Style Rococo, Style des Lumières
Throughout the history of mankind there have been different places at different points in time in the world that were at their philosophical, literary, and artistic peak. It is sometimes controversial whether a certain style should have the distinction of having an entire period named after it. France during the 18th century was a fruitful ground for the development of a variety of sophisticated styles. There were major accomplishments in the field of literature and fine arts in this period. Since writing style and painting style were both a means of expressing the French citizens’ values, thoughts, and way of life, they have similar characteristics and are therefore both part of a significant movement: le style Rococo, le style des Lumières.
What is the Rococo? The beginning of the development of the Rococo style in France can be placed in the early 18th century, approximately in the year 1710. It is mostly seen as a style that was at its peak during the first half of the 1700’s. However, France during the 18th century was characterized by a large variety of philosophical, artistic and aesthetic approaches and therefore full of different movements, each reflecting another creative point of view. In other words, the Rococo is only one of the distinctive styles that could be found in the 18th century. Given this complexity of influences in the Age of Enlightenment, it is a fairly delicate issue to narrow this multitude of diverse inspirational attitudes down to one single style. “The eighteenth century in Europe is known as the Age of Enlightenment, an age in which reason and common sense were put forth as the real remedies of society’s ills and ‘progress’ was seen as a law of human development.” (De la Croix, Tansey, and Kirkpatrick, p. 818) However, if one had to identify and categorize the 18th century in terms of its creativity -- not only practically speaking, but also from a theoretical point of view -- one could generally describe it as the century of two major styles: Rococo and Neoclassicism.
After Louis XIV died in the year 1715 and Louis XV ascended the throne, the social situation in France was subject to a number of changes, which provided a fruitful basis for a new style to develop. After a moment of crisis resulting from the rapid loss of a stable political and aesthetic value system, people found themselves in a state of speculation and innovation. “France turned away from imperial aspirations to focus on more personal -- and pleasurable -- pursuits. As political life and private morals relaxed, the change was mirrored by a new style in art, one that was intimate, decorative, and often erotic.” (“18th-Century France: The Rococo and Watteau”, 1990) New literary works were received with favorable tolerance, and ideologies like hedonism and epicurism were reborn. The era of the Rococo was about to begin.
When the Rococo style first emerged, it was primarily limited to the field of interior decoration and design. In fact, it was only later on that it expanded and also influenced other parts of the artistic and creative life of the French 1700’s. The Rococo style has its origins in Paris, which was considered the capital of Europe in the period. It took some time until this new, softer style started to expand its influence and made its way to Italy and the rest of Europe, eventually displacing the Baroque style. Or as De la Croix, Tansey, and Kirkpatrick put it, “Older patterns of life and society continued and obscured for a time the emergence of the new forces of change.” (p. 818)
How could one describe the 18th century in France? It is the period of the glamorous Lumières, of such great writers as Marivaux, Montesquieu, Lesage and Prévost. Furthermore, it is the era of the trio of brilliant philosophical thinkers Voltaire, Rousseau, and last but not least Diderot. All three of these talented, well-known, and unique philosophers were experimentalists and at the same time approached the world and its problems from a rational point of view. Generally speaking, one could refer to the Age of Enlightenment as a period full of controversial stimuli, intrinsic contradictions, and specific dichotomies. One of these influences was the Rococo. When comparing the art style and the writing style of the Rococo in his book Style Rococo, Style des Lumières, Roger Laufer portrays the enormous complexity of the period as follows:
« Et sans doute cette distinction est-elle aussi applicable à la littérature: mais elle offre les mêmes dangers que les étiquettes « raison » et « sensibilité », « pseudo-classicisme » et « pré-romanticisme » que nous venons rejeter. Elle a cependant l’avantage, en contredisant celle-ci, de nous suggérer que la première moitié de l’âge des lumières est à la fois pseudo-classique et baroque, la seconde, néo-classique et préromantique. » (p. 13)
As Laufer has pointed out in the statement above, the Age of Enlightenment is subject to the clash of many diverse Weltanschauungen. In fact, people were indefatigably struggling back and forth in between different sets of values, such as those imposed by the ancient regime and those of the grande bourgeoisie. According to Friedrich Schürr in Barock, Klassizismus und Rokoko in der Französischen Literatur, literature in the 18th century in France could be described as primarily, fundamentally and purely philosophical, and salonnière. (p. 9) Speaking of different opinions concerning the dichotomy or even multiplicity of the 18th century provided by the German school, I would like to point out that the German language actually refers to the word Rococo as opposed to the notion Aufklärung.
Moreover, in the part Hauptfragen der Romanistik of his discourse on Französische Rokokoprobleme, Fritz Neubert introduces us to the concept of delicacy, sublimity, and sensibility to detail that emerges in the Rococo style. “Ihre Größe beruht ebenfalls auf ihrer Kleinkunst. Das Siècle des jolies bagatelles, wie es ein zeitgenössischer französischer Kenner (Couret de Villeneuve) treffend genannt hat.” (p. 267) In other words, when regarding the Rococo style from an analytical point of view, one can certainly compare its distinctive elements, its whole emphasis on “smallness” and its concept favoring details to Porzellanfigürchen. In fact, the crucial importance of these tiny pieces of porcelain can be metaphorically applied in order to characterize the period in question. Or as Voltaire describes them, « Parfaits dans le petit, sublimes en bijoux …».” (Laufer, p. 10) Etymologically speaking, the word Rococo came from rocaille meaning “pebble” referring to a “curved line”. This reference is concretely tied to the concept of small ornaments and little motifs that were used in the field of interior design in the beginning of the Rococo style.
