How Edwardian was King Edward?

If, as we have seen, Victoria personally embodied the spirit of Victorianism, the brief reign of Edward VII was, in many ways, also characterized by the attitudes and habits of its monarch. In particular, the toleration of a kind of limited anarchy that violated, but did not fundamentally challenge the social status quo that is evident in much of Edwardian literature was also present in the life of Edward. As the longtime prince in waiting and then as king, Edward often flouted codes of both Victorian etiquette and conventional morality in person, but was also credited with ushering in a new kind of social order and mannerliness in British society. This tension, was well known in the press of the day and may have emboldened his peers and eventually his subjects to live their lives in the same manner; all of which has lent the era of his kingship a tone of barely restrained excess and a festive, but vaguely dissipated spirit.

Since his early life and childhood Edward had been regarded by his parents and the public at large as a somewhat unworthy heir to the great Victoria. Despite specific training that was designed to teach him to avoid “dandyism” and to “eschew gossip, cards and billiards” (Weintraub, 131) Edward still seemed unable to live up to his mother’s aspirations for him. She confided to her daughter Vicky, “he is so idle and weak…God grant that he may take things more to heart and be more serious for the future” (Weintraub, 132). This sense that Edward was an indulgent, perpetual child was also present in the public papers.
























As he grew older, the perception that Edward’s sense of propriety was distinctly different from his mother’s was reinforced time and again. Against her reputation as a devoted wife, mother and, eventually, widow Edward was known as a philanderer and, perhaps worse, an unapologetic one at that. In a particular incident in which Edward sought to visit Knole House, the stately home of Victoria Sackville-West, he inquired whether he could bring his entire entourage, male and female alike. Eventually the retinue was declined but the fact that “he had intended to bring with him not only his royal spouse, but his discarded mistress as well as his new inamorata, awed Lady Sackville” (Weintraub, 361). Gambling was also widely considered a public scourge and one which Victoria had explicitly warned Edward against as a youth. The game of Baccarat, illegal in Britain, was the centre of a scandal known as the Tranby Croft affair in which Edward was called as an “expert” witness. In the wake of the trial, “Victoria insisted that her son write a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to be made public, deploring gambling. It was an empty gesture recognized as ludicrous by readers who knew the Prince of Wales had been betting on horses at Ascot as the jury was rendering its decision (Weintraub, 323). The press had a field day with, among others, Puck featuring the following cartoon in June 1891. The list of offenses reads: “keeping low company,” “advertising actresses,” “hard drinking,” “in debt to everybody,” “loose morals,” “inveterate gambling propensities,” and “too, too, too fond of baccarat!” (Weintraub, 324).

When Edward ascended the throne early in the new century, everyone in England and much of the rest of the world anticipated a distinct change.

One of the more notable observations of the change wrought by Edward came from outside of Britain in a magazine piece written well into Edward’s reign on June 14, 1908, by the New York Times. In it the author describes the notable changes — both good and bad — that had occurred in British society under Edward’s leadership. The subtitle of the article begins, “In Various Ways the Social Restraints Characteristic of Queen Victoria’s Reign Have Been Relaxed.”

The article cites notable changes in the status at court of divorcees, observance of the Sabbath (which had prompted an unprecedented open letter from the various clergy of the high and low churches of England), and the author’s own sense that the code of honour surrounding gambling had almost completely evaporated.



The article goes on to note that while these issues seem to have developed under Edward’s kingship, there were other great improvements in the moral fibre of British society.





























It is in this article’s critique and measured praise of King Edward that we can see the manner in which the Edwardian age was a true match for the spirit of its King. At the same time as Edward privately tolerated (and personally indulged in) breaks with conventional manners, he was just as surely entrenching those manners as key to the development of the “Jolly Old England” often thought of today.

Works Cited:

Weintraub, Stanley. Edward the Caresser: The Playboy Prince Who Became Edward VII. Simon & Schuster, New York, 2001.

Too Much Information?

The entertainment of the Edwardian period was the same as that of the Victorian age, live theatre, sporting events, and fine dining, were the primary social outings for much of the middle class. These events were not marked by an influx of information regarding the world at large. However, during the Edwardian period the emergence of new electronic arts, specifically cinema and radio, provided a new way for the people to receive information about the world and the society they inhabited. After WWI, cinema and radio began to assume part of the traditional role of the newspaper and they provided news to the public in a much more engaging fashion. Newspapers did not, however, lose significant readership at this point, it would take the advent of the internet to show a reduction in the number of subscriptions. The cinema news reels produced during WWII are great examples of British propaganda and forecast the propaganda we see today on many television networks.

One significant aspect of these new technologies is the way in which they have come to affect our lives on a daily basis. By the late 1930’s the television set was available commercially and the obvious increase in viewership and the development of cable television networks made it so that news across the world could reach millions of homes in an instant. This was further increased with the development of the internet in the 1990s, and today we are literally a few seconds away from any piece of news, we hear and see it reported as it happens wherever it happens.

The Edwardians were one of the first groups to experience such a drastic change in media. The leap from print media, and to a lesser degree radio, to the visual medium of the cinema provided a plethora of novel experiences for the modern viewer. What they marvelled at, we take for granted. In our post-modern world the dissemination of news via a visual medium has been taken to the extreme, now we discover news the moment it occurs across the globe from such websites as Youtube or Digg, websites mediated by the viewers themselves. The medium has diversified to include even recorded images from the cameras in our cellphones. When the twin towers fell in New York many of us were watching the newsfeed live in our homes, imagine if that had been the case when the Titanic sank, or when the first atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Would writers like H.G. Wells or George Orwell have been surprised by the vision of the future we live in today? In this digital age we find the very world at our fingertips, far from the birthplace of such technologies that brought us to this point, but still very much related. The excess of the Edwardian period surrounds us today, however, it is not found in our immediate physical surroundings but online in the billions of ones and zeroes that provide us with the information, information we can access at any time and from virtually anywhere. But how much is too much? Furthermore, how do we discern where the truth lies in such a system?

Socialism After the Edwardian Years

Socialism grew as a political dogma in England during the Edwardian period, and throughout the world it continued to gather supporters. With the beginning of World War I many European supporters and leaders in socialist movements, including those in England, backed their government’s decisions regarding the war, and because of this many socialist groups were forced to alter their guiding principles. In England the socialist movement made great changes during and after the war. Perhaps most importantly was the difference in socialist leaders. While MacDonald and Hardie continued to influence socialist progress, they both formally resigned from their positions with the Independent Labour Party. In their place Philip Snowden took on a much more prominent role, and is credited with many significant changes in the socialist movement. Morgan describes Snowden as someone who “stressed the constitutional, political method of obtaining social change. He urged the need for socialism to have a nationwide appeal, transcending class barriers” (Morgan 108). With the outbreak of the war many Liberals in England began to see socialism as a valid ideology to subscribe to and parties gained more members than ever before. After the war socialist movements continued to dispute over the two dominant forms of socialism, political and industrial; although political socialism had been dominant during the Edwardian period, industrial socialism began to gain in popularity with such events as the Labour movement, the general strike of 1926 and the depression.
Outside of England socialism was changing form as well, most notably in Russia, where Lenin opposed the war and pushed for a revolution by the proletariats. Eventually the Russian revolution took place which changed the meanings of socialist movements worldwide. A distinction was beginning to form between socialism and communism, and political groups were forced to clearly make the distinction to which ideology they belonged, and discount the validity of the other. In the inter-war years this created tension between many socialist parties both within England and outside. With the beginning of World War II socialist and communists found a common enemy; the fascist. This union was short-lived however, and after the war ended socialist parties began to decline. Recently, since the collapse of communism socialism has re-emerged in as a potential utopia in many areas of the world. Today in England socialist parties still have a marginal presence in the far left of politics. Though their views and political ideas are not in the forefront of British politics today, socialist leaders had a tremendous impact on Edwardian politics and the years that followed. The Edwardian values allowed for the creation of such groups as the Independent Labour Party, and their presence helped to develop the affairs of state in England.

