Why writers should question their assumptions

[barbarienne]

Dear author of this regency romance:

In Europe, pink wasn't considered a "delicate, feminine" color in the early part of the 19th century. It wasn't even considered such in the early part of the 20th century

Comments

[eeknight]

Officers in the U.S. Army rode in their "pinks" up until about 1941.

[dorianegray]

Don't know about "a delicate, feminine colour", but the colours considered especially suitable for debutantes in Regency London were white, pale pink and pale blue.

Cf Georgette Heyer, who, yes, was writing historical novels, but was well-known to do a great deal of research for them.

(Fashion-plates and cartoons of the time seem to mostly dress women in white, but when dresses are coloured, pink turns up fairly often.)

[barbarienne]

Pink certainly happened, but it wasn't specifically feminine. Men wore pink, too.

[hominysnark]

I guess it beats pairing him up with one named "Chastity."

[sartorias]

At least she wasn't yet another Cat! (Though I guess the heroines of UFs are Cats.)

[mastadge]

I just came across the pink/blue thing in another book, and while I noticed the error, I chalked it up to one of those decisions writers have to make: just make the color association your audience expects, or make the correct color association for the setting and risk annoying e-mails from readers complaining about your "error", or make the correct color association and find some way to explain that things used to be different that neither interrupts the story nor comes across as a clumsy infodump.

[barbarienne]

It was the specific reference to it being a feminine color that bugged me. The dress could be pink, and the author didn't need to specify a gender-association for it.