Regency look or Georgian?

Hi, Jo here, comparing and contrasting Regency and Georgian ladies' fashion.

I've been interested in the Regency since my teens, but that was entirely because of Georgette Heyer. At that time I didn't distinguish between the Georgian (ie 18th century) novels such as These Old Shades and The Convenient Marriage, and the Regency, such as April Lady, Sprig Muslin etc. If I had, I'm sure I'd have voted for the Georgian, because even then I adored the peacock men, the hooped silk gowns, and the atmosphere of sophisticated decadence.

On the subject of clothes, there's me as a teenager with my sister the nun. They left habits behind fairly soon after that, thank heavens. That was taken in the 1960s, the only other period that favored high-waisted dresses, but it's caught me in a suit. It was a very mannish, very tailored suit I bought from a charity shop. Once I'd cut the skirt well above the knee it was great. The one on the right is of me in a high-waisted dress. I don't like it much.

I don't think a high-waisted style is flattering to many, which is perhaps why, throughout history, it rarely catches on. For one thing, the waist is very important in female allure.

If we look at Regency fashion plates, I don't see a style likely to flatter many women, and the high breasts would be uncomfortable for most because of the corsets needed to achieve that.

Years ago, people would say they liked Regency fashion because women back then didn't have to wear corsets, but we now know that isn't true. For the fashionable look, a lady had to wear one, and a substantial one, too, which could restrict movement as much and perhaps more than the Georgian stays.

Why more? Just my deduction, but when the appropriate look is flattened breasts, light garments achieve it reasonably well. They were called jumps. (See right.) When the look is breasts at armpit level, there's no way to achieve it without heft, including wide shoulder straps that make it impossible to raise the arms above shoulder level. See the right hand example in the picture on the left.

However, the belief that women could enjoy the freedom of a gown over a shift perhaps helps with the appeal of the Regency.

What do you think?

Another matter is hair. We all know the stories of the extreme hair fashions of the later part of the 18th century, when fashionable ladies wore feet high constructions which were kept in place so long that mice took up residence. I'm sure that was as common as Regency belles dampening their skirts so they'd cling to their bodies.

Oddly, the 1960s also saw high hair such as the beehive look, achieved with serious back-combing and loads of strong hair-spray. Thank heavens that soon gave way to the long, loose look. But is there a connection between rising waistlines and rising hair?

The Georgian period is long and for most of it hairstyles were rational. See the lady with the jumps. I chose to set my Georgian romances, the Malloren World books, in the 1760s in part because I liked the hairstyles.They did powder their hair for court and some other major events, but not all the time. The neat hair look is obvious in my favorite period portrait, which is from the 1760s, and which I think is perfect for my character Diana, Countess of Arradale and Marchioness of Rothgar.

Isn't that a more gorgeous look than the Regency on the right? Mind you, if you click on that to enlarge it, you'll see her skirt is almost transparent! However, enlarge "Diana" and look closely and you'll see she's flashing a nipple. Strange goings-on.

Here's a French fashion plate from the early 19th century that compares the latest look, on the left, with the older style on the right. The lady on the right is dressed for court rather than every day, so the contrast isn't entirely fair, but for fantasy and fun I'd rather play dress up in the old style than in the new.

What about you?

In my opinion the Georgian look works for any age, whereas the Regency style best suits the young.

Agree or disagree?

Jo

 

 

 

Comments

[ElizabethMoss1]

Definitely Georgian. With my enormous tummy, I would have looked a complete freak in a thin Regency muslin. But all those Georgian overskirts and hoops and lace bows would have been the perfect disguise for the rounder figure. :)

[Mel Stuart]

For me Regency, I find the Georgian look a bit too fussy and complicated, plus I always fancied myself as Lizzie Bennett. I love the high waisted look too(which may be becuase I'm short and it makes me look taller), I'm now sorely in need of a visit to the V&A after this conversation.

[Joan M Wilson]

oh the regency definitely. I would look s much like a football. As yu know how short I am.
Joan in Canada

[Patricia Rice]

The Regency "nightshift" look certainly works better on young, sylph-like figures, but not all gowns were that diaphanous. Practically speaking, while the Georgian gowns were all a girl could want for the prom, I wouldn't want to have to kick them around all day. Or clean them.

[Mary Robinette Kowal]

Very much Regency. Corsets weren't required, which is why you can see the nipple in that painting above.

Even if you did opt for corsetting, they were commonly short stays which feel pretty much like wearing a bra.

Having been to a lot of events with Regency and Georgian re-enactors, I think the Regency dresses tend to be more flattering on plus size women.

