Music and mischief were the chief draws of Vauxhall Gardens. I’ve come a long way from the days when I played classical music on the cello, and I’m not as mischievous as I used to be. But within the past decade I’ve become addicted to country music for its sometimes whimsical humor. The first time I heard Confederate Railroad’s Trashy Women I almost went off the road.
Yeah, an' I like my women just a little on the trashy side,when they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.Too much lipstick an' er too much rouge,gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.An' I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
Boswell wrote this of Vauxhall: “There being a mixture of curious show---gay exhibition---music, vocal and instrumental, not too refined for the general ear.” No one could ever call the above lyrics refined as they touch upon the virtues of bold, brassy women. Then as now, some gentlemen preferred a woman who knew her way around the Dark Walk. The true Vauxhall Vixens were the ladies who lurked in the shrubbery. Vauxhall was a notorious assignation place, and could be dangerous to the innocent. Soldiers were hired to patrol the grounds in the days before a police force.
Nowadays historical novels are chock-full of not-so-innocent courtesans, widows and experienced women, and I, for one, am happy to see it. Reading and writing about seventeen year old virgins can be tiresome. But there’s still a backlash against a “fallen” woman in romance. Accordingly, most fallen women in fiction haven’t fallen very far. Verity in Anna Campbell’s fabulous Claiming the Courtesan had just three lovers---an older man who was more mentor than stud, a young man who was more puppy than hound, and Justin. It is assumed that a “normal” man had every right to satisfy his sexual desires; only an “abnormal” woman would have followed suit.
How do you feel about a heroine who’s said “yes” to one lover or more before “I do” to the hero? Is she realistic in historicals? Or do you want your heroine to be a feisty 30 year-old virgin, thus meeting the maturity and purity requirement?
What men desire is a virgin who is a whore. ~Edward Dahlbert
Yeah, an' I like my women just a little on the trashy side,when they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.Too much lipstick an' er too much rouge,gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.An' I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
Boswell wrote this of Vauxhall: “There being a mixture of curious show---gay exhibition---music, vocal and instrumental, not too refined for the general ear.” No one could ever call the above lyrics refined as they touch upon the virtues of bold, brassy women. Then as now, some gentlemen preferred a woman who knew her way around the Dark Walk. The true Vauxhall Vixens were the ladies who lurked in the shrubbery. Vauxhall was a notorious assignation place, and could be dangerous to the innocent. Soldiers were hired to patrol the grounds in the days before a police force.
Nowadays historical novels are chock-full of not-so-innocent courtesans, widows and experienced women, and I, for one, am happy to see it. Reading and writing about seventeen year old virgins can be tiresome. But there’s still a backlash against a “fallen” woman in romance. Accordingly, most fallen women in fiction haven’t fallen very far. Verity in Anna Campbell’s fabulous Claiming the Courtesan had just three lovers---an older man who was more mentor than stud, a young man who was more puppy than hound, and Justin. It is assumed that a “normal” man had every right to satisfy his sexual desires; only an “abnormal” woman would have followed suit.
How do you feel about a heroine who’s said “yes” to one lover or more before “I do” to the hero? Is she realistic in historicals? Or do you want your heroine to be a feisty 30 year-old virgin, thus meeting the maturity and purity requirement?
What men desire is a virgin who is a whore. ~Edward Dahlbert
18 comments:
I had to think about this for a while. First I had to get the image of Monty Python out of my head (they’re the only ones besides you and my husband, Maggie, who I’ve heard use the word shrubbery!), then I thought about it.
My heroines by no means need to be 17 year old virgins for me to enjoy the story. On the other hand, I’m not too fond of an author trying to write a feisty, experienced woman, but instead giving her the words and actions of a modern day woman. To say women had a lot less freedom, even 50 years ago, than we enjoy today is a gross understatement. So, to write a woman in 1815 with 2008 sensibilities would pull me out of the story.
