(Lacroix 447)
"Their attitudes are affected, unnatural and desultory; and their draperies fantastic; or, as one of our English artists expressed himself, they are all of a flutter" (Smollett 52).
Tobias Smollett’s Travels Through France and Italy and Samuel Foote’s The Englishman in Paris: A Comedy serve as a prime example of English resentment of France’s major influence upon European culture during the Eighteenth Century. In Smollett’s case especially there is a marked tension over the influence exerted over his homeland of Great Britain, resulting in British patricians speaking French amongst themselves, and adopting French tastes including hairstyles, fashions, valets and salons, which took a toll upon English tradesmen (Colley 88). The cultural power which France enjoyed was no doubt made all the more threatening to Smollett and his fellow Britons due to the adversarial relationship that existed between the two nations in several other areas, which are discussed elsewhere on this website.
Sections on this page:
Language and Literature
Fashion and Etiquette
Hard Times
Other Passages of Interest
Language and Literature
From Tobias Smollett's Travels Through France and Italy:
Though I have a hearty contempt for the ignorance, folly, and
presumption which
characterise the generality, I cannot but respect the talents
of many great men, who have
eminently distinguished themselves in every art and science:
these I shall always revere and
esteem as creatures of a superior species, produced, for the
wise purposes of providence,
among the refuse of mankind. . . . It would be equally absurd
to suppose the French are a
nation of philosophers, because France has given birth to a
Des Cartes, a Maupertuis, a
Reaumur, and a Buffon. (64)
A major contributing factor to France’s cultural supremacy during this time period is that French replaced Latin as Europe’s international language. In some countries, such as Germany, upper-class children were taught French as their first language, so that their native language would not effect their pronunciation (Lough 4-5). The dominance of the French language was no doubt made more grating to the Britons as in many cases it was often necessary for English works to be translated into French before being distributed throughout the continent. While in this process, the French were influenced by British ideas, during the translation French ideals were undoubtedly infused into the works. Furthermore, subsequent translations into other European languages were based on the French translations rather than the original English text (Lough 7).
Another way in which French ideas were diffused throughout Europe was a result of Absolutism. This strict form of government in which all power is vested in a single ruler or authority offered both benefits and disadvantages. Due to state patronage, academies, luxury goods, imperial expansion and many other institutions thrived under the reigns of Louis XIV, Louis XV and Louis XVI. However strict censorship of the literary world restricted the publishing of scandalous material and political writings that failed to comply with state views (Creating). French authors were therefore forced to find foreign publishers to distribute their works, which helped to further disseminate French language and ideas (Lough 5).
| That France boasted such outstanding and influential authors also contributed to the country’s popularity. In 1762 Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract was published, possibly foreshadowing the French Revolution. He suggested that society develops for security and mutual benefit between citizens (a mean between the social contract theories of Englishmen Thomas Hobbes and John Locke), and that community interests should be placed before those of the individual. In 1792 Francois Marie Arouet (a.k.a. Voltaire) published Candide, his criticism of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz's Discourse on Metaphysics and Alexander Pope’s "Essay on Man," in which works it is suggested that the way things are is the way they are supposed to be and that this is the best of all possible worlds. |
|
From Tobias Smollett's Travel's Through France and Italy:
The French, however, with all their absurdities, preserve
a certain ascendancy over us,
which is very disgraceful to our nation; and this
appears in nothing more than in the article of
dress. We are contented to
be thought their apes in fashion; but, in fact, we are slaves to
their taylors,
mantua-makers, barbers, and other tradesmen. One would be apt to imagine
that our own tradesmen had joined them against us. When the natives of
France come to
London, they appear in all public places, with cloathes made
according to the fashion of their
own country, and this fashion is generally
admired by the English. Why, therefore, don't we
follow it implicitly?
No, we pique ourselves upon a most ridiculous deviation from the very
modes we
admire, and please ourselves with thinking this deviation is a mark of our
spirit
and liberty. But, we have not spirit enough to persist in this
deviation, when we visit their
country: otherwise, perhaps, they would come to
admire and follow our example: for,
certainly, in point of true taste, the
fashions of both countries are equally absurd. . . . In
every other
circumstance of dress, male and female, the contrast between the two nations,
appears equally glaring. What is the consequence? when an Englishman comes
to Paris, he
cannot appear until he has undergone a total metamorphosis. . . .
On his return to his own
country, this frippery is useless. He cannot
appear in London until he has undergone another
thorough metamorphosis; so he
will have some reason to think, that the tradesmen of Paris
and London have
combined to lay him under contribution: and they, no doubt, are the
directors
who regulate the fashions in both capitals; the English, however, in a
subordinate
capacity: for the puppets of their making will not pass at Paris,
nor indeed in any other part
of Europe; whereas a French petit maitre
[fop] is
reckoned a complete figure every where,
London not excepted. (57-59)
From Samuel Foote's The Englishman in Paris: A Comedy:
"Mr. Sub.
Well, well, that maybe: but still I say a frenchman--
Class. Is a fop;
it is their national disease; not one of the qualities for which you celebrate
them, but owes its origin to a foible; their taste is trifling,
their gayety grimace, and their politeness
pride" (5).
| There is no doubt that France was Eighteenth-Century Europe’s leader in the world of fashion. It was thought throughout the continent that the French, while their political policies were frowned upon, were the only authority when it came to high fashion. The French had established a veritable monopoly on fashion by 1760, not only exporting their creations but also their way of life (Ribeiro 15-17). It is important to note, however, that just as there was a wave of "francophilia" sweeping through England’s upperclass, "anglomanie" was also a factor in France (Colley 88; Lough 7). The English considered men that subscribed to French senses of style and decorum as fops (similar to Italy's cicisbei), which may generally be understood as an attack on their masculinity, as is made very clear by both Smollett and Foote. The Britons preferred a more simplistic style than the French and modified their designs accordingly. By the end of the century, France had set the standard for formal, or courtly, dress, while England was the major influence for everyday and aristocratic sports wear (Ribeiro 17). |
|
From Tobias Smollett's Travels Through France and Italy:
If I was obliged to define politeness, I should call it, the
art of making one's self agreeable. I
think it an art that necessarily
implies a sense of decorum, and a delicacy of sentiment.
These are
qualities, of which (as far as I have been able to observe) a Frenchman has no
idea; therefore he never can be deemed polite, except by those persons among
whom they
are as little understood. (65)
|
|
From Lord Chesterfield's Letters, Sentences, and Maxims: The colder northern nations generally look upon France as a whistling, singing, dancing, frivolous nation; this notion is very far from being a true one, though many petits maitres by their behavior seem to justify it; but those very petits maitres, when mellowed by age and experience, very often turn out very able men. The number of great generals and statesmen, as well as excellent authors, that France has produced, is an undeniable proof, that it is not that frivolous, unthinking, empty nation that the northern prejudices suppose it. (304) |
As far as etiquette is concerned, Jorge Arditi, author of A Genealogy of
Manners, suggests that while French and British expectations of behavior
began similarly several centuries earlier, they had grown apart by the 1700s due
to "historical events and their largely unintended consequences," which affected
the power structures of each country. He argues that in its simplest terms
"etiquette" is a way for the aristocracy to stay in power (Arditi
223). Arditi spends a good deal of time discussing The Letters of Lord Chesterfield,
written between 1738 and 1765 to his son, and later his godson, and published in 1773 after
their deaths. Because Chesterfield was an English diplomat, as well as a francophile, he seems a reliable source for information of this nature. Arditi
suggests that Chesterfield believes that morality and etiquette have little–if
anything–to do with each other. Morality, like etiquette, would have to become
relative to the group which one is associating with, if the opposite were the
case. For Chesterfield the "most important principle of behavior is, simply, not
to be different" (Arditi 211). He wrote to his son:
On the contrary, you should always
endeavor to procure all the conveniences you can to the
people you are with. Besides being
civil, which is absolutely necessary, the perfection of good
breeding is, to be civil with ease,
and in a gentlemanlike manner. For this, you should observe
the French people; who excel in it,
and whose politeness seems as easy and natural as any
other part of their conversation.
Whereas the English are often awkward in their civilities, and,
when they mean to be civil, are too
much ashamed to get it out. (Chesterfield 83)
This necessity to confirm to the company one keeps would seem to explain some of Smollett’s difficulties in dealing with the French people he came in contact with. This difference in expectations is also apparent in the main character of Foote’s play, Buck. The young Briton was sent by his father to France in an attempt to get him away from bad influences, yet he refuses to comply to any French customs, instead picking fights with any Frenchman who crosses his path. At the close of the play when Buck’s father has come to bring him back to England, the former states, " I have now learned that he who transports a profligate son to Paris, by way of mending his manners, only adds the vices and follies of that country to those of his own" (Foote 29).
"Here, too, I found a young Irish recollet,
in his way from Rome to his own country. He
complained, that he was almost starved by the inhospitable
disposition of the French people . . ."
(Smollett 105).
“The French are generally counted insincere, and taxed with want of generosity”
(Smollett
68).
"The vandange
was but just begun, and the people were employed in gathering grapes; but I
saw no signs of festivity among them.
Perhaps their joy was a little damped by the bad
prospect of their harvest; for they
complained that the weather had been so unfavourable as to
hinder the grapes ripening" (Smollett
74).
(Lacroix 270)
In France agriculture dominated domestic economic life. Because of this dependence upon the harvest, the country was extremely susceptible to depressions. If there was a bad harvest (and there often was during this time period) not only would the people go hungry–if not starve–it caused a major drop-off in trade and industry as well. This led to what the people dubbed "famine plots": "a secret machination to starve the people in order to achieve certain ends" (Kaplan 1). Everyone from aristocrats, to priests, to generals, to merchants were blamed for these shortages. Clergy and nobility, for example, profited from long-term rises in rents and swollen feudal dues (Kaplan 1).
In the case of the Crisis of 1765-1770, the famine was helped along not only by poor harvests, but by the liberalization laws of 1763-1764, the same time Smollett was writing his Travels Through France and Italy. It is likely the effects of these laws were beginning to be seen in rising grain prices. This time the famine was blamed on the government trying to lay hold of as much grain as possible, an accusation that rose out of the secret fund that was storing grain to be distributed in case of an emergency. However it was believed by the populace that this company’s goal was "to starve out" whole provinces, ship the grain abroad, then re-import it and sell it at higher prices under another name. Even the king was suggested to be a part of the plot and was referred to as "our monarch, merchant of grain" (Kaplan 52-57).
 (Lough 8) |
 (Hay 227) |
Smollett may not have completely understood the situation in which the French found themselves during a famine. While the continent still suffered from "starvation of the ancient kind," England was able to avoid such dire crises (Hay 71). While Scotland and Ireland were still hit by famine at times, England generally avoided such extreme situations, though it still faced "periodic dearth and high prices" (Hay 71). In fact, England’s "nutritional levels were better than those on the Continent" (Hay 71).
Researched by Krista Schroth