Considering the elements and characteristics used in literary works of the Age of Enlightenment and comparing them to the visual compositions of artists in the period, one can definitely notice a similar approach. Nevertheless, one is also facing the same set of crucial contradictions. In fact, there are basic similarities concerning Rococo art and Rococo literature, as well as concerning the social life of the period that primarily centered around les salons: Everything seems to be underscored by the concept of reason on the one hand, and by the notion of sensibility and a certain kind of movement, Bewegtheit, on the other. In order to sum up the fundamental differences we face in the 18th century, I would like to refer to a statement by Gita May, who has outlined its major contradictions as follows: “It is by now a widely recognized fact that the 18th century cannot be reduced to a dominant style or Weltanschauung and that its favorite position is a precarious balance between antithetical binary values and principles: reason/sensibility, light-heartedness/high moral purpose, stoicism/hedonism, simplicity/luxury.” (“Neoclassical, Rococo or Preromantic? Diderot’s Esthetic quest”, p. 185)
Since a significant part of my discourse focuses on the establishment, proof and discussion of a theoretical statement pointing out the similarities between Rococo writing style and Rococo painting style, I would like to first outline the literary aspects of the period and later on compare them to its artistic elements. Furthermore, I am going to support my thesis by the use of concrete examples extracted from a Rococo literary work -- my choice are Voltaire’s tales -- and an analysis of a Rococo painting: “La Fête de Saint-Cloud” by Fragonard. At this point, I would like to continue to the general characterization of the Rococo writing style and thereafter devote myself to the great painters of the period.
What are the most important and frequently used elements of Rococo literature? The style in question is characterized by a spontaneity of expression, a theatrical atmosphere, and the reflection of an unstable society that is split between aristocratic and bourgeois values. In fact, we notice a certain kind of value reversal, for example in Voltaire’s Lettres Philosophiques. When diving into such masterpieces as Manon Lescaut, we are introduced to the influences of the roman picaresque espagnol. Moreover, the genre comique and transparency of style amuses us in Lesage’s Histoire de Gil Blas de Santillane while allowing us to enjoy the irony of detail of the portraits charges. Furthermore, we are exposed to foreign elements, references to traveling, and the confrontation between the Orient and Occident, for example in Montesquieu’s Lettres Persanes. Voltaire’s tales even seem to combine all concepts that are characteristic for the period -- aesthetic of pleasure; enormous richness and elegance; the repetitive comical aspect; oriental, adventurous, and fictive elements etc. -- and bring the style of the 18th century to its peak.
Since we find ourselves in an atmosphere of illusory aspects, exaggeration, and mystification, we float between the duality of realistic elements and imaginary characteristics. We get to know enigmatic characters and femmes fatales that are powerfully attracted to les jolies choses and consequently represent the typical Rococo personage, for example Manon Lescaut. We explore the esprit français -- Zeitgeist – and are introduced to the hommes des letters. The epistolary writing style not only gives us the chance to develop an awareness of sensual intimacy, but even introduces us to a new kind of feminism. These intimate, passionate and feminine sentimental elements can be found in such works as the Lettres Portugaises, La Vie de Marianne, or Les Liaisons Dangereuses. In fact, these influences are not just present in the particular literary works of France. Generally speaking, Europe was more open to feminine power during the Rococo period. Women like Madame de Pompadour in France, Maria Theresa in Austria, or Elizabeth and Catherine in Russia exerted a powerful influence on both the political and social structures of their times. (De la Croix, Tansey, and Kirkpatrick, p. 821)
Moreover, profound contradictions like the tension between reason and sensibility and the crisis of the genre traditionnel that we find in the works of fiction of the Rococo period keep us in a continuous state of intellectual stimulation and creative movement. We are amused by the comical, satirical, and provocative portrayal of certain individuals or of situations of life in general. When we look closer, we see the incessant attempt of Rococo writers and philosophers to portray and express more than just the surface of things. In other words, we become aware of their endeavor to make a more profound approach to life, starting from the smallest entities, human individuals; expanding to include larger ones, like society or a country; or even striving for the ultimate ones, like religious concepts or the entire world. We learn to appreciate and admire the spontaneity of the Rococo style, which is not only part of the writing style but can also be found in the great paintings created in this period.
Who were the great painters of the Rococo period? Chronologically speaking -- listing their names depending on date of birth and approximate creative activity -- the works of the following painters were considered most influential: Nicholas de Largillière (1656-1746), Jean-François de Troy (1679-1752), Jean-Antoine Watteau (1684-1721), Nicholas Lancret (1690-1743), Jean-Baptiste Siméon Chardin (1699-1779), François Boucher (1703-1770), Maurice Quentin le Tour (1704-1788), Jean Baptiste Greuze (1725-1805), Jean-Honoré Fragonard (1732-1806), Jacques Louis David (1748-1825), and last but not least, Elisabeth Louise Vigée LeBrun who lived from 1755 to 1842, when the gradual transformation to Neoclassicism was already beginning. (Grattan.)
Before introducing a specific analysis of one of the great visual creations of the aforementioned artists, I would like to give a general idea about the most important elements of Rococo painting style. One should be aware of the fact that the characteristics I will point out are in fact rather similar to the attributes of Rococo writing style mentioned earlier in my discussion. Roughly speaking, one has to make a general abstract conversion of the different facets that identify the great literary works of the 18th century and apply them to painting. In other words, after having made an approach to Rococo that went hand in hand with the description of the art of writing, we are now required to focus on elements of a primarily visual nature.