Virginity, heck even marriage, doesn’t seem to be as big a deal today (although I can see conflicts in contemporaries also), but not being a virgin back then was serious stuff. Making a good marriage and bringing to that proof of your virginity meant the difference between a life of luxury or poverty. I guess I would like the consequences or at least the internal conflict to be written appropriately. That being said, I have read historicals with an experienced woman and it’s been done well. As with every other aspect of the story… if the author is good (and we all know a lot of really good ones!) I’ll buy just about anything.
I don't mind non-virgins. Probably prefer it in contemp reading... historical. I'm sure it happened more often then people thought. Those women were sent to live in a nunnery, or abroad or deep in the country to have babes... before they rejoined society, if their family were the forgiving type. Sure many of the young misses were virgins... but lets talk Georgian period... they were a naughty bunch...
Great quote Maggie. I've read it somewhere else before... maybe on one of your blogs in the past. I love it.
Irish, I love to make people think! I totally agree--- I'm sick of reading about 19th century women w/21st century personalities. All this talk lately of "I'll never marry because then I'll give up my 'freedom' but I'll sleep with the hero to find out what sex is all about" irritates the heck out of me.
I know Loretta Chase is coming out with an experienced woman story, and if anyone can make a bad girl sympathetic, it will be LC.
Tiff, I didn't plagiarize from myself, honest! I found the quote for this post. But it does reflect the whole virgin/whore dichotomy that I've addressed somewhere before. Sometimes I think we women are damned if we do and damned if we don't. But I'd really like to read a book about a woman who is comfortable with her sexuality---a female rake book, if you will. Without VD, of course! *g*
I don't have any requirement for a virgin in historicals, but I think it's hard to expect them to be "too" experienced with all the external pressures not to do it.
The stakes were high for them. VD that could kill you, premarital pregnancy that could ruin you, stripping you of your chance to marry and find yourself in a comfortable situation.
I think when modern writers disregard those strictures, the novel starts to feel contemporary instead of historical. Those things are what make historicals, well, historical. I don't mind bending a bit, but disregarding is never good.
I like more experienced women in my novels, too. I don't mind the virgins but what draws me out of the story is when the virgin is totally clueless. As in what do you mean I'm pregnant? What's that thing hanging between your legs, my lord?
I just want to shuck the book at her then.
I wish though that some authors if they're going to write an experienced bad girl don't have her to try and explain her past experiences. The men don't.
I can handle a woman with a past in a historical but not if she's young, unmarried and on the market for a catch. Maybe it did happen that way back then but I just prefer the stories to keep it clean until the heroine finds her hero.
Now, if she's widowed, that's different. A weathly widow playing around I can understand. Like Grissy in the Essex Series. And I would consider Esme a female rake of sorts. Until she found Sebastian.
In contemps, I have a hard time believing a woman anywhere over 21 being a virgin though one not having had good sex until finding the hero I can totally believe. Totally.
True about the 21st century heroines in the 19th century settings. I can't stand modern heroines in the past. Unless they are time travel...lol! Cause I do like those...
I can deal with a 21 year old virgin. what drives me nuts is when an author only writes virgins, and all of the 28 year old variety.
Judith Ivory's Sleeping Beauty, Adele Ashworth's Winter Garden, Diane Gaston's The Mysterious Miss M all feature experienced heroines who are credible and appealing heroines. As for the virginal heroine, I think Eloisa James did a wonderful job of capturing in the character of Josie Essex the blend of curiosity, innocence, and nature that seems completely reasonable and real in a regency-set historical.
For me, everything depends upon the writer's skill. I have no problem even with the virgin over 21 in a contemp if the writer gives her a story that makes her situation credible. Such a heroine would not be unusual in inspirationals, for example, where religious convictions determine the heroine;s choice. What I do find unrealistic in any contemp and in many historicals is a heroine who is totally ignorant of sex and unaware of her own sexuality.
