gotten further in my own writing attempts. I am so afraid I will get the little details wrong. I also agree about the character mind-sets. So many authors put 21st century minds in their historical characters and it's very annoying to read. I love Austen spin-offs, so I'll look for The Last Man in the World when I'm out book shopping! Great article!
Wonderful guest post! I thoroughly enjoyed reading the differences between marriage in 1812 and marriage today. Best of luck to Abigail with her tour and new release!
I think this is such an interesting guest post, Abigail. Marriage was so different then! It seems to me that whereas today sex before marriage is accepted in society, but it was shunned back then–yet affairs after marriage were very common, but they are frowned upon today (at least in America – I can't speak for the French!). Nowadays, sexual intercourse against one's will constitutes as rape, regardless of if the offender is the victim's husband. Someone would undoubtedly have laughed at you in 1812 if you claimed your husband had raped you! I always get goosebumps when I read about young girls being placed in forced marriages…I'm reading O, Juliet by Robin Maxwell right now, and young, pretty Juliet is meant to be married off to a horrible, gross man with rotting teeth and wretched breath named Jacopo. I feel so horrible for her, and for every other young woman throughout history (and in novels) who is made to marry a man they despise. It's so fascinating to take an institution like marriage and compare it now vs. then. Unfortunately, I fear that in many areas of the world, these antiquated views of marriage still exist. I saw a feature on Opra the other day called "Marriage Around the World". She interviewed women in Egypt, Denmark, India, and even a mail order bride from the Ukraine. I don't usually watch Opra regularly, but I found this episode really informative on how different cultures interpret marriage.Thanks so much for your input on all of this, Abigail!
I haven't read any of the original Jane Austen books or the variations (I did see Pride & Prejudice tho). Even so, this guest post was fascinating and funny. Thanks.
Fantastic guest post Abigail! I didn't know that about Regency engagements and weddings…very interesting! And I agree – if the story is good, I can overlook a few inaccuracies, as long as they aren't too ridiculous!To be honest, I'm not much into the Austen spin-offs, but I think I would like to try this one. Thanks for this Allie and Abigail!
Amy and Arleigh – I completely agree re: inaccuracies in historical fiction.One that I simply could not forgive that immediately springs to mind…(which was a huge disappointment to me, as I respect this author as an incredibly accurate historian in her nonfiction titles) in Carrolly Erickson's book The Hidden Diary of Marie Antoinette, she has MA jetting off to Sweden with Axel Fersen (no, not literally in a jet, but still!). C'mon! And then in The Secret Life of Josephine, she has Josephine as a child climbing rocky cliffs in order to visit a mystical voodoo doctor in the woods. I think it is fine to stretch history, even to the point of having to suspend belief a bit (i.e. Maxwell's Signora da Vinci where da Vinci's mama dresses up like a man), but there was no way the Queen of France could feasibly be whisked off to another country on vacay with her lover, unnoticed. Nor would little Josephine be climbing mountainous peaks on Martinique. Those were instances where the altering of history was just too unbelievable to me.I think I could definitely let the brandy vs. port issue slide! I wouldn't have even known that brandy would be inaccurate – but I can see how as an author writing about history, the little details like that might gnaw at you.
Abigail,I have not yet read any of the variations, but I did read Pemberley By The Sea and I enjoyed it a lot. I have your variations on my list of books to read though. Allie, I'm enjoying your blog a lot. I'm new to the blog world and don't completely know what I'm doing yet. Yours I find amazing.
Very informative guest post! Abigail really knows her stuff. The norms of the Regency times would be very hard for a modern woman to adapt to (did anyone see "Lost in Austen"?)!Allie, I have an award for you here:http://thetruebookaddict.blogspot.com/2010/01/awards.html
Allie – I couldn't agree more about Carrolly Erickson's book on MA… it was a real let-down… that character of hers who when from lady's maid to die hard revolutionary was a bit out there too. I have 5 of her non-fictions and I actually have not read them yet, but I've asked about the Josephine one and it was not recommended. I will judge for myself soon enough… I really want to start the one on Victoria.
Abigail, what a very interesting comparison of the expectations of sex vs. laundry in Regency times vs. now. I've also skimmed over things where I couldn't put myself in a character's shoes. But I try hard not to insert 21st century values/thought into my writing. It can be a challenge, can't it?I *really* enjoyed this post, thank you.
Gosh, I wanna read that new novel. Great writing about the perils of writing historical novels. I learned from it.
Very interesting post. I did not know the difference between engagement and marriage was so big. It all makes sense now. I will be sure to check out your books because I like the What if scenarios.As far as historical inaccuracies, unless it's glaring, I don't even notice. It's the story and characters that count for me.Great post.