The dilettantism project proved to be the most important document on the concept during the period of Weimar Classicism. Goethe still uses the term regularly after 1800, but he never engages with it to the same extent. As was shown in the last chapter, his autobiographical references are characterized by a cautious awareness: although he acknowledges the value of his own activities, he only alludes to his dilettantism. The other references from this period add various nuances to his understanding of the concept. In the Maximen und Reflexionen (of which most were written after 1800), maxims 821–27 of the section entitled 'Kunst und Künstler' are concerned with dilettantism. In general the material here simply paraphrases ideas already in the project about the disadvantages of dilettantism on the grounds of its inadequate approach to art, which suggests that it provided a different means of publishing this material. But maxim 824 offers a new perspective on the development of the dilettante:
Die Zudringlichkeiten junger Dilettanten muß man mit Wohlwollen ertragen: sie werden im Alter die wahrsten Verehrer der Kunst und des Meisters.
[The pushiness of young dilettantes must be benevolently tolerated: in old age they become the truest admirers of art and the master].1
This reference to the mature dilettante's eventual respect for art and the master can be interpreted as another allusion to the modest value of his own activities.
The majority of Goethe's other later references to dilettantism are negative.2 Another of the maxims in this section can also be found in Book Two of Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre:
Die Dilettanten, wenn sie das Möglichste getan haben, pflegen zu ihrer Entschuldigung zu sagen, die Arbeit sei noch nicht fertig. Freilich kann sie nie fertig werden, weil sie nie recht angefangen ward. 3
[When they have done their utmost, dilettantes usually make the excuse that the work is not finished. Of course it can never be finished, because it was never started properly.]
This indictment of dilettantism would not be out of place in the project itself, and it shows that Goethe's essential belief in the innate inferior ability of the dilettante remained long after the project was abandoned.
A humorous reference to the limited value of dilettantism can be found in Part One of Faust (1808), when a character called Servibilis introduces the 'Walpurgisnachtstraum' play:
SERVIBILIS Gleich fängt man wieder an.
Ein neues Stück, das letzte Stuck von sieben;
So viel zu geben, ist allhier der Branch.
Ein Dilettant hat es geschrieben,
Und Dilettanten spielen's auch.
Verzeiht, ihr Herrn, wenn ich verschwinde;
Mich dilettiert's, den Vorhang aufzuziehn.4
[It will start again now.
A new play, the last one of seven;
It is the custom here to do so many.
A dilettante has written it,
And dilettantes are performing it too.
Forgive me, gentlemen, if I disappear;
I'm dilettanted to raise the curtain.]5
Here the term is used to denote an amateur production and is predominantly comical, particularly in the neologism 'Mich dilettiert's'. This comical use of the term provides an example of the creative expression of the concept which Goethe suggests at the time of the dilettantism project; it is essentially light-hearted, but the association of dilettantism with second-rate amateur dramatics is conveyed.
Eduard and Charlotte's attempts at landscape gardening in Die Wahlverwandtschaften (written 1808–09) clearly suggest dilettantism, and several studies have explored this connection.6 But Goethe never designates them as dilettantes, and the one reference to the term in the novel is in a different context. It occurs at the beginning of the third chapter of Part Two:
Es ist eine so angenehme Empfindung, sich mit etwas zu beschäftigen, was man nur halb kann, daß niemand den Dilettanten schelten sollte, wenn er sich mit einer Kunst abgibt, die er nie lernen wird, noch den Künstler tadeln dürfte, wenn er über die Grenze seiner Kunst hinaus in einem benachbarten Felde sich zu ergehen Lust hat.7
[It is so pleasant a sensation to occupy yourself with something you can only half do that you should never reproach the dilettante if he engages in an art he will never learn or blame the artist if he feels inclined to go beyond the boundaries of his art into a neighbouring field.]8
This quasi-epigrammatic defence of the pleasure of Halbkönnertum (partial ability) is illustrated by the example of the architect of the chapel, who moves into another sphere when he takes charge of painting its interior.9 The use of the term here combines several advantages of dilettantism from the project, thus also realizing to some extent Goethe's suggestion to Schiller that a poetic representation might be more effective. The activity of the dilettante is defended on grounds of the pleasure that it brings. The argument that the artist should not be reproached for activities in other fields can be interpreted as another example of Goethe's self-justification, and it also supports the view that he associates the artist with one specific field. The architect has no pretence to originality in his painting, concentrating instead on the successful and tasteful imitation of models. It is interesting that Goethe's technique here mirrors his autobiographical uses: he offers a general statement about the dilettante as opposed to designating somebody with the term. This example also supports the argument that artistry and dilettantism can coexist within the same person.
A final reference suggests a specific association between dilettantism and Romanticism. In a letter to Zelter dated 24 August 1823, Goethe discusses the talent of a painter named Hensel, which he views as symptomatic of contemporary dilettantism:
Auch er [Hensel], wie so manche andere, hat ein eingebornes Talent, was aber daraus werden kann, das weiß — nicht Gott, der sich um dergleichen schwerlich bekümmert — aber ich weiß es, der ich diesem Irrsal seit mehr als zwanzig Jahren zusehe. Auch er stickt in dem seichten Dilettantismus der Zeit, der in Altertümlei und Vaterländelei einen falschen Grund, in Frömmelei ein schwächendes Element sucht, eine Atmosphäre, worin sich vornehme Weiber, halbkennende Gönner und unvermögende Versuchler so gerne begegnen; [. . .].10
[Like so many others, he [Hensel] also has an innate talent, but what will become of it — well, God doesn't know, since he hardly bothers himself with this sort of thing — but I know, because I've been watching this madness for more than twenty years. He too is becalmed in the shallow dilettantism of the age, which seeks a false basis in antiquarianism and patriotism and an enervating element in false piety — an atmosphere where aristocratic women, semi-knowledgeable patrons and half-competent enthusiasts are so happy to meet [...].
Goethe's derisive dismissal of recent art develops his conception of dilettantism. Certain elements are familiar (class, gender, incompetence), whereas others are new (antiquarianism, nationalism, false piety). This shows how the concept of dilettantism can be applied to different periods; the characteristics are the same, but the manifestations are different. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this use is the fact that Goethe considers Hensel to have an innate talent, which implies that he has been adversely affected by contemporary artistic fashion. This recalls his critique of Wieland's 'laxity', suggesting a parallel between Rokoko art and Romanticism. Both periods lack the norms and rules of Weimar Classicism, and Goethe sees similar elements of dilettantism in Romanticism. This view is developed by Hans Joachim Schrimpf in his study of Goethe's later career. Schrimpf interprets this view of Hensel as a critique of Romanticism, arguing that Goethe rejected the 'subjectivism' ('Subjektivismus') of the new art.11 An element of subjectivism was a part of Goethe's (and Schiller's) conception of dilettantism even before the dilettantism project, and this view is still evident in Goethe's critique of Romanticism,12 His association of the subjectivism of Romanticism with dilettantism can therefore be seen as a natural progression of the ideals of the project.
In his notes on Maximen und Rejlexionen in the Hamburger Ausgabe, Schrimpf argues that Goethe's conception of dilettantism is unequivocal after the neo-classical period, claiming that he uses it as a critique of the general disintegration ('Auflösung') of the age.13 But the ambivalence evinced by other references in this period challenges this view, particularly with regard to the autobiographical uses. The fact that his fundamental ambivalence towards the concept remained until his death can be attributed to his personal experience of the advantages of dilettantism. Vaget supports this reading, arguing that Goethe retained his dual perspective on dilettantism but no longer attempted to reconcile the positive and negative types.14 He also identifies a gradual shift in Goethe's conception of dilettantism from an aesthetic phenomenon to an existential one. This reinforces the impression that Goethe's personal experience of dilettantism plays an increasingly significant role in sustaining his dual perspective. Although the examples may change, the positive and negative views of dilettantism remain applicable until the end of his life.
In the decades after Goethe's death, the terms 'Dilettant' and 'Dilettantismus' become less common in German critical discourse. Georg Stanitzek proposes a socio-political reason for this decline:
Seit dem Ende des 18.Jh.s und insbesondere — als 'Massenerscheinung' (Friedrich Sengle) — in der Biedermeierzeit tritt an die Stelle der adeligen eine bildungsbürgerliche Dilettanten-Kultur. Zudem wird diese Kultur nun durchaus von am Markt operierenden freien Schriftstellern bedient; und daraus resultiert eine Trivialliteratur. die zwar professionellen Ursprungs, doch unter Qualitäts-gesichtspunkten als dilettantisch zu bezeichnen ist.15
[After the end of the eighteenth century and particularly in the Biedermeierzeit — as a 'mass phenomenon' (Friedrich Sengle) — the noble dilettante-culture is replaced by an educated-bourgeois one. In addition this culture is served perfectly by professional writers, resulting in a Trivialliteratur, which is professional in origin but can be described as dilettantish from the point of view of quality.]16
Goethe and Schiller's dilettantism project had already alluded to the rise of the educated middle classes and the consequent increase in professional literary production; Stanitzek develops this association by connecting the concept of dilettantism to the emergence of professional writers ('freie Schriftsteller') and the increased amount of Trivialliteratur in the Biedermeierzeit (i.e. approximately between 1815 and 1848). He refers here to Sengle's survey of the Biedermeierzeit, where Sengle describes how the period was characterized by a general increase in all fields of artistic activity, which in literature led to increased production of both poetry and prose.17 Sengle views literary dilettantism as characteristic of the Biedermeierzeit, attributing the poor reputation of the period principally to the amount of second-rate literary production; for the first time printed literary dilettantism ('der gedruckte literarische Dilettantismus') was available in large quantities.18 He also attributes the increase in dilettantism during the Biedermeierzeit to the Romantic notion of 'universal poetry' ('die Universalpoesie der Romantik'), which encouraged more people to write.19 This recalls both Goethe and Schiller's earlier critique of excessive subjectivity and Goethe's subsequent critique of Romanticism. Sengle argues that the Romantic cult of sensation, the political revolution and the general idea of humanity ('Humanitätsidee') also contributed to the increased literary production by women.20 Although he eschews the a priori equation of women's writing with dilettantism made by Goethe and Schiller, he does consider the increased number of women writers to be another cause of the decline in literary standards. He also suggests that this pervasive decline left its mark even on the first-rate writers of this period, echoing Goethe's critique of Hensel's painting.21
This association of the Biedermeierzeit with an increase in dilettantism can therefore be attributed to two main factors: the rise in the number of professional writers and the influence of Romanticism, which combined to cause a decline in literary standards. Consequently, the term 'Biedermeier' itself took on connotations of dilettantism, to the extent that the description of a writer as 'Biedermeier' is problematic. However, as is so often the case (an analogy can be made with Realism), many of the writers associated with the Biedermeierzeit cannot simply be dismissed by this category; it is more useful to recognize 'Biedermeier' elements in writers such as Droste-Hülshoff, Grillparzer, Heine, Immermann, Mörike and Stifter.22 A parallel can be made between the argument that 'Biedermeier' elements can exist within first-rate artists and the argument that dilettantism and genuine artistic ability can coexist within an individual artist, thereby reinforcing the view that art and dilettantism are not mutually exclusive.
The gradual increase in second-rate literature during the nineteenth century can be seen as one reason why the term 'Dilettantismus' lost its critical force and became less popular. Koopmann considers that the term becomes gradually assimilated into German ('eingebürgert'), arguing that it becomes a collective label 'für epigonale Bestrebungen jeglicher Art' (for epigonic endeavours of any kind).23 The reference to 'Epigonen' here implies the increased imitation of literary models, and in this respect the ideals of the neo-classical period survived because, as Koopmann shows, the increased number of 'Epigonen' still required classical models.24 The notion of 'Epigonentum', central to the Biedermeierze.it, can be seen as another element of the increased literary dilettantism of the time. Vaget also suggests that the post-classical conception of dilettantism gradually loses its impact, attributing this loss to the increased number of people practising the arts as a hobby and the perceived educational benefits of such practice. In this respect the dilettante corresponds to the eighteenth-century figure of the 'praktischer Liebhaber'.25
It is interesting however to compare these views of dilettantism as both increased amateur activity and mediocre mass production with a writer associated with the Biedermeierzeit, Franz Grillparzer, who is one of the few writers to use the term during this period. In 'Brief über den Dilettantismus', an undated letter written in either 1825 or 1826, Grillparzer criticizes the prevalence of dilettantism in contemporary German literature and art:
Zur Sache! Das Grundübel unserer neuesten deutschen Literatur und Kunst scheint mir in dem Vorherrschen eines gewissen Dilettantismus zu liegen.
