#gauvis

This blog is only three days old and I've already had a couple people message me regarding their logic behind their tagging things Victorian vs. Edwardian (Hello!  And thank you for acknowledging me!  I'm getting a lot more attention than I expected so soon!  And none of it is hate yet, yay!).  Do not worry, either of you--you actually had very similar reasoning which I totally get.  Edwardian, when not labeled specifically as such can be very difficult to distinguish from Victorian.  At first, I was going to include it if I had my doubts, but since then I have found myself skipping over posts such as these as they are not the goal of this collection.  Unless something is specifically labeled as after 1901, then I will not bother to point out it might be mislabeled.  I hope I don't ever come off as too much a tight-ass about semantics, but for something to be without a doubt Edwardian labeled as Victorian seems no different than something from 1989 being considered during the Reagan administration, at least to me, being an American that is.  It's just not correct.