To start with, we are exposed to a triumph of clarity, detail, and sublimity, which has been referred to in terms of Porzellanfigürchen at an earlier point. The artists creating and reflecting the Rococo style communicate to us in a fairly indirect, subtle, and sometimes almost secret way. We find ourselves before brilliant paintings, which represent fairly imaginary and abstract models. This tendency can also be identified when observing the exotic, fictive, and even utopian attributes of Rococo writing style. However, at the same time they absolutely succeed in remaining full of life and incessant movement, very similar to the rapidity, shortness, and suggestive aspect of the writing style of the period. The elements of the paintings do not exclusively manifest themselves around one single center. On the contrary, they seem to even create another imaginary center of their own, only implicitly suggested to the observer. Generally speaking, we find ourselves in the distinctive atmosphere, the basic ambience, and the typical mood of the Rococo era.
Just like in Rococo literature, we also notice a kind of inner contradiction in the visual arts of the period. The artistic creations of the Rococo style have a tendency of hiding their true subject. Consequently, this dichotomy is represented by such opposing aspects as an extremely simple structure on the one hand, and a complex, opulent decoration on the other. Speaking of the noticeable arabesque influences concerning visual ornamentation, I would like to point to the ornate, playful, and even erotic style of Rococo literature. Once again, we come to the conclusion that the oriental world has left noticeable traces. We are exposed to a new kind of sensuality, emotionalism, and even sentimentalism. Or as May explicitly puts it, “A great work of art therefore has the power to stir our deepest emotions. The pleasure we experience in viewing representations of powerful emotions, whether on the stage or on canvas, derives from this instant recognition on our past.” (Eighteen Century French Aesthetics, p. 230) I would like to point out that this pathos is not only represented in studio art and drama, but Kelly’s statement is also applicable to the art of writing in the 18th century in France.
In continuing to sum up the similarities of the Rococo writing style and the Rococo painting style, I would like to refer to the fact that both are characterized by an extraordinary richness, an immense sense of elegance, and an aesthetic concept that is oriented towards the pleasures of the world. The euphoria of the artists resulting from their newly obtained freedom of expression is reflected in their work. At this point, I would like to state that my comparative general descriptions of the Rococo style in literature and painting so far are self-referential. In other words, since I have already discussed the basic features of each of the two artistic media of the Rococo style, and since I think that they speak for themselves, I would like to avoid repetitively comparing every single common characteristic once again.
Instead, I would like to concentrate on a more specific, individual, and concrete interpretation of the Rococo painting style. I have chosen a particular Fragonard painting to be the subject of my analysis. First, some words about the artist: Jean-Honoré Fragonard, who lived from 1732 to 1806, was a French painter whose scenes are characterized by a certain kind of light-heartedness, stylish eroticism, and use of color, which most certainly was typical of the Rococo spirit. For a rather brief period of his life, Fragonard was a student of Chardin. In the time before he won the Prix de Rome in the year 1752, he was taught by Boucher. According to De la Croix, Tansey and Kirkpatrick, Fragonard was “…a first-rate colorist whose decorative skill almost surpassed his master’s.” (p. 825) Among his most important and famous compositions are “The Swing” (1766), “The Reader (1770-1772), “The Bathers” (1765) and perhaps “La Fête de Saint-Cloud”, which I have chosen as the subject of my discussion.
Unfortunately, we are not able to observe precisely the creative development of such a brilliant, inspired, and talented artist as Fragonard because he had a tendency of not dating his masterpieces. Nevertheless, he was a fairly influential painter whose extraordinary compositions had a vaporous, subtle, and imaginary quality, which reminds us of the fantastic atmosphere of a dream. Like many other artists of the period, Fragonard succeeded in finding a colorful way of communicating serious matters to us with great clarity, chic, and elegance. “Alongside those of Boucher, his paintings seem to sum up an era. His delicate coloring, witty characterization, and spontaneous brushwork ensured that even his most erotic subjects are never vulgar, and his finest work has an irresistible verve and joyfulness.” (Pioch)
What scene do we become part of when we observe “La Fête de Saint-Cloud”? We find ourselves in a very strong, impressive, and vivid atmosphere supported by the breathtaking portrayal of the trees and the sky. Fragonard proves himself as a master of coloration in terms of creating a brilliant contrast between light and shadow. I believe that this painting even has what I would call a dramatic atmosphere, which manifests through Fragonard’s effective use of lighting. Nevertheless, I think that the lack of precisely clear-cut lines at certain points of the work, which goes hand in hand with a fading of details, does not diminish its overwhelming richness of contrast. I would like to quote Roger Laufer who has given a brilliant description of “La Fête de Saint-Cloud”:
La symétrie et le contraste s’accordent grâce à la souplesse et à la variété des nuances. […] De quelque coté qu’on la considère, la structure de l’œuvre contraint le regard à se porter sur la vapeur indistincte d’eau, de feuillage et de ciel qui est au milieu de la toile; mais cette perspective inconsistante et comme absente fuit vers le haut et sur les cotés, redescend par les trouées de lumière vers les spectacles de charlatans et de marionnettes dans un mouvement perpétuel.