Der Dilettant ist ein gesteigerter Liebhaber. So wie dieser, kann auch er viele, ja bedeutende Einsicht in das Wesen einer Kunst, ja selbst eigene Ideen von größerem oder geringerem poetischen Gehalte haben, nur fehlt ihrn bei allem Streben, doch das Vermögen einer genügenden Darstellung.26
[Let's get to the point! The basic problem with our most recent German literature and art seems to me to reside in the prevalence of a certain dilettantism.
The dilettante is an enhanced amateur. Like the amateur, he can also have many important insights into the nature of art and even his own ideas of greater or lesser poetic substance. But despite all of his efforts, he lacks the ability to produce a satisfactory representation.]
The similarities with Goethe and Schiller's writings on the dilettante are striking, although the date of the letter means that Grillparzer wrote it before the project was first published.27 Grillparzer's definition of the dilettante as an enhanced 'Liebhaber' who lacks the ability to produce a satisfactory representation of his ideas is essentially a variation on one of the definitions from the dilettantism project: the dilettante is productive but second-rate. In the same letter he proposes a hierarchy of artist types, similar to Goethe's 'Die Eisbahn' in the Xenien, which places the dilettante between the Liebhaber and the Künstler.28 In Grillparzer's taxonomy of 'artist types' the dilettante shares the artist's emotional and intellectual qualities, but lacks the ability to create a work of art.
This productive type seems initially to correspond to the second-rate artist associated with the increase in literary output during the Biedermeierzeit, but Grillparzer's examples belie this assumption. He reiterates his belief that the term 'artist' rests on the successful representation of an idea, arguing that the Schlegel brothers will never attain the rank of poet ('Dichter').29 He does not expand the reasons for his allusion to the Schlegels' dilettantism, but other references to dilettantism suggest that he associates it specifically with certain aspects of Romanticism. A transcribed conversation with Bauernfeld in 1834 contains the following reference to Tieck: 'Auch locker in der Form, bringe kein abgeschlossenes Ganzes zustande. — Kurz, er sei eigentlich der erste deutsche Dilettant' (Also slack with regard to form, unable to achieve anything which is completely whole. — In short, he is the first German dilettante).30 Grillparzer's description ofTieck as a dilettante is based on two particular criteria: his lack of formal rigour and his inability to produce a complete work. The fact that he refers to Tieck as the first German dilettante suggests however that he saw dilettantism as an intrinsically contemporary phenomenon, combining individual characteristics with prevalent views of art. In a diary entry from 1837 Grillparzer compares certain German 'Kunstliebhaber und Dilettanten' to parasites who lay their eggs in foreign bodies, arguing that they are only interested in what they bring to a foreign work. In this context he refers again to Tieck, arguing that he only appreciated Shakespeare for what he read and wrote into him himself.31 This notion of the dilettante as parasite adds another dimension to the relationship with the artist; Grillparzer's comparison of dilettantes with parasites is based on the premise that they are unable to go beyond the subjectivity of their self-interest. His criticism ofTieck does not refer to the process of translation per se, but toTieck's solipsistic interpretation of Shakespeare. This inability to go beyond self-reading can be interpreted as one reason for the dilettante's inability to achieve a satisfactory artistic representation.
A final use of the term by Grillparzer, in an epigram from 1854, suggests that dilettantism is harmless if it remains a private affair.
Der Dilettant freut sich zu Haus
An seinem eignen Geklimper
Doch geht seine Kunst in die Welt hinaus
Wird der Dilettant zum Stümper.32
[The dilettante has fun at home
Tinkling on the piano
But if his art goes into the world
The dilettante becomes a bodger.]
This distinction between private and public activity echoes the implication of the dilettantism project. It also displays a similar ambivalence to dilettantism, acknowledging the advantages of art as a form of private pleasure. Grillparzer uses the term in the same way as Goethe and Schiller, as both a general critical concept and a specific tool of contemporary criticism. Vaget acknowledges Grillparzer's affinity with the ideas of Weimar Classicism, but argues that the parameters of the terminology gradually changed: the distinction between art and dilettantism is less clear, and the 'Meister' is no longer the antithesis of the dilettante.33 However, although Grillparzer does not use the term 'Meister' as the counterpart, the above examples show that he distinguishes between the artist and the dilettante (and between art and dilettantism) as clearly as Goethe and Schiller had done. The terms exist in a binary relationship, and Grillparzer therefore never even alludes to his own dilettantism. In this respect his views are nearer to Schiller's than to Goethe's.Vaget argues that the absence of a fixed conception of art is responsible for the relaxing of divisions, but Grillparzer's individual conception of art is just as dogmatic. Generalizations about the conception of dilettantism during particular periods must always be read against individual views.
A contrasting view from this period can be found in sections 249 and 250 of Schopenhauer's Parerga und Paralipomena II (1851), which offer a defence of dilettantism. Schopenhauer begins with a definition:
Dilettanten, Dilettanten! — so werden die, welche eine Wissenschafc oder Kunst aus Liebe zu ihr und Freude an ihr per il loro diletto fzu ihremVergnügen] treiben, mit Geringschätzung genannt von denen, die sich des Gewinnes halber darauf gelegt haben; weil sie nur das Geld delektiert, das damit zu verdienen ist.34
[Dilettantes, dilettantes! — that is the name given to those who engage in a science or an art for the love and the joy of it per il loro diletto [for their pleasure]. They are given this name disparagingly by those who concentrate on profit, because they delight only in the money they can earn through it.]
This use of the term seems curiously anachronistic, recalling not only the Italian origins of the term and the Society of Dilettanti, but also Goethe's defence of activity practised solely for pleasure. Schopenhauer concludes his defence of the dilettantes by arguing that their achievements always exceed those of the 'wage-earners' ('Lohndiener').35 He begins the next passage by describing Goethe as a dilettante in the light of this claim: 'So war denn auch Goethe ein Dilettant m der Farbenlehre —darüber ein Wörtchen!' (So Goethe was then a dilettante in his theory of colours — a word about this!).36 He argues that the negative reception of Goethe's Zur Farbenlehre is due only to the narrow-mindedness of the German education system, although he does not develop his discussion of Goethe's dilettantism beyond the message that the work of the dilettante should not be undervalued. Schopenhauer's vigorous defence of dilettantism as work for the sake of pleasure can also be read as self-defence, given that he was a man of private means and an outsider in his own field.37
It can be concluded that the German conception of the term after Weimar Classicism retained its essential ambivalence. The social changes meant that there were fewer noble or non-professional dilettantes (Schopenhauer is a notable exception), but the rise of the middle classes meant that the notion of the dilettante as 'praktischer Liebhaber' survived. The increase in literary production during the Biedermeierzeit may have led to the term becoming synonymous with second-rate work, particularly the work of 'Epigonen'. However, Grillparzer and Schopenhauer's respective uses of the term show that this was not the only conception, and Goethe and Grillparzers respective uses posit a specific association between dilettantism and Romanticism. In short, the Einbürgerung of the term may have fixed the lay definition, but the individual uses still subverted this process.
