Read Royal Romances: Sex, Scandal, and Monarchy Online
Authors: Kristin Flieger Samuelian
Tags: #Europe, #Modern (16th-21st Centuries), #England, #0230616305, #18th Century, #2010, #Palgrave Macmillan, #History
the “did she or didn’t she” question and to evade it in a continual
tease. Caroline calls her love for Algernon “a chaste, mutual, and
disinterested love” (173), a “refined and virtuous passion” worthy of
Rousseau: a “primitive love . . . an affection natural to honest minds”
deserving “not condemnation, but applause” (172). But she also tells
10.1057/9780230117488 - Royal Romances, Kristin Flieger Samuelian
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 110
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 110
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
Th e N o v e l , R e g e n c y, D o m e s t i c a t i o n o f R o y a l t y 111
her daughter, in language loaded with recognizable markers and even
semi-steamy details, that she “made no shew of affected resistance”
but “committed” herself to Algernon’s “protection,” flinging herself
“ upon his honorable, though heaving breast” (172). So what hap-
pened? We don’t know, but we feel as if we do. The scene offers both
the voyeurism of the roman à clef and the intimacy of the epistolary
mode. Like Rowlandson and the authors of the Florizel and Perdita
novels, Ashe gives his readers the thrilling sensation that they are
peering around the bed curtains of royalty, while also inviting them
to identify with the individual character-narrator.
The Spirit of “the Book”
evokes form partly to exploit it and partly
veConnect - 2011-04-02
to call attention to form’s slipperiness. When Ashe names the report’s
algra
familiar title within his own, he draws on its identification as a material
object that circulates and that has a narratable sequence: all familiar
markers of a book. Yet the success of his project depends on the Book’s
romso - PT
failure to meet these criteria. The report is not narrative, although it
is possible to infer a story, or several stories, from it. It is a collection
lioteket i
of depositions that fail to prove the Princess’s adultery but describe
a mode of living in which adultery might be expected to flourish. It
sitetsbib
is a document with a legal meaning (“not proven”34), and it is also
juicy reading. So juicy is it that the Book’s salacious details override
its legal meaning. In providing benign explanations for those details,
and linking these explanations in a coherent sequence, Ashe connects
narratability with legality: the Book’s truth is now consistent with
the pleasure it offers the reader.35 And that pleasure is available to
any reader with fifteen shillings or a library subscription. The Book,
on the other hand, never circulated as any bestseller must. Printed
veconnect.com - licensed to Univer
privately and then suppressed, it was not even seen by the public. It
was a name: a book that one holds in one’s mind as a concept, not in
.palgra
one’s hand as an object. Like money that has been taken out of cir-
culation, or like a bank note without gold backing, it does not stand
om www
for anything except itself. Ashe offers to reintroduce, and maximize,
the Book’s value by printing one remaining copy. His plan to publish
originates in a version of the “found manuscript” narrative. He makes
a fortuitous discovery that demonstrates his discernment, claiming
yright material fr
to have “obtained” from the printer “a sight of the rough sheets in
Cop
succession as they were printed off” (
Memoirs and Confessions
III.
83). Even this is unlikely, but the advertisement in the
Phoenix
makes
a bolder claim: that Ashe “has access to one of the extant copies”
(quoted in
Memoirs and Confessions
III. 87). Whether this threat is
directed at Perceval or Erskine, Ashe certainly expected to be bought
off: having refused to pay him for his writing earlier, Perceval—or
10.1057/9780230117488 - Royal Romances, Kristin Flieger Samuelian
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 111
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 111
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
112
R o y a l R o m a n c e s
someone—will now have to pay him
not
to publish. When this plan
does not work, Ashe instead recirculates the content of the Book as its
“spirit,” simultaneously evoking the Book’s essence and reiterating its
materiality. Ashe’s novel will supply—and unite—form and content
and will restore the gold backing to the scraps of paper that make up
the Book.
When The Satirist calls
The Spirit of “the Book”
“an imposter book”
and suggests that only by knowing “the character of the man” can
we know how to read it, he is arguing for an idea of fraud as some-
thing that cannot be contained within a single system. Ashe/Anvil is
an imposter: an alias (i.e., a criminal), not an esquire (a gentleman),
veConnect - 2011-04-02
a plagiarist and trickster rather than an author. And, if he is not an
algra
author, then it follows that his book is not a book. People who regu-
larly use aliases are imposters. Blackmailers who threaten to publish
documents they do not have are imposters. Bank notes represent-
romso - PT
ing cash that does not exist, or representing transferable property of
nonexistent payees, are imposters. And books that promise to provide
lioteket i
the “true” story of events about which their authors know little are
imposters.
sitetsbib
But imposture, as Russett points out, is not opposed to authorship;
linking forgery narrative to “the Shelleyan account of creativity as the
recovery of a buried inspiration” (29), it is built into the process of
romantic-era textual production. The Satirist insists on this connec-
tion with his reiteration of the root word. To impose meant not only
to exploit credulity by making a false representation; it also meant
to work in the production of printed documents. An imposer (or,
earlier, impositor) laid the stereotype plates on the imposing stone
veconnect.com - licensed to Univer
of a press and secured them so that sheets could be printed in order.
