Mme. de la Fayette, whose maiden name was Marie-Magdeleine Pioche de La
Vergne, was born at Paris in 1634. Her father belonged to the lesser
nobility, and was for awhile governor of Pontoise, and later of Havre.
Her mother was sprung from an ancient family of Provence, among whom,
says Auger, literary talent had long been a heritage; but the mother
herself--if we are to believe Mme. de La Fayette's biographers--possessed
no talent save that of intrigue. This opinion of Mme. de La Vergne,
however, rests mainly upon the testimony of Cardinal de Retz; and may it
not be that Mme. de La Fayette has drawn for us the portrait of her
mother in the person of Mme. de Chartres? If this be true, Mme. de La
Vergne, vain and intriguing though she may have been, was not wholly
unworthy of her daughter.
The early education of Mme. de La Fayette--for by this name we can best
speak of her--was made the special care of her father, "un père en qui
le mérite égaloit la tendresse." Later, she was put under Ménage, and
possibly Rapin. Segrais, with his usual garrulousness, tells the
following story:
"Trois mois après que Mme. de La Fayette eut commencé d'apprendre le
latin, elle en savoit déjà plus que M. Ménage et que le Père Rapin, ses
maîtres. En la faisant expliquer, ils eurent dispute ensemble touchant
l'explication d'un passage, et ni l'un ni l'autre ne vouloit se rendre
au sentiment de son compagnon; Mme. de La Fayette leur dit: Vous n'y
entendez rien ni l'un ni l'autre.--En effet, elle leur dit la véritable
explication de ce passage; ils tombèrent d'accord qu'elle avoit raison."
And Segrais goes on to say: "C'étoit un poëte qu'elle expliquoit, car
elle n'aimoit pas la prose, et elle n'a pas lu Cicéron; mais comme elle
se plaisoit fort à la poésie, elle lisoit particulièrement Virgile et
Horace; et comme elle avoit l'esprit poétique et qu'elle savoit tout ce
qui convenoit à cet art, elle pénétroit sans peine le sens de ces
auteurs." Learned for a woman of her times Mme. de La Fayette indeed
was; but of this learning she made no show,--"pour ne pas choquer les
autres femmes," says Sainte-Beuve.
At the age of fifteen, Mme. de La Fayette lost her father; and her
mother, after brief waiting, and--if Cardinal de Retz is to be
believed--much intriguing, found a second husband in the Chevalier
Renaud de Sévigné. This union was an important event in the life of Mme.
de La Fayette, for it marks the beginning of her residence at Paris, and
of her friendship with Mme. de Sévigné, who was a kinswoman of the
Chevalier.
How close and lasting was this friendship is seen on almost every page
of Mme. de Sévigné's correspondence. Indeed, so often does the name of
Mme. de La Fayette occur in Mme. de Sévigné's letters to her daughter,
that the latter may well have been jealous of her mother's friend. The
companionship of Mme. de Sévigné was, after the death of La
Rochefoucauld, the chief comfort of Mme. de La Fayette in her ill-health
and seclusion; and it was from the sick-chamber of her friend that Mme.
de Sévigné's letters would seem to have been written in those latter
years. In 1693, soon after the death of Mme. de La Fayette, Mme. de
Sévigné writes as follows of her dead friend: "Je me trouvois trop
heureuse d'être aimée d'elle depuis un temps très-considérable; jamais
nous n'avions eu le moindre nuage dans notre amitié. La longue habitude
ne m'avoit point accoutumée à son mérite: ce goût étoit toujours vif et
nouveau; je lui rendois beaucoup de soins, par le mouvement de mon
coeur, sans que la bienséance, ou l'amitié nous engage, y eût aucune
part; j'étois assurée aussi que je faisois sa plus tendre consolation,
et depuis quarante ans c'étoit la même chose: cette date est violente
mais elle fonde bien aussi la vérité de notre liaison." The whole story
of friendship is told in these lines,--a friendship which during forty
years had been undarkened by a cloud, and had remained unstaled by
custom. The relation was equally sincere on the part of Mme. de La
Fayette, though she was by nature more self-contained and reserved. But
this reserve gives way to the strength of her feelings when in 1691,
tormented by ill-health and knowing that her end is not far off, she
writes to Mme. de Sévigné: "Croyez, ma très-chère, que vous êtes la
personne du monde que j'ai le plus véritablement aimée."
