Monday, September 22, 2008

Biography of the Duchess

Front cover of the book, The Duchess by Amanda Foreman

After finishing Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire by Amanda Foreman, I have come to the conclusion that the flaming youth of the 1770's and 80's were just about as wild a bunch that could be. It seems that the generation of aristocrats who came of age in the decade and a half immediately before the French Revolution liked to live life at the edge. Fashions were extreme, homes were elaborate, and fortunes were gambled blithely away. Traditional morals and religious practice were given a public nod while being privately cast aside. The "sweetness of living," as Talleyrand nostalgically referred to the ancien régime, was to be replaced by the wars and successive revolutions of the next two centuries.

The decadent old world, which would soon be turned upside down, was in England presided over with glamor and opulence by Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire. In France, Marie-Antoinette was perceived as being the queen of the fashionable whirl, but she was never so popular in society and genuinely influential in politics as was her friend Georgiana in England. Also, Marie-Antoinette's domestic life became calmer after the birth of her first child at age twenty-two. With Louis XVI to steady her, she eventually gave up gambling, and became the strong and courageous queen who was able to face the upheavals of the Revolution. Furthermore, Louis did not indulge in chronic infidelity as did the Duke of Devonshire. Georgiana, on the other hand, went from one personal fiasco to another, hardly ever letting up until she was in her forties, and even then died with enormous debts.

The book gives a detailed account of the vast political influence wielded by ladies of high society in the days when women could not vote. The assortment of characters depicted by Reynolds and Gainsborough were finally given personality for me in Foreman's well-written biography. My trouble was with Georgiana herself. I could not grasp why she was so psychologically needy, what with the drinking and all night parties and spending and inordinate attachments to her friends. She had come from a loving family, although they were not perfect, but at least they cared and actively intervened in her troubles. Her husband did not love her, clearly, but many women were in loveless marriages. Unlike Marie-Antoinette, Georgiana could not seem to get her gambling under control. I do not understand why such a charming, intelligent and popular woman would be so insecure. Part of this is because I am so used to reading and writing about people who had extreme traumas and upheavals, such as Louis XVI, Marie-Antoinette and their immediate family. Most of poor Georgiana's troubles were of her own making and completely avoidable. While she is a fascinating character, adored by the common folk for her ability to mingle, she is a bit puzzling.

For one thing, it was so odd for Georgiana to tolerate Bess Foster's presence in the Duke of Devonshire's bed for all those years. Georgiana was such a bottomless pit of emotional need that she insisted on keeping Bess as her friend no matter what. As for Bess, she wanted everything Georgiana had; she wanted to be Georgiana. In the end, she had her way, and became the Duchess of Devonshire, but she was never loved the way Georgiana was loved. Georgiana's daughter Harriet described Bess thus: "...More perverted than deceitful...I really believe she hardly knows herself the difference between right and wrong now." (p. 308) Foreman says that Bess' version of events in her diary "was more fantasy than truth." (p.177) This is why I take it as a grain of salt when anything Bess wrote in regard to Count Fersen and Marie-Antoinette is given as evidence that they had an affair.

I also wish to point out that, contrary to what is said on page 129, Marie-Antoinette did not weep in front of her attendants when Count Fersen left Versailles in 1778. The Swedish ambassador recorded that her eyes "filled with tears," which is different from having a good cry. Marie-Antoinette was pregnant at the time with her first child. She may have been a bit emotional as are many women in that condition. It could also be that the beau Fersen did indeed impress her with his charm and masculine beauty. She was not made of wood. But what must be remembered is that the Austrian ambassador Count Mercy, who constantly spied on Marie-Antoinette, reporting everything to her mother, did not think the incident with Fersen was worth mentioning. He was more upset about the influence of Madame de Polignac on the young queen. The Spanish ambassador Count Aranda, who paid servants to inspect the royal sheets so that he knew when the king and queen had relations, also did not think anything of the Queen's friendship with Fersen.

The person I find to be most sympathetic in the biography about Georgiana is her long-suffering mother, Lady Spencer. I do not blame Lady Spencer one bit for having the governess as her spy. After all, she had to keep track of the various illegitimate children who were being smuggled into the Cavendish nursery, after being born and fostered out with utmost secrecy. Between Bess Foster and Georgiana's sister Harriet, I lost track of which child belonged to whom. And then Georgiana herself, fleeing to France to give birth to little Eliza. At least the children were not abandoned or destroyed; each was given care and love. For Lady Spencer to try to supervise the situation, and attempt to have Bess thrown out, was basic prudence. She was the only responsible adult in the clan and how her daughters carried on must have broken her heart.