Both words are derived from the Latin
imponere
, to impose. To be
.palgra
an imposter is to be a producer of texts. Not just Ashe’s, then, but all
novels are imposter books. The novel engages “the reader’s sympathy
om www
with an unreal personality” (Russett 15). In epistolary novels like
Ashe’s, that unreal person is the supposed writer of letters that were
never meant for our eyes. If the “editor” is the privileged recipient of
the documents, the readers are the privileged voyeurs. But epistolar-
yright material fr
ity in Ashe’s novel is a self-conscious convention. Unlike the “spirit,”
Cop
these letters are never intended to be taken as anything but fiction.
They are only a means of rendering the spirit. And the spirit inheres
in two elements of the text, the truth of which the Satirist contests.
On one hand, the spirit consists of the “facts” of the case: the
story to be culled from the commission report. Here, as the Satirist
points out, Ashe simply takes rumors and events that have already
10.1057/9780230117488 - Royal Romances, Kristin Flieger Samuelian
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 112
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 112
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
Th e N o v e l , R e g e n c y, D o m e s t i c a t i o n o f R o y a l t y 113
been reported and fabricates plausible (in some cases barely) and
vindicatory explanations for them. But the spirit consists also in the
psychology behind the events; the emotion that generates, inspires,
and provokes the letters and gives them their peculiar character. In
allowing us to listen in on a mother’s impassioned confession to her
daughter, Ashe gives us a carefully delineated portrait of royalty. His
likeness is as intimate as any of Rowlandson’s or Gillray’s. The differ-
ence is that, where their portraits offer intimacy as a means of dimin-
ishing the stature of their subjects, Ashe’s is intended to elevate the
stature of his readers. He offers them not just a likeness
of
but a like-
ness
to
royalty: She may be a princess, but she feels just as you do, and
veConnect - 2011-04-02
now you can know—and own—her innermost thoughts.
algra
The Satirist aims to explode to the presumption behind this affec-
tation of showmanship. Ashe is a self-aggrandizing fool, not a confi-
dante of royalty. His failed attempts to inflate his own consequence
romso - PT
(whether through blackmail or forms of imposture) reveal the impass-
able distance between him and the subjects he pretends to know. He
lioteket i
cannot know the Princess, not only because he has never met her
or read the document he claims to summarize, but also because the
sitetsbib
portrait he offers is obviously false. Ashe’s Caroline is true to a fictive
ideal, the heroine of sensibility. She is false, however, to the pattern
of maternity that the Satirist assumes a princess must match. This
is where the superimposition of Ashe’s epistolarity becomes clear. It
takes two to make a letter a letter. An epistolary novel need not tell
as much about the recipient as about the writer of the letters, but it
perforce implies something about the relationship between the two.
Pamela’s letters to her parents reveal her confidence in them, and
veconnect.com - licensed to Univer
that confidence exemplifies the bourgeois familial ideal that she will
bring to a marriage with her social superior. Florizel writes to Perdita
.palgra
because he is hoping to bed her. Her responses are constrained by
similar expectations. The erotic charge of the letters provokes readers
om www
to imagine the relationship to which they allude. If they write
such
things to each other, what must their actual encounters have been
like?
If Caroline’s letters reveal a relationship, it is one the Satirist
yright material fr
repudiates on ideological grounds. She makes her daughter her con-
Cop
fidante and shares details of erotic encounters with both her lover
and her husband. This point alone discredits the entire production,
because no mother worthy of the title—and certainly no princess of
England—would write so to her daughter: “Reader, this requires no
comment. Only recollect that the daughter to whom this ribaldry
was addressed, was then scarcely
fourteen
years of age, and that it
10.1057/9780230117488 - Royal Romances, Kristin Flieger Samuelian
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 113
9780230616301_05_ch03.indd 113
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
10/22/2010 6:04:02 PM
114
R o y a l R o m a n c e s
is the Princess, whom this author affects to
defend
, that is made to
utter it!!!” (323). The Satirist doesn’t need to explain the imposture
here; the letters can reveal no truths because the relationship they
construct is a false one.
Ashe’s letters reveal a forgetfulness of audience, despite the repeated
“my Charlotte’s” with which they are peppered. Caroline not only tells
her daughter things that a fourteen-year-old girl perhaps ought not to
know,36 she also lectures her on topics, such as the constitution of her
grandfather’s government and of her own family, that a reader would
expect a princess already to know. Charlotte’s malleability, or invisibil-
ity, as an addressee is a function of the unapologetic awkwardness of
veConnect - 2011-04-02
Ashe’s vehicle, one he assumes will not trouble his readers overmuch.
algra
Ashe needed a way to get his material in front of the public, and let-
ters from a mother to a daughter had a solid generic lineage. They
also derive verisimilitude from the public knowledge that Caroline
romso - PT
and her daughter were living apart, despite her objections.37
In pretending to assume that Ashe meant us to believe the factual-
lioteket i
ity of the letters, the Satirist shifts the terms of Ashe’s offense against
the royal family. His book is now an imposter because it reveals the
sitetsbib
Princess to be no true mother. And, if no mother, then no princess:
“to such a letter he has had the villainy to affix the
forged
signature of