(p. 27)
Before I provide an actual example of 18th century writing style in order to demonstrate the similarity of elements used in the visual arts of the period, I would like to clarify the notion of “love for detail” mentioned earlier in my essay. Throughout my previous discussion of the concept of “smallness” and distinctive characteristics used in the French Rococo style, I treated this subject from a fairly general point of view. Now, however, I would like to clarify that it is not actually the notion of detail that was stressed in the period. More precisely, it is a certain kind of love for small, subtle, and revealing gestures that are part of a classic Rococo scene – in paintings of masters like Fragonard, Boucher, or Watteau and also in literary works like Voltaire’s tales. In Style Rococo, Style des Lumières, Laufer refers to an “organic unity” distinct to the Rococo style in terms of its delicate, yet illuminating small gestures, which lend a kind of kinetic vitality to each work. « Notre auteur anonyme, en découvrant une analogie de structure entre la peinture et le roman, dégage une caractéristique fondamentale du style Rococo, celle d’une unité organique: elle le distingue radicalement du style classique à l’unité hiérarchique. » (p. 25)
I feel that Voltaire’s tales are a perfect example since they contain a large variety of these small gestures. I am thinking of the description in the 16th chapter of Candide ou l’Optimisme called Arrivée de Candide et de son Valet au Pays d’Eldorado, et ce qu’ils y virent, or of particular situations of L’Ingénu. For example the scene where St. Yves is offered a dubious proposition in order to save l’ingenu:
La St. Yves pleurait, elle était suffoquée, à demi renversée sur un sofa, croyant à peine ce qu’elle voyait, ce qu’elle entendait. Le St. Pouange, à son tour, se jeta à ses genoux. […] Enfin la tête lui tourna au point qu’il lui déclara que c’était le seul moyen de tirer de sa prison l’homme auquel elle prenait un intérêt si violent et si tendre. (p. 363)
This scene creates a distant, theatrical, and even erotic atmosphere, just like a painting by Fragonard or the other Rococo painters.
I would like to refer briefly to another excerpt of Voltaire’s tales because I feel that a particular scene in Zadig ou la Destinée provides an excellent example of Voltaire’s integration of revealing gestures. In the chapter pointedly called Le Nez, Zadig almost loses his nose in order to prove to his wife how fast the ways of love can change. « Elle prit donc un rasoir; elle alla au tombeau de son époux, l’arrosa de ses larmes, et s’approcha pour couper le nez à Zadig, qu’elle trouva tout étendu dans la tombe. Zadig se relève en tenant son nez d’une main, et arrêtant le rasoir de l’autre. » (p. 34) In my opinion this description speaks for itself and for the expressive talent of Voltaire. I would also like to point out that comic elements can be found in the portraits charges in such works as La Vie de Marianne or Histoire de Gil Blas de Santillane.
Regarding the beginning of the 18th century when the Rococo emerged, one has to remember the presence of controversial circumstances at that point in time. We find ourselves in the middle of the querelle des Poussinistes et des Rubénistes and the querelle des Anciens et des Modernes. (Kelly, p. 230) It is a period facing the clash of two worlds, of the classicists’ ideas and the new Rococo values. In order to understand the Age of Enlightenment, I find it absolutely imperative to refer to the great philosophers of the period, Voltaire, Rousseau, and Diderot. They all observed from skeptical points of view the spontaneous compositions of the Rococo style although they partly sympathized with its ideas. “Yet even authors who roundly denounced Rococo, frequently wrote in the same spirit of inventiveness, improvisation, light-hearted wit and delight in sensuous pleasures. Voltaire fiercely attacked the Rococo style in the Temple du Goût, but in Le Mondain celebrated the joys and delights of the senses.” (May, “Neoclassical, Rococo or Preromantic? Diderot’s Esthetic quest”, p. 183)
In fact, a fairly strong anti-Rococo reaction was present in the 18th century. People claimed to miss the formal and solemn aesthetic approach to the arts from the past, which they believed to be a more reasonable concept since it was not bound to time, changes, or innovation of any kind. Rousseau, who was a rather radical thinker, was fond of the emphasis on emotion, and of preserving a natural aspect to art: “The later 18th century was also the time of Rousseau, the “age of sensibility” whose leading thinkers preached the value of sincere feeling and natural human sympathy over artful reason and the cold calculations of courtly society.” (De la Croix, Tansey, and Kirkpatrick, p. 832)
What were Diderot’s thoughts about Rococo art? First of all, I would like to point out that Diderot did not only find himself in a period full of dichotomies, but he also had his own almost paradoxical point of view concerning the arts of the 18th century. On the one hand he “…denounced what impressed him as the unnaturalness, artificiality and meretriciousness of such otherwise divergent artists as Watteau, Boucher and Fragonard” and claimed that the Rococo style was missing “…dramatic and expressive intensity as well as a commitment to a higher ideal that transcends the immediate, sensuous pleasure derived from the play of purely visual values.” (May, “Neoclassical, Rococo or Preromantic? Diderot’s Esthetic quest”, pp. 184, 185) On the other hand, Diderot was amazed by the emotional, theatrical, and dramatic elements of visual compositions that were reinforced by a spectacular use of colors and were full of creative Bewegtheit. He had a high appreciation for a visually successful portrayal of a specific dramatic situation. Despite his ambiguous attitude towards the Rococo, Diderot was so widely recognized as an influential thinker, writer, and critic of the period that Fragonard painted “Portrait de Denis Diderot” in 1769, which can be viewed at the Louvre.