Male Fashion, Table Etiquette and the Monarchy---2008

The Rise of Male Fashion: Metrosexual 2008

With t.v. series like Strait Eye for the Queer Guy rising in popularity (or at least popular a few years ago) there has been a new focus on the importance of clothing and appearance. It is not a new phenomenon when one reflects on the Edwardian era. The terminology is really the only thing that has changed. Instead of regarding well dressed men as Gentlemen we now refer to them as metrosexuals. Our contemporary society associates being well dressed with being a homosexual or rather with being effeminate. The same does not apply to the Edwardians—in a sense. The idea of the Gentleman, according to the Oxford Online Dictionary, is this:

“A man of gentle birth, or having the same heraldic status as those of gentle birth; properly, one who is entitled to bear arms, though not ranking among the nobility (see quot. 1882), but also applied to a person of distinction without precise definition of rank.”

“A man of superior position in society, or having the habits of life indicative of this; often, one whose means enable him to live in easy circumstances without engaging in trade, a man of money and leisure. In recent use often employed (esp. in ‘this gentleman’) as a more courteous synonym for ‘man’, without regard to the social rank of the person referred to. spec. in Cricket: a non-professional player (opp. PLAYER¹ 2c).”

The idea of the Gentleman is completely based on status—so in a country where there is no class system. Gentle has to do with status and is not synonymous with careful, or feminine. It is interesting that here in Canada, where we have no class system, that we associate being well dressed with being effeminate. Gentle is generally used to describe someone who is careful. Obviously fashion associates itself with the wealthy but as I said in my previous blog a jean and t-shirt generally are appropriate for most occasions.

Table Manners Table Shamanners

This is a link to an article that appeared in Macleans Magazine in September 2006:

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060904_132508_132508&source=srch

It is titled: Here's a tip: Be nice to the waitress

The article is not really reporting anything new but it reminds me of the rule from my previous post:

“(19) Do not command, but ask a waiter if you need something. If you command, the tone of your voice will only make other people think that you were a servant at one time yourself. 20) If a servant breaks something, do not turn around to notice what it is.”

The Macleans article brings up who are the worst customers and who are the best.

“The worst customers, she says, aren't the ones you might expect. Benlolo admits to having dropped "a lot of things" on people over the years, including a tray of water glasses, but all those diners have been "amazing." Once she spilled blue cheese dressing all over a man. "He completely didn't mind smelling like sour cheese for the rest of the night." On the other hand, seemingly well-off mothers who come in with their children have shortchanged her by large amounts.”

It is surprising that the well off mother would short change the waitress and it says a lot of how Canadian society is turning. Etiquette is not just about little picky rules. Etiquette has an actual function. If everyone was rude to staff, and they could very well be, there would be no dignity or worker satisfaction and that would lead to less restaurants or at least willing staff. That scenario seems unlikely but the function of etiquette is really just treating others around you with respect. Instead of prancing around with complete arrogance people who follow the codes of etiquette treat others well. The rules about leaving with a lady on your arm or talking to the lady on the right of you are examples of showing respect to all women. No woman is left unattended and ignored if the rules are followed. In return the males are also not left out of a conversation: it makes the experience much more enjoyable and organized.

“If a gentleman is seated by the side a lady or an elderly person, it is up to him to pour their drink and obtain whatever else they might want at the table.”

It should not be interpreted as a gesture to express someone’s inability but rather one of respect. These rules are hardly known let alone understood—but it all makes practical sense.

Queen E 2:

I had a bizarre childhood: I was raised with a picture of the Queen on the fire place. I am also considerably young and I remember when the picture of the Queen was in all public buildings. If one still rides certain BC ferries there are pictures of the Queen on board and on display. The monarch is said to be our head of state but it is completely a non functioning role. It is a role of complete ceremony and tradition and many believe that it should be abolished. Arguably many people in Canada are from ancestries that are not British, many are immigrants that have no tie to the old Empire whatsoever but does that mean the Queen is not Canadian. I think it is completely part of the Canadian being. After all I am referring to Queen Elizabeth as the Queen—and those who are reading this are most likely thinking of the Queen of England and not some African tribal Queen. Also Canada’s history is relatively non-existent why eliminate it or deny it. There is also a fascination with the monarchy—stories about the family appear in our tabloid magazines all the time. The only other family that rivals the royals is the Bechhams, and they have influenced our pop culture. The Queen may only not have control but as a figure head she represents Canada’s history.

How Victorian was Queen Victoria?

