George Sand and Frederic Chopin: Lucrezia Floriani
George Sand, part of an unfinished double portrait of Sand and Frédéric Chopin by Eugène Delacroix, 1838.
Source: Wikipedia
Source: Wikipedia
Their acquaintance was renewed in the spring of 1838, however, when they met again in the Paris apartment of mutual friends during an after-theater party for the actress Marie Dorval. Chopin was prevailed on to perform an impromptu, and Sand wrote him a quick note: "On vous adore" (We adore you).
Arthur (Artur) Rubinstein performing Chopin's Impromptu in F-sharp major op. 36 (1839):
Sand must have improved on closer acquaintance. She and Chopin became lovers a few weeks later, although she would not fully extract herself from a relationship with her son's tutor Félicien Mallefille until September.
Frédéric Chopin, part of an unfinished double portrait of George Sand and Chopin by Eugène Delacroix, 1838,
at the same scale as the portrait of Sand above. Source: Wikipedia
at the same scale as the portrait of Sand above. Source: Wikipedia
From the beginning of their relationship Sand recognized that the younger and less sexually experienced Chopin was physically frail and emotionally sensitive. But perhaps these were some of the qualities, along with his artistic nature, that attracted her. And as in her other great affair, with Alfred de Musset, with Chopin she became nurse as well as lover. She was to write, "I look after him like a child, and he loves me like his mother." [2]
There is a current of (largely misogynistic) thought that portrays Sand as a distracting and destructive influence on Chopin. In fact, "much of his greatest music was composed in [Sand's country estate at] Nohant" [3], and he composed almost nothing after their separation in 1847 (although it's also true that his health was poor and continued to decline until his death in 1849). And Sand was deeply appreciative of his musical expressivity. In her autobiography The Story of My Life (1856) she wrote, "Chopin's genius is the deepest, the most sensitive and the most emotional in existence. He made a lone instrument speak the language of the infinite." [4]
Frédéric Chopin by Jakob Götzenberger, 1838. Source: Wikimedia Commons/Google Art Project
This is not to deny that there were continuing tensions. In many ways the two were opposites. Sand was politically liberal, while Chopin was conservative. Sand moved in bohemian circles, while Chopin cultivated friends and patrons with high social standing. Sand was passionate and impulsive, while Chopin could be withdrawn and irritable. There was also a kind of gender role reversal between the fastidious Chopin and the trouser-wearing, tobacco-smoking Sand; as Chopin's friend and biographer Frederick Niecks noted, "He is so lady-like, and she is such a perfect gentleman." [5]
Sand was gregarious and sought a wide acquaintance, while Chopin was reserved and became increasingly jealous of Sand's friendships with other men. That jealousy, and the ultimate doom it spelled for the relationship, were reflected in the novel Sand worked on in the summer of 1846, Lucrezia Floriani.
Lucrezia Floriani (1846)
Title page of Belgian edition of Lucrezia Floriani. Source: archive.org
As the novel opens the young, neuraesthenic Prince Karol de Roswald and his friend Salvator Albani arrive at Lake Iseo, about halfway between Milan and Verona (Sand and her then-lover Pietro Pagello had visited it in 1834; see George Sand and Alfred de Musset: The Confession). Karol is described in terms that are reminiscent of Chopin: social correctness, constitutional weakness and emotional coldness.
. . .he had the gift of pleasing even those who did not know him well. His charming face predisposed one in his favour; his physical frailty made him interesting in the eyes of women; the richness and ease of his intellectual gifts, the suave and attractive originality of his conversation, won him the attention of educated men. As for those of lesser metal, they liked his exquisite politeness and they were all the more appreciative of it as they could not imagine, in their simple goodheartedness, that he was merely performing a duty and that sympathy did not enter into it at all. [6]Salvator learns that an old friend for whom he has kept burning an unrequited passion, the actress and playwright Lucrezia Floriani, is staying at her villa nearby. He impulsively convinces Karol to join him in dropping in on her unannounced. Lucrezia is an idealized version of an unconventional woman very like George Sand herself:
'Would you say that I am a courtesan? I don't think so, since I have always given to my lovers and have never received anything. . .
'Would you say that I am a wanton? My heart, not my senses have ruled me, and I cannot even begin to understand pleasure without rapturous affection.
'Finally, am I a low, immoral woman? We must know what you mean by that. I have never sought scandal. Maybe I have caused it without wishing to, and without knowing. I have never loved two men at the same time. I have never in fact and in intention belonged to more than one man during a given time, depending on the duration of my love. When I no longer loved him I did not deceive him. I broke with him absolutely. True, at the height of passion I had sworn to love him for ever; when I did swear it, I was in perfect good faith. Each time I have loved, it was with so much of my heart that I thought it was for the first and last time in my life. . .