Having referred to this immensity of controversial, unbalanced, ambiguous and even self-contradicting elements of the Rococo style, I would like to bring this theoretical discourse to an equilibrium. When the diversity of contrasts and the structural asymmetry enter a certain kind of artistic symbiosis, the organic unity I have referred to earlier is brought to life. Creative balance, powerful harmony, and an artistic equilibrium are established in both domains, literature and painting of the 18th century. To establish a true appreciation of Rococo literature, we have to understand the crucial and radical separation between philosophical concepts and social entertainment. In other words, we have to differentiate between the light poetry of the salons and the more profound works of the period. As we have seen, there is what one could call a common Rococo style for both, the creators of outstanding literature and brilliant paintings. Maybe the true spirit of the “unfinished” style lies in the ultimate reunion of both aspects of the Rococo. I agree with Voltaire that the elements of this period can only be described by the use of superlatives such as sublime, and I would like to refer to Laufer’s definition: « Entre le classicisme de 1660 et le romantisme de 1830, la France n’a élaboré qu’un seul style, auquel je propose de donner un seul nom, celui de Rococo. »
Having primarily concentrated on the first part of the 18th century and having provided a descriptive and methodical discussion of the parallels of the Rococo style in literature and the visual arts, I would now like to extend my discourse and include an author of the second half of the 18th century: Pierre Choderlos de Laclos. Although his Les Liaisons Dangereuses was published in 1782 and is therefore placed in the second half of the 18th century, it can still be considered part of the Rococo movement. Or as Laufer put it:
Ainsi, derrière le poli d’un roman néo-classique qui réduit la psychologie et le comportement en maximes de libertinage, Les Liaisons Dangereuses contiennent-elles les deux faces parfaitement assemblées de l’art Rococo, créant une tension ironique forte, dissimulée cependant par l’illusion de vécu que Laclos a su donner à sa création grâce à la richesse d’éléments concrets précis qu’il y a enfermés. (p. 139)
What are the characteristics that make Les Liaisons Dangereuses a Rococo work? Laufer describes the composition as based on baroque imagination as well as on classical discipline while comparing the novel to “…un meuble à secret Louis XVI”, which masks its true nature and purpose. (p. 135) Laufer goes on to say, « Pour apercevoir le caractère vraiment Rococo des Les Liaisons Dangereuses, il faut d’abord distinguer entre le néo-classicisme un peu grêle de leur maniérisme et le classicisme puissant de leur contrepoint, entre les maximes du libertinage et les alternances du cœur. » (p. 135) Using the epistolary writing style, characteristic for a novel of the 18th century, and exploring all the possibilities this technique offers, Laclos succeeds in portraying a number of different voices. He introduces a psychological realism that blends historical and fictive elements and conveys a crucial moral message, which functions as a counter-example. This aspect is even mentioned in the “Préface du rédacteur” of Les Liaisons Dangereuses: « ‘le rédacteur’ déclare qu’il entend ‘rendre un service aux mœurs ‘, en dévoilant ‘les moyens qu’emploient ceux qui en ont de mauvaises pour corrompre ceux qui en ont de bonnes’. » (p. 31) Moreover, Laclos treats topics like the relationship between men and women, the concept of libertinage, social influences and the bourgeoisie, sensibility and eroticism.
The scandalous success of Les Liaisons Dangereuses and its cynical portrayal of the relations between the two sexes are closely tied to the concept of libertinage. Laclos states in the Journal des Amis de la Constitution :
On se convaincra par sa lecture que les fictions atroces ou scandaleuses, à l’aide desquelles les romanciers dévoilaient et combattaient les caractères infâmes qu’ils mettaient en scène, étaient encore au dessous de la réalité… On y reconnaîtra enfin que la Révolution n’était pas moins nécessaire pour le rétablissement de mœurs que pour celui de la liberté. (Oeuvres complètes,
p. 643)
According to Cazenobe, he made this statement to justify and defend Les Liaisons Dangereuses: « Il prétendit que son roman avait eu la portée d’un libelle politique. » (p. 17) To Laufer, the dramatic libertinage of the novel appears to be relatively simple; he sees it as a tale of two libertines whose flirtatious alliance degenerates to open war when a devout woman comes between them. (p. 138) Given that the concept of libertinage usually goes hand in hand with oppression of the other sex, Laclos’ novel is exceptional because it depicts the difficulties of a conspiracy between a man and a woman. According to Laufer, « à la symétrie formelle et statique de confidences alternées, il [Laclos] substituait ainsi la dissymétrie réelle et dynamique d’un dialogue dramatique. » (p. 140)
Considering the fact that the Marquise de Merteuil and the Vicomte de Valmont become accomplices from an external and objective viewpoint, their main motivation is to achieve personal victory over others. The concept of libertinage and their social status are among the factors that bring them together and cause them to choose a bourgeoise as their victim. Regarding their conspiracy from an internal and individual standpoint, however, the goal of their “partnership” is to prove their superiority to one another. Since their true personal motives are not remotely identical, their alliance is predestined to result in fatal disaster. Thody comments, “It becomes apparent, early in the exchange of letters between Madame de Merteuil and Valmont, that each is intensely jealous of the other’s exploits.”(p. 5) It seems as if the two protagonists, who Laufer describes as “des personnages lucides mais aliénés” (p. 141), are not aware of the true cause of their own actions and therefore suffer from the unexpected outcome of their wicked liaison. Because of the strong social pressures in terms of their sexual identity, they endeavor to exchange their gender-specific roles in order to express their personal freedom. « Valmont se fait femme, la Merteuil se fait homme…[La Marquise] veut vaincre les hommes en homme» (Laufer, p. 142)
The social situation of women in the 18th century largely depends on their reputation. The Marquise de Merteuil is an example par excellence for a woman who fights against a society in which men seem to have all the advantages. Especially in her famous autobiographical letter, she gives the reader insight into her personal struggle. This representation of the condition of womanhood refers to the necessity to lie on a regular basis, to play a certain role and to wear a masque in society. In the letter LXXXI, the Marquise de Merteuil explains what makes her a unique woman and describes her chef-d’œuvre:
Mais moi, qu’ai-je de commun avec ces femmes inconsidérées ? quand m’avez vous vue m’écarter des règles que je me suis prescrites, et manquer à mes principes ? je dis mes principes, et je le dis à dessein : car ils ne sont pas, comme ceux des autres femmes, donnés au hasard, reçus sans examen et suivis par habitude, ils sont le fruit de mes profondes réflexions ; je les ai créés, et je puis dire que je suis mon ouvrage. (Laclos, Les Liaisons Dangereuses, lettre LXXXI, p. 263)
In the course of her psychological interpretation of Les Liaisons Dangereuses Therrien comments about the Marquise in her chapter ”Interprétation du Libertinage Féminin“, « La dissimulation, le masque sont par conséquent des éléments indispensables de son entreprise de séduction. […] Elle prétend jouir de la même liberté qu’un homme dans la vie amoureuse. » (p. 62) According to Loy, she bases her life on a “love equals vengeance” concept. (p. 162)
Since I am particularly interested in this subject, I would like to explore feminist viewpoints in the 18th century. It is a matter of fact that women in the period were victimized by a male-oriented society and they were “…regarded by even the most enlightened men as inferior in intellect, as weaker vessels that had to be both disciplined and protected…” (May, “Rousseau’s Antifeminism Reconsidered”, p. 309) It seems to me that women were doomed to live in a prison, in the literal sense as well as in the figurative sense of the term. Not only were they captured in confined spatial units, such as their homes or the convent, but also mental and emotional barriers were imposed on them, such as no right for education, or forced marriage. Women in the 18th century found themselves in a continuous struggle against stereotypes, clichés, and masculine hostility. The problematic circumstances of their existence certainly found their way into the world of literature of the period. Although created by a man, such characters as the Marquise de Merteuil reflect the hardships of women at that time. Nevertheless, this representation is not entirely precise and truthful. The women writers of the 18th century give us an even more accurate insight concerning the difficulties of their gender, even if they were fighting yet another battle: to be accepted as writers. In her book Ecriture Femme, Didier treats this issue in depth and comments, « L’hostilité de la société à l’égard de la femme qui écrit prend toutes sortes de formes, depuis le simple ridicule, jusqu’à la destruction pure et simple, le refus de la transmission du texte. » (p. 13)
My discussion of the “woman question” in the 18th century leads me to another topic of great importance: sensibility and the Age of Enlightenment. I would like to introduce a quote by Brownstein on this subject, from her book Becoming a Heroine: Reading about Women in Novels:
To want to become a heroine, to have sense of the possibility of being one, is to develop the beginnings of what feminists call a “raised” consciousness: it liberates woman from feeling (and therefore perhaps from being) a victim. […] [The Marquise de Merteuil] is unlike all other women, being important and unique, but she is also quintessentially feminine, therefore rightly representative of her sex.” (pp. XIX, XXI)
The emphasis on sensibility, emotionalism, and eroticism is an indisputable element of the novel of the 18th century. It is in fact one of the main goals of the libertines to assert their identity in the only realm that does not seem to limit their actions: eroticism. (Laufer, p. 136) The Marquise de Merteuil, for example, literally seems to explore the entire spectrum of emotions: from strength to weakness, pleasure to pain, love to hatred, and social death to physical death. The Vicomte de Valmont also develops an unexpected kind of sensibility when he gets more attached to the Présidente. According to Laufer, his ambivalence in this respect grows, not only making it possible for him to balance his libertinage and his amorous desires, but making it essential. « Sans libertinage, son projet disparaît; sans attachement sentimental, la séduction redevient vulgaire. » (p. 147)
What is it that makes a novel sentimental? According to Todd in her book Sensibility: An Introduction, “The arousal of pathos through conventional situations, stock familial characters and rhetorical devices is the mark of sentimental literature. […] The sentimental work reveals a belief in the appealing and aesthetic quality of virtue, displayed in a naughty world…” (pp. 2, 3) The term “sentimental novel” is primarily used for 18th century sentimental literature, which was subject to heavy criticism, numerous attacks and intense mockery from the 1780’s onwards. (Todd, p. 141) This is exactly the time Laclos’ Les Liaisons Dangereuses was published. Can it be considered a “sentimental novel”? In Brissenden’s opinion, this term is very helpful, although it lacks a precise definition. He comments in the chapter “Sentimentalism and the Novel of Sentiment” of his book Virtue in Distress;
Indeed both from necessity and choice I have employed it often myself throughout this study to describe novels which it is my ultimate concern to show are not sentimental in the sense that the word is understood today – novels like Clarissa, Tristram Shandy, A Sentimental Journey, Werther, Les Liaisons Dangereuses, and others. (p. 138)
Another crucial aspect in my discussion of Les Liaisons Dangereuses is the epistolary writing style. Using this technique and exploring all its possibilities, Laclos succeeds in creating an incomparable work of literature with compressed action and complex dramatic elements. However, the reason why it is not perfect might actually be its overemphasis on perfection. Although he considers Les Liaisons Dangereuses a “chef-d’œuvre du genre [épistolaire]”, Versini questions Laclos’ perfectionist technique in terms of its “liquidation”, « Lorsqu’une forme d’art a atteint son point de parfaite maturité, elle ne peut plus que se survivre. » (Laclos et Tradition, p. 637) Laufer also comments that the only mistake he can possibly find in this “Rococo symphony” is its “excessive perfection.” (p. 139) In Le Roman Epistolaire, Versini points out the following characteristics of the epistolary novel; « Permanence d’une esthétique du discontinu: mosaïque, polyptyque, kaléidoscope, le roman épistolaire, du moins dans sa forme polyphonique, propose une vérité composite, multiple, une juxtaposition pratique qui convient aussi bien à des générations prises de doute. » (p. 161) In the same paragraph, he refers to the fact that the basic composition of an epistolary novel involves separation, and consequently a struggle for unity. He states that we are dealing with separations of a different kind: those in love, and those caused by war or by society.
