Hello! Id like to premise this by saying sorry if this is a dumb question or the wrong place to be posting it. I'm new here. I have a question about using a monarchy in my story. My story takes place in Victorian London, but in a sort of alternative universe with magic ....etc. Assuming it takes place around 1850 - 1890's the monarchy of England would have been Queen Victoria. For my stories sake, I sort of wanted to make the king or queen part of the villainous group opposing the hero. BUT I'm not really into making a person who was actually Queen at one time a villain ... and so comes my question. I really want to specify that the story takes place in London and have landmarks such as the River Thames, Jacobs Island and Big Ben....etc. However was wondering, would it be weird to make up a fictional King or Queen - one that didn't exist in history - and use them in my story instead of Queen Victoria, but in very real London? I very much realise this might be perceived as a stupid question as 'if its a fictional story, you can do whatever you want, and create any world you want.' However I just felt that maybe for readers, having a real place such as London and a made up monarch might be contradictory and people might think it would have been better just create whole new city/ world entirely. I'm from London and really pumped to base the story here, but was interested on what people thought. Sorry for my jumbled thoughts.
If it is an alternative universe with magic I think people will understand a change to a different monarch. I have written short stories similar. Many authors seem to do this for real people, such as in Harry Potter the Prime Minister was simply refered to as Prime Minister, which gives it a more timeless feel. It will also allow you to create a more in depth villian as you can do it from scratch rather than tentatively make guesses about what an evil Queen Victoria would do. In summary: I don't think a new world is needed for this, have fun making a new royal villian!
Why not? If George IV or William IV had any legitimate sons, Victoria wouldn't have become Queen. Yes Prime Minister used entirely real locations, but all the characters were fictional.
I don't see why you cannot make a very real London with fictional characters. As the other replies state, Harry Potter is a prime example of this. With the fictional and magical characters set in a charming London atmosphere which then turns into Hogwarts, a totally fictional castle, Rowling created her very own magical world with London roots. Rowling quickly showed how magical her world was by having Dumbldore and Mcgonagall drop off harry at his aunt and uncle in a very magical way. This set the stage for the entire series. Roughly a page into each novel, Rowling reinforced this magical atmosphere by having magic either happen or be mentioned before thrusting the reader back into the magical world of Harry Potter. So create that royal villain, infuse London with magic, and make your tale worthy to be placed upon the bookshelf of life.
I'd say go ahead and make a fictional monarch. However, you probably need to make it very clear to the reader that this IS an alternate universe, and that the monarch in question is NOT Queen Victoria. Otherwise, you might have a lot of people angry and upset.
I can't imagine a world where any writer would desecrate the beloved memory of our Victoria, and I speak for the colonies as well when I say that. I have included a short educational video
Apologies for another dumb question. But do you think I need to explain why the blood line of the royal family we know doesn't exist anymore? Or do you think I could just ignore it, and outright say John smith (or whatever my villainous king's name will be) is the king with no explanation? I want the character to play an essential part in the story and I don't feel like I can just call him 'The King' like Harry Potter nicely does with 'The Prime minister'
There are a number of stories ans movies doing this monarchy-exchange without any explanation. So unless there ist some important detail in the why I wouldn't bother too much
I agree with @SpokenSilence , you can change your monarchy without an explaination, it unfortunately may be too info dumpy and take people out of your story for many but if you personally want to make a family tree so you know the world's inner workings, go ahead ^^
Anyway, there's absolutely no reason why you can't have an evil Queen Victoria if you wish. None of the current members of the House of Saxe-C0burg-Gotha will complain. And believe me, none of your readers will, either.
If you artfully insert the bloodline here and there, maybe a character bemoaning the times of the father or whatever that would be fine. Just don't make the king evil for the sake of evil. Pay just as much attention to your villain as you wou would the hero. Find out what makes the villain tick. Why is he evil? What turned him evil? Does he justify his actions with the illusion of what is best? What makes him sleep at night? You don't have to share this info all at once. Sprinkle it in like salt on on a tasty dish. Show it in his actions, in his decorations, his attitude. Lace it in whenever you can but avoid the info dump at all costs. No one but the writer wants to read pages of character background dumped onto pages. Feel free to dump information in a file for your own use but pick and chose carefully for the information threat the reader needs to know to understand you're villain. A great way to show a wicked ruler is how he treats those who he finds valuable, which is well, and those who he thinks is a waste of space, which is terrible. Will he torture the waste or will he make their death drawn out and sheer agony? Here is a suggested book to read. Rayne Hall Writing about villains it is where I learned how to make my villain into one that is cruel but has his reasons. Thour became a villain that my testers love to hate. if you cannot afford it send me a PM and I will give you her email so you can reach out to her and offer to review her book in return of copy. Just make sure you have the kindle app and send it to whatever portable you have. I always tweet her to make sure she gets it. She's an extremely nice lady and even wished me a happy birthday one year!
I question the setting. The UK in the mid 19th century was a parliamentary republic like it is now. The reigning sovereign could influence legislation but not dictate it. And why does the villain have to be the King or Queen? Could it not be an heir or a Minister in the government just as easily? Just seems to be not well thought out....
The UK is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, not a republic. There is plenty of fiction that posits that the monarch has more actual power than what is publicly displayed or acknowledged. There's no reason why this setting shouldn't work - it's been done before, not least by those who believe the Queen ordered the death of Princess Diana.
A republic is where representatives of the electorate - eg MPs - control the government. A parliamentary form is where a subset of the legislature forms the government. But still I have reservations about the setting. Better to go back a bit further and veer from history to make it more plausible, like what Randall Garrett did with his Lord Darcy stories.
A key characteristic of a republic is where the head of state is NOT a hereditary monarch. Despite what you may have seen in Britain of late, MPs do not control the government.
