Part 17 (1/2)
From this element of prost.i.tution was disentangled, to a large extent, the great gallantry of the eighteenth century. This was accomplished by adding an elegance to debauch, by clothing vice with a sort of grandeur, and by adorning scandal with a semblance of the glory and grace of the courtier of old. Possessing the fascination of all gifts, prodigalities, follies, with all the appet.i.tes and tendencies of the time, these women attracted the society of the period--the poets, the artists, even the scientists, the philosophers, and the n.o.bility.
Their reputation increased with the number and standing of their lovers. The genius of the eighteenth century circled about these street belles--they represented the fortune of pleasure.
As the church would not countenance the marriage of an actress, she was forced to renounce the theatre when she would marry, but once married a permit to return to the stage was easily obtained. Society was not so severe as the laws; it received actresses, sought out, and even adored them; it received the women of the stage as equals, and many of them were married by counts and dukes, given a t.i.tle, and presented at court. The regular type of the prost.i.tute was tolerated and even received by society; ”a word of anger, malediction, or outrage, was seldom raised against these women: on the contrary, pity and the commiseration of charity and tenderness were felt for them and manifested.” This was natural, for many of them--through notoriety--reached society and, as mistresses of the king, even the throne itself. ”If such women as Mme. de Pompadour were esteemed, what principles remained in the name of which to judge without pity and to condemn the _debauches_ of the street,” says Mme. de Choiseul, one of the purest of women.
This cla.s.s usually created and established the styles. There is a striking contrast between the standards of beauty and fas.h.i.+ons of the respective periods of Louis XIV. and Louis XV.: ”The stately figure, rich costume, awe-inspiring peruke of the magnificent Louis XIV.--the satins, velvets, embroideries, perfumes, and powder of the indolent and handsome Louis XV., well ill.u.s.trate the two epochs.” The beauty of the Louis XIV. age was more serious, more imposing, imperial, cla.s.sic; later in the eighteenth century, under Louis XV., she developed into a charming figure of _finesse, sveltesse et gracilite_, with an extremely delicate complexion, a small mouth and thin nose, as opposed to the strong, plump mouth and _nez leonin_ (leonine nose). More animated, the face was all movement, the eyes talked; the _esprit_ pa.s.sed to the face. It was the type of Marivaux' comedies, with an _esprit mobile_, animated and colored by all the coquetries of grace.
Later in the century, the very opposite type prevailed; the aspiration then became to leave an emotion ungratified rather than to seduce; a languis.h.i.+ng expression was cultivated; women sought to sweeten the physiognomy, to make it tender and mild. The style of beauty changed from the brunette with brown eyes--so much in vogue under Louis XV., to the blonde with blue eyes under Louis XVI. Even the red which formerly ”dishonored France,” became a favorite. To obtain the much admired pale complexion, women had themselves bled; their dress corresponded to their complexion, light materials and pure white being much affected.
In these three stages of the development of beauty, fas.h.i.+on changed to harmonize with the popular style in beauty. In general, styles were influenced by an important event of the day: thus, when Marie Leczinska, introduced the fad of quadrilles, there were invented ribbons called ”quadrille of the queen”; and many other fads originated in the same way. French taste and fas.h.i.+ons travelled over entire Europe; all Europe was _a la francaise_, yoked and laced in French styles, French in art, taste, industry. The domination of the French _Galerie des Modes_ was due to the inventive minds of French women in relation to everything pertaining to headdress, to detailed and delicate arrangements of every phase of ornamentation.
Every country had, in Paris, its agents who eagerly waited for the appearance of the famous doll of the Rue Saint-Honore; this figure was an exponent of the latest fas.h.i.+ons and inventions, and, changing continually, was watched and copied by all Europe. Alterations in style frequently originated at the supper of a mistress, in the box of a dancer or in the atelier of a fine modiste; therefore, in that respect, that century differed little from the present one. Trade depended largely upon foreign patronage. Fortunes were made by the modistes, who were the great artists of the day and who set the fas.h.i.+on; but the hairdresser and shoemaker, also, were artists, as was seen, at least in name, and were as impertinent as prosperous.
An interesting ill.u.s.tration of the change of fas.h.i.+on is the following anecdote: In 1714, at a supper of the king, at Versailles, two English women wore low headdress, causing a scandal which came near costing them their dismissal. The king happened to mention that if French women were reasonable, they would not dress otherwise. The word was spread, and the next day, at the king's ma.s.s the ladies all wore their hair like the English women, regardless of the laughter of the women who, being absent the previous evening, had their hair dressed high.
The compliment of the king as he was leaving ma.s.s, to the ladies with the low headdress, caused a complete change in the mode.