Mme. de La Fayette was in her time a mild _précieuse_, having been
introduced at an early age into the society of the Hôtel de Rambouillet.
No one could pass through such a society with impunity, says Boissier;
but Mme. de La Fayette seems to have escaped very lightly. For, although
in her earlier works the _précieuse_ influence is everywhere felt, yet
all traces of such influence disappear in _La Princesse de Clèves_.
Auger tells us gravely that Mme. de La Fayette found the reading of the
Latin poets a safeguard from the bad taste and extravagance of the
Rambouillet _coterie_. But the same safeguard should have proved
effectual in case of Ménage first of all, says Sainte-Beuve, who then
gives the true relation of Mme de La Fayette to the Hôtel de
Rambouillet: "Mme. de La Fayette, qui avait l'esprit solide et fin, s'en
tira à la manière de Mme. de Sévigné, en n'en prenant que le meilleur."
After the breaking-up of the Hôtel de Rambouillet, there were formed
various smaller _coteries_, among which that of Mme. de La Fayette was
by no means the least important. From her little circle of _précieuses_,
Mme. de La Fayette was drawn to the Court of Louis XIV. chiefly through
the friendship of "Madame," the Princess Henrietta of England. This
unfortunate princess had passed her exiled youth in the convent of
Chaillot; and Mme. de La Fayette, going thither on frequent visits to a
kinswoman, was drawn into intimacy with the young girl, who must even
then have given evidence of those charms which later made her brief
reign at Court as brilliant as it was unhappy. When the young princess
had become the sister-in-law of the King and the idol of the young
Court, she remained steadfast in her love for the friend who had cheered
her lonely convent life; and thus Mme. de La Fayette came at the age of
thirty to be one of the company that gathered around Madame at
Fontainebleau and Saint-Cloud,--"spectatrice plutôt qu'agissante," says
Sainte-Beuve. For Mme. de La Fayette, though belonging wholly to the
young Court, took no part in the intrigues and factions of the royal
household. It is this Court life, which, under guise of that of Henry
II., is described in _La Princesse de Clèves_: "There were so many
interests and so many intrigues in which women took part that love was
always mingled with politics and politics with love. No one was calm or
indifferent; every one sought to rise, to please, to serve, or to
injure; every one was taken up with pleasure or intrigue.... All the
different cliques were separated by rivalry or envy. Then, too, the
women who belonged to each one of them, were jealous of one another,
either about their chances of advancement, or about their lovers; often,
too, their interests were complicated by other pettier, but no less
important, questions."
It was in the arms of Mme. de La Fayette that Madame, her brief day of
splendor over, fell into that strange slumber the wakening of which was
to be so horrible; and it was Mme. de La Fayette who soothed the
princess in those last hours, the torture of which drew tears even from
the heart of Louis. M. Anatole France says that he suspects Mme. de La
Fayette of having hated the King. Perhaps she did; for resentment at the
fate of her friend and mistress was natural. True it is, however, that
Louis showed more than once his deep respect for the woman who had seen
him in his one moment of remorse at the bedside of the dying princess.
After the death of Madame, her faithful friend withdrew more and more
from the Court, into the seclusion and quiet of her little band of
chosen friends, urged partly by her distaste for Court life and partly
by her increasing ill-health. But her society was still much sought
after; for a notice of her death in the _Mercure galant_, tells us that
when she could no longer go to the Court, the Court might be said to
have come to her.
Mme. de La Fayette was some twenty-two years old,--long past the usual
marriageable age of French maidens,--when, in 1655, she was married to
the Count de La Fayette. Little is known of her married life. Boissier
in his _Vie de Mme. de Sévigné_ says: "When the correspondence of Mme.
de Sévigné with her daughter begins (1671), Mme. de La Fayette has been
long a widow." But of this early widowhood there is no positive
evidence, the weight of testimony being rather to the contrary. Those
who are curious in this matter are referred to d'Haussonville's _Vie de
Mme. de La Fayette_, where the whole controversy is summed up in the
following words: "Une chose est certaine: c'est qu'il faut renoncer
désormais à considérer Mme. de La Fayette comme une jeune veuve."
