Domestic Doyennes: Purveyors of Atmospheres Spoken and Visual

from Intumus: Interior Design Reader Edited by Mark Taylor and Juleanna Preston 2006 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

John C Turpin

The art of conversing and the art of living are, according to John Turpin, linked through the need for expression. The social challenge, the demand for mental acuity and the game-like aspects of conversation are explored in this text via a discussion of late nineteenth-century French salons and English drawing rooms. Turpin's historical examination of this interior environment points to the aural spatial affect of conversations that are driven and influenced by the presence and interaction of company in such interior settings. The tangible design of such spaces is revealed to be equally manufactured and contrived as the temporality of conversation that occurs within it.

Between conversation and civilization, the art of talking and the art of living, there has always been a vital link.

Peter Quennell¹

If examined closely, Quennell's quote speaks of a phenomenon that is critical to human existence: the need for expression. Whether verbal or physical, humankind has continually devoted significant time and energy to the process of self-expression. Why? According to John Kasson, 'the protocols of conversation is one example of a ritual that establishes the structures by which individuals define one another and interact, defining social identities, social relationships, and an individual's perception of their social reality.'² Katherine Grier offers a similar view, but very clearly includes the significance of both etiquette and decoration which 'express the progress of civilization; both [are] … a way of choosing language that reflects the presence of some cultural framework for organizing many kinds of human experiences.'³ Both Kasson and Grier support Quennell's views by identifying how human expression, whether through direct human interaction (conversation) or the stage for its performance (decoration), are intimately tied to each other and the development of a culture.

Interestingly, correlations have been made between verbal communication and the notions of space. In his 1926 essay, Talking, John Priestly categorizes certain types of

368

dialogue as 'atmosphere creating.'⁴ He posits that various aspects of a verbal exchange help define an experience that in some ways creates an implied space. For example, the proximity of individuals during a conversation may evoke the feelings of an intimate space as the participants reveal information of a sensitive, personal nature. By choosing to confide in a specific individual, the speaker projects an aura of security onto the event. Priestly further relates the physical environment with the spoken word by stating, 'Such words as we use shall be but extra shutters and curtains and blazing coals and cushions.'⁵ These allusions of a warm, comfortable interior environment are equated with the similar effects of an intimate verbal exchange.

Since Priestly's publication, little scholarship on the relationship between conversation and the environment has surfaced. This article will attempt to revive Priestly's discussions by asking a primary question: Is there a relationship between the ritual of conversation and the art of decoration? …

In the first half of the seventeenth century, a new exclusive space developed for the nurturing of the elite culture. Originally referred to as an alcove or ruelle, today it is known as a salon. Here, conversation created its own social space with carefully marked boundaries as French women began redefining the criteria for inclusion and exclusion into the strata of the social elite. The vehicle for change would be the restructuring of etiquette.

The history of etiquette as a well-defined entity begins in Renaissance Italy with the development of a new literary genre, the courtesy book.⁶ The Florentines regarded the art of civility as a branch of rhetorical theory. From these rather philosophical beginnings, etiquette eventually evolved into a political tool for social advancement and control in seventeenth-century France. Ambitious courtiers manipulated courtly politics during the reign of Louis XIV by exploiting increasing opportunities of the commercial classes. Through refinements in social conduct, courtiers meticulously refashioned their social selves.⁷

In 1630 Nicholas Faret altered the design of human relations by rejecting the military metaphors of the past.⁸ Typical of male posturing in social events, French males demonstrated an impatient desire to engage in the rhetoric of combat. Acknowledging that the military was a classic gentleman's profession, Faret viewed military prowess only as an accomplishment for the model courtier. With the exclusion of a male-only topic such as the military, Faret facilitated the participation of women in a new definition of elite sociability. Due to their 'natural' taste, women soon became proprietors of good manners and civility. As a result, the best social education emanated from cultivated women, the gatekeepers of elite society.