It now remains but to ill.u.s.trate these various cla.s.ses by types--by women who have become famous. The d.u.c.h.esse de Boufflers, Marechale de Luxembourg, was the woman who most completely typified the spirit and tone of the eighteenth-century _cla.s.sique_ in everything that belonged to the ancient regime which pa.s.sed away with the society of 1789.
She was the daughter of the Duc de Villeroy, and married the Duc de Boufflers in 1721; after the death of the latter in 1747, and after having been the mistress of M. de Luxembourg for several years, she married him in 1750. Her youth was like that of most women of the social world. A _savante_ in intrigues at court, present at all suppers, bouts, and pleasure trips as lady-of-the-palace to the queen, intriguing constantly, holding her own by her sharp wit, in a society of _roues et elegants enerves_ she soon became a leader. Mme. du Deffand left a striking portrait of her:
”Mme. la d.u.c.h.esse de Boufflers is beautiful without having the air of suspecting it. Her physiognomy is keen and piquant, her expression reveals all the emotions of her soul--she does not have to say what she thinks, one guesses it. Her gestures are so natural and so perfectly in accord with what she says, that it is difficult not to be led to think and feel as she does. She dominates wherever she is, and she always makes the impression she desires to make. She makes use of her advantages almost like a G.o.d--she permits us to believe that we have a free will while she determines us. In general, she is more feared than loved. She has much _esprit_ and gayety. She is constant in her engagements, faithful to her friends, truthful, discreet, generous. If she were more clairvoyant or if men were less ridiculous, they would find her perfect.”
On one occasion M. de Tressan composed this famous couplet:
”Quand Boufflers parut a la cour, On crut voir la mere d'Amour, Chacun s'empressait a lui plaire, Et chacun l'avait a son tour.”
[When Boufflers appeared at court, The mother of love was thought to be seen, Everyone became so eager to please her, And each one had her in his turn.]
One day Mme. de Boufflers mumbled this before M. de Tressan, saying to him: ”Do you know the author? It is so beautiful that I would not only pardon her, but I believe I would embrace her.” Whereupon he stammered: _Eh bien! c'est moi._ She quickly dealt him two vigorous slaps in the face. All feared her; no one equalled her in skill and shrewdness, or in knowing and handling men.
After her marriage to the Marechal de Luxembourg, she decided, about 1750, to open a salon in Paris; it became one of the real forces of the eighteenth century, socially and politically. While her husband lived, she did not enjoy the freedom she desired; after his death in 1764 she was at liberty to do as she pleased, and she then began her career as a judge and counsellor in all social matters. She was regarded as the oracle of taste and urbanity, exercised a supervision over the tone and usage of society, was the censor of _la bonne compagnie_ during the happy years of Louis XVI. This power in her was universally recognized. She tempered the Anglomania of the time, all excesses of familiarity and rudeness; she never uttered a bad expression, a coa.r.s.e laugh or a _tutoiement_ (thee and thou). The slightest affectation in tone or gesture was detected and judged by her. She preserved the good tone of society and permitted no contamination. She r.e.t.a.r.ded the reign of clubs, retained the urbanity of French society, and preserved a proper and unique character in the _ancien salon francais_, in the way of excellence of tone.
The Marquise de Rambouillet, Mme. de La Fayette, Mme. de Maintenon, Mme. de Caylus, and Mme. de Luxembourg are of the same type--the same world, with little variance and no decadence; in some respects, the last may be said to have approached nearest to perfection. ”In her, the turn of critical and caustic severity was exempt from rigidity and was accompanied by every charm and pleasingness in her person. She often judged [a person] by [his] ability at repartee, which she tested by embarra.s.sing questions across the table, judging [the person] by the reply. She herself was never at a loss for an answer: when shown two portraits--one of Moliere and one of La Fontaine--and asked which was the greater, she answered: 'That one,' pointing to La Fontaine, 'is more perfect in a _genre_ less perfect.'”
By the Goncourt brothers, her salon has been given its merited credit: ”The most elegant salon was that of the Marechale de Luxembourg, one of the most original women of the time. She showed an originality in her judgments, she was authority in usage, a genius in taste. About her were pleasure, interest, novelty, letters; here was formed the true elegance of the eighteenth century--a society that held sway over Europe until 1789. Here was formed the greatest inst.i.tution of the time, the only one that survived till the Revolution, that preserved--in the discredit of all moral laws--the authority of one law, _la parfaite bonne compagnie_, whose aim was a social one--to distinguish itself from bad company, vulgar and provincial society, by the perfection of the means of pleasing, by the delicacy of friends.h.i.+p, by the art of considerations, complaisances, of _savoir vivre_, by all possible researches and refinements of _esprit_. It fixed everything--usages, etiquette, tone of conversation; it taught how to praise without bombast and insipidness, to reply to a compliment without disdaining or accepting it, to bring others to value without appearing to protect them; it prevented all slander.