Thoughtful responses, everybody. I think I remember reading somewhere that historical authors were turning to writing contemporaries for virgin-avoidance. As they were maturing, it became increasingly more difficult to stay interested in innocence. And the usual age range---the 30 year old rake and the 18 year old in her first season can have an ick-factor, too.
Loretta Chase had a fascinating post up yesterday on Word Wenches that talked about Harriette Wilson and the life of a courtesan. You can click to it from our link on the sidebar.
The newest thing I'm working on now features a woman who risked all for love. I don't want her to feel any guilt or shame. It's tricky though. She really is a virtuous woman, LOL.
I should clarify it's not that IRL I expect any woman over 21 to be active. LOL! *I* was still a good girl at 21. I was just sort of picking a number I guess.
I think Janga hit on more of what bothers me. The contemp woman in her 20s or older who doesn't know anything about sexuality. Not that everyone knows or even understands everything but I can't imagine a 30 year old not wanting to have sex because she thinks it's going to *hurt*. But then sex and sexuality were never a closed subject in my family so that might just be my take on it.
BTW - thanks for putting the Madonna song in my head. Must get that out...
*Kissed for the very first time*
See, I can buy some contemp. heroines being virgins b/c not because they haven't wanted to do it or they fear it hurts, but perhaps the opportunity never presented itself to them.
What I find hard to belief is that your reading a particular kind of heroine and then all of a sudden Ms. Geeky becoems Heidi Fleiss.
I think 19th century women should act like 19th century women. 19th century women who thoughtless speak back with 21st century ideals...who are a bit too worldly for their supposed knowledge, bothers me.
I am a 21st century girl--therefore my knowledge about sex was not non-existent, but MY mother's idea of telling me about the birds and the bees involved giving me a very uninformative, boring book...and said, "If you have any questions...ask your sister." I mean, seriously. I was born in 1975! During the sexual revolution! And this is how I got my sex education?
Therefore Regency-bred lasses who are far more blase about sex than I can be, modern girl I supposedly am, is annoying.
Of course, reading book after book after book of the tepid virgin who asks with wide-eyed sincerity: "Will it fit?" *does* make me laugh and roll my eyes. Yes, ding-dong, it's going to fit...so shut up already. If this were really 1815, you wouldn't be looking anyway--and his idea of foreplay would have been tugging back the covers on the bed!
Great topic. I like reading about heroines who've had some experience - even good experience - before the hero. Whether they're widows or just ladies with an unfortunate indiscretion in their pasts. All my heroines thus far have been relatively young and virgins, but they're all aware of their sexuality. I think what does bug me, and what I completely can't identify with, is the 20-year-old virgin who has never felt any "stirrings of desire" until the hero flashes her that devilish grin. I'm okay with incomplete understandings of sex (although the "will it fit" discussion gets old for me, too), but for a woman to be completely unaware of her own sexuality and a total stranger to feelings of desire...that never rings true to me. That smacks of hormonal deficiency! Unless she's a victim of some abuse or something, and is in denial rather than simply unaware.
Hellion said: "...and his idea of foreplay would have been tugging back the covers on the bed!"
That is what I think was more the norm! It cracks me up, I'm wondering how many guys were totally clueless about women's sexuality. We read about these sexually experienced heroes when I think the opposite was more the case. I'm not saying they were mean or cruel (although I'm sure there was enough of that to go around), but just ignorant. Maybe that is why EJ's "Your Wicked Ways" is such a favorite of mine. I think there were more Rees than Maynes. I'm sure not a lot of fathers pulled their sons aside and gave them the talk and told them to make sure they took their wife's feelings and needs into consideration! LOL
no they didn't irish.. their whores were for that. and seriously less foreplay would have been the norm because they weren't as clean back then. baths were most likely not a daily observance in all households. need I say more?
Eeeewwww. TIFF! See, that's when historicals get too realistic. *LOL*
Post a Comment