369

For purposes of studying manner and wit, the women of highest rank began initiating carefully constructed meetings, where noble and scholar stood on equal ground. During such encounters, French women like Madame Geoffrin and Madame Lespinasse maintained high levels of control over carefully selected participants. In these situations, the women created atmospheres both spoken and visual to ensure a successful event. By the middle of the seventeenth century the salons began to separate themselves from the court society of the Louvre. One example is the infamous Chambre Bleu of Madame Rambouillet. She gave architectural proportions to this new concept of exclusivity. A description of the Chambre Bleu, the first known salon, follows:

[The Marquis'] house featured numerous relatively small, well-proportioned rooms, instead of the great hall and central staircase. Passing through a series of ornately finished rooms, a visitor arrived at last in the famous chambre bleu, whose intimate proportions and daring use of color established an elegant and fresh tone. The chambre bleu had waist-high painted and gilded panels lining its walls, which were hung with patterned blue tapestries encrusted with gold and silver. Paintings and Venetian mirrors hung on the walls. The focus of the room was the blue, damask-hung bed in the second alcove where the Marquis de Rambouillet reclined.⁹

The physical design of the Hotel de Rambouillet with its architectural features facilitated movement between the rooms, creating a more unified interior space, with tall windows and doors offering the occupants enlarged exterior perspectives. Similarly, ideal conversation had to permit both a smooth pattern of movement between the participants and a broad view of the world outside.¹⁰

The art of conversation in the salon was unique in that nobles and scholars engaged on equal ground. Ideal conversation was possible only if all participants were confident of their equal standing within the group.¹¹ Domination, dispute, interruptions and inattentiveness were not permitted. An atmosphere of peace and tranquillity was far removed from the sometimes-hostile engagements between the gentlemen. The salon would be considered a failure and that particular salonnière would lose her most valued position if the environment was not perfect.¹² (… p 44)

From the standpoint of the women, this new, distinct influence was significant in its retention of feminine qualities of tact, sympathy and mental alertness, as opposed to the masculine diversions of politics and letters. Without compromising the integrity of their gender, these women created a new position in society for themselves based on the ability to enhance human relations through controlled conversations.¹³ Thus, French women clearly aided in defining the cultural standards of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries through their skilful manipulation of the interior environment and the ritual of conversation.

370

Across the channel, nineteenth-century England set a completely different stage in which to socially interact. Both their interiors and manners were highly manufactured. The salon continued to slowly fuse itself with the culture of the English upper class, but without the emphasis on enlightened discussions occurring in France. With the increase in the wealth of the nation, the rise in the standard of living, and the growth of the middle classes, English ladies experienced a new way of living. However, the salon itself was not as popular as a room type. The drawing room was a more affordable choice. Here, participants focused on anomalous conversation with the sole intent of social and political advancement. The motivation for social events in Victorian England was far different than those in France. The relations between men and women delineated roles based on a patriarchal system. Compared to the more liberated French women, the English ladies were not permitted as much self-expression. For example, a wife was legally bound to uphold the husband's social status.¹⁴ This was accomplished in two ways. The first was the presentation of the home. The second required the acquisition of new manners. Similar to the French madams, failure in crafting a successful public image meant ostracism, ridicule and exclusion from sources of power and wealth; in other words, a swift social and political death for the husband.

English gentlemen demonstrated their success in business by making enough money such that the wife no longer required additional income. As a result, women left the labor force. However, since a woman should not be idle, she spent a considerable amount of time on more 'appropriate' tasks, including the furnishing and maintaining of larger houses, social occasions and festivities. The profuse interior decor, with which the Victorian period is identified, was itself a product of all that female energy going into ornamenting the home.¹⁵ Women flooded their drawing rooms with upholstered sofas with brightly embroidered cushions ornamented with beadwork, grand pianos, heavily layered windows, and elaborate chairs.