One of the more characteristic aspects of the study of literature is the impulse to group works together in a kind of thematic way. In the case of the Edwardian and Victorian Ages of course the grouping is obviously linked to the beginning and end dates of the reigns of the various monarchs. What is not so obvious is whether it is in any way legitimate to link those authors who wrote while happening to live in those times. Furthermore, did those particular monarchs exert any significant influence by their own personalities on the times that have come to bear their names? How Victorian and Edwardian were Victoria and Edward themselves?

Certainly, monarchies have served to define at least the technical boundaries of an era in their own times. That Queen Victoria was the longest serving monarch of her nation could be demonstrated indisputably by the simplest calculation of dates and her Jubilees, both gold in 1887 and diamond ten years later were celebrated in high style and in a way which would have been impossible for any Londoner to have missed. Furthermore, the sway both Victoria and Edward were perceived to have over the real politics of their day seems to outstrip that of any of their successors. It is significant that Edward’s was the last era of English art, literature and culture to be named for its presiding monarch.

Also, the sense of Victoria and Edward’s reigns both signifying an “age” is further shaped by the proximity of Victoria’s death and Edward’s ascension to the throne to the turning of the century, following that auspicious date by only three weeks. The ostentation of her funeral coupled with the formal departure seemed to have a powerful effect on writers like Henry James who wrote, “I mourn the safe and motherly old middle-class queen, who held the nation warm under the fold of her big, hideous Scotch-plaid shawl and whose duration had been so extraordinarily convenient and beneficent,” to Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. “I felt her death much more than I should have expected; she was a sustaining symbol.”

Queen Victoria’s death, in fact, gives perhaps the truest insight into her life or at least how Victorian’s themselves perceived the way she herself had influenced them. That Victoria was a devoted wife and mother is obvious in her fastidious care for her children’s lives and arranging their marriages as well as her devotion to the memory of her husband Albert after whose death she wore black for the remainder of her life. But this sense of Victoria as epitomizing the domestic is evident also in the Times of London’s obituary on the day after her death. The anonymous writer summed up that: “To most of us the whole course of our lives as subjects of the Queen has been the proof of the inimitable way in which—unique woman—whose small frame was permeated, so to speak, with Royal dignity, whose home life was so simple and pure, and whose intelligence, with none of the brilliancy of her eldest daughter or of her Imperial grandson, was yet formed by work and long experience into a powerful instrument of life—has met the difficulties of the longest and the fullest reign in English history.

Though such a “tribute” may seem back-handed and somewhat patronizing (matronizing?), it is clear that from the people closest to Victoria to those who found her era repugnant she was held to be, in many ways, the epitome of her age. Christopher Clausen summarizes:

“The age itself and the widow who gave it its name still refuse, in some odd sense, to behave as though they were dead. Victoria's last private secretary wrote in his memoirs: "Never in her life could she be confused with anyone else, nor will be in history. Such expressions as 'people like Queen Victoria' or 'that sort of woman' could not be used about her." Twenty years into the century, even Strachey paid grudging tribute to the "sincerity" that, he concluded, was the source of her lasting power over the imaginations of others. "She moved through life with the imposing certitude of one to whom concealment was impossible--either towards her surroundings or towards herself. There she was, all of her.., she had nothing more to show, or to explain, or to modify; and, with her peerless carriage, she swept along her path."

Clausen, Christopher, “The Great Queen Died.”American Scholar, December 1, 2001, Vol. 70, Issue 1

James, Henry. letter, Feb. 20, 1901, to jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.. Letters of Henry James, vol. 4 (1984).

This was actually posted by Graham!

Edwardian Culture:

Fashion: http://www.victoriana.com/edwardianfashions/edwardiandresses.php

In comparison to now, the rules and expectations of clothing were much stricter. It is almost exceptible anywhere nowadays to wear blue jeans but back then clothing meant a lot. Women’s fashion gets a lot of attention but it is apparent in our novels that the men were expected to wear the right clothing all the time too. Psmith’s rants about Bistrow are a perfect example.

