Life in general in Paris during the restoration of the nineteenth century was complicated: both bohemian and regimented, depending upon the social circles and environment of the resident. The July 1930 Revolution overthrew Charles X, the last of the Bourbons, and placed Louis Philippe I on the throne. The actual living environment in Paris was both interesting and potentially dangerous. It was safe in the sense that there was little power above the middle class, especially above the bourgeois, the merchant class, who worked but also owned the means of production. It was also safe in that the occupying elite army exerted considerable control over the lower classes, keeping their activities with reason. In addition, Paris had attracted a highly multicultural population and was a constantly stirring bed of political and philosophical thought. The renaissance in Europe had developed language and art to a high degree and the political uprisings and social problems of Early nineteenth-century Paris, after the July revolution made it once again relatively safe, pushed artists to express ideas as a reaction to the overall climate of change that was overtaking Europe. (Taylor, 1950, 47-66) Change produces tension, and tension, within a reasonably safe environment, produces art.
By July 1830, Paris had been through many different political regimes and had seen Charles become a wasteful despot. Once deposed, Louis Philippe was established as a constitutional monarch. This was the completion, in essence, of the bourgeois revolution of 1789. Women had seen the gains of the revolution vanish under Napoleon, and the July Monarchy did little to address this. Those who were still discontented became businesswomen or artists and writers like George Sand. (McPhee, Peter, 2004, 123) The first two years following the revolt were economically disastrous. However, Louis Philippe hung on, working with advisors to create a unity of purpose between himself and the remaining landed aristocracy, who held most of the votes. Within this climate, economic problems were dealt with, certain workers’ rights were validated. Technological changes were pushing large-scale industrialization and mechanized nation. This meant that workers were still paid low wages while their productivity makes more profit for the company. Workers wouldn’t put up with this, and with a union-like action, pushed for change.
There was a large influx of population from everywhere. Some of these new immigrants were skilled workers, but many joined the lowest social class, getting by any way they could. The cholera epidemic of 1832 wiped out a generous portion of this population, recorded as about one in 20 as opposed to the much lower death rate, approximately 1%, among the wealthier inhabitants. With a higher than 30% growth in population in Paris following 1830 and the high inflation rate, there were more poor and more difference between the rich and the poor and a huge drop in the percentage of children who could be educated. (McPhee, Peter, 2004, 11-20) However, there were, during this time, two different middle-class groups: the shopkeepers, clerks, and lower-level professionals and the new “elite” middle class, wealthier and upwardly mobile, who began to exert their influence upon art and music. (Sampson, Jim Ed. 2004, 57-63).
This. Paris has been variously described as Bohemia and the beginning of the modernist era. However there are not only many disagreements on where to draw the lines, but depending upon with whom you talk or what you read, one of these is favored over the other. Those who favor Bohemia believe that the modernist era tended to formalize excessively, rather like plastic culture. Those who favor the modernist would say that the Bohemian era was cluttered with uncertainty and anarchistic morass from which it was miraculous that any arts survived. Regardless of what you call it or where you draw the line, it is obvious that these two periods were opposing and interdependent at the same time. After the July Revolution, there were fewer constraints on hearts of all kinds. However, the major constraint was represented by the consumer. In these turbulent times, those involved in creative arts had to please an audience, not an audience of one, but have many. After a mid-century, life in Paris had begun to more resemble its modern counterpart, finally emerging from countless interior revolutions. The Industrial Revolution had begun to change the character of cities around the world, and they change daily life at the same time.
It was in this climate that art and music were beginning to flourish in Paris, as the political and social changes and the further needs created a fertile atmosphere for creative people. Between 1830 and 1850, Paris was an eclectic mixture of cultures and classes, a roiling pot for political ideas and a socially responsive milieu for creative thought. By 1830, Paris had become “The” place to be for artists in all media.
Chopin arrived in Paris in 1831 and began teaching in private practice and performing in salons. However, the period he spent with George Sand, between 1838 and 1847, was his most productive. He composed the Sonata in B flat minor (1839 while actually in Spain with George Sand) and the Barcarolle in 1846. Franz Liszt was already in Paris when Chopin arrived, involved with Countess Marie d’Algout. Both Chopin and Liszt took advantage of the Salon system in Paris, which was a slightly less than a public manner of performance. Performers would gain much from this system, more intimate than the concert hall. They acquired students and indebted the host. They could then assure attendance and generous largesse at their annual fundraising salons. (Sampson, Jim Ed. 2004, 62) There were, of course, the usual institutionalized public performances, and even very public concerts hosted by Valentino and Musard, which were attended by the lower middle class and even the working class. The wealthy elite spent about 2% of their income on entertainment, while the less affluent spent perhaps 1%. Still, this provided more than adequate opportunities to those involved in art, music, and literature for support. Entertainment venues for music and drama ranged from the boulevard theatres to the grand Théatre-Italien, which charges 2 francs for the cheap seats, within the reach of the lower middle class.
Since it was necessary for artists, writers, and musicians to earn their living during this time in Paris, while there were certainly numerous income opportunities, the competition was fierce. This forced artists of all kinds to become marketers or to find patrons who would do that for them. Chopin, Liszt, and Thalberg were among the most popular of the musician, and even they had to stay aware that they depended upon their public. Chopin gave several disastrous concerts between 1832 and 1835, so he turned to earning his living with teaching and composing with only salon appearances. Meanwhile, Liszt and Thalberg were engaged in a spirited rivalry in concert and elsewhere.
Another method of earning money was commissioned on instruments. Chopin promoted Pleyel, while Liszt backed Erard, both yielding 10% commissions. (Sampson, Jim Ed. 2004, 76-77) Composers also made royalties from published music but had to release their music simultaneously in several countries to protect their copyright. Still, unauthorized editions were produced and sold. The increase in amateur performance boosted sales in Paris. Popular musicians and composers made extra cash writing material for music education. Czerny was extremely popular and is still in use for music education as his practice melodies were both entertaining and progressively more difficult, making them ideal for student practice. Others will be found as collections of certain types of music, and one might assume they were written at different times, but many were written as practice collections. A very popular use of poetry, including many of the best poets, was to set their poetry to music. Eduard Lalo did this extremely well, being highly influenced by Schubert. He subjected poems by Hugo, Alfred de Muset, Gautier, and Lamartine, and others to this treatment quite successfully. (Sampson, Jim Ed. 2004) Hugo was quite irritated with this practice.
The writers of Paris were even more influenced by the turbulence of the period, and yet, they were freer than ever to create. Their most serious limitation was the taste of their audience. Victor Hugo, Alexandre Dumas, and Alfred de Muset found this out when they produced plays based on the romanticism of Shakespeare. Hugos’ play Hernani sparked riots when it was performed at the Comedy Français. (Heath, Duncan, 2008, 145).
The climate of a time and place was never more evident than in the first half of the nineteenth century in Paris. Poets, writers, and artists alike tried to make sense of their environments, the changing time, cultural and economic forces, and a growing sense that these problems must be resolved.
George Sand was known for her novels: Indiana appeared in May 1832, Valentine in 1833, and Jacques in 1834. In these three books, I should like to show our present feminism, already armed, introduced to us according to George Sand’s early ideas. (Doumic, 1910, p. 77) The sand was socially involved with Balzac, Liszt, and his countess and Chopin about this time. She gave Balzac the subject for his novel: “Balzac accordingly wrote it, and it figures in the Comedie humaine as Beatrix. Beatrix is the Comtesse d’Agoult, the inspirer, and Liszt is the composer Conti. ” (Doumic, 1910, p. 173) Despite the rivalry of Liszt’s companion, Countess Marie d’Algout, presumably because Liszt and Chopin were friends, George Sand took Chopin to Spain in 1838, thinking that it would be good for his health. However, it turned out quite the opposite and they wound up being turned out of their lodgings because the Spanish authorities considered “consumption” to be highly contagious. They stayed at the Chartreuse monastery of Valdemosa thereafter until they could return to Paris in 1839. “Art and literature did not gain much either by this expedition. George Sand finished her novel entitled Spiridion at Valdemosa. She had commenced it before starting for Spain. In a volume on Un hiver à Majorque she gave some fine descriptions, and also a harsh accusation of the monks, whom she held responsible for all the mishaps of the Sand caravan.” (Doumic, 1910, p. 184) Liszt tells us that Chopin composed his Prelude in B-flat minor at the monastery while George and her children were off on a journey and a violent thunderstorm ensued. He was terrified that they would be hurt, and this resulted in the wild emotional composition. He was passed out when they returned safely, but the music was complete. This attachment has been described by many as a deep friendship and parental (especially maternal on Sand’s part) love.
After their return to Paris, they continued to be involved for eight more years. “In the summer Chopin stayed at Nohant. Eugene Delacroix, who was paying a visit there too, describes his presence as follows: ‘At times, through the window opening on to the garden, we get wafts of Chopin’s music, as he too is at work. It is mingled with the songs of the nightingales and with the perfume of the rose trees.’” (Doumic, 1910, p. 185) There is no doubt that Chopin’s music had some influence on both George Sand and Delacroix, who was also acquainted with each other. Delacroix was deeply touched by music, as is shown in his sketch of Paganini, which was probably painted in 1831 when the violinist gave a concert in Paris which Delacroix attended. “Tubercular and syphilitic when he came to Paris and toothless before he left, Paganini was yet at the height of his powers as a violinist.” (Johnson, 1963, p. 49) This particular portrayed by Delacroix shows very little detail, but the spirit of the violinist is magnificently portrayed in the gypsy-like figure advancing out of the darkness, somewhat distorted, yet fluid like smoke, it is one of Delacroix’s best works. Everybody who was anybody came to Paris. This made it the place to be for a large group of artistic types.
George Sand liked to entertain many of these artists, writers, and musicians, but this made Chopin uneasy, as he was an introvert at heart, and not very intellectual in his pursuits. People such as Pierre Leroux, Louis Blanc, Edgar Quinet, Étienne Arago were reformers, arguers, and speechifiers to him. The final split came in 1847, not long after George Sand’s novel, Lucrezia Floriani, in which she had depicted Chopin as Prince Karol. This amused Liszt and completely annoyed Chopin, who recognized himself. The portrait is not in any way derogatory, and in fact, it was quite pleasing, but Chopin was annoyed at the principal.
“The romantic writers were less inclined to accord the same welcome to music as to the plastic arts. Théophile Gautier is said to have exclaimed that music was “the most disagreeable and the dearest of all the arts. “Neither Lamartine, Hugo, nor any other of the great writers of that period was influenced by music. Musset was the first one to be impassioned by it, and this may have been as much through his dandyism as from conviction.” (Doumic, 1910, p. 197) George Sand, agreed with Musset, who wrote extensive poetry praising music. Sand said, “the most beautiful of all the arts” could paint “all the shades of sentiment and all the phases of passion.” She claimed that music could express anything, whereas language was limited.
The art of the time is perhaps our best record of what was going on in Paris, politically, socially, and economically. The turbulence in 19th-century Paris stemmed from the various military actions, generally necessary to remove unfit rulers, the political unrest caused by a system in flux, and the difficult economic times brought on by the massive influx of lower classes seeking better opportunities. Delacroix ( Johnson, 1963, pp47-51) painted several local scenes, among his other paintings from Africa and his religious work, and his subjects range from the aristocracy to the very poor. His marvelous use of color reflects the changing science of the times and the new technologies available in all areas of life. At the opposite end was Daumier, who made clay caricatures and paintings that are greatly entertaining today but would have galvanized the viewers of his time. Any of these could have variously gotten him lionized as a hero or hung as a traitor. It was fortunate for him that law had begun to be more constitutional than it had in the previous century. Even so, he did spend some time in jail. (Gluck, Mary 2005, 11-14).
This kind of climate as existed in Paris between 1830 in 1850 has seldom been duplicated. It was a time of great troubles, political, economic, and spiritual. Yet, there had been many improvements since deposing the Bourbons and other despots. France had suffered violence to effect political change. These changes were not always for the better, but the French kept trying. The 19th-century represents possibly the time of the most change for the better in that country. Paris, being at the center of things, attracted all sorts from every class of people. It was a veritable banquet for social observers, an important stimulus for creativity and the time of cultural development unprecedented in that city before or since. San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury was a microcosm of the same social development that has occurred in 19th-century Paris, without all the health problems, the squalor, the political unrest, and what must’ve been a somewhat difficult though quite interesting life.
It is not surprising that this was a time of tremendous creativity output among artists of all kinds. These artists we have discussed represent only a small portion. Between the great European Renaissance and the developments of the 19th century, particularly in Paris, but also in other major cities such as London, would benefit now from a massive body of interesting, informative, and truly enlightening artistic work. This encompasses the music of composers like Chopin and Liszt, operas such as Carmen by Merimee, novels and other works by writers such as Hugo and George Sand, and a marvelous range of visual arts. While it would not have been an easy life, I think it would’ve been highly interesting to live in Paris during these times. It probably wasn’t interesting for the real low class, since all of their efforts would have been bent on mere survival. However, for any creative person, this would have been the grist for the creative mill. There is no doubt that the artists living in Paris during that time exerted considerable pressure for change in the political system and the economic climate. It is just as true that the status of the political system and economic climate of Paris at the time exerted just as much influence on the works that these artists produced.
References
Bruun, G. (1960). Nineteenth-Century European Civilization, 1815-1914. p93. New York: Oxford University Press.
Doumic, R. (1910). George Sand; Some Aspects of Her Life and Work (Hallard, A., Trans.). p77,p173,p194,p185,p197.New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Gluck, Mary, 2005, Popular Bohemia: Modernism and Urban Culture in Nineteenth-century , pp11-14. Harvard, University Press,
Heath, Duncan, 2008, Introducing Romanticism, p145, Web.
Johnson, L. (1963). Delacroix. pp47-51. New York: W. W. Norton.
McPhee, Peter, 2004, A Social History of France 1789-1914,2nd Ed., p123, pp11-20, Palgrave MacMillan, NY, Web.
Sampson, Jim Ed., 2004, Cambridge History of Nineteenth Century Music, pp57-63,pp76-77, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Taylor, A. J. (1950). From Napoleon to Stalin: Comments on European History. P47-66. London: Hamish Hamilton.