Due to the strong sense of guilt for such excessive expenditures, Victorian women justified the extreme opulence and extravagance by invoking the idea of social duty. Clearly, the women were experiencing conflict between social responsibilities and the religious teachings of the church. The women often applied self-imposed restrictions in order to soothe guilt. Ironically, such 'sins' were acceptable for women, but not for the men.¹⁶ In English society the women clearly played a secondary role to their male counterparts. Even though they were given the responsibility of hosting events to maintain the couple's social status, society refused to allow them to stand alone. 'The great hostess must be a wife or nothing. No hostess counts without a host.'¹⁷ However, it is the case that the English ladies, much like the French madams, were considered to be the gatekeepers of society. Again, etiquette bestowed the power. (… p 46)

371

Unlike the enriching discussions of the French salons, the English drawing rooms were filled with pretentiousness and vacuity. The goal was neither to offend nor inform. By subduing intellectual growth, the social elite defined their status more or less by simply being in each other's presence. The aura of elitism found expression on elaborate stages where the significance of the actors' visual performance surpassed their verbal utterances. Staccato conversations permitted all present to participate in the creation of an atmosphere characterized by a 'false view of life.'¹⁸

Mentmore, the estate of Baron Meyer Amschel de Rothschild, manifests the extremity of elitism and arrogance in both its architecture and interiors. The disposition of spaces within the floor plan enhanced the primary function of Victorian social events, to be seen. Impressive foyers, such as the one at Mentmore, required guests to ascend to the Grand Hall, a pretentious metaphor communicating the superior status of the host and hostess. Upon reaching the level of the gala event, guests anxiously awaited their public announcement of arrival. After a momentary glance from other participants, the primary function of the guest had been accomplished. They were seen.

In opposition to the ascension of the guest, the Lady of the house often waited until her company had arrived so that they may witness her descent from the Grand Staircase axially aligned with the Grand Hall. The remainder of the rooms were arranged in a manner that permitted guests to mingle from room to room continuing their performance on the grandest of stages.

The interior of the Grand Hall is decorated with all the pretentiousness of most Victorian homes. Count D'Orsay's rules of conversation are supported by the stage set. For example, the avoidance of long stories in polite conversation prevents any one individual from being a point of focus. Conversation is to move freely and rather rapidly from one to another. In similar style, the Victorian interior is riddled with objects, each so spectacular in form and ornamentation that the eye of the guest is never permitted to rest. Unintentionally, the interior's demand for a roving eye may have lubricated the ritual of being seen as accidental glances imparted unintended meanings. (… p 47)

America realized the absence of a native hereditary aristocracy prevented the infusion of etiquette into a society whose masses were mainly middle class. Yet, the need for direction was becoming increasingly important. Women quickly took charge of the issue and were viewed as the principal guardians of decorum in the middle and upper classes. By the turn of the twentieth century, basic etiquette regressed as the bustling American city interfered with ceremonious intercourse. An added obstruction was the exodus to the suburbs, which physically limited social interaction.¹⁹ Prior to the appearance of the likes of Emily Post and Lillian Eichler, a new professional arose to fill the cultural void and embrace the need for etiquette.²⁰ Enter the interior decorator. (… p 48)

372

Clearly fueled by her views of etiquette, Elsie de Wolfe expounds her rules regarding entertaining and decorating in her publication, The House in Good Taste. Within only a few pages, de Wolfe lays claim on both entertaining and decorating as female responsibilities. 'It is the personality of the mistress that the home expresses. Men are forever guests in our homes, no matter how much happiness they may find there.'²¹ In the true spirit of the French madams and the Victorian ladies, Elsie de Wolfe would combine the ritual of entertaining and etiquette and the practice of interior decoration into a cohesive whole.

De Wolfe draws quite a few direct correlations between conversation and interior decorating and the manner in which they guide each other. In setting her own precedents, de Wolfe admits to being heavily impacted by the French culture. She refers to the Hotel Rambouillet and how it was 'devised for and consecrated to conversation, a new form of privilege.'²² According to de Wolfe, while Americans use the terms 'drawing room' and 'salon' interchangeably, there is an appreciation for the term salon for its implication of brilliant conversation.²³

De Wolfe utilizes the projects in her book as a means of disseminating the lessons of the salon. 'Your sense of the pleasure and meaning of human intercourse will be clear in your disposition of your best things, in your elimination of your worst ones.'²⁴ From the standpoint of decoration, the atmosphere should be warm and inviting by utilizing textures, materials, color, lighting, and seating arrangements. In her own home on 55th Street in New York City, de Wolfe describes a 'room made for conversation.' 'In this drawing room there is furniture of many woods, there are stuffs of many weaves, there are candles and chandeliers and reading-lamps, but there is harmony of purpose and therefore harmony of effect' [italics by author].²⁵ Her formula is further developed through the arrangement of numerous conversation centers, intimate in spirit, such that no one chair is isolated. (… p 49)

Notes

1 Peter Quennell, Affairs of the Mind: The Salon in Europe and America From the 18th to the 20th Century, New Republic Books (Washington DC), 1980, p 9.