“I am hard pressed. The fight is beginning tro be too much for me. After a grim struggle, after days of unremitting toil, I succeeded yesterday in inducing the man Bristow to abandon that rainbow waistcoat of his. Today I enter the building, blithe and buoyant, worn, of course, from the long struggle, but seeing with aching eyes the dawn of another, better era, and there is Comrade Bistrow in a satin tie. It’s hard, Comrade Jackson, it’s hard, I tell you.” Page 145

Psmith’s reaction is quite dramatic but what is reflected throughout the novels is the sense that the visual is very important. Psmith’s apartment is also quite nice and well furnished compared to Mike’s whose is depressing. It is the extravagance of the clothing that is so important. Chesterton’s story “The Napoleon of Notting Hill” is of course set in the future but clothing was made a big deal by Quin Aberone—the selected King of England. When the King establishes the states he gives them all colours to wear. He also establishes different dress uniforms for different bureaucrats.

It is simple, people associated dressing with status and people wanted to look above their status/class. Today we are a society that can wear blue jeans everywhere to anything and no one cared…but back then it was a huge deal to be prim.

Table Manners: In Wodehouse’s “Psmith in the City” Chapter 17 is dedicated to a dinner that takes place at Mr. Waller’s House. I found a website that lists the proper rules to the dinner table. http://www.currensnet.com/ladies/tablemanners.HTM

It says its Victorian—but It also applies to the Edwardians.

Here are some that I did not know of:

Actually many of them I did not know….starting from number one:

“you leave the parlor for the dining room, pass out the door first, and allow the lady to follow you, holding your arm lightly. At the door of the dining room, the lady will drop your arm, you should then pass in and wait at one side of the entrance until she passes you. Having arrived at the table salute the lady, and she in turn, bows and takes her seat.

15) If a gentleman is seated by the side a lady or an elderly person, it is up to him to pour their drink and obtain whatever else they might want at the table.

“30) Ladies generally retain their seats at the table until the end of the feast, but if they should withdraw beforehand, all gentlemen will rise and remain standing until the ladies have left the room.”

There is a great formality to this all, it is interesting the lady gets escorted to the table and served as well. There is a certain reverence (that may be offensive) that was given to women at the time. It can be seen as sexist or reverence.

“2) Gloves are not worn at the dinner table.”

This goes back to the fashion thing---people wore gloves all the time as a part of dress code.

“19) Do not command, but ask a waiter if you need something. If you command, the tone of your voice will only make other people think that you were a servant at one time yourself.” 20) If a servant breaks something, do not turn around to notice what it is.

Once again this goes back to a class thing. The Nobility does not have insecurities—their staff’s performance does not reflect on their status. For someone to abuse their staff just shows this insecurity—and how dreadful that would be.

The site is terribly interesting and I recommend it to those who have five minutes.

Monarchy: The American Revolution was more than hundred years before the Edwardian era. Up rose a nation that defined itself as a republic (the significance that the declaration of independence has in almost everyday American life is still substantial). IN the early 1900’s Britain was losing colonial control yet the Edwardians still identified highly with a monarch. Francesco Crispi—an Italian—once said “The monarchy unites us; the republic would divide us.” There is that same feeling in Jerome K Jerome’s “Three Men in A Boat”. The local Pubs along the Thames River all used the royal visits as a way of advertisement and it worked.

The Era itself was named after King Edward. The history of England, especially after Queen Victoria, shows that a lot of powerful people did a lot of good and great things (corruption was not totally overlooked “Psmith in the City” has socialist overtones). Having a monarch is also what made Britain different from the rising USA.

Obviously there is a lot more to say, but these blatantly hit me from reading the novels. They are also incredibly different from the cultural rules we follow in Present day Canada.