The term 'dilettante' is rarely used in French before the 1820s, although the earliest recorded use is in Charles de Brosses's Lettres familières écrites d'ltalie en et 1740.38 In a letter entitled 'Spectacles et musique', Brasses affectionately refers to a friend as 'un dilettante, quasi même un virtuose' (a dilettante, almost even a virtuoso).39 The context of the reference suggests that the terms 'dilettante' and 'virtuose' are intended to be understood as a positive reference to a refined appreciation of Italian art, akin to the aims of the Society of Dilettanti. However, de Brosses's collected letters were not published until 1799, so his influence on the eighteenth-century conception of the term would have been minimal. The next significant date is 1752, when the arrival of an Italian opera buffa troupe in Paris instigated the 'Querelle des Bouffons' over the relative merits of French and Italian opera. On this subject Geérald Antoine quotes from Fournier's entry for 'dilettante' in the Encyclopédic du Dix-Neuvième Siècle of 1833, which states that 'les premiers dilettanti fran^ais parurent à l'Opéra en 1752' (the first French dilettanti appeared at the Opéra in 1752).40 According to Bloch and von Wartburg's Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue française, the term was first used to denote 'un amateur passionné de musique italienne' (a passionate enthusiast for Italian music), and the 'Querelle des Bouffons' seems to have restricted the initial French usage of the term to this meaning.41 The prevalence of the term 'amateur ' seems to have ensured that the term 'dilettante' initially retained this specific meaning in French during the eighteenth century.
There is at least one different use of the term during this period.42 In a letter to Voltaire dated 1 May 1760, King Frederick II of Prussia refers to his pamphlet, Réflexions sur les talents militaires et sur le caractère de Charles XII. He had published the pamphlet himself in January that year in an edition of twelve copies, which had been given to friends. In the original sense of a member of the nobility practising art for pleasure, this is an example par excellence of a dilettante's work. But Frederick uses the term in order to refer to his limited ability:
C'est encore de ce genre d'ouvrages qui sont bons dans de petites sociétés, mais qui ne sont pas faits pour le public. Je suis un dilettante en tout genre; je puis dire mon sentiment sur les grands maîtres;je peux vous juger, et avoir mon opinion du mérite de Virgile; mais je ne suis pas fait pour le dire en public, parce que je n'ai pas atteint à la perfection de l'art.43
[It is another example of that type of work which is good in intimate circles but is not made for the public. I am a dilettante in all things; I can express my feelings on the great masters; I can judge you, and have my opinion on the merit ofVirgil; but I am not made for expressing it in public, because I have not attained the perfection of the art.]
Frederick therefore attributes his status as a dilettante to his moderate ability as a critic. The affinity with contemporaneous German uses such as Blanckenburg's is clear, and Goethe and Schiller would no doubt have approved of the king's declaration. But there is no evidence that Frederick's use of the term influenced Voltaire and led to a change in French usage.
The next recorded use is by Stendhal, who refers to 'dilettanti' throughout his Vie de Rossini, written in 1823 and published in 1824.44 The first reference occurs in the introduction:
Vers 1803, les triomphes de Mozart à Munich et à Vienne vinrent importuner les dilettanti d'ltalie, qui d'abord refusèrent bravement d'y croire. Un barbare venir moissonner dans le champ des Arts!45
[Around 1803, Mozart's triumphs in Munich and Vienna came to disturb the Italian dilettanti, who at first bravely refused to believe in them. A barbarian coming to reap the harvest in the field of Art!]
Stendhal uses the term to refer to aficionados of opera in general; in the course of the book the term becomes synonymous with aficionados of Rossini in particular.46 His use of the term is neutral throughout, but the context of other uses gives further information on his conception of the dilettante. The term occurs with the greatest frequency in a chapter on Madame Pasta, the celebrated interpreter of Rossini in both Milan and Paris.47 Her popularity in Paris was such that Stendhal devotes a chapter to her, referring to the 'vrais dilettanti' (real dilettanti) who came to her performances.48 This distinction demonstrates Stendhal's awareness that the term 'dilettanti' could be ambiguous and his consequent desire to distinguish between the true aficionados and those who follow fashion. Antoine attributes Stendhal's use of the term not only to his residence in Italy but also to his admiration for de Brosses's Lettres familières écrites d'ltalie en 1739 et 1740 emphasizing the importance of Stendhal's influence on the emerging popularity of the term in France.49 The success of Vie de Rossini gave Stendhal the idea of collecting his reviews of various opera buffa productions in the Journal de Paris. Although he did not manage to implement this idea, they were published posthumously in 1867 under the title 'Notes d'un dilettante', thereby reinforcing his positive self-identification with the term.50
In the wake of Stendhal's Vie de Rossini, uses of the term in French became frequent. The earliest recorded use of the cognate 'dilettantisme' to refer to the activity of the Parisian dilettanti also dates from 1824, in an anonymous theatrical dictionary article on Madame Pasta:'PASTA (Mme)...Idole du dilettantisme'.51 In 1829Joseph d'Ortigue published a book on Rossini's influence on Parisian opera, entitled De la guerre des dilettanti.52 On 7 November the same year Fromental Halévy's opera Le Dilettante d'Avignon, with a libretto co-written by François-Benoît Hoffman and Léon Halévy, had its premiére in Paris at the Opéra-Comique.53 The opera was well received and remained part of the Opéra-Comique's repertory for many years; Hugh MacDonald writes that 'part of its success lay in Léon Halévy's skill in turning a libretto by F.-B. Hoffman into a topical satire on Italian librettos'.54 Hoffman had died the previous year; Antoine quotes a contemporary review of the opera which expresses doubt that he chose the title himself.55 The choice of title reflects this idea of a topical satire on Italian librettos, which suggests that the view of the eponymous 'dilettante' here was pejorative.
It can therefore be concluded that the French conception of the dilettante was ambivalent virtually ab initio, as was the case with the initial German conception. The ambivalence rests on a simple factor of point of view: the aficionados of Rossini used the term positively, whereas those who wanted to satirize the vogue for Italian opera used it negatively. The association between opera and dilettantism is also evident in a German comic opera by Albert Lortzing, with the French title given as Les dilettanti de haut parage; ou, La répétition d'un opéra-bouffer.56 The German title for this is Die Opernprobe; oder, Die vornehmen Dilettanten, which was first performed in Frankfurt in 1851.57 This can be seen as an example of what might be called linguistic cross-pollination: the new French use of the term influenced the existing German conception.
The influence of Stendhal's specific use of the term is also evident in similar uses by other nineteenth-century writers. An early example is found in one of Balzac's Lettres sur Paris, dated 9 October 1830, where he uses the term as part of a simile. Referring to a soirée where the conversation was about the threat of a possible war, Balzac describes the reaction of the group to a comment that 'la guerre est inévitable!':
C'est bien la millième fois que cette phrase sacramentelle avait été prononcée; mais tout le rnonde contempla le vieillard et l'écouta comme aux Italiens les dilettanti écoutaient madame Pasta, quand elle apparaissait sur la scène.
[It is no less than the thousandth time that this sacred phrase had been pronounced, but everybody contemplated the old man and listened to him like the dilettanti listened to Madame Pasta when she appeared on stage at the Théâtre des Italiens.]58
Although Balzac's use of the term is ostensibly a neutral echo of Stendhal's use, the allusion to disproportionate and fashionable admiration suggests that he may have had a low opinion of the Parisian dilettanti. The use of simile is significant because it shows how a term can move by association from one context to another, namely from a lover of Italian music to a follower of any fashion.
Balzac uses the term in a different context in Modeste Mignon, published in 1844, where he refers to worshippers who remain at prayer after the end of a mass as 'les dilettanti de la dévotion'.59 The use of italics and the Italian plural show that he considered that the word had not yet been assimilated into French, and the notes to this edition state that he added the term 'dilettanti' to a later draft of the manuscript, replacing the term 'les dévotés'.60 His choice of the term in this context reflects its popularity, and might also imply ostentation of their worship as opposed to the degree of devoutness. Crucially it shows how a creative piece of work could develop the meaning of the term to denote passionate appreciation in general.
Other references retain the specific association with music and with foreign opera, such as George Sand's use of the term in Consuelo et La Comtesse de Rudolstadt (1842), in a passage where the Count describes his passion for sacred music: 'je suis dilettante de musique sacrée'.61 Sand's neutral use of the term also recalls its orginal connotations of class. In Madame Bovary (1857), Flaubert uses the term in a musical context when describing Emma's chance meeting with Léon at the performance of Lucia di Lammermoor:
Alors Léon, pour faire le dilettante, se mit à parler musique. Il avait vu Tamburini, Rubini, Persiani, Grisi; et à côté d'eux, Lagardy, malgré ses grands éclats, ne valait rien.62
[Leon, in order to play the dilettante, then began to talk about music. He had seen Tamburini, Rubini, Persiani, Grisi; and next to them Lagardy, despite his great feats, was worth nothing.]
Flaubert's own view of dilettantism is not obvious; the contrast between the list of Italian names and the sole French one recalls Stendhal, but the context has connotations of metropolitan snobbery, given that Léon has recently returned to the provinces after studying in Paris. The association of Léon with this type of dilettantism is also evident in his reply to Emma's question about his musical preferences: 'Oh! la musique allemande, celle qui porte à rêver' (Oh! German music, which makes one dream).63 The connection between dilettantism and music is reinforced by the entry for 'dilettante' in Flaubert's Le Dictionnaire des idées reçues, which reads: 'Homme riche, abonné à l'Opéra' (Rich man, season ticket at the Opéra).64 Again this apparently neutral use seems to imply a slight derision for fashionable activity.
The definition of 'dilettante' as an aficionado of foreign music is the basis for Adolphe Jullien's Paris dilettante au commencement du siècle (1884), which discusses the reception of foreign opera in Paris during the Empire and the Restoration, referring to Meyerbeer, Mozart, Rossmi, Spontini, and Weber.65 Jullien uses the term 'dilettante' as a neutral synonym of 'mélomane' (music lover), and his argument that Mérimée appreciated music 'en dilettante' is based on Stendhal's definition of the dilettante as a non-productive aficionado of music.66 Antoine shows that the association of dilettantism and opera was still evident in 1905, referring to a satirical article in the Revue bleue entitled 'Dilettantisme surprenant':
lis et elles [Parisiens et Parisiennes] reviennent réguliérement à l'Opéra; et leur dilettantisme touche à la frénésie, car on les rencontre aussi dans les plus redoutables concerts; et si vous leur parlez musique, les voilà qui pâment, qui prennent un ton à la fois mystérieux et languissant, pour vous dire:'Ah,Tristan!... Ah, Pelléas!...'.67
[They [Parisiens] regularly return to the Opéra, and their dilettantism borders on frenzy, because one also meets them in the most formidable concerts; and if you talk to them about music, just see if they don't swoon and assume a tone both mysterious and languid in order to tell you:'Ah! Tristan!... Ah, Pelléas!...'.]
The use of the term here is clearly pejorative, suggesting pretentiousness and superficiality. It shows that the original connotations of the term survived the changes instigated by Bourget in the 1880s. Stendhal's use therefore ensured the future association of dilettantism with opera (particularly foreign opera), as well as giving rise to the intrinsic ambivalence of the term in French usage. It also exerted an influence on the subsequent associations of the term with Romanticism and l'art pour l'art, as will be shown in the remaining sections of this chapter.
The meaning of the French term 'dilettante' gradually expanded from mélomane to denote a general art lover ('amateur d'art'); the Trésor de la langue française shows how this definition encompassed both reception and production, referring to the 'amateur' who appreciates and the 'amateur' who participates.68 But although the terms 'dilettante' and 'amateur' appear to be synonymous here, the former retained its connotations of the new, the foreign, and the fashionable. Antoine argues that the French concept of dilettantism has its origins in Romanticism, tracing this association back to the 'Querelle des Bouffons', and proposing the hypothesis that these French aficionados of Italian music in the 1760s showed early signs of the Romantic temperament: 'dédaigneux de l'école française, moins instruits que sensibles, épris de mélodie et de virtuosité avant tout' (disdainful of the French school, sensitive rather than informed, taken above all with melody and virtuosity).69 The emphasis on sensitivity here recalls Schiller's view that the dilettante is able to produce an artistic effect without understanding its cause; the French dilettanti of the 1760s appreciated similar qualities to those which Schiller associates with dilettantism, thereby suggesting an affinity between the two conceptions. Stendhal's appreciation of Rossini was part of the emergence of French Romanticism in the 1820s; as Antoine shows, the controversial reception of Rossini in Paris was part of the general cultural conflict between Classicism and Romanticism.70 The Parisian dilettanti appreciated Rossini's combination of comedy and seriousness in the same way that the admirers of Hugo appreciated his combination of comedy and tragedy. The association here of dilettantism with the transgression of genres also reinforces one of the tenets of the dilettantism project.
The importance of this initial association between dilettantism and Romanticism resides in its influence on critical discourse. The first recorded use of the term with regard to literature is by Sainte-Beuve in Vie, poésies et pensées de Joseph Delorme (1829), where he uses the term to criticize the poetry of Jacques Delille:
A propos de toutes les questions d'art poétique dans lesquelles j'ai la manie fort innocente de me délecter, il ne me vient jamais à l'esprit de citer l'abbé Delille, quoiqu'il ait essayé aussi d'innover; mais il l'a fait si mesquineinent, avec une intention si formelle de gentillesse et un dilettantisme si raffiné d'harmonie imitative, qu'il est allé précisément contre le but de l'art, et a retardé la réforme au lieu d'y aider. Delille était atteint de faux goût; et le faux goût une fois infiltré dans un talent, le corrompt à tout jamais et jusqu'en ses meilleures parties.77
[With regard to all the questions of poetic art in which I have the quite innocent habit of taking pleasure, I never think of mentioning Delille, although he too tried to innovate; but he did this in such a petty way, with such an express intention of kindness and such a refined dilettantism for imitative harmony, that he went precisely against the purpose of art and delayed its reform instead of helping it. Delille suffered from false taste', and false taste, once infiltrated into a talent, corrupts it forever, even affliciting its best parts.]
Sainte-Beuve uses the term to refer to the appreciation (and imitation) of harmony in poetry, and his conception seems to be clearly pejorative; dilettantism is productive, but the poet's production is based on a false taste which contravenes Sainte-Beuve's conception of art. He does not define what he understands by 'faux goût', but it seems to be synonymous with false aesthetics based on 'gentillesse' and 'dilettantisme'. This use of the term is clearly detached from Stendhal's use, although the musical connotations remain. In fact, the connotations of aesthetic refinement, imitation and error here suggest a strong affinity with the ideas in Goethe and Schiller's dilettantism project. Although the project was not published until 1832, Fernand Baldensperger has shown that in 1829 a translated selection from Goethe and Schiller's correspondence was published in the Nouvelle Revue germanique.72 Although Baldensperger investigates the influence of Goethe on Sainte-Beuve throughout his career, he does not refer to dilettantism.73 The notion of influence is therefore only conjecture, but the fact remains that the first French use of the term in the context of literature displays an affinity with the Weimar Classicist conception. Sainte-Beuve's use also displays an affinity with Grillparzer's contemporaneous use of the term as a tool of cultural criticism.
This reference was followed in 1830 by the first recorded reference in a creative work, Charles Nodier's reference to'dilettanti' in his novel Histoire du roi de Bohême et de ses sept châteaux. It occurs in a pastiche of a review of a novel (also entitled Histoire du roi de Bohême et de ses sept châteaux), where the fictitious reviewer comments on the novel's style:
ce bourdonnement de phrases sonores si infructueusement soumises à un diapason dont la vibration n'est sensible que pour le trés-petit nombre des dilettanti de la prosodie.
[this murmur of sonorous phrases so fruitlessly submitted to a tuning fork whose vibration can only be appreciated by the tiny number of dilettanti of prosody.]74
The term is used to describe those few connoisseurs who are able to appreciate the novel's rarefied style (the reviewer is dismissive of the novel's content).75 It seems to be based on an implicit analogy with the dilettantes who admire Italian music and constitutes a logical development from the appreciation of music to the appreciation of prosody. This might be interpreted as a dismissive reference to certain aesthetes who can appreciate the refined nuances of a prose style in a work where the content is worthless. However, Nodier is satirizing the reviewer of this work in order to satirize the Académie Française (which is represented in the novel as 'L'Académie de Tombouctou').76 It consequently becomes impossible to discern his actual evaluation of dilettantism.
The context of this reference is of particular interest. Histoire du roi de Bohême et de ses sept châteaux is an experimental satirical work which owes a clear debt to Rabelais and Sterne; it was inspired by Corporal Trim's unfinished tale in Sterne's Tristram Shandy. Nodier called it a 'bluette', which can be translated as 'caprice'.77The first use of the term in a creative work in French is therefore in a satirical work, as was the case in German (Wieland's 'Das Urteil des Paris'), reinforcing the affinity between satire and dilettantism. It is interesting that these creative uses of the term are either positive or neutral, whereas the uses in critical works tend to be negative: the creative uses by Wieland and Nodier are countered by the negative uses by Sulzer and Sainte-Beuve respectively. It seems easier to use the terms 'dilettante' and 'dilettantism' positively in a creative work because of the commensurate artistic freedom. This is certainly borne out by the case of Goethe, although there are also exceptions to this hypothesis, such as Merck's critical writing.
This initial affinity between Nodier and Wieland is reinforced by another negative use of the term by Sainte-Beuve. In his 1832 portrait of Etienne Sénancour, Sainte-Beuve uses the term to distinguish between Sénancour and Nodier, referring to the latter's 'mélange diversifié de passions brûlantes, de manies exquises, de dilettantismes consommés' (varied mixture of burning passions, exquisite idiosyncrasies, consummated dilettantisms).78 The term here seems to refer disparagingly to various ephemeral interests; Sainte-Beuve adds that 'il [Nodier] a tout traversé, et s'est pris à chaque attrait sans s'arrêter à aucun' (he [Nodier] has passed through everything and has taken to each attraction without stopping at any). The unprecedented use of the plural here ('dilettantismes consommés') suggests that Sainte-Beuve considers there to be more than one form of dilettantism, encompassing not only the aforementioned elements of aestheticism and imitation, but also the notion of multiple activity. He implies that Nodier's multiple interests are superficial in comparison with the work of Sénancour, and his description of Nodier's flitting from one interest to another evokes the image of a butterfly passing from flower to flower. This image of ephemerality and mutability recalls Wieland's self-description as a chameleon, suggesting a further affinity between the two writers; dilettantism here suggests transience, with connotations of inconsistency and contradiction. Sainte-Beuve's use of the term prefigures Bourget's definition, and the concept of transient multiplicity becomes a central feature of fin-de-siècle dilettantism. In this respect both Nodier and Wieland can be seen as fin-de-siècle dilettantes avarit la lettre.
After 1830 the term'dilettante'is also used in French to denote the idea of collecting associated with the amateur, as was the case with the German terms 'Liebhaber' and 'Dilettant'. The notion of collecting is not simply confined to objets d'art; it is also used for the collection of rare pleasures and sensations.79 This development of the term to include both the search for pleasure and an aesthetic attitude towards both art and life suggests obvious affinities with figures such as the dandy, the aesthete and the Decadent, and these affinities will inform the use of the term throughout the nineteenth century.80 In this respect the French conception of dilettantism expands to signify a refined variation on the attitude to art and life epitomized by the Society of Dilettanti. This usage of the term is illustrated by Barbey d'Aurevilly's Memoranda entry for 23 September 1838, where he writes:'Dîné gaîment et avec un dilettantisme de gourmets exercés et superbes' (Dined merrily and with a dilettantism of practised and superb gourmets).81 However, a reference m the entry dated 23 August 1838 shows that his conception of dilettantism was not unequivocally positive. Referring to his reading of Stendhal's Mémoires d'un touriste, he writes: 'Lu du Stendhal, homme amusant, mais qui admire trop. Toujours trop dilettante (Read Stendhal, amusing man but one who admires too much. Always too dilettante).82 The idea that it is possible to be 'too much a dilettante' or 'too dilettantish' and the reference to excessive admiration implies that dilettantism (in the sense of aesthetic appreciation) should not be uncritical. Here Barbey uses Stendhal's own term to criticize him.
The legacy of Romanticism is therefore the association of dilettantism in French with a type of aesthetic appreciation which emphasizes sensitivity, beauty, and exoticism; for certain critics it was also synonymous with superficiality and excess. This association culminates in the uses of the concept in relation to l'art pour l'art.
Nodier's use of the term 'dilettanti' in a creative work is followed by a similar use by Théophile Gautier in 1832. In his comic narrative poem 'Albertus, ou l'âme et le péché, légende théologique', Gautier uses the term twice. The first use is a conventional one to denote the enthusiasm of the audience at an opera:
— Jamais dilettanti n'ont du fond de leurs loges
Sur la prima donna fait pleuvoir plus d'éloges.83
[— Never have dilettanti from their boxes
Rained so much praise on the prima donna.]
However, his second use of the term introduces a different meaning, as he describes the diabolical musical perfomance which Albertus witnesses when he descends to hell. The conductor of this performance is described as 'un diable rococo', complete with aristocratic air and elegant moustache and tie.84 This rococo devil conducts the musicians in a piece which surpasses the work of the great composers, including Beethoven, Gluck, Meyerbeer, Hoffmann, Weber, and even Rossini. This fictitious piece is played by 'les noirs dilettanti' (black dilettanti), whose musical talent exceeds that of 'Boucher et Bériot, Paganini lui-même'.85 The influence of Stendhal m the reference to foreign music is still evident, but the 'dilettanti' are now performers with superhuman ability, conducted by a dandy devil; Gautier expands the term from reception to production, thereby associating dilettantism not only with aestheticism but also with a positive evaluation of artistic activity.
Gautier's use of the term in this context can partly be attributed to the poem's themes. 'Albertus' was composed in homage to Victor Hugo and written when Gautier was a member of Pétrus Borel's Petit Cénacle. It parodies the interest of Romantic literature in the macabre and supernatural, drawing on works by Goethe, Hugo, Nodier, Mérimée, Musset, and Walter Scott.86 The influence of the imagery of 'Walpurgisnacht' from Faust is clear, and the depiction of a performance in 'Albertus' echoes the 'Walpurgisnachtstraum'. This is the section where Goethe uses the term 'Dilettant', and Nerval's 1828 prose translation of Faust retains the terms: 'C'est un dilettante qui l'a écrite, et ce sont des dilettantes qui la jouent' (A dilettante wrote it, and dilettantes perform it).87 Nerval's translation of Faust may have influenced Gautier's reference to performing 'dilettanti' in 'Albertus', thereby expanding the French conception of dilettantism.
Gautier's use can also be attributed to the poem's form. It has been shown that both Wieland and Nodier used the term 'dilettante' in a satirical work, and the same association is evident in 'Albertus'. There is a clear parallel in particular between Wieland's 'Das Urteil des Paris' and 'Albertus': both are comic narrative poems, both are parodies, both use the term 'dilettante' positively. The decision to use the terms positively in a parody suggests an analogy between the intrinsic combination of seriousness and comedy in the parodic form and the similar combination of seriousness and comedy in the concept of dilettantism. It is possible to use the term 'dilettante' in a comic (i.e. light-hearted) way, referring either to Pariss ability to judge beauty or to the incredible musical ability of Satan's minions, while still retaining the idea that dilettantism is a serious artistic activity.
Gautier also uses the term in the Préface to Mademoiselle de Maupin, written in 1834 and published in 1835. The well-known passage where he argues for the mutual exclusivity of beauty and utility contains the following example:
Quoique je ne sois pas un dilettante, j'aime rmeux le bruit des crincrins et des tambours de basque que celui de la sonnette de M. le président.
[Although I am not a dilettante, l prefer the noise of scraping fiddles and of tambourines to that of the President's bell.]88
His use of the term here illustrates his argument that even bad art is preferable to a functional sound. Again this reference is informed by its context;just before it he claims that he would gladly renounce his rights as a French citizen in order to see a genuine Raphael or a beautiful naked woman, such as the Princess Borghesi when she posed for Casanova, or Julia Grisi in her bath.89 Julia Grisi was an Italian singer who enjoyed great success at the Théâtre des Italiens in Paris at the time; Gautier commented on her beauty, writing the poem 'La Diva' for her in 1837.90 The term 'dilettanti' (in the sense employed by Stendhal) suggested by the reference to Grisi may have resulted in its use. Gautier is certainly not declaring his own dilettantism, be it as aficionado of music or as general lover of beauty. However, the use of the term in a work famous for its support for the idea of l'art pour l'art surely influenced Baudelaire's subsequent association of Gautier with dilettantism, which will be discussed m the next section.