2 John F Kasson, Rudeness and Civility: Manners in Nineteenth-Century Urban America, Hill and Wang (New York), 1990, p 4.

3 Katherine Grier, Culture and Comfort: Parlor Making and Middle-class Identity, 1850–1930, Smithsonian Institution Press (Washington DC), 1988, p 1.

4 J Priestly, Talking, Jarrolds Publishers (London), 1926, p 10.

5 Priestly, Talking, p 14.

6 Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Cambridge University Press (Cambridge), 1978, p 14.

7 For further details see Jolanta Pekacz's Conservative Tradition in Pre-Revolutionary France: Parisian Salon Women, Peter Lang Publishers (New York), 1999.

8 Nicholas Faret, L'Honnête homme ou l'art de plaire a la cour, PUF (Paris), 1925.

373

9 Bonnie Anderson and Judith Zinsser, A History of Their Own, Oxford University Press (New York), 2000, pp 103–4.

10 Elizabeth Goldsmith, Exclusive Conversations: The Art of Interaction in Seventeenth-Century France, University of Pennsylvania Press (Philadelphia), 1988, pp 44–6.

11 Goldsmith, Exclusive Conversations, pp 44–6.

12 Pekacz, Conservative Tradition, p 125.

13 Helen Clergue, The Salon: A Study of French Society and Personalities in the Eighteenth Century, The Knickerbocker Press (New York), 1907, p 3.

14 Leonore Davidoff, The Best Circles: Women and Society in Victorian England, Rowman and Littlefield (Totowa, NJ), 1973, p 40.

15 See Anderson and Zinsser, History of Their Own, for a discussion on women’s roles in England.

16 Davidoff, Best Circles, p 39.

17 Philip Guedalla, Bonnet and Shawl: An Album, Books for Libraries Press (New York), 1970, p 157.

18 Joan Wildeblood, The Polite World: A Guide to English Manners and Deportment from the Thirteenth to the Nineteenth Century, Oxford University Press (London), 1965, p 76.

19 Arthur M Schlesinger, Learning How to Behave: A Historical Study of American Etiquette Books, Macmillan Company (New York), 1946, pp 49–50.

20 In 1918, a prolific wave of publications on etiquette flooded the market. Between 1918 and 1945, over 140 books intended to educate the American public on what was considered to be socially acceptable behavior; the success of which Schlesinger (1946) attributes to the ‘many earnest souls [searching] for a steadying hand in a period of bewildering flux in social conventions.’ Within a 23 year period, Lillian Eichler’s Book of Etiquette (1922) sold over a million copies; a far cry from the socially deemed queen of manners, Emily Post, whose publication, Etiquette (1923), reached over 65 million homes in roughly the same period of time. For the first time in American history, etiquette was disentangled from the religious-based ethics of the past and now accepted as a generalized pattern of behavior designed to lubricate social intercourse.

21 Elsie de Wolfe, The House in Good Taste, Atheneum (New York), 1913, p 5.

22 De Wolfe, House in Good Taste, p 11.

23 De Wolfe, House in Good Taste, pp 135–6.

24 De Wolfe, House in Good Taste, p 15.

25 De Wolfe, House in Good Taste, p 49.

John C Turpin, ‘Domestic Doyennes: Purveyors of Atmospheres Spoken and Visual’, In.Form: The Journal of Architecture, Design, and Material Culture, vol 3, 2003, pp 42–54.

Published by the Kruger Collection in conjunction with the Interior Design Program of the University of Nebraska.

(Excerpts pp 42–9)

374