Edwardians and the Cinema: Bringing the World Home to the Empire

The advent of the motion picture in the late 19th century brought a new level of interaction for the people of the world and their relationship to media. Such a relationship had, in previous times, existed primarily on the subjective level of interpretation of the reader vis a vis the word on the page or the voice on the radio. With the emergence of film as a new medium for conveying information, the once static pictures of the newspaper began to come to life on the silver screen. Some of the first films presented in England were those made by the French Lumière brothers, they were usually presented as part of travelling Cinematograph or Kinematoscope shows. Many of their films depicted scenes of everyday life, workers leaving a factory, or the arrival of a train. People would line up and pay their money to watch snippets of everyday life from across the Channel.
Around the turn of the twentieth century, a pair of men from Lancashire, James Kenyon and Sagar Mitchell, began producing films which captured the essence of Edwardian life. Some were similar in nature to the Lumière productions, films which showed factory workers leaving work at the end of the day, however, some of their films had a greater cultural relevance, films like the Bradford Coronation Procession (1902), which displays the city’s celebrations to mark the coronation of King Edward VII, show the pride of Empire which was evident throughout England at the time.
As with other emergent mediums, film was viewed at first as a novelty with no practical purpose outside of simple observation and documentation. Kenyon and Mitchell’s films might prove this, however, as the industry grew it became increasingly clear that film could also inspire and inform the general public, be it through retellings of true stories or fictional narratives. This does not diminish the importance of Kenyon and Mitchell’s collection of films as important documents of Edwardian culture, untainted by any kind of narrative flair or convention of the cinema which followed.
The emergence of such a medium at so crucial a time in human history cannot be overlooked. Film was another step in the rapidly increasing industrialization process. As the Lumière brothers show in their film La Sortie de l'Usine Lumière à Lyon which displays factory workers heading home. Although the films of the early twentieth century were predominantly separated between narrative and pure documentary, cinema evolved throughout the years to provide historical documentation not only of the events that were occurring but also the way in which the films were presented to their audiences. The news reels commonly shown during World War II were cast in such a patriotic light so as to spin the war in Britain’s favour, regardless of whether they were victorious in their endeavours or not. Such propaganda greatly aided the war effort. Unfortunately, very little film of World War I still exists, some of what does exist can be viewed here and here.

Edwardian Politics: The Rise of Socialism

The Edwardian era marked significant transformation in British society, and political views in Britain became more diverse due to the rise of new Liberalism, trade unionism and socialism. Kenneth Morgan separates socialism from the other two movements by describing it during this time; “there was an emphasis upon collectivism, upon the positive and benevolent role of central government in combating social and economic evils such as poverty, slum housing, malnutrition and unemployment” (Morgan 93). Though socialism made its largest growth after the First World War, groups such as the Fabian Society, the Social Democratic Federation and the Independent Labour Party began to increase in numbers, and create a stronger presence in the Edwardian political scene. As P.G. Wodehouse alludes to in his novel Psmith in the City, socialism was only beginning to be discussed in public spheres, and the majority of people were critics during this time. Wodehouse’s character Mike represents this part of the population when he remarks that socialism is “a rum business” (Wodehouse 112). Many major politicians openly denounced socialism and attacked the idea saying that it would undermine capital and enterprise on which Britain’s wealth depended. Since Socialism faced many opponents during the Edwardian period its supporters were forced to utilize alternative methods of spreading their message. One of the most prominent means of spreading socialist ideas was through publications such as The Clarion, and later, the Daily Herald. The main tribulations facing the rise of socialism during this time were the inconstancies among the different socialist groups, as the three major forms had various internal problems. Of the groups the Independent Labour Party had the greatest political impact, and influence over the socialist message at the time.
The Independent Labour Party’s success during the Edwardian period can be partly attributed to the extraordinary leaders that it produced. Men such as Ramsay MacDonald, Keir Hardie and Philip Snowden were noted to be the leading figures in gaining converts to socialism during the Edwardian period. All three individuals published works about the socialist movements, and were said to be able to inveigle entire crowds of people with their charismatic speeches. Of these men Ramsay MacDonald stood out as the most influential leader of Edwardian socialism. He was recognized for his quasi-Darwinian vision of socialism, and he advocated a peaceful evolution which rejected the Marxist style of class war. MacDonald was also noted to attract young middle-class intellectuals to the Independent Labour Party, which had huge long term benefits for their cause. MacDonald was also acclaimed with the success of making socialism a practical reality in parts of London where municipalities took local ownership of water, tramways and other utilities. Internationally MacDonald was also known, as he and Hardie travelled widely to spread their message of a peace movement, which was to become even more popular after the horrific events of World War I. MacDonald’s main critics argued that he occasionally abandoned the ideals of socialism in order to collaborate with other political ideologies such as radical liberals on wider issues. Despite this criticism MacDonald was one of the leading figures in laying the foundations of socialism in Edwardian England. After the First World War socialism became one of the leading political ideologies, and men such as Ramsay MacDonald were credited with the success of making socialism recognizable as a reality rather than a utopian dogma.