I am well aware of the fact that there are multiple interpretations of Les Liaisons Dangereuses in general, as well as of this particular issue, depending on the subjectivity of the protagonists. In my opinion, Les Liaisons Dangereuses depicts a separation that partially results from social pressures, but mostly stems from the fact that the protagonists are two individuals with incompatible personal goals who try to establish a union under the mantle of libertinage while endeavoring to accomplish two completely different chef-d’œuvres. Moreover, the influence of their chosen victim on their partnership develops in an unexpected way, which results in the formation of a triangular plot. Consequently, the accomplices become rivals in the art of seduction and lose control. Duplicity, intrigue, and treachery make the situation very complex. What appears to start out as a simple act of revenge on a past lover of the Marquise develops into a fatal catastrophe. The ensuing battle leaves no winners behind. According to Laufer one can interpret the novel in only two possible ways: « comme celui de la passion obscure et souterraine des amants qui s’ignorent; ou comme la démonstration de la conséquence fatale qui résulte d’une situation impersonnelle donnée » (p. 139)
I would like to apply the concept of separation to the protagonist couple of the novel and discuss its different aspects. Considering this matter from the Marquise’s point of view, I would say that the inevitable separation from Valmont actually results from her own inner separation. In other words, it is this duality of her personality, this enormous division of her actual being from who she appears to be, that makes her a victim of her own system and consequently alienates her from Valmont. In fact, she does not become a tragic victim but a pathetic one. In order to present Valmont’s standpoint in terms of the issue of separation, I would like to quote Thelander on Valmont’s letter IV in her work Laclos and the Epistolary Novel, “In Valmont’s prophetic words, the plot of Les Liaisons Dangereuses is the story of what happens to the relationship of the separated lovers as each pursues a separate course until they finally do come together in the end.” (p. 51)
Another dramatic effect of the epistolary writing style is the creation of a number of different voices and of individual writing styles, which are distinct for the diverse personages. In my opinion, Laclos succeeds in identifying a personal writing style for each of the characters in Les Liaisons Dangereuses. The Marquise de Merteuil for example has a fairly sophisticated and elevated writing style, representative of her personality. Laufer however, makes an interesting observation of this “roman d’analyse”. He points to the fact that Laclos’ perfectionist use of the epistolary writing style bears a certain kind of artificiality: « …les différentes voix sont un peu trop nettement distinguées par les effets de plume, mais se confondent par le mode de pensée. » (p. 136)
Laclos’ emphasis on establishing a credible representation of the different characters through their distinctive writing styles raises the question of how important it was to him to bring a seemingly authentic correspondence to life. This issue also involves a reevaluation of the notion of perfectionism brought into context by this work. Lee discusses the complexity of the roles of the “rédacteur” and the “éditeur” of Les Liaisons Dangereuses in the chapter “L’Editeur devient Dangereux : Les Liaisons Dangereuses“ of Roman à Editeur. « …le but ultime de toute cette perfection technique ne semble pas résider dans l’illusion de l’authenticité du manuscrit. Car dès la préface, cette illusion est mise en cause. » (p. 117) In other words, we should take the contradictory character of the double preface of Les Liaisons Dangereuses into consideration when regarding its perfectionism, since it refers to it as being simply a novel on the one hand (éditeur), and points to the letters as being authentic on the other hand. (rédacteur)
Since I am particularly interested in the character of the Marquise de Merteuil, I would like to continue analyzing her personality. Given that the 18th century is a period favoring angel-devil clichés, the Marquise represents a diabolic personage as opposed to the angel like Présidente. Laufer comments; « La Présidente est la contradiction vivante de la Marquise. » (p. 150). Baudelaire describes the Présidente as « Une Eve touchante.-- La Merteuil, une Eve satanique. » (p. 999) Laufer introduces the concept of two different types of women in the period. On the one hand there is the “femme romanesque, dévote et prude”, and on the other hand we are dealing with the “femme facile.” Given that she devotes herself to libertinage and it is consequently her goal to be a “femme libre”, the Marquise de Merteuil refuses to be part of either category. However, she admits that she was not born as such. On the contrary, it is only through excessive, systematic and painful self-cultivation and discipline that she has been able to create and control her chef d’œuvre: herself. This circumstance makes her a “femme artificielle”. Still, she becomes a victim of her own system and is highly intimidated or even defeated in a certain way by a “femme naturelle”.
