Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Worst Sexual Terminology

Susan Holloway Scott
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: July 2010

Post by Susan Holloway Scott » Tue July 20th, 2010, 7:08 pm

Michy, I've wondered that, too. Though my knowledge of English kings isn't all-encompassing by a long shot, I can't think of any others besides Charles who received such a super-stud reputation as part of national pride. (Anyone else suggest one?)

What's interesting in Charles's case is that when he's praised most for his virility, he's usually in popular favor or just done something particularly king-ly -- his navy wins a battle, say, that sort of thing -- but when his people and Parliament aren't happy with him -- his navy loses a battle, and he's spending too much money on mistresses instead of ships -- then the poems and other scurrilous press starts describing Charles's faltering penis with great glee. So you get this curious balance of Good Government=Amazing Studly Erection with Bad Government=Impotence. Try imagining THAT on CNN....!

SonjaMaire, thank you for the welcome! I'm so glad to hear you enjoy my books and in spite of the "bad girl" heroines. *g*

Misfit, that is some quote! Sex scenes are always a challenge to write: one person's thrilling passion is another's smut, or worse, gigglefest. But I hadn't yet thought of the venison angle....*g*

User avatar
Ken
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 633
Joined: April 2009
Location: Truro, Cornwall, UK

Post by Ken » Tue July 20th, 2010, 7:33 pm

As one who has to shyly admit to being super over-endowed (I have to tuck my sceptre into one of my socks to keep it warm in winter), I can sympathise with writers who have to describe their heroine's first encounter with such a monster! Well, actually no, I can't. I'll leave that up to you!!!! ;) :o :o

User avatar
Michy
Bibliophile
Posts: 1649
Joined: May 2010
Location: California

Post by Michy » Tue July 20th, 2010, 7:52 pm

[quote=""Susan Holloway Scott""] I can't think of any others besides Charles who received such a super-stud reputation as part of national pride. (Anyone else suggest one?)

[/quote]

Perhaps it's because Charles had so many mistresses and fathered so many illegitimate children? I know the same could be said of many kings, but maybe the "mood" of Charles' court further fostered his reputation as a randy stud, more so than a lot of other kings - ? But your description of how his virility seemed to vary according to national events makes me think that, yeah, it probably had a lot more to do with his persona as king rather than with actual fact. I mean, how many of his courtiers and mistresses would go on record as saying anything that wasn't incredibly flattering?

User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Tue July 20th, 2010, 9:19 pm

Misfit, that is some quote! Sex scenes are always a challenge to write: one person's thrilling passion is another's smut, or worse, gigglefest. But I hadn't yet thought of the venison angle....*g*
Heh, you should have seen what the author (Annette Motley) did in another part of the book with Catherine the Great trying to consummate her marriage with nutty Peter ;)

Funny how Charles is always idolized in most novels, but in Norman's The Vizard Mask he's quite a different, almost unlikeable character. And his usual side-kicks have quite a nasty side to them.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

User avatar
EC2
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3661
Joined: August 2008
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Post by EC2 » Tue July 20th, 2010, 9:19 pm

Hi Susan and welcome to the forums!

Henry I had over a score of illegitimate offspring. but a chronicler commented that it was because he really loved children that he begot them. He wasn't doing it for the fun of it or because he fancied a bit. Heaven forbid! Nor was it tied into anything to do with national success etc. The tone was perhaps slightly defensive if anything...
Les proz e les vassals
Souvent entre piez de chevals
Kar ja li coard n’I chasront

'The Brave and the valiant
Are always to be found between the hooves of horses
For never will cowards fall down there.'

Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal

www.elizabethchadwick.com

User avatar
Michy
Bibliophile
Posts: 1649
Joined: May 2010
Location: California

Post by Michy » Wed July 21st, 2010, 3:18 pm

[quote=""EC2""]a chronicler commented that it was because he really loved children that he begot them. He wasn't doing it for the fun of it or because he fancied a bit. [/quote]

Um, sure. So, I wonder what it was about children that King Henry I loved so much? Changing diapers? Teething? Yeah, right....

Anyway, this is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. Now I know the true origins of political spin doctoring! :p

User avatar
EC2
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3661
Joined: August 2008
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Post by EC2 » Wed July 21st, 2010, 5:33 pm

[quote=""Michy""]Um, sure. So, I wonder what it was about children that King Henry I loved so much? Changing diapers? Teething? Yeah, right....

Anyway, this is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. Now I know the true origins of political spin doctoring! :p [/quote]

Well the church had to say that he only did it for the love of children because that was the only reason you were supposed to have sex in 12thC Christian Europe - to procreate. I'm sure that wasn't always the first thing in people's minds, but it was the party line. I think Henry I may well have deliberately sought to get his partners pregnant in order to have a host of willing minions to help run the country, rule the church and to make useful marriage ties. So I think the chronicler might well have been telling the truth. Henry did love children - not in a goo-goo way, but in a rubbing the hands, who can I marry this one off too sort of way... :)
Les proz e les vassals
Souvent entre piez de chevals
Kar ja li coard n’I chasront

'The Brave and the valiant
Are always to be found between the hooves of horses
For never will cowards fall down there.'

Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal

www.elizabethchadwick.com

User avatar
Jemidar
Avid Reader
Posts: 397
Joined: February 2010
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Post by Jemidar » Thu July 22nd, 2010, 4:01 pm

[quote=""Susan Holloway Scott""]Seeing it here, though, makes me realize perhaps I should have thought twice about using it. Accurate or not, if any historical expression makes a reader stop reading to roll her/his eyes, than it's not a good choice -- and will land me (deservedly) here in a "Worst Sexual Terminology" thread. *g*[/quote]

Hi Susan, really good to see you here--well not here on this thread as such, but here at HFO :) .

I don't mind references to Royal Scepters etc, as I imagine that anyone intimate with a King would probably use terms like that, even if they were only joking. But as a reader it's difficult to deal with when the same corny phrase (or variations of it) is used over and over again. Less is definitely more in this case!

BTW, I'm a fan of your books, and I love the way you do the bad girls. I think Sarah Churchill was my favourite because I wouldn't have believed she could be sympathetic until I read your book! Nell, of course is my favourite just for herself and Louise comes a close second. As much as I didn't like Barbara much, I could see why Charles did :) .

And don't worry too much about appearing on this thread, there are much, much worse examples out there, they just haven't been mentioned here. Had a lively discussions about someone's "love stalk" (how sexy...NOT!) on Goodreads the other day. I just couldn't believe someone would use such an awkward term :p .
Jenny

"Well-behaved women rarely make history."
Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

Currently Reading:


User avatar
Misfit
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 9581
Joined: August 2008
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Misfit » Thu July 22nd, 2010, 4:43 pm

I just couldn't believe someone would use such an awkward term
You just reminded me. Roberta Gellis can get awfully odd at times. I think it was Fires of Winter wherein they kept referring to Sir Jehad his "standing man". Lol.
At home with a good book and the cat...
...is the only place I want to be

User avatar
cw gortner
Bibliophile
Posts: 1288
Joined: September 2008
Location: San Francisco,CA
Contact:

Post by cw gortner » Thu July 22nd, 2010, 5:33 pm

Hi Susan, so good to have you here!
Last edited by cw gortner on Thu July 22nd, 2010, 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
THE QUEEN'S VOW available on June 12, 2012!
THE TUDOR SECRET, Book I in the Elizabeth I Spymaster Chronicles
THE CONFESSIONS OF CATHERINE DE MEDICI
THE LAST QUEEN


www.cwgortner.com

Post Reply

Return to “Chat”