Of Monsieur de La Fayette's relations to his wife, we are almost wholly
ignorant; and the sole evidence--beyond a line or two in Mme. de La
Fayette's letters--that he existed at all, was the birth to the wife of
two children. "We find now and then," says La Bruyère, "a woman who has
so obliterated her husband that there is in the world no mention of him,
and whether he is alive or whether he is dead is equally uncertain."
Doubtless her husband discovered--as did many of her friends--that Mme.
de La Fayette was a woman whose personality overshadowed everything
around her.
That there was little congeniality between husband and wife cannot be
doubted, yet Mme. de La Fayette's own letters go to prove that for a
time at least she was not unhappy. In a letter to Ménage, written from
Auvergne soon after her marriage, she says: "La solitude que je trouve
ici m'est plutôt agréable qu'ennuyeuse. Le soin que je prends de ma
maison, m'occupe et me divertit fort et comme d'ailleurs je n'ai point
de chagrins, que mon époux m'adore, que je l'aime fort, que je suis
maîtresse absolue, je vous assure que la vie que je mène est fort
heureuse.... Quand on croit être heureuse vous savez que cela suffit
pour l'être."
This frigid, make-believe happiness, even though supported by the
satisfaction of being absolute mistress of the household, could not long
suffice for a nature like Mme. de La Fayette's; and therein lies perhaps
the secret of all the unwritten history that follows.
Just at what time the friendship between Mme. de La Fayette and La
Rochefoucauld began, is uncertain. Boissier in his _Vie de Mme. de
Sévigné_ says that when, in 1671, the correspondence between mother and
daughter begins, "Mme. de La Fayette has but recently united herself
with the Duc de La Rochefoucauld in that close intimacy which gave the
world so much to talk about."
However, Mme. de Sévigné's letters leave us wholly in the dark as to
when this intimacy began. Sainte-Beuve holds that it was about 1665, and
makes a strong argument for his view of the matter. D'Haussonville
believes that this remarkable union was the result of long acquaintance
and slowly ripening friendship, the acquaintance having begun in the
years following Mme. de La Fayette's marriage,--that is, between 1655
and 1665. He sums up the matter as follows: "Une chose est certaine:
c'est que La Rochefoucauld s'est emparé peu à peu de l'âme et de
l'esprit de Mme. de La Fayette." And again: "C'est aux environs de
l'année 1670 que La Rochefoucauld commença à faire ouvertement partie de
l'existence de Mme. de La Fayette." And here we leave this much-vexed
problem of chronology.
Of the nature of this union and of the talk it gave rise to, we shall
not speak. Mme. de Sévigné tells all that need be known. "Leur mauvaise
santé," writes she, "les rendoit comme nécessaires l'un à l'autre.... je
crois que nulle passion ne peut surpasser la force d'une telle liaison."
The influence of this friendship upon each may best be set forth in the
words of Mme. de La Fayette: "M. de La Rochefoucauld m'a donné de
l'esprit, mais j'ai réformé son coeur." La Rochefoucauld had been
embittered by disappointed ambition, ill health, and the loss of his
favorite son; and his opinion of humanity in general and of woman in
particular was none too lofty, to say the least. Perhaps Mme. de La
Fayette's greatest service in this respect was in toning down the
severity of the immortal Maxims.
We know how deep and lasting was the grief of Mme. de La Fayette for the
loss of the man with whose life her own had been so long and so closely
united. On March 17th, 1680, Mme. de Sévigné writes: "M. de La
Rochefoucauld died last night. When again will poor Mme. de La Fayette
find such a friend, such kindness, such consideration for her and her
son? So great a loss is not to be repaired or obliterated by time." And
again: "Poor Mme. de La Fayette is now wholly at a loss what to do with
herself. The death of M. de La Rochefoucauld has made so terrible a void
in her life that she has come to judge better of the value of such a
friendship. Every one else will be comforted in the course of time, but
she, alas, has nothing to occupy her mind."
Apart from M. de La Rochefoucauld, La Fontaine was the only one of the
many great men of her time with whom Mme. de La Fayette was on terms of
friendship. Boileau has left his opinion of our author in a pithy
sentence. "Mme. de La Fayette," said he, "est la femme qui écrit le
mieux et qui a le plus d'esprit." But this is all.
Mme. de La Fayette's first published work was _La Princesse de
Montpensier_ in 1660 or 1662. This was followed by _Zaïde_, in 1670,
which bore the name of Segrais, but which is by Mme. de La Fayette. The
latter of these (for we confess not to have read the former) has indeed
some merit, though written in the style of the old heroic romance, "with
its abductions, its shipwrecks, its pirates, its gloomy solitudes, where
flawless lovers breathe forth their sighs in palaces adorned with
allegorical paintings."
_La Princesse de Clèves_ was published in 1677 from the house of Claude
Barbin. It was in four volumes, and bore no name. The little work (for
it is scarcely longer than our own _Vicar of Wakefield_) at once took
its place among the immortal productions of French literature. It is
needless for us to discuss the unprofitable question of why Mme. de La
Fayette withheld her name from the titlepage, and would never own to the
authorship. That _La Princesse de Clèves_ was written by her, and her
alone, the world is well agreed; and this is enough for us to know. It
is interesting, however, to read a letter of hers touching this point,
for it shows, apart from other things, what opinion her contemporaries
had of her masterpiece. This letter, bearing the date April 13th, 1678,
we translate in part:
"A little book [_La Princesse de Montpensier_] which had some vogue
fifteen years ago, and which the public was pleased to ascribe to me,
has earned me the title of author of _La Princesse de Clèves_; but I
assure you that I have had no part in it, and that M. de Rochefoucauld,
who has also been mentioned, has had as little as I. He denies it so
strenuously that it is impossible not to believe him, especially in a
matter which can be confessed without shame. As for me, I am flattered
at being suspected, and I think I should acknowledge the book if I were
sure that the author would never claim it of me. I find it very
agreeable, well written, without being extremely polished, full of very
delicate touches, and well worth more than a single reading; and what I
especially notice is an exact representation of the persons composing
the court and of their manner of life. It is without romanticism and
exaggeration, and so it is not a romance; it is more like a book of
memoirs,--and I hear this was the first title of the book,--but it was
changed. There you have my opinion of the _La Princesse de Clèves_; let
me ask you for yours, for people have almost come to blows over it. Many
blame what others praise, so, whatever you say, you will not find
yourself alone in your views."
With _La Princesse de Clèves_, Mme. de La Fayette created a new kind of
fiction,--"substituting," says Saintsbury, "for mere romance of
adventure on the one hand, and stilted heroic work on the other, fiction
in which the display of character is held of chief account." The very
briefness of the work, its sober language and simple incident,
contrasted with the appalling length, the mighty catastrophes, and grand
phrases of the old romances, may have indeed contributed much to its
immediate popularity, but its abiding interest rests upon the
truthfulness with which character is drawn, and emotions and motives are
analyzed. The old order of fiction had indeed already fallen into
contempt; Boileau and others had dealt it fatal blows, but the finishing
stroke was justly due to Mme. de La Fayette. And the world has ever
gladly owned its debt to her.
_La Princesse de Clèves_ is an historical romance. The historical
interest is, however, the least of its charms. The scene purports to be
laid in the Court of Henry II.; but the manners--and the personages,
apart from their names--are all those of the Court of Louis XIV. Certain
critics have endeavored to trace the character of Mme. de La Fayette in
that of the Princess of Clèves, of M. de La Rochefoucauld in that of M.
de Nemours; but too strict an autobiographical interpretation destroys
the charm of the story. The little book should be read for its
intrinsic worth,--its delightful style, its faithful delineation of
character, and its earnestness of moral purpose.
Mme. de La Fayette died in 1693. During her last years ill health and
sorrow had forced upon her an almost absolute seclusion, and she died
forgotten by all except a few faithful friends. The place of her burial
is unknown.
* * * * *
The editors return their thanks to Professor van Daell for helpful
suggestions, and to Drs. James W. Tupper and George C. Keidel of the
Johns Hopkins University, Professor James A. Harrison of the University
of Virginia, and Professor F.M. Warren of Adelbert College, for aid
generously given.
[Page 1]