An Elegant Madness: High Society in Regency England: A Social Hist: Amazon.de: Venetia Murray: Englische Bücher

Amazon.com

Regency England was, according to Venetia Murray, a "glorious paradox": High society placed a premium on civilized living, yet vulgarity, gluttony, and moral vicissitude were considered fashionable--and socially acceptable--vices. In An Elegant Madness, Murray examines this polarity, providing readers with an accurate, entertaining, easy-to-read portrayal that conveys the mood of the period, focusing primarily on the oft-paradoxical social practices and attitudes of the English aristocracy.

Generally understood as a 50-year period beginning, as with the French Revolution, just before the dawn of the 19th century, Regency England (or, more precisely, its uppermost stata) remained, in many ways, oblivious to and safely distanced from the ravages of the Napoleonic Wars consuming the continent. The tone of society, according to Murray, tends to be set by its titular head; thus, the paradox and political detachment of the Regency Period emanated primarily from its leader, the Prince Regent. The carefree Regent, who would reign as King George IV from 1820 to 1830, was known not only as "The First Gentleman of Europe," but also as a dedicated hedonist, drunkard, and lecher. Elegance and vulgarity characterized the rest of the English aristocracy, as well, and Murray's chapters clearly illustrate how Regency high society appropriated for itself the same duality as their leader's. Her chapters, each a freestanding study of its own, examine fashions of the period, the (exorbitant) cost of living, London high society, clubs and taverns, the common practice of taking a mistress, the country home, and the seaside resort. She embellishes her study with cartoons, prints, and caricatures of the period, all of which contribute to our understanding of this unique period of English history. --Bertina Loeffler Sedlack -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine vergriffene oder nicht verf�gbare Ausgabe dieses Titels.

From Kirkus Reviews

Glittering and gossipy, an extravagant panorama of the ``Age of Scandal''. Describing a period where manners were all, morals nothing, and money useful but not essential, novelist and social historian Murray (Castle Howard: The Life and Times of a Stately Home, not reviewed) lightly surveys the English aristocracy's and beau monde's best time since the Restoration. The habits and hobbies, fancies and finances of Regency bucks and beaux, debs and ``demi-reps'' (i.e., courtesans) may be fodder for bodice-buster novels, but the facts are no less sensational, at least at the top of society's upper crust. The Prince Regent, the future George IV, arguably had more taste (both good and bad) than any other monarch and set the tone for the bon ton with reckless spending, architectural extravagance, sartorial ostentation, an irregular love life, and gluttonous appetitesubjects addressed here in titillating detail. In Nurrays account, these characteristics of his count for more than, say, his ties with radical politics or his succession scheming during the Regency Crisis. Likewise, among his friends, Beau Brummel, the era's best-dressed gentleman, counts for more in these pages than Charles James Foy, the brilliant but dissolute opposition politician, and in the historical calendar of events, the Grand Jubilee of 1814 gets more space than the ``Peterloo'' massacre during food riots in 1816. With a top-heavy but otherwise wide-ranging array of observers and informants, Murray's sources include the mandatory Lord Byron and Lady Caroline Lamb as well as Captain Charles Gronow and the busybody Princess Lieven of Austria, plus the archives at Windsor and Chatsworth. Murray ends in cautioning her reader that the Regency Era was not merely ``a glamorous chimera,'' but like any good gossip, her book cannot help gravitating to the era's diverting aspects. A social historywith the emphasis heavily on the socialboth frivolously entertaining and assiduously researched. (16 pages b&w illustrations, not seen) -- Copyright ©1999, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved. -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine vergriffene oder nicht verf�gbare Ausgabe dieses Titels.

Alle Produktbeschreibungen

Kundenrezensionen

5 Sterne

4 Sterne

3 Sterne

2 Sterne

1 Sterne

17 Rezensionen

3.1 von 5 Sternen

Kundenrezension verfassen

Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen

4 von 4 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich

Check the Sources - this book is alarmingly bad 19. April 2000

Von Filicity

Format:Gebundene Ausgabe

Wow - this book as elicited quite a few reviews hasn't it? I was really interested in reading it as I love this period, but I read the reviews here carefully and wondered about the seeming huge polarity in popularity of the book.

