A few years ago I read a wonderful book called, The Queen of the Fashion: What Marie Antoinette Wore to the Revolution. I loved so many things about it but what I, as an amateur fashion historian and one who loves clothes almost to the exclusion of all else, loved most was Caroline Weber's (the author) ability and interest in placing clothes into real and serious historic events and explaining their importance to the events. So many people think of fashion as frivolous-no it doesn't provide a cure for cancer or AIDS or poverty-all the things people think of as serious things. I know a woman who works at a Chanel cosmetics bar who donates her time to women in Memorial Sloan Kettering, who have advanced stages of cancer putting makeup on them. She often talks about the look of joy and relief on their faces when she's finished. It gives them hope and takes their mind off the terrible disease ravaging their bodies and stealing them away from their friends and families-so don't try to tell me that fashion isn't a serious thing. It's also a big business employing millions around the world from the highest echelons of real french couture to the polyester KMart copies, specifically it is one of the largest employers in NY. So don't tell me it has no importance. And we all must get dressed every day. How can something that touches almost every human being, from poorest to richest almost every day not be taken seriously?
To put Marie Antoinette's clothing choices into a political discussion seemed nothing less than fascinating to me-and it was. Partly for the clothes themselves which are glorious! I am desperate for time travel (back and forth), I'd make my weekend getaways not to Boston or Chicago but to European capitals in every era starting with about the 15th century-just so I can wear the clothes. I admit, I might choose London for my late 18th century costuming weekend, however...Partly for the brilliance of Marie using one of the few avenues open to her to effect her own history and her own life-so much was either taken away from her or forced upon her.
I don't believe that Marie Antoinette was stupid, and, I think way smarter than her insecure, socially awkward, inept husband, but she was young, too young to have been thrown onto the world stage she was thrown onto. She was not allowed to be involved in any real political discussions or decisions but was blamed for them when they went wrong, after all one could not criticize a king in 18th century Europe. So she did what what was expected of her, the only thing open to her, she became a creative dresser, she became the most creative dresser at court and as the second most senior executive, so to speak, her choices were expected to be more over the top than anyone else's. And she learned the importance of this very quickly yet she always seemed to go one day too long with each choice. She was supporting French industries-good. She was creative and wore gorgeous sumptuous clothes- good. Followed ancient protocols with much good grace-good. But then there were some difficult harvests and people were starving in the streets and her sumptuous was seen as disrespectful-bad. So she started wearing simple peasant costumes but that was also seen as disrespectful so she was punished in the press for it. It was said she was killing the silk industry in Lyons to shore up the cotton industry in England (France's arch enemy); it was said she appeared in public in her lingerie (everyone else was covered in pounds of satin and undergarments and bows and jewelry and protocol and she was hanging around in almost sheer white dresses. You get the point, no matter how hard she tried she just never got it right. I think that had her family not been arrested and killed and had she ever been allowed to actually rule she would have grown up into an intelligent fair Queen-perhaps not among the best like her mother, like Catherine the Great or like either of England's Elizabeths. But given enough time she would have figured it out. She was not the silly ruffly creature that history and Sofia Coppola suggests, if you read about her behavior while imprisoned with her family you will see a grace that was never there before, she grew up.
I first became interested in Marie Antoinette when I read "Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire" the two women were friendly and I loved Georgiana, how could a woman she was friends with be so terrible? History has painted Marie Antoinette with such a deplorable brush, for so long (especially French people who still seem to hate her). But I have seen that modern historians have begun to reexamine the Queen and see her through perhaps different eyes over the past several years. So, I did what I always do when I'm interested but uneducated about someone-I began to read about her. I think poor Marie tried to so hard to please, to do the right thing but she just never quite got it, everything the poor girl did seemed one step off. She was the youngest daughter of a brilliant and powerful mother, the Empress of Austria she was never expected to rise to the heights of marrying the French heir to the throne so she was never trained for such an exalted position (remember that in the 1750's France was the world's super power). Her mother, Marie Therese trained her older daughters to be able to be Queens of important countries yet one by one they dropped out of the running-a few died and a few even stood up to their mother and said "no" and married kings or princes of smaller countries-men the liked or respected. That left Marie Antoinette. She did what she was told but was never allowed to be part of the real political structure, the real running of a country, because she was a woman. I have long thought that one of the greatest sins perpetrated against women over previous centuries was that we were not allowed to work, especially wealthy titled women. There was so little outlet for our intellect, creativity or energy-I have long thought that Georgiana (an important political hostess, though only through her husband, and it was the only option she had) would have made a brilliant PR person. She would have had her own firm, I'm sure of it-had she lived today. The current Duchess of Devonshire by the way is the grandmother of Stella Tenant (who works hard and is so very successful).
Last week, I went to another lecture at FIT, given by Caroline Weber about her book. My hero, Valerie Steele (more about her in another piece) introduced Caroline to the podium and the gorgeous young woman who appeared could not possibly have all of the education and books to her credit?!?!? And yet, the minute she opened her mouth you knew she did. Her passion for fashion history, about how to place fashion within history, about history, and French history was immediately infectious! You can't count my joy in listening to her as her enthusiasm for fashion history is my passion in life. But to see my best friend's boyfriend who has very little interest in fashion history become excited about the subject was a joy for me as well. Ms. Weber fielded audience questions with charm and was able to tell us more stories about Marie Antoinette through her answers! At her book signing, my friend asked her a question she had never been asked before and it was a rather exciting experience-we know that many women were influenced by Marie Antoinette's fashion choices but did she have any influences over men's fashion? Just one point of fashion history of my own before I tell you Ms Weber's answer, before about 1810 or so men wore clothing much more similar to women-they wore sumptuous silks with rich color, they wore heels and accessories and lacy flouncy "blouses", they wore powdered wigs and even nail polish and cosmetics-we have one character in about 1810 maybe a bit earlier who got men to start wearing black suits and white shirts and the drastic difference in men's clothes and women's has not come back together until the late 20th century-and even today it takes a very special man to wear really high fashion clothes. So Dr. Weber told us that Marie Antoinette had a huge influence on Louis' younger brother the Duke D'Artois who ran with a very fast crowd and who tried to outdo one another in the hugeness of their buttons and the largeness of their wigs, among other things.
The one issue I would take with my new idol Caroline Weber is on the Spring 2010 Chanel collection. Mostly I think Karl Lagerfeld has it within him to be a genius but he can be so lazy, though I cannot comprehend what on earth he was thinking by showing the "Daisy Dukes farmer in the dell" collection. But Dr Weber loved it and her point, I believe comes from her being an historian first. She liked the collection because for her it referenced Marie Antoinette wearing little white dresses on her farm-I certainly understand the historical correlation but remember, that was considered disrespectful to real farmers who were starving. For me, as a fashion person first and a Chanel lover, I defy you to find me one person who can afford to buy Chanel who would then wear it on a real farm! I'm sure there are many wealthy people who own farms or ranches but I feel certain that when they are in the fields they are wearing crummy jeans and Wellies-not high end French couturiers! Doesn't that make it just as disrespectful to today's struggling farmers some 250 years later!? And what about disrespectful to the clothes? And DO NOT even get me started on those positively HIDEOUS clogs!
Caroline Weber has taken some time off from teaching to write another book and may, I brag here, for a moment? She was impressed that I knew the name of her new subject and a little tiny bit of her history. I am so looking forward to reading it and hope there will be another FIT talk to go with it. It's not really my place to tell someone else's secret but I will say she was one of the original flappers, so I know I am sure to love the book!
Comments