I think it's a matter of perspective. It was when the first realistic or modern style literature appeared, and books themselves went from being decoration for libraries and carriage trade goods to something everyone read. Novels that explored social problems and concerns were popular and initiated movements for change. I doubt the world was a nice place before the mid-late 1800s but if you are limited to dry historical facts and fictional literature meant for consumption by the upper classes, you wouldn't know it.
Hi, Not being hugely knowledgeable of history I'd just point out a few things. First during the Victorian era was when books started being printed for the masses - not talking the Gutenburg press here, just pointing out that writing and reading were on the upswing during those years with a much greater proportion of the country being literate. If more books are being written and more people are reading them, and it's no longer a pass time of the rich, then there's going to be more information about those times available for authors to work with. So pre-Victorian I would guess is neither romanticised nor denigrated so much simply because there was less writing around at the time to work with. While during the Victorian era with this huge upsurge in reading and writing you get both the warts and all society shown by Dickens and the romanticised works of say the Bronte's. Second, when I think of the Victorian era I think more of the late Victorian, after Vic's hubby had died and when the entire country seemed to go into mourning for decades. When everything was proper and there could be no thought of scandal etc, and even piano legs had to be covered. However early Victorian as I understand it was a much happier time. The optimism of the queen it seemed filtered through from the queen to the people, and when her hubby died so did it. Third and this may be most important on how we view the period, when we look back at times we often want to use rose coloured specatacles, and this would be particularly true for the decades that followed Vic's death. You've got to remember that what followed was war, WWI not the Bohr war, and when countries are at war or recovering from its aftermath looking back twenty to seventy years to a long period of peace has to seem a little dreamy. And of course after WWI was the great depression in the US just to add to the misery of the people. Is it any wonder that they might consider their past a great literary escape. Cheers, Greg.
Mmm, I'd question this analysis. You are lambasting all literature for doing the Victorians a disservice in particular, but you are only focussing on certain types of novels. Surely it's about focus! Sure, the Regency and Georgian periods look great from the perspective of a Regency romance or a Jane Austen novel, but that's because they are focussed on one small aspect of society; gentry getting married and having babies! And yes, the Victorian period is going to look corrupt, immoral and poverty stricken from the novels of Charles Dickens and Elizabeth Gaskell, but the purpose of these books was as a social commentary, not a light romance like Jane Austen. Whatever your personal opinions on whether the period is a good or bad time to live, surely each historical novel is meant to say something different, ie. The Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Kay Penman - oh, weren't the Tudors mean about Richard III vs. William Shakespeare's Richard III - Richard was corrupt and illegitimate, wasn't Henry Tudor great? Not all novels are going to say the same thing about a historical period, and you are only ever going to find a historical novel that reflects your views and opinions on a certain time period unless you write it yourself! But in all honesty, I can understand it is frustrating seeing what you feel is an inaccurate portrayal of a time period. For me, it's Medieval England. Sure, there was the legal capacity for Lords to be cruel to their serfs, their peasants, their children, their animals and their wives, but did this mean that every single one of them was? Just my two cents!
What is unfair? Just read "The Condition of the Working Class in England" by Engels or take a peek at those early photos of London slum...
The "unfair" relates to the popular perception of Victorian England in comparison to other periods. As other contributors have said, this is in part due to the expansion of the popular press and writings during the nineteenth century. It is the lack of information about the realities of life in the periods immediately preceding the Victorian age that I think slews the view held by many.
Outside of Steampunk... Victorian England was portrayed so negatively because of how repressive the society was. In this society you were expected to conform to such a strict concept of normality that even a mild deviation from the norm would get you ousted by society. Even something as small as getting a little too drunk at a bar could get you fired and effectively black listed from ever working in your field. This period was also very sexually repressive. This was a time where showing any sexual desire was heavily looked down upon. children clothing was designed to not make it possible to masturbate and bicycling with girls was strictly prohibited because it could cause pleasure (actually does the opposite, but not the point)
I am not entirely sure whether Victorian-style depravity existed before, although I assume it did. In any case, there's a compelling historical record of Dostoyevsky visiting London in 1862. and writing a dismal review of the place. He wept at the sight of child prostitutes, the zombified hungry poor, the sheer opulence, debauchery and cruelty of the filthy rich etc. He was deeply shocked at what he saw in an apparently civilised city, he might have called London a sore on the face of a civilised society or something to that effect. And he never returned to London after that. So I believe Victorians were especially depraved and deeply entrenched in a very cruel class system, the remnants of which we are still seeing today (albeit in traces).
history can be portrayed in any way..suffering,glory but what never changes from one era to the next is just an opinion wright or wrong..even if you lived through it your opinion is personnel to you alone.
Are you happy with the world we live in today? I think you are correct in what you say, that the seeds were in the industrial revolution. I think history will judge our own period harshly. There is so much violence, mistrust, inequality, unemployment, prejudice and genuine suffering everywhere in the world, including Europe and the USA. Every winter old people have to choose between food and heating and some die every year from cold in the UK. Homeless people are seen in every town and there are high suicide rates, so very sadly particularly amongst the young. It is not difficult to focus on the negative aspects in any period, or the positive, and to tell the truth in either case!