If it did not impart modesty, goodness, indulgence, n.o.bleness of sentiment, it at least imposed the forms, exacting the appearances and showing the images of them. It was the guardian of urbanity and maintained all the laws that are derived from taste. It represented the religion of honor; it judged, and when it condemned a man he was socially-ruined.”
A type of what may be called the social mistress of the n.o.bility--the personification of good taste, elegance and propriety such as it should be--was the Comtesse de Boufflers, mistress of the Prince de Conti, intimate friend of Hume, Rousseau, and Gustave III., King of Sweden. The countess was one of the most influential and spirituelle members of French society, her special mission and delight being the introduction of foreign celebrities into French society. She piloted them, was their patroness, spoke almost all modern languages, and visited her friends in their respective countries. She was the most travelled and most hospitable of great French women, hence the woman best informed upon the world in general.
She was born in Paris in 1725, and in 1746 was married to the Comte de Boufflers-Rouvrel; soon after, becoming enamored of the Prince de Conti, she became his acknowledged mistress. To give an idea of the light in which the women of that time considered those who were mistresses of great men, the following episodes may be cited: One day, Mme. de Boufflers, momentarily forgetting her relations to the Prince de Conti, remarked that she scorned a woman who _avait un prince du sang_ (was mistress of a prince of the blood). When reminded of her apparent inconsistency, she said: ”I wish to give by my words to virtue what I take away from it by my actions....” On another occasion, she reproached the Marechale de Mirepoix for going to see Mme. de Pompadour, and in the heat of argument said: ”Why, she is nothing but the first _fille_ (mistress) of the kingdom!” The marechale replied: ”Do not force me to count even unto three” (Mme.
de Pompadour, Mlle. Marquise, Mme. de Boufflers). In those days, the position of mistress of an important man attracted little more attention than might a petty, trivial, light-hearted flirtation nowadays.
After the death of M. de Boufflers, in 1764, the all-absorbing question of society, and one of vital importance to madame, was, Will the prince marry her? If not, will she continue to be his mistress? In this critical period, Hume showed his friends.h.i.+p and true sympathy by giving Mme. de Boufflers most persuasive and practical advice in reference to morals--which she did not follow. Her relations with Rousseau showed her capable of the deepest and most profound friends.h.i.+p and sympathy. According to Sainte-Beuve, it was she who, by aid of her friends in England, procured asylum for him with Hume at Wootton. When Rousseau's rashness brought on the quarrel which set in commotion and agitated the intellectual circles of both continents, Mme. de Boufflers took his part and remained faithful to him, securing a place for him in the Chateau de Trie, which belonged to the Prince de Conti.
All who came in contact with her recognized the distinction, elevation of _esprit_, and sentiment of Mme. de Boufflers. With her are a.s.sociated the greatest names of the time; being perfectly at home on all the political questions of the day, she was better able to converse upon these subjects than was any other woman of the time.
When in 1762 she visited England, she was lionized everywhere. She was feted at court and in the city, and all conversation was upon the one subject, that of her presence, which was one of the important events of London life. Everyone was anxious to see the famous woman, the first of rank to visit England in two hundred years. She even received some special attention from the eccentric Samuel Johnson, in this manner: ”Horace Walpole had taken the countess to call on Johnson.
After the conventional time of a formal call had expired, they left, and were halfway down stairs, when it dawned upon Johnson that it was his duty, as host, to pay the honors of his literary residence to a foreign lady of quality; to show himself gallant, he jumped down from the top of the stairway, and, all agitation, seized the hand of the countess and conducted her to her carriage.”
No woman at court had more friends and fewer enemies than did Mme. de Boufflers, because ”she united to the gifts of nature and the culture of _esprit_ an amiable simplicity, charming graces, a goodness, kindness, and sensibility, which made her forget herself always and constantly seek to aid those about her.” She made use of her influence over the prince in such ways as would, in a measure, recompense for her fault, and thus recommended herself by her good actions. She was the soul of his salon, ”Le Temple.” The love of these two people, through its intimacy and public display, through its constancy, happiness, and decency, dissipated all scandal. Always cheerful and pleased to amuse, knowing how to pay attention to all, always rewarding the bright remarks of others with a smile, which all sought as a mark of approbation, no one ever wished her any ill fortune.
The last days of the Prince de Conti were cheered by the presence of Mme. de Boufflers and the friends whom she gathered about him to help bear his illness. The letter to her from Hume, on his deathbed, is most pathetic, showing the influence of this woman and the nature of the impression she left upon her friends: