In February I’ve really been inspired by two artists; Kees van Dongen and Kandinsky, and other things such as Manic Street Preachers (anniversary!), peacocks, films such as The Young Victoria and The Invisible Woman. Japanese sakura trees, beautiful gardens and temples were also very inspiration, perhaps due to this late winter days when I long for flowers and spring the most.
I’ve also read The Lord of the Rings I and II this month, and I’ve started reading the third part.
‘Each colour lives by its mysterious life.’ – Kandinsky
1925. Swinging – Wassily Kandinsky
In these grey days, in times between winter and spring when there’s no snow but no flowers either, my heart longs for colours and joy. I must say that I’ve found a tremendous joy in immersing myself in Kandinsky’s world of colours.
Wassily Kandinsky was deeply absorbed by colours; their meanings and mystical values. He argued for art that was purified from all references to the material world, and colour was essential for liberating the inner emotions of an artist, and transferring those emotions on canvas in a form of whimsical, dynamical and modernistic compositions.
My particular favourite these days is the painting ‘Swinging‘; the title itself suggesting dynamic movement, a certain rhythm and playfulness. The reason behind this sense of dynamic movement is Kandinsky’s deep study of colours and their connections. Even as a child he was drawn to colours, and the delight he felt on first seeing fresh paint come out of tube was indescribable. (…emotion that I experienced on first seeing the fresh paint come out of the tube… the impression of colours strewn over the palette: of colours – alive, waiting, as yet unseen and hidden in their little tubes…) Colours possessed a secret meanings for Kandinsky and they evoked different emotions for him. While blue colour symbolised spirituality and coolness to him, and yellow spiritual warmth, he seemed to really despise green colour, if it’s even possible to connect such intense emotion to colours, associating it with narrow minded and self-satisfied people, believing that it possesses nor joy, nor grief nor passion. Still, green is evident in his art, although not as frequently as blue.
Painting ‘Swinging‘, painted around 1925, during his ‘Bauhaus’ period, is overwhelmingly rich in dynamics, vividness, and it almost has a mystical dimension to it. First glance at this painting instantly brightness anyone’s day. How can something so strict in composition appear so playful, vivid and full of joy at the same time? I especially adore how despite all the strong and vibrant colours, transitions between shades are so soft. It’s that magical, mystic quality of Kandinsky’s paintings that really appeals me strongly, and there’s a certain vibe of innocence about them, like a childhood exploration.
1930s Several Circles, Vasily Kandinsky
1913. Vassily Kandinsky – Color Study, Squares with Concentric Circles
1923. Circles in a Circle – Vassily Kandinsky
1910-11. ‘Cossacks’ was made during a transitional period, when Kandinsky retained some representational elements, such as the two Russian cavalrymen in tall orange hats in the foreground.
Nevertheless, Kandinsky’s exploration arrived from the inability to face the world that was becoming more and more obsessed with materialism, while the values of the ‘old world‘ were vanishing forever right before his eyes. Kandinsky escaped into a world of his own; a world of colours and abstraction, ecstatically enjoying the mystical qualities of colours.
‘The true work of art is born from the Artist: a mysterious, enigmatic, and mystical creation. It detaches itself from him, it acquires an autonomous life, becomes a personality, an independent subject, animated with a spiritual breath, the living subject of a real existence of being.‘ (Kandinsky)
Out of all the Impressionists, Caillbotte’s paintings evoke the spirit of the new modern Paris the most.
1877. Gustave Caillebotte Paris Street, Rainy Day, Art Institute of Chicago.
Gustave Caillebotte is nor the most famous of the Impressionists, nor the most interesting, nor the most scandalous one, but still some of the paintings he painted remain the best examples of the everyday life in Paris, and are influential even today. His paintings ‘Paris Street, Rainy Day‘ and ‘The Floor Scrapers‘ remain his most intriguing and most outstanding paintings.
Gustave Caillebotte was rich and rather pampered, having inherited the great fortune of his father which meant he was financially independent for the rest of his life. Painting was primary a hobby for him, as was photography later on. It was Edouard Degas who introduced him to the Impressionists, which were also called ‘Independents‘ and ‘Intransigents‘ at the time, having been aware of his money. He supported his fellow artists and became a sort of patron and a collector. Claude Monet, Renoir and Pissarro’s work held a special place in Caillebotte’s collection.
This painting, ‘Paris Street, Rainy Day‘ was painted in 1877. and it depicts the Place de Dublin, known in 1877. as the Carrefour de Moscou. On the first sight, the painting depicts a city scene, nothing unusual for the Impressionists, but it is the background information that makes this painting so special. The couple seen strolling around Paris on a rainy day are actually newly rich Parisians, members of the bourgeoisie. They’re enjoying themselves, strolling around and flaunting in a new, modern Paris which looks so bright, so fresh, so open and clean with those wide boulevards and broad streets. Caillebotte played with perspectives and purposefully presented Paris wider and higher than it really was, painting it in a wide angle. That’s the Caillebotte’s Effect’.
Still, Caillebotte’s figures appear cold and lifeless, mirroring the alienating mood of the city.
‘Painting is the most beautiful of lies.’ – Kees van Dongen
1918. La Casati by Kees Van Dongen
Kees van Dongen was a Dutch born French Fauvist painter famous for his sensual, somewhat gaudy female portrait, infallibly permeated with avant-garde and mystique. Out of all the Fauvists, Kees van Dongen’s work is the most appealing to me. His paintings have a great charisma for me; the decadency, the sultry face expressions of van Dongen’s ladies, palette of cold and vibrant colours, and those brilliant blue-greys, it’s all just enchanting to me. The close line between banality and glamour, clash between elegance and eroticism makes a powerful combination which draws the viewers in a world of false glamour and bleakness; a prelude to the Roaring twenties. Kees van Dongen’s female figures have often been described as ‘half drawing-room prostitute, half sidewalk princess‘.
1920. Kees van Dongen, La violoniste
Kees van Dongen’s paintings have a strong erotic, modernly sensual vibe, which is not strange as he was a ‘ladies man‘. The combination of eroticism and vibrant colours made his paintings very popular in the First World World and the years immediately after the war. Still, some found his paintings too repetitive and his best work is considered to be done before 1920. Even at the age of fifteen, while he was still in the Netherlands, he used to visit the docs and sketch sailors from afar, and courtesans that gathered there too. In 1899. Kees left for Paris for good. He participated in the exhibition and Salon D’Autumne in 1905; the exhibition was controversial but it set a scene for a new art movement; the Fauvism.
Kees was one of the painters of the new generation of artists with avant-garde tendencies and an enormous elan for improvement. Main characteristics of Fauvism were vibrant colours and strong brush strokes; raw energy thrown on canvas, each brush stroke overwhelmed with emotions and passion. The combination of the two proved to be a particularly powerful one as the works of Fauvists are still valued today, and, although Kees van Dongen isn’t the most popular of them, his painting evoke the spirit of the time better than anyone elses, at least for me.
1917. The Bowl of Flowers – Kees van Dongen
This particular painting ‘The Bowl of Flowers‘, shown above, captivated me the most these past days. The painting shows a rich and eccentric heiress, Luisa Casati. She was an Italian heiress, muse, patron of arts, and in the first place an extravagant society hostess, a femme fatale who scandalised and delighted European high society for three decades. Luisa is the epitome of decadency and eccentricity and she lived her life with passion, relishing in abundance. It won’t come as a surprise that she commissioned many portraits of her to be painted from artists such as Giovanni Boldini, Romaine Brooks, and Kees van Dongen as well.
On this painting, Kees van Dongen used his tested technique of elongated figures, large eyes and strange vibrant yet mystical colours. As he was famous for portraying rich and fashionable ladies and society hostesses, he commented one time ‘The essential thing is to elongate the women and especially to make them slim. After that it just remains to enlarge their jewels. They are ravished.‘ I especially love the composition, how Luisa was placed on the far left instead of the usual central position common for portraits, and find it very interesting how she turned her back on the viewers, intriguing them even more. Her figure is elongated, her hands are thin, her waist is tiny, and that greenish skin colour, that sickly absinthe shade of green. Her pearl necklace, red high-heel shoes and thin flimsy shawl are here only to round off her mystical, sensuous and dreamy figure with all its decadency and avant-garde mood which is so appealing even today.
1920s Luisa Casati, Kees Van Dongen
1913. Kees van Dongen – Tamara, The Painter’s Muse
1910. The Lace Hat, Kees van Dongen
Kees van Dongen’s ‘Femme Fatales‘ live in their own world; trapped in avant-garde, bursting with beauty and modern kind of sensuality, living at the clash of glamour and decadence. They are mythical creatures, divine and garish at the same time, living at the verge of dreams and reality; they are the fruit of Kees van Dongen’s imagination, so wonderful, so timeless, and so surreal.
Marie Spartali Stillman was a British Pre-Raphaelite painter of Grecian descent, but she was also a muse and a model to other Pre-Raphaelite painters, enchanting them with her elegant stature and classical features, resembling a Grecian or a Roman goddess.
1868. Marie Spartali Stillman, Photo by Julia Margaret Cameron
Marie studied painting for several years from 1864, as a pupil of Ford Madox Brown, an English painter whose painting style resembles the Pre-Raphaelite version of Hogarth’s work. She studied alongside other pupils Georgiana Burne-Jones and Brown’s daughter Lucy Madox Brown, both of whom would grow up to be a painters in their own right.
Dante Gabriel Rossetti soon found out that Marie had become Brown’s pupil and he wasted no time writing to him, on the 29th April: ‘I just hear Miss Spartali is to be your pupil. I hear too that she is one and the same with a marvellous beauty of whom I have heard much talk. So box her up and don’t let fellows see her, as I mean to have first shy at her in the way of sitting.‘ Marie indeed sat for Rossetti very soon, in 1867. Her head proved to be a hard one for portraying, as Dante had wrote to Jane Morris.
Marie possessed the kind of beauty which was perfect for modelling, and in Dante’s eyes she resembled a goddess with her tall figure, elegant gestures, long hair and a gaze that was straightforward and dreamy at the same time. She embodied the Pre-Raphaelite ideal of beauty, as did Jane Morris before.
1871. Self-Portrait – Marie Spartali Stillman
That Marie became a painter, a muse and a model to artists, choosing a bohemian life in a way, is not a coincidence for she came from a cultural and refined background; art was valued in Spartali’s household. Her father, Michael, was a wealthy merchant, principal of the firm Spartali & Co, who moved to London in 1828. Her mother, Euphrosyne, known as Effie, was a daughter of a Greek merchant from Genoa. Her heritage, along with later life abroad, is woven in her works, all of which burst with sensuality and richness in colour.
Spartali family lived in a Georgian country house, known as ‘The Shrubbery‘ with a huge garden and views over the Thames and Chelsea. Marie’s father was fond of lavish garden parties so he invited young artists and writers of the day at the gatherings in his blossomed garden. Growing up in artistic environment meant that Marie and her younger sister Christine had many opportunities to meet famous artists of the day. One time, in the house of a Greek business man A.C. Iodines in south London, they met Whistler, an American-born but British-based artist, and Swinburne, an English poet and playwright. Swinburne was overwhelmed with emotions upon meeting Marie, that he said of her ‘She is so beautiful that I want to sit down and cry.‘
1884. Madonna Pietra degli Scrovigni by Marie Spartali Stillman
Upon marrying American journalist and painter William J. Stillman, against the wishes of her parents, she divided a lot of time between London and Florence from 1878 to 1883, and then Rome from 1889 to 1896, as William was a foreign correspondent for The Times. Her time spent in Italy proved to be fruitful for her painting style in a way that she entirely absorbed the aesthetics of Italian Renaissance. Her fascination with Italian landscapes and females figures with their unhidden sensuality, vividness and liveliness, along with studious depiction of nature, place Marie’s paintings side by side with works of great Pre-Raphalite painters such as Rossetti, Hunt, and Millais.
Perhaps my favourite painting by Marie is ‘Madonna Pietra degli Scrovigni‘ shown above. It dazzled me with its charming and detailed depiction of nature, and the visual equalization of nature with the woman who is actually a character from Dante’s poetry. She is described as a lady in green, very heartless, but very pretty, her moss green robe merged with the nature in the background. She’s holding a crystal ball reflecting the figures of Love and Dante. The depth of the landscape is magnificent, one could feel that is goes on and on, never ending, through the trees, bushes, all the way up to the hills.
Influence of Rossetti’s later period is evident in Marie’s paintings, ‘Madonna Pietra degli Scrovigni‘ being no exception. In later phase of his work Rossetti was influenced by the Italian High Renaissance, especially the painters such as Titian and Veronese, representatives of Venetian school. Marie continued Rossetti’s tradition with this painting for she painted the lady half-length in a Renaissance manner, but still, it remains a completely personal painting reflecting the beauty of the Italian landscapes Marie had observed, admired and cherished.
My enchantment with the 1840s cannot be put in words for it is a decade that inspires me, fires my imagination, makes me quiver, and enriches my daydreams with its dark romantic aesthetics, beautiful portraits, saloon parties, sentimentality and melancholy, that atmosphere of the changing times; the fleeting nature of Romanticism which defined a whole decade.
1846. Marie-Caroline de Bourbon-Siciles, Duchesse d’Aumale by Winterhalten
In the 1840s Paris was still a rabbit warren of narrow, dark and dirty medieval streets, though some parts such as the boulevards and the quays of the Seine were clean and spacious. It was only in 1848. that Georges-Eugene Haussmann started with his gigantic public work projects for new wide boulevards, parks, a new opera house, a central market, new aqueducts, and sewers.
Politically, France was a liberal constitutional monarchy under Louis Philippe I, which lasted from July Revolution of 1830 to the French Revolution of 1848. This was Balzac’s Paris with the rise of the bourgeoisie, ambitious but poor students, filthy boarding houses, corrupted and greedy aristocrats, and poor old people who are unable to adapt to a new age, very different from the one they grew up in.
In these fleeting times when idealism was fading, slowly replaced by materialism (positivism), heroes vanished and common people took their place with common sorrows and troubles, exotic landscapes were replaced by cityscape; illusions were lost for a generation of young Romanticists and a new epoque illuminated Paris like a ray of sunshine. Still, there was an oasis of Romanticism in that half old-half new Paris, over and above, Romanticism developed quite late in France, but this place assembled the heroes of the evanescent times.
1847. Lady Elizabeth Jocelyn (1813–1884), Marchioness of Londonderry
Charlotte Rothschild, aged only eighteen in 1843 when she married her English-born cousin Nathaniel Rothschild, was at the center of cultural events as her parents were very wealthy and artistically inclined, and, as such, they patronised a number of artists, writers and musicians such as Frederick Chopin, Honore de Balzac, Eugene Delacroix, Heinrich Heine and Gioacchinno Rossini. Frederick Chopin enchanted Parisian aristocratic saloons upon arriving in Paris in 1831, at the age of twenty one, after the ‘November 1830 Uprising‘ or the Polish-Russian war took place. Although homesick, Chopin was never to return to his dear homeland.
His new home was Paris, the center of Romanticism at the time, and the capital of European culture in general. His Parisian debut took place on 26 February 1832 at the Salle Pleyel. Liszt, who attended Chopin’s debut, later remarked ‘The most vigorous applause seemed not to suffice to our enthusiasm in the presence of this talented musician, who revealed a new phase of poetic sentiment combined with such happy innovation in the form of his art.‘ Soon after arriving in Paris, Chopin befriended E.Delacroix, Franz Liszt and Hector Berlioz. He led a luxurious life, bohemian, but still dressed rather elegantly and showed some vain habits such as wearing a new pair of white gloves every day and riding in his own carriage. He loved the sophisticated Parisian lifestyle.
1840. Claire de Bearn, Duchess of Vallombrosa by Winterhalten
Young Charlotte had a privilege of being Chopin’s piano pupil in 1841, and he even dedicated his celebrated Ballade No. 4 in F minor, Op. 52. John Ogdon, twentieth century English composer and pianist later commented ‘It is the most exalted, intense and sublimely powerful of all Chopin’s compositions … It is unbelievable that it lasts only twelve minutes, for it contains the experience of a lifetime.‘ Charlotte was very lucky to have had the opportunity to grow up in a wealthy and culturally inclined family which allowed her to meet many famous artists and writers.
Growing up around the artistic friends of her parents left a lifelong mark on Charlotte who later befriended many other artists too, such as Edouard Manet, Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot and Henri Rousseau. Her passion for art did not stop there for she became a painter in her own right. She studied with Nelie Jacquemart and produced many profound watercolours and landscapes which earned her respect. Past weeks I’ve been wondering and daydreaming, then wondering again, how splendid would it be to spend your teenage years at the very center of Parisian Culture in Romanticism, and meet the legends such as Chopin, Victori Hugo, Balzac, Delacroix etc. I’m completely absorbed in these thoughts lately.
1840s Portrait of Yekaterina Scherbatova – Joseph-Desire Court
This is just one of the many aspects of the 1840s that I adore. There’s so much more about this beautiful decade: Jane Eyre and the Bronte sisters, first years of Queen Victoria’s reign, founding of the Pre-Raphalites Brotherhood in 1848, Edgar Allan Poe, Elizabeth Barrett-Browning…
The atmosphere, the portraits of ladies, the fashion, it all deeply engulfs me, enchants me, inspires me unutterably. The 1840s aesthetics are the epitome of the word ‘romantic’ for me; those ladies with their shiny silk dresses with sloping shoulders, slight gothic touch, their wild curls decorated subtly with a rose or two. Sentimentality and melancholy seem to pervade every pore of art and culture in the 1840s.
If you want to immerse yourselves in this Late Romanticism epoch, you can visit my Pinterest board for the visual part of my inspiration.
Paintings of Venuses pop up everywhere in the history of art, but my favourite representation of Venus, the ideal of beauty and a symbol of eroticism, is Manet’s version.
Olympia, Edouard Manet, Musee d’Orsay, Paris
Olympia is a painting by Manet, painted in 1863 and first exhibited two years later. It shows a nude woman, Olympia, lying on a bed with a rumpled linen, completely uninterested in a bouquet of flowers that her black servant is presenting. Olympia is modeled by Victorine Meurent; Manet’s favourite model who posed for many of his famous works such as The Luncheon on the Grass, Woman with parrot, Street Singer and The Railway. Victorine, a model and an artist herself, was only nineteen years old when she set for this Manet’s masterpiece in 1863.
Manet’s unique depiction of a self-assured courtesan shocked both the critics and the audience. The painting was controversial not because it showed a nude woman, nudes were nothing new in art, but because of Olympia’s straight forward gaze and details that suggest that she is a courtesan. Orchid in her hair, her bracelet, worn out mule slippers, ribbon tied around her neck, pearl earrings and the oriental shawl on which she lies all accentuate her sexuality, nakedness and courtesan lifestyle. In addition, swept hair, the orchid, black cat and the bouquet of flowers were all recognised as symbols of sexuality at the time. Even the name ‘Olympia’ was associated with the ‘ladies of the night‘ in Paris at the time.
Olympia’s confrontational, blunt and uninterested gaze absolutely disgusted the critics. Olympia disdainfully ignores the bouquet of flowers presented to her by her servant, probably a gift from her client. Some even suggested that she is looking in the floor indifferently because one of her client had just barged in unannounced. Her gaze is puzzling even today; at first it seems dull and lifeless, yet it possesses a whole set of emotions and thoughts. Her large dark eyes convey a mood of melancholy and contempt at once.
Manet’s representation of Venus was something completely new, and it was, as such, rejected by critics. Every tiny detail of the painting repelled them, from the model’s face to overt symbols of sexuality. According to Antonin Proust, French journalist and politician, ‘only the precautions taken by the administration prevented the painting being punctured and torn‘ by offended viewers.
Shocking the audience was nothing new for Manet; he did it before with his painting The Luncheon on the Grass. At the time, it seemed that there was nothing more he could do to infuriate the critics, but with ‘Olympia‘ he succeeded even in that. Namely, it was a challenge for Manet to paint a nude which would be shown in Salon at display. The painting’s modernity was defended by a small group of like-minded contemporaries with Emile Zola at their head. The painting’s ‘avant-garde‘ appeal was also appreciated by artists such as Claude Monet, Paul Cezanne, Gustave Courbet and Paul Gauguin.
Even Olympia’s hand position is a mockery of the old masters; in previous depictions Venus gently and modestly hides her pubic area with her hand, but here the hand looks almost ‘shamelessly flexed‘, according to a contemporary critic, showing Manet’s profound sense of wit and mockery of the relaxed and modestly shielding hand of Tizian’s Venus. In composition, Manet deliberately placed a black cat at the foot of the bed instead of the sleeping dog in Tizian’s portrayal of Venus of Urbino; black cat symbolising sexuality instead of the dog that was considered a symbol of fidelity.
Manet’s paintings may seem serious today, but deviations from the norms were a constant in Manet’s artistic career. The flatness of the painting is inspired by Japanese Ukiyo-e woodblock prints which influenced many artists later on too, most notably van Gogh. These served to make the nude appear more humane and less voluptuous which was the norm in all the previous representations of Venus. Here, Olympia’s body is rather thin according to the artistic standards of the day, and looks underdeveloped, more girlish than womanly. Also, the skin tone looks yellowy and sickly, not fresh and rosy as you’d expect from a goddess. The bracelet we see Olympia wearing on her right hand belonged to Manet’s wife, which again adds a natural tones to his art.
Manet’s version of Venus is all together an ironic take on the works of old masters and the representation of Venus in art in general. Prior to seeing Manet’s ‘Olympia’, the audience most likely had an image of a plump, healthy and womanly looking Venus, with long golden hair, representing the timeless ideal of beauty, but the obvious absence of idealism in Manet’s painting appalled the audience.
With this painting, Manet presented a modern Venus; a real woman with all her flaws and imperfection, in real and natural surroundings, far from the previous mythological settings. Double standards of morality of the Victorian society are evident here as well; a nude woman is appropriate only if it is the case of a mythological scene, but a nude prostitute is not acceptable, even if it mirrored the reality.
The modern Venus is a high-class courtesan waiting for a client. Victorine Meurent perfectly fitted in the role of Olympia for she is the modern Venus, the woman from the streets, not possessing the kind of artificial beauty painters have aspired to paint in the form of Venus ever since the Renaissance. This difference between traditional Venus and Manet’s modern one is particularly apparent if you compare ‘Olympia‘ with Alexander Cabanel’s ‘The Birth of Venus‘ painted the same year.
As it is the case with ‘The Luncheon on the Grass’, Manet was inspired by the works of old masters regarding the composition. In part, Olympia was inspired by Titian’s Venus of Urbino (c.1538), or, painted even earlier, Giorgione’s Sleeping Venus (c.1510), which was painted by Giorgione and finished by Titian after Giorgione had died.
There are however many other female nudes that could have served as inspiration such as Goya’s La Maja Desnuda (1800), Paris Bordone’s Sleeping Venus with Cupid (1540), Reni’s Venus and Amor (1639), and many others. Again, in all these versions the atmosphere is sensuous, warm and opulent, whereas Manet depicted a drab everyday reality of a Parisian courtesan.
Olympia, a modern Venus, is nor erotic nor the ideal of beauty, she is a woman full of melancholy, disgust and contempt for the hypocritical high society.
1538. The Venus of Urbino is an oil painting by the Italian master Titian, Uffizi, Florence
1508-10. Giorgine’s ‘Sleeping Venus’, Old Masters Gallery, Dresden
1800. The Nude Maja, Goya, Museo del Prado, Madrid
Manet repeated the tested recipe for shocking the audience and the critics, as with his previous masterpice ‘The Luncheon on the Grass‘, Manet used the composition from the respected artists and painted something completely modern, daring and scandalous, at the same time mocking the past and revealing the true face of society and its problems, its hypocrisy and insincerity. With a little wit, Manet turned a masterpiece into a scandal.
After watching BBC’s documentary ‘Scandalous Women of the 19th Century‘ I felt really saddened by the unfortunate destinies of these Victorian ladies, but also inspired by the great strength and courage they possessed, and a massive amount of compassion they showed for the less fortunate ones, overcoming their own grief by rebating the sufferings of others.
‘I admire people who choose to shine even after all the storms they’ve been through.‘
Caroline Norton (1808-1877)
‘Woman has no rights, she has only wrongs.‘
Caroline Norton was a famous English social reformer and an author, and, although scandalous in her time, her ideas and efforts foreshadowed the Feminist movement.
Caroline was born in London on March 22nd, in a grand but impoverished family. While living in Hampton’s Court Palace, Caroline and her two sisters, Helen, the elder, and Georgiana, both the youngest and the prettiest, were collectively known as ‘The Three Graces‘ for they combined both beauty and refinement with knowledge and wit. Caroline’s father died when she was only eight years old. The family being completely penniless, Caroline was compelled to marry George Norton in 1827.
The marriage proved to be deeply unhappy; George was abusive towards Caroline, and vicious beating proved to be regular in Norton household. George was jealous, possessive and prone to drinking. Along all of this, George and Caroline didn’t even get along politically; he was a Tory member of parliament and she was more liberal and outspoken, inclined to Whig party. Caroline still used her beauty, wit and political connections to help her husband’s career.
She established herself as a major society hostess, which gained her many admirers, and many enemies too. With her liberal behavior and candid conversations, Caroline attracted friends such as Mary Shelley, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, English Romantic poet Samuel Rogers, Edward John-Trelawny, a friend of Percy Shelley and Byron, and Fanny Kemble, a young actress.
Despite both mental and physical abuse by her husband, Caroline found joy in writing prose and poetry, having published her verses ‘The Sorrows of Rosalie‘ (1829) and ‘The Undying One‘ (1830). Still, Caroline found the greatest joy in her three sons. She was a devoted mother, kind, loving, and delighted to spend time with her children. Everything else came second.
Caroline’s romantic friendship with Lord Melbourne only added fuel to the fire of their already wobbly marriage. In 1836 Caroline finally left her husband, having previously gotten a taste of financial independence in her publications in magazine of the day such as ‘La Belle Assemblée‘. However, all her earning legally belonged to George who claimed all the money she earned and all her possessions to be his. George claimed that Caroline was guilty of adultery with Lord Melbourne. The trial, which lasted nine days, concluded that Melbourne was not guilty. Nevertheless, Caroline’s reputation and friendship with him were destroyed forever. In addition, George took custody of the children, and Caroline was never to see her loving sons again.
Caroline’s protest and efforts were instrumental in the passing of the ‘Infant Custody Bill of 1839′ and ‘Marriage and Divorce Act of 1857‘. She also attacked the child’s labour in her work ‘Voice from the Factories’ (1836). Caroline died in 1877, just three months after she married William Stirling Maxwell, a long time friend.
Harriet Mordaunt (1848-1906)
Lady Mordaunt, born Harriet Sarah Moncreiffe on February 7th 1848, grew up is ‘free and easy‘ atmosphere in Moncreiffe household. As a child she was acquainted with Edward, Prince of Wales and later attended informal parties with the Prince and his wife Alexandra, including dances at Abergeldie Castle. In a liberal atmosphere, Harriet grew up to be pretty and flirtatious, but also headstrong and shallow, fun loving girl, tom boyish in a way.
Harriet married Sir Charles Mordaunt at the age of eighteen. The marriage proved to be a happy one; he was wealthy and respectable, and she was young and pretty. Charles was a Conservative Member of Parliament and a highly respected member of the community. Charles had no solid interests besides hunting and shooting, and Harriet was a young vivacious girl, keen to partying and chatting. Luckily for Harriet, Charles traveled a lot, and her friends visited her to keep her company, and so did The Prince of Wales, despite Charles’ rigid insistence on Harriet to stop seeing him. One time, Charles returned earlier from his trip only to find his wife in the company of the Prince.
On February 28th 1869, Harriet gave birth prematurely to a girl Violet Caroline. The timing was significant as Charles had been absent on a fishing trip eight months earlier. As the baby developed an eye infection, Harriet suddenly began pondering whether she was infected by Venereal disease. She admitted everything to her husband ‘Charlie, I have deceived you; the child is not yours; it’s Lord Cole’s‘, she said and added, ‘Lord Cole, Sir Frederick Johnstone, the Prince of Wales and others, often and in open day‘.
In her innocence, Harriet most likely believed that Charles would forgive her, as he did forgive her for everything, but that did not happen. He commenced proceedings for divorce on 20 April 1869. Lady Mordaunt family claimed that she was mad. If she were to be found insane, she could not be trialed for adultery.
Harriet was proclaimed mad, and, in 1871, deserted by everyone, she was living at the Manor House asylum in Chiswick, at the western outskirts of London. The Asylum however, had a human reputation with enlightened approach to patients. Harriet died in May 1906. and was buried at Brompton Cementary.
Josephine Butler (1828-1906)
Josephine Butler was a Victorian era feminist and a social reformer especially concerned with welfare of prostitutes, education and public health.
Josephine came on scene in 1869 when she began her campaign against the Contagious Diseases Acts. Born Josephine Elizabeth Grey on April 13th 1828, she was brought up in a family steeped deep in radical politics and she believed passionately in woman’s rights. She came from a very refined, highly educated and cultured background, but in addition to her knowledge, she was very humane, very spiritual, with a great sense of social justice.
Josephine married an academic George Butler in 1852, a man with similar radical political views. They had three sons and a daughter named Evangeline who died in 1864. aged only five, after breaking her neck upon falling from the stairs. From then on, Josephine had an irresistible desire to find a pain keener than her own so she threw herself into charity work.
She understood others sufferings for she had suffered herself. Josephine became deeply concerned with woman’s rights, and the welfare of the unfortunate ones the most. Although a deeply spiritual Christian, disgusted by the idea of sin, Josephine regarded the women as being ‘exploited victims of male oppression‘, and she was one of the few Victorian women brave enough to attack the double standards of sexual morality. Josephine held speeches across the country in order to repeal the Contagious Diseases Acts, calling the procedure a ‘surgical rape‘.
Upon moving to Liverpool, Josephine was shocked by the living conditions of the poor women who have no other option than ‘starvation and prostitution‘. At last, she had found the cause she was so desperately seeking for. Josephine was not judgmental, she treated those unfortunates as her equals, and gained their trust in return. Those women, girls, often barely thirteen years old, were hopelessly poor, uneducated, and above all, lonely and abandoned as the ‘stain on Victorian society‘. Josephine seemed like an angel to them, having talked to them, embraced them and treated them with nurture and respect; nobody has treated them with kindness before.
In addition, Josephine was part of a group which forced parliament to raise the age of consent from 13 to 16, and her interest in woman’s education eventually led to the foundation of the all-women college at Newnham.
Byron's Muse 