The Prince of Pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the Making of the Regency

George IV or the Prince Regent is the caricature monarch of English history. In the age of the scything cartoonist, the larger than life Prince was the ideal subject through his loves, sense of melodrama and overblown antics. David, wisely in my opinion confines himself to the period before his ascendancy to the throne, after which George, by virtue of his gout and his unpopularity became a subdued, sorry figure. David whisks us through all the major episodes, Mrs. Fitzherbert, his doomed marriage, the infidelity of both spouses and his eternal opulence and theatrics. There is such a wealth of literature both on the Prince and the Regency, that a new approach or a fresh insight is virtually impossible, particularly from a biographical standpoint. Hence the best an author can do under the circumstances is provide a rollicking read and a fun, lively approach and David measures up to the task. This is a thoroughly enjoyable book about a perenially endearing cartoonlike figure. No revisionist breakthroughs here, but a lot of fun.

This book was the first I've read that presents a balanced picture of the Regent. He had many unattractive qualities but they were the shortcomings of someone who never really grew up, a lifelong adolescent. He had some finer traits that might have served him perfectly well if he'd been a private gentleman instead of the heir to the throne. I was particularly interested in the theory that the Regent suffered to a lesser extent the hereditary disease that most historians believe caused George III's madness.

I read 'The Prince of Pleasure' by Saul David because I am fascinated with the Regency Period in England, the French Revolution, and Jane Austin's writing. Partly biography and mostly very good historical research (letters, journals, diaries), the book provides excellent background information on architecture (the Pavillion at Brighton, townhouses in London); clothing (Empire waistlines, Beau Brummel); Luddite rebellions and starving workers in Glasgow; the Duke of Wellington and Waterloo; and Nelson, the British Navy, and Trafalgar. Mostly, I read the book because I love Jane Austen and want to know all I can about her times. Saul David says that next to Walter Scott, Jane Austen was the Duke of Wales' (Prince Regent and eventually George IV) favorite novelist. Ms Austen did not reciprocate his feelings. In one of her letters, Austen said of Princess Caroline, the wife the Duke was attempting to divorce and/or put away, "I shall support her as long as I can because she is a Woman, and because I hate her husband...[If] I must give up the Princess, I am resolved at least always to think that she would have been respectable, if the Prince had behaved tolerably by her at first."When she visited Carlton House (one of the Royal residences) in November 1815, the librarian informed Austen of the Regent's admiration for her work. By this knowledge she was coerced into dedicating her next novel 'Emma' to the Prince Regent. But she had earlier expressed her poor opinion of the Prince indirectly in 'Mansefield Park.' In what David describes as a "thinly veiled criticism" she set a scene where a crises is precipated by the absence of the 'Lord' of the Manor, Sir Thomas Bertram (like George III) and the reckless follies of his oldest son Tom, "who takes over the 'regency' from his brother Edmund...[and like the Regent Prince] "loves to gamble, live well and run up debts." When Tom becomes the 'Regent' of Mansfield Park, he "prefers the ceremonial to the practical aspects of government." The subversive conclusion of 'Mansefield Park' "is that the younger son is a more suitable regent that the legal heir, while the poor female relation (Fanny Price) is preferable to them both."My goodness, it's a wonder they didn't try Ms. Austen for Sedition. But then, most readers didn't get her irony, and still don't.

A wasted life - wasted on wine, women, song, dance, poetry - they say the 'road to Hell is paved with good intentions.' Truly Prinny had good intentions - he wanted to lead his troops in battle, win glory and thereby the respect of his disapproving parents; he wanted to do many things, but the booze, porphyria, and, obviously, depression kept getting in his way. That he passed it on to his only recognised daughter is another tragedy - but, with regard to today's situation amonst the British Royals, isn't this just another case of unruly spoiled children?Very well done and full of 'dirt' - George IV wasn't the only brat in the family - 'Prince of Pleasure' presents an incisive view of late-18th century politics and society. His explanation of the various 'regency crises' is succinct and easy to follow - something that most historians make a hash of. The Pitt and Fox portraits are particularly revealing - altruitic for the one and definately earthy for the other. Overall an extremely readable overview of the period that 'formed' the 19th century in Britain and the US.

Any history of George IV that covers his regency as Prince of Wales is sure to be a good romp. Saul David's is particularly well done. The Prince Regent's world is one in which the inhabitants of Jane Austen's novels have little intercourse, but which frames their discourse. And, to his great credit the Prince Regent himself requested a special edition of Austen's complete works.