'I have never fought against my passions. If I have acted well or badly I have been punished and rewarded by those passions themselves. I was to lose my reputation as a result; I expected it; I sacrificed reputation to love, and that concerns me alone.' [7]
L'amoureuse au piano by Eugène Delacroix, 1843
Karol is dismayed to learn of Lucrezia's past—she has four children by three different men and has never married—and is determined to leave as soon as possible. But as he is departing the next day he falls ill, and after Lucrezia slowly nurses him back to health they become lovers. Salvator sees what is happening with unease, but leaves the two to their idyll.
"You are mortally sad this evening." Illustration from Lucrezia Floriani, Chapter 24, by Maurice Sand (George Sand's son), 1854. Source: archive.org
But that idyll only lasts a few weeks. The actor father of one of Lucrezia's children comes to visit, and Karol is tortured by jealousy. Soon that jealousy spreads to all of Lucrezia's past and present contacts with other men, and poisons their relationship.
The more exasperated he was the colder he appeared and one could only judge of the degree of his fury by that of his icy courtesy. . .And then he brought wit into play, false, brittle wit, in order to torture those whom he loved. He was bantering, artificial, precious, utterly disgusted with everything. He seemed to be nibbling very gently, for sheer pleasure, but the wound he was making penetrated ever deeper into one's soul. Alternatively, if he had not the courage to contradict and mock, he withdrew into a scornful silence, a fit of sulks which rent his victim's heart. . .he thoroughly despised everything one had said and one could possibly say.After many weary years, Karol's possessiveness kills Lucrezia's love for him, and ultimately Lucrezia herself loses the will to live: "She was extinguished like a flame deprived of air." [9]
. . .A nature which is rich through exuberance and one which is rich through exclusiveness cannot fuse. One of the two must consume the other and leave nothing but its ashes. And this is what happened. [8]
In mid-August 1846 Eugène Delacroix travelled to Nohant to visit with Sand and Chopin. One evening George Sand read her work-in-progress aloud to both men. The parallels between Lucrezia/Karol and Sand/Chopin were stunningly clear to Delacroix; he later wrote, "Executioner and victim both amazed me. Madame Sand seemed absolutely at her ease, and Chopin never stopped admiring the story." [10]
Photograph of a daguerreotype likely to be of Chopin by Louis-Auguste Bisson, ca. 1847, found in a private collection by Alain Kohler. Source: Institut Polonais Paris/CBC
However, Chopin may have been brought to recognize and resent the unflattering portrayal. After that summer he never returned to Nohant, and although Sand saw him over the next winter in Paris, the inevitable final break occurred—by letter—the following summer. (There was another ostensible cause: Chopin sided with Sand's daughter Solange and against Sand in a family quarrel.) Although Sand continued to make solicitous inquiries about him through mutual friends such as Pauline Viardot, Chopin remained bitter towards Sand for the remainder of his life. He died in October 1849, probably of chronic tuberculosis.
At the end of Lucrezia Floriani the narrator suggests that there may be a sequel that would continue to follow Prince Karol, but one never appeared. Perhaps regarding these characters Sand came to feel that there was nothing more she wished to say.
Other posts in this series:
- George Sand and Gustave Flaubert: Marianne (1876)
- George Sand and Pauline Viardot: Consuelo (1842)
- George Sand and Alfred de Musset: The Confession (1836)
- George Sand: Indiana (1832)
- Combined quotation from Ann Deters, 2003, "Frederic Chopin and George Sand Romanticized," Constructing the Past, Vol. 4, No. 1, Article 6. http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/constructing/vol4/iss1/6, and Curtis Cate, George Sand: A Biography, Houghton Mifflin, 1975, p. 413. Translation slightly altered.
- Quoted in Kornel Michałowski and Jim Samson, 2001, "Chopin, Fryderyk Franciszek." Grove Music Online.
- Michałowski and Samson.
- Quoted in Catherine Kautsky, 2012, "Sand and Chopin: The Mysterious Liaison," American Music Teacher, Vol. 61, No. 5, pp. 25-28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43539981. Translation slightly altered.
- Quoted in Kautsky.
- George Sand, Lucrezia Floriani, translated by Julius Eker, Academy Chicago Publishers, 1993, p. 8.
- Sand, pp. 25-26.
- Sand, pp. 212-213. Translation slightly altered.
- Sand, p. 227.
- Quoted in Cate, pp. 545-546.
Well written article, my compliments!
ReplyDeleteI would respectfully start a dialogue on a few points only.
The last daguerrotype was proven to be of a photo of a painting of Chopin, so it’s not an accurate photo of him. This is but a minor detail.
I would challenge the conclusion that Sand was interested in any meaningful way about Chopin after she discarded him (apart from maybe being a little curious about his health) and I’d also challenge the notion that Chopin remained bitter and resentful about Sand.
The circumstances of the break-up are rarely discussed in their entirety.
But to start with, Sand was famous of her gazillions of lovers, she did not entirely step out of the Malefille-story while already starting an affair with Chopin, it was evidenced that she cheated on Chopin at least with one person (Borie, if I remember well - some say there were more) and she constantly surrounded herself with a circle of drooling men. All the while she stopped being physical with Chopin, because she said she was afraid it would kill him. Considering all this, I don’t know who would have felt comfortable and not jealous in Chopin’s place.