I wish I could have understood why Georgiana plunged into the affair with Charles Grey, Eliza's father. Her life was already a mess, what with the heavy drinking and gambling; her involvement with Earl Grey served to further complicate matters. The affair seemed to come not so much from a great love but from sheer recklessness on the part of someone who had totally lost control of her life. However, the book does not capture any sense of passion. Perhaps that is because so many of Georgiana's letters were censored or destroyed by her Victorian descendants, quite an editorial feat in itself.

To Georgiana's credit, she often displayed genuine remorse for her disordered ways and tried to amend her life. Her failing health eventually forced her into a simpler, calmer existence. Her oldest daughter wrote that she was the best of mothers. The Duchess was devoted to her family, no question about it, while struggling with so many addictive behaviors, so many demons. Tormented she was, without a doubt. I only wish I understood why.

Here is a review of the new film. Share


Enbrethiliel said...


I've been waiting to hear more about Georgiana from you Elena. I love this post!

Will you be reviewing the movie soon?

I've come upon comparisons between Georgiana and Diana, Princess of Wales that sound very much like comparisions between Marie Antoinette and Diana. Do you think there are more accurate parallels in Georgiana's case?

elena maria vidal said...

Thank you, Enbrethiliel. I will review the film at some point, probably after it comes out on DVD.

Marie-Antoinette, Georgiana and Diana were all women of fashion, possessing lots of star quality. They each loved their children a great deal. But that is really the end of the similarities between the three. I think that Georgiana and Diana resemble each other in the fact that, in spite of their immense and unflagging popularity with the masses, they struggled to be able to fill a deep emotional void.

Georgiana, however, was more of an intellectual than either Diana or Marie-Antoinette, well-educated, very accomplished, fascinated by science and politics.

On the other hand, Marie-Antoinette seemed to have more of an inner core of strength, perhaps from practicing her Catholic faith, which she did with increasing devotion as time went on. And perhaps she (the queen) was just naturally a stronger person, being the daughter of Maria Theresa, after all. In each case, there are different strengths and weaknesses, different challenges unique to the respective situations.

Catherine Delors said...

Ah! Elena, I see you have the same problem as I with this biography: I don't "get" Georgiana at all. I am not through with the book yet, but I find that Amanda Foreman gives us many bits and pieces of Georgiana, but no complete, coherent image of her.

Otherwise, I agree that it is a great, maybe an indispensable read for anyone interested in English society and politics of the times.

You are probably wise to wait for the DVD to come out. I am not hearing too many good things about the film (but I will probably go see it in a few weeks anyway...)

elena maria vidal said...

Thank you, Catherine. I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that the book gives us "many bits and pieces of Georgiana, but no complete, coherent image of her." I am looking forward to your reviews of both book and film.

Enbrethiliel said...


And here I thought I was the only one who didn't "get" Georgiana! (Not that I have any right to say that, as I've mostly been reading Foreman's online articles and Elena's posts to get a "feel" of her.) I don't understand the way she responded to the trials of her life.

On the other hand, I "get" Diana. I feel like I have some idea, however small, what it would be like to be in her shoes. While I can't like how she acted out so much, I understand where she was coming from. On the other hand, Georgiana is just a mystery. The phrase "bottomless pit of emotional need," which Elena has used to describe her in two different posts, has been stuck in my mind for days--but it hardly encapsulates her.

elena maria vidal said...

Same here. I "get" Diana. I don't like everything she did, but I totally understand where she was coming from. I am only a year younger than Diana; I know what girls of our generation were taught and what we were not taught. I understand about coming from a broken home and having a difficult marriage.

Georgiana came from loving parents who were devoted to each other and to their children. She was carefully educated and formed. Yes, her husband was unfaithful, but it was Georgiana who insisted on having Bess around. Bizarre. The only thing I can figure is that, like others who have come from seemingly "normal" families, Georgiana was an alcoholic. She reminds me of girls in the cheerleader crowd when I was in high school, many of whom came from nice families, but who were into drugs and heavy drinking. Georgiana just never seemed to grow out of it.

Gabriela said...

Hello Elena,

So great to find your blog!
Incredible information.

~ Gabriela ~

elena maria vidal said...

Welcome, Gabriela. Your blog looks lovely, too!

Sophie said...

I see where you are all coming from, we will never be able to truly "understand" Georgiana as there are not enough sources to see all sides of her story. As Elena mentioned, her victorian descendants destroyed many sources as she greatly contributed to science and politics and, in a society where women could not have much power, this was seen as inappropriate. However I feel that Georgiana was the way she was for many reasons, starting with a mother who, although loving, constantly critisised Georgiana. This made her obsessed with pleasing people and led to a need to be admired by her peers,loved by her son, which at times was a trying relationship. And have a close, loving relationship with her husband, which she never had. I also think that Georgiana was her day equivalent to the biggest celebrity, her face was in the papers every day and the pressure in such a high society would have been very difficult. Every move she made was scrutinised, which would have affected her so much more as she could not bare critisism.