Although the Marquise keeps stressing her uniqueness in comparison to other women of the period, she gets pushed to the point where she is about to enact the most feminine weakness and make a declaration of her love to Valmont. However, he seems to be too deeply involved in his “spiritual seduction” of the Présidente to even realize it. (Laufer, p.148) After having forced Valmont to leave her and hereby having eliminated her rival, the Marquise de Merteuil writes, « Celle même qui serait tendre et sensible, qui n’existerait que pour vous et qui mourrait enfin d’amour et de regret, n’en serait pas moins sacrifiée à la première fantaisie, à la crainte d’être plaisanté un moment; et vous voulez qu’on se gêne? » (Laclos, Les Liaisons Dangereuses, lettre CLII, p. 470) Her definition of love seems to go hand in hand with the establishment of a state of war and with a deep and passionate need for revenge. She is a pathetic victim of her own principles. In his chapter “Le demon Femelle,” Versini gives a description of the Marquise de Merteuil which I find particularly brilliant, « La Marquise est condamnée par son système et ses ‘principes’ à la terrible solitude du démon qui n’a personne à aimer, pas d’amis, pas de sœurs, qui est incapable d’éprouver amour, amitié ou même solidarité avec son sexe dont la sépare un féminisme individualiste et méprisant. » (Le Roman le plus Intelligent, p. 112)
Given the complexity of the Marquise’s personality, her wicked alliance with Valmont is of an even more complicated nature. According to Laufer, the couple Merteuil-Valmont falls into the same category as the “imaginary models” that inspired Montesquieu, Marivaux, Voltaire, Diderot and Rousseau. He describes them as creations of paper mâché who depict a lesson. (p. 153) In Laclos ou le Paradoxe, Pomeau makes the following statement: « …tout le recueil des Les Liaisons Dangereuses démontre la supériorité du couple libertin. Ils sont eux toujours lucides et jamais dupes. […] [Valmont] a un don de pénétration psychologique, qu’il développe par un effort volontaire, tendu jusqu’à devenir douloureux. » (p. 169) There is in fact a large variety of contradictory elements in Les Liaisons Dangereuses, starting from its smallest units, such as the internal separation of the personage and the complex nature of the protagonists’ liaison, reaching larger ones, such as Laclos’ preface, or the disharmony between the figures and the basic philosophy of the Lumières. Bayard reinforces this theory; « Qui dit paradoxe dit contradiction, et celles-ci abondent dans Les Liaisons Dangereuses. » and provides an example for the latter; « Quand nous disons que la lettre autobiographique de Mme de Merteuil est une lettre monstrueuse et une grande page de la philosophie de Lumières, il n’existe aucun moyen de réunir ces deux énoncés autour d’une formule de compris satisfaisante. » (p. 39) Moreover, he points to even more globally ambiguous aspects, which he calls “le paradoxe du menteur” or even “le paradoxe de la lecture” of Les Liaisons Dangereuses. (p. 175)
Having explored the complexity of the 18th century from its very beginning while primarily focusing on the Rococo, I would like to conclude by restating that we are dealing with a hybrid period that bears a large variety of controversies, contradictions and even paradoxes. Emerging in the first half of the century, the Rococo style is a distinct part of the Age of Enlightenment, which has found its way into the world of literature as well as into the world of the visual arts. Having based my discourse on Laufer’s Style Rococo, Style des Lumières, I have extended my analysis in order to include an author of the second half of the 18th century. I would like to close with Laufer’s words about Laclos’ novel: « Malgré leur date tardive et une tournure louis-quatorzienne caractéristique de l’époque du retour à l’antique, Les Liaisons Dangereuses sont le dernier chef-d’œuvre et l’un des plus beaux fleurons de notre littérature Rococo. » (p. 154)
Bibliography
“18th-Century France: The Rococo and Watteau”. Online. National Gallery of Art. Internet. May 6th, 1999.
Available: http://www.nga.gov/collection/gallery/gg54/gg54-main1.html
Baudelaire, C. Oeuvres Complètes Gallimard. Paris, 1954
Bayard, P. Paradoxe du Menteur. Les Editions de Minuit. Paris, 1993
Brissenden, R.F. Virtue in Distress: Studies in the Novel of Sentiment. Macmillan. London, 1974
Brownstein, R. Becoming a Heroine. Viking Press. New York, 1982
Cazenobe, C. Crébillon Fils ou la Politique dans le Boudoir. Honoré Champion. Paris, 1997
De la Croix, Tansey, and Kirkpatrick. Gardner’s Art Through the Ages. Harcourt
Brace Javanovich Inc. Orlando, 1991
Didier, B. L’Ecriture Femme Presses Universitaires de France. Paris, 1991
Grattan, L. J. ”Chronological List of Artists.” Online. Jim’s Fine Art Collection. Internet. May 6th, 1999. Available: http://www2.iinet.com/art/artists/artists2.htm
Laclos, P.C. Les Liaisons Dangereuses. Garnier-Flammerion. Paris, 1981
Laclos, P.C. Oeuvre Complètes. Gallimard. Paris, 1979
Laufer, R. Style Rococo, Style des Lumières. J.Corti. Paris, 1963
Lee, B. Roman à Editeur. Peter Lang. Berne, 1998
Loy, J.R. L’Esprit Créateur. “Love/Vengeance in the Late 18th Century French Novel.” Lawrance, Kansas [etc.]. v. III (Winter) 1963
May, G. “Eighteen Century French Aesthetics”, Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, by Kelly M., Oxford University Press. Oxford and New York, 1998
May, G. “Neoclassical, Rococo or Preromantic? Diderot’s Esthetic quest”, Diderot, Digression and Dispersion, ed. J. Undank & H. Josephs French Forum. Lexington, Kentucky, 1984
May, G. “Rousseau’s Antifeminism Reconsidered“ French Women and the Age of Enlightenment, ed. S.I. Spencer. Indiana University Press. Bloomington, 1984
Neubert, F. Französische Rokokoprobleme. Duncker & Humblot. Heidelberg, 1922
Pioch, N. ”Fragonard, Jean-Honoré“. 1999. Online. Webmuseum, Paris. Internet. May 6th 1999.
Available: http://metalab.unc.edu/wm/paint/auth/fragonard
Pomeau, R. Laclos ou le Paradoxe. Hachette. Paris, 1993
Schürr, F. Barock, Klassizismus und Rokoko in der Französischen Literatur. Leipzig and Berlin, 1928
Thelander, D. Laclos and the Epistolary Novel. Librairie Droz. Geneva, 1963
Therrien, M. Les Liaisons Dangereuses: Une Interprétation Psychologique. Société d’Edition d’Enseignement Supérieur. Paris, 1973
Thody, P Les Liaisons Dangereuses. University of Glasgow French and German Pub. Glasgow, 1994
Todd, J. Sensibility: An Introduction. Methuen. London, 1986
Versini, L Laclos et la Tradition. Librairie Klincksieck. Paris, 1968
Versini, L Le Roman le Plus Intelligent. Honoré Champion. Paris, 1998
Versini, L Le Roman Epistolaire. Presses Universitaires de France. Paris, 1979
Voltaire, F. M. A. Romans et Contes. Garnier-Flammerion. Paris, 1966