Chopin was not stupid, even if he handled his intimate life with discretion and chose not to comment. It was a degrading situation for him. Prrobably only his desperate need for Nohant and composing in peace justifies it.
The break-up’s circumstances are no less messy.
Solange had a very decent fiancee up until february 1847 when Clesinger appeared. Chopin warned Sand against Cl., he knew about his reputation as a drunkard full of debts, but she did not listen. She married off Solange to Clesinger behind the back of Chopin, she didn’t want to deal with his disapproval. When things turned ugly pretty quickly in July, physical violence erupted between Maurice + Sand and Clesinger (who was there with Solange). Sand threw Clesinger and Solange out of the house and expressly denied Chopin’s carriage to be used by them. Solange (who was pregnant) omitted everything that just happened and simply asked Chopin for his carriage. Chopin regarded Solange as a daughter and was aware of her pregnancy, so asked no questions but lent them his carriage. Sand assumed Chopin knew about what happened and took offense, she interpreted Chopin’s action as siding with the enemy and accused him of loving Solange and not loving her any more. Consequently she sent a brutal break-up letter which caught Chopin off guard, he was in shock. He responded with a lot of dignity, he was appealing to George’s motherly heart and expressed a firm convinction that things must and will smooth out between mother and daughter, as it cannot be otherwise. He wrote: ‘In the face of such a serious event I will not mention what concerns me. Time will do its job. I will wait. Always the same - your wholly devoted Ch[opin]’.
In the following months and years until his death he never ceased to encourage Solange to keep in touch with her mother and try to smooth out things. Sand didn’t speak to him any more, she just asked from friends every now and then how Chopin’s health was.
ReplyDeleteSome friends of both Chopin and Sand, like Viardot tried to mediate between them. It was clear for everyone that Chopin did not turn against Sand, didn’t do anything dishonourable and was as devoted to her as ever. For some reason Sand chose to ignore Chopin’s own words as much as these friends’. This only proves that she simply had it with Chopin and all this was just indeed an excuse to get rid of him.
Her unfaltering efforts to paint Chopin everything that he wasn’t -which completely covers a proper character slander-
(even in Histoire de ma vie as much as in Lucrezia Floriani) probably stem from the fact that she had to justify her otherwise unjustifiable decision to get rid of him.
Chopin, who practically did nothing wrong and from all parties involved (incl. Maurice, Clesinger, Solange or Sand herself) was the only one behaving with courtesy, dignity and moral integrity ended up being depicted everything that he didn’t deserve.
The simple fact that the only written accounts people read are the ones written by Sand (who was by definition a fiction writer who didn’t shy away from changing reality into her own story that pictured her in a better light) are determining the fate of Chopin who chose not to comment and this way we know not what he suffered because of Sand.
The way Sand treated him even in front of other people is appalling. She gave him belittling diminuitives, she called her Chip-chip and ‘my dear corpse’, it makes one shudder.
She wrote Lucrezia Floriani, then read it to Chopin while other friends were listening. Does this not speak volumes? Are people completely oblivious to what’s right in front of them?
I do not know, but I do find it abominable.
Anonymous, many thanks for your highly informed comment. I think the reasons for the Sand-Chopin break-up, as with many less famous ones, may depend on your perspective. Through my series on Sand, I have attempted not to take sides, but simply to provide readers with background material informing my reading of Sand's works.
DeleteEmotional and erotic freedom was one of Sand's central principles, as anyone becoming involved with her in 1838 couldn't help but be aware. Unlike Lucrezia, Sand did not always "absolutely break" with one lover before taking up with another. But she was hardly alone in this practice; it's a privilege that men have often assumed. Alfred de Musset, for example, consorted with other women when he travelled with Sand to Venice.
Did Sand refer to Chopin with "belittling diminutives," comically exaggerated pet names, or tender endearments? Again, it may depend on one's perspective. By the accounts I drew on for this post, the two had fundamentally different temperaments: she was witty, sociable, and bohemian, while he was reserved and sensitive to the point of irritability.
As for Sand reading Lucrezia Floriani aloud to Delacroix and Chopin, Delacroix reports that "Chopin never stopped admiring the story." Evidently he was not offended, at least at first, by the novel.
Finally, Chopin intervened in opposition to Sand's express wishes in a family quarrel. Whether or not we feel Sand was being unreasonable, this is an action that could hardly fail to arouse her anger.
In short, what is remarkable is not that they broke up, but that they remained together despite their incompatibilities for so long. Clearly a key reason for that was Sand's deep respect and admiration for Chopin's creativity, and her desire to foster it. You say that we don't know what Chopin suffered because of Sand; however, we do know that, as I quote from Grove Music Online in the post, "'much of his greatest music was composed in [Sand's country estate at] Nohant.'" She offered him the conditions, support and care he needed to compose; inevitably her care of him must have impinged on the time she needed to write. I don't see a villain in this situation, but rather two artists who deeply admired one another's work but who found that they were ultimately unable to sustain a romantic relationship.