I didn't really know much about the Regency times and would have quite happily accepted the rave reviews - it is after all a pretty book. I was very interested in the detail in some of the reviews here which cited specific problems with Murray's sources - so I checked out the books. Its pretty easy to get hold of Roger Fulford's book "the Royal Dukes" - which Murray says she used as a source for her book - and lo and behold she has misrepresented events.

I then had a look at the a few Brummell biographies in my library including the one she has in her bibliography - and again - Murray misrepresented and misdated events.

What other events has she misdated or mis-represented in this book? I guess I could continue looking - but I have since thrown the book out in disgust.

I guess I just prefer authors who are accurate.

Kommentar |

War diese Rezension f�r Sie hilfreich?

Nein

1 von 1 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich

There are so many good books on the Regency - not this one 10. M�rz 2000

Von Harriet Ponsonby

If people want a good book on the life and times of the Regency I would strongly suggest something like Amanda Foreman's excellent book 'Georgiana' or Stella Margeton's 'Regency London' or Priestly's "Prince of Pleasure". But don't read this book.

Venetia Murray is clearly cashing in on the popularity of the Regency Market. She doesn't seem to know or understand the period so while the book might sparkle with good prose it is flat on fact. Now shouldn't that be what a non-fiction book should have as its primary concern? Fact? Sure make them nice to read, but they should be factual.

I see someone in a previous review has suggested that people who have written negative reviews must have some kind of agenda - or be amateur historians. Well there is that. I mean how do you know what reviewers backgrounds really are?

Well, unless you know the period well I would suggest that Murray's book is quite convincing. But it is her attention to detail that lets her down - and has caused her to make so many mistakes and to misinterpret events. I would suggest that the easiest way to confirm this for yourselves is a quick look through the index at the back of An Elegant Madness.

There are people that she hasn't fully named - they are just surnames - if she knows who these people are, why hasn't she fully named them. Check an index on a Hibbert book, or Amanda Foreman or any other reputable author and you will see a full name entry - with title and often with dates of birth and death.

Murray hasn't even bothered to match the correct pages in numerous cases - so looking for 'Hazlitt' she claims in the index that he is mentioned on pages 19, 24, 112, 128, and 277. Well a check through the book only shows him appearing on page 19. For the Earl of Barrymore she has two pages noted - but the Earl doesn't turn up on page '52' as she says - but I stumbled across him on page 42.

For one entry in her index where she mentions two pages - on one page the person is said to be the Duke of Wellington's nephew - on another he is the Duke's brother. Well he wasn't both...they are in fact two different people she is referring too.

Yes, I know, everyone is saying 'but this is a readable why worry about the index?'

Well the index is so bad....so very very bad....it is an easily demonstrable indication of just how terrible Murray's standards really are. This standard of workmanship and attention to detail is evident throughout her whole book and reflects the level of attention she gave to her own research.

I just think there are so many really good Regency Books out there that there is no need to waste reading time on something that is just going to mislead. Another excellent read apart from the one's mentioned above is Christopher Hibbert's "George III".

Read something else - not this. I have left my email address on this message and people are welcome to contact me further if they have any questions - or wish to discuss with me the plethora of errors that litter this book.

Entertaining, if not terribly accurate 18. April 2000

Von Michael J Edelman

Format:Taschenbuch

This book caught my eye on a display, and I bought it more out of curiosity than from any great desire to know the intimate details of the upper classes of the late 18th and early 19th century. I'm not terribly knowlegable on the history of the Regency, so I can't really comment on the accuracy of the history, but it is an entertaining read. It also manages to illumintate some of the social history of a critical point in modern history- the transition from a mercantilist agragrian society to a modern market-based one. It's not unlike reading Paul Johnson; the author may not have a terribly good grasp of the details, but there's an interesting narritive nonetheless.