[Susan/DC]

Some of the Georgian dresses are gorgeous, but I think for everyday I prefer the Regency. Something about the simplicity of line and the way the fabric drapes. I do love the lacy sleeves of the Georgian, however, because they make the lower arms and hands look so graceful, and the way the bodices frame the bust is also quite lovely. Definitely prefer both of them to the mid-victorian, however, which was generally far too fussy and often in highly unflattering colors (even the word puce is ugly).

As for period clothing, I definitely recommend the current exhibit at the Hillwood Museum in Washington DC, Pret a Papier. It is life-sized dresses made all of paper, mostly Georgian in style but others through the 1920s. The dresses are stupendously detailed and lovely, and I practically wore out the battery on my cell phone taking photos. The website is hillwoodmuseum.org, if anyone wants to look.

[joanna bourne]

This is telling -- the "Georgian look works for any age, whereas the Regency style best suits the young".

We need only look at Rowlandson's prints to get some idea of how a fashionable group of women might have actually looked.

The young and slim can wear anything. (I'm thinking miniskirts here.) I hope the middle-aged of 1802 practiced modest restraint, many layers of underclothing, and nice sturdy cotton fabrics.

Susan -- what a lovely exhibit that looks. Someone had a great deal of fun creating that.

http://www.hillwoodmuseum.org/whats/exhibitions/pr%C3%AAt-%C3%A0-papier

I do wish museum sites would take close up and detailed pictures, declare the images creative commons, and post them in a library at the site for researchers of the future.

[Jo Beverley]

Jo here. A leaning toward Regency, I think.

Pat, I'm not sure there'd be much difference between Regency and Georgian for fabric hanging around the legs. Not if the Regency style was realistic, with a petticoat and a fairly full skirt of substantial fabric.

Jo

[Jo Beverley]

Mary, I'm not sure I agree with you on the corsets. The nipple showing is above the stays. The fashionable Georgian stay flattened the breasts but also pushed the top part up. Generally the stay and bodice did cover the nipple, but sometimes only just.

All the Regency corsets I've seen in museums were much more substantial than bras. Most fit down to the hips. The big difference between the two periods is the cups. Regency style has cups and thus emphasises the roundness of the breasts. Georgian style doesn't.

That's as I understand it, anyway.

Jo

[Jo Beverley]

Susan, thanks for the reference to that exhibit.
And Joanna, thanks for the link.

Jo

[Julie]

I love the fabric and the luxury of the Georgian period. The Regency (and I lived thru the late '60's & early 1970's) high wasted styles ONLY suit the tall and slim. For short, heavy and big busted women, we all looked pregnant. I don't have much of a waist but I still dress to create the optical illusion that I do! Would have loved the Georgian clothes!

[Jo Beverley]

Julie, I'm with you. It's true that a full skirt, especially with a hoop or crinoline creates a waist even if the lady doesn't have much of one.

Jo

[theo]

I'm with the Georgian camp. I wore a regency style to prom one year (that's the dress I was still trying to finish sewing as my date was knocking at the door) and though the dress was pretty and I was tall and thin enough to pull it off, I was never comfortable in it. I just didn't feel it was flattering. No shape. No feminine appeal or silhouette. Just...straight.

Give me the corset, the tiny waist, the wonderful huge skirts any day. Those make me feel female.

[Margot]

I'd definitely go for a Georgian dress any day. They just seem so much more fabulous :D Besides which, I definitely lack the figure for high-waisted dresses.

(Although to tell the truth, my number one pick is Georgian men's clothing. I don't like wearing skirts and dresses very much, but I love full-skirted coats.)

[Isobel Carr]

I’m far fonder of the Georgian than the Regency for re-enacting, so I’ll totally agree. Anyone can look good in 18th century style clothing. It’s about fit. For Regency, you have to have the right build (which I did in my youth, alack not anymore, LOL!).

I love the hair in the Georgian era too (with the exception of the 1770s). My favorite though is the 1780s “hedgehog”. It’s actually pretty flattering on most people.

And I’m with Jo, corsets were ABSOLUTELY required in the Regency (and as far as I can tell from period sources, the short stays were for loungewear, similar to jumps, not for wearing under gowns). You simply can’t get your breasts into the right location and shape for Regency without a corset, and I know a LOT of women who’ve tried). When I teach my Regency wardrobe workshop, I include pictures of women in Regency gowns both corseted and uncorseted, and the difference is obvious.

[Mary Jo Putney]

Jo, I loved the pictures of you when you were young! Also like you, I only vaguely differentiated between Heyer's Georgian and Regency novels--but to the extent I did, I preferred the Regencies. Go figure. *G*

As for the clothes--I really wouldn't want to wear either! I much prefer loose trousers. Loose everything, really. I was never fond of girly clothes, much less corsets.

[Ella Quinn]

I like both Regency and Georgian. What I don't like is Victorian. Isobel Carr brought Regency stays, the long version, to the 2012 Beau Monde Mini-conference and it was not at all tight. The look was supposed to be natural.