Gautier's contribution to the concept of dilettantism therefore resides more in the context of his references than in any specific innovation. But his association of the concept with aesthetic appreciation has led to interpretations which propose his own dilettantism. Georges Matoré considers that Stendhal, Musset, Mérimée, and Gautier are all dilettantes who imitate Byron in their contempt for the writer's professional status.91 This reading uses the term to denote the Romantic rejection of the idea that art is a profession, thereby recalling the original Italian meaning. Matoré refers to this particular type of aestheticism as 'dilettantisme', locating it in the preface to Mademoiselle de Maupin itself and referring to the sections where Gautier emphasizes the importance of pleasure for its own sake.92 His argument that dilettantism is part of l'art pour l'art is based on an extrapolation of Gautier's use of the term in this context. Although I would question his decision to label Gautier as a dilettante, it is clear that Gautier's support for l'art pour l'art advocates a particular type of aestheticism which prefigures later uses of the concept. This is evident not just in the cult of beauty but also in his ironic tone; in this respect Jean-Francois Hugot suggests that the preface to Mademoiselle de Maupin can perhaps be seen as the first manifesto of dilettantism.93 This is a valid hypothesis, although it must again be seen as dilettantism avant la lettre. Gautier's dilettantism resides in his amorality, his Epicureanism and his detached, ironic style, which playfully subverts seriousness. This is evident not only in the style which pervades Mademoiselle de Maupin but also in light-hearted satirical works such as 'Albertus'. Gautier can therefore be seen as a precursor of fin-de-siècle dilettantism whose use of the term exerts a significant influence on the development of the concept.
Baudelaire does not refer to the figure of the dilettante to the same extent that he does to the dandy or the flâneur. But he uses the term 'dilettantisme' and the neologism 'dilettantiste' on several occasions from 1859 onwards, and planned to write an essay entitled 'Dandys, Dilettantes etVirtuoses'in 1861.94 Unfortunately the essay was never completed and his conception of dilettantism rests on these various references from different sources. The first is in the essay 'Théophile Gautier (I)' of 1859, where he praises Gautier's style in Mademoiselle de Maupin:
Avec Mademoiselle de Maupin apparaissait dans la littérature le Dilettantisme qui, par son caractère exquis et superlatif, est toujours la meilleure preuve des facultés indispensables en art. Ce roman, ce conte, ce tableau, cette rêverie continuée avec l'obstination d'un peintre, cette espèce d'hymne à la Beauté, avait surtout ce grand résultat d'établir définitivement la condition génératrice des œuvres d'art, c'est-àdire l'amour exclusif du Beau, l'Idée fixe.95
[With Mademoiselle de Maupin literature saw the appearance of Dilettantism, which, through its exquisite and superlative character, is always the best proof of the faculties indispensable to art. This novel, this tale, this painting, this reverie sustained with a painters persistence, this kind of hymn to Beauty, had above all this great result of establishing definitively the productive condition of works of art, namely the exclusive love of beauty, the idée fixe.]
Baudelaire's association of dilettantism with the love of beauty central to l'art pour l'art manifests the latent connection discussed with relation to Gautier. It also differs from previous uses of the term in that he emphasizes dilettantism as a product and not as a process. Goethe and Schiller conceive dilettantism as a flawed attitude to art which leads to a flawed product, as does Sainte-Beuve, whereas Baudelaire conceives it here as the product of genuine ability. His use of an upper-case letter suggests that he views 'Dilettantisme' as a specific quality rather than a general one, and his conception seems to be unequivocally positive: dilettantism, with its exquisite and superlative character, is proof of genuine artistic ability. This product is in turn linked to the theory of l'art pour l'art; if the love of beauty creates an art work, then this love of beauty creates dilettantism. In short, dilettantism in literature is the result of a belief in l'art pour l'art, and can therefore be seen as the product of aestheticism.
The reason for Baudelaire's innovative use of the term here is uncertain; Gautier's own use of the term 'dilettante' in the preface to Mademoiselle de Maupin would surely have been an influence, but Baudelaire transforms its meaning. The remainder of the essay on Gautier sheds light on this choice. Baudelaire's assertion that Gautier creates a comic effect through his ironic treatment of the subject matter reinforces the association of irony and dilettantism, and his reference to Gautier's desire not to be deceived ('dupe') suggests a further affinity between the dilettante and the dandy.96 Baudelaire argues that Gautier added an extra quality to Romantic literature, placing him with Balzac and Auguste Barbier as part of 'le mouvement littéraire moderne', and distinguishing Gautier's works from those of Sainte-Beuve, Vigny, Alexandre Dumas, and Hugo (with the exception of Notre-Dame de Paris).97 His use of the term 'Dilettantisme' may therefore be seen as a means to distinguish between Gautier's particular aestheticism and the aestheticism of other writers. By extrapolation, dilettantism is therefore part of what Baudelaire considered to be the modern movement, or second phase of Romanticism. Irony is also an intrinsic part of this dilettantism, which can be defined provisionally as 'ironic aestheticism'.
After this essay Baudelaire uses the term in different contexts (and cognates), but always positively. In a letter written to the critic Armand Fraisse on 18 February 1860, he praises Fraisse's articles on Hugo and on Joséphin Soulary, writing of the latter article:
Votre étude est excellente et pleine de charme.Vous sentez la poésie en véritable dilettantiste. C'est comme cela qu'il faut le sentir.
[Your study is excellent and full of charm. You appreciate poetry as a true dilettantiste. This is how it should be appreciated.]98
The expression 'dilettantiste' appears to be Baudelaire's own neologism; the Trésor de la langue française attributes it to him, but the assertion that it is always pejorative is clearly incorrect here.99 His earlier use of an upper-case letter corresponds to his creation of a neologism and use of italics here: his terms 'Dilettantisme' and 'dilettantiste' are distinct from existing conceptions of 'dilettantism' and the 'dilettante'. From the context of the letter to Fraisse, Baudelaire's conception of 'le dilettantiste' can be read as a cognate of the term 'le Dilettantisme' in the essay on Gautier; 'le dilettantiste' is the person who is able to appreciate the quality of 'Dilettantisme', namely the exclusive love of beauty in art. In short, 'le dilettantiste' is the aesthete who is able to appreciate the type of aestheticism pioneered by Gautier. Before using the term Baudelaire compares Fraisse to Gautier, with regard to the former's critical acumen; Fraisse had also praised Les Fleurs du Mai in earlier articles, and Baudelaire seems to allude to this critique as the work of a 'dilettantiste'.100 One can infer that Baudelaire hoped that his own work was an example of 'Dilettantisme' in literature, in the lineage of Gautier.
Baudelaire's conception of dilettantism is not restricted to literature, as is shown by Paradis artifiacls, written at various stages m the 1850s and published in 1860. In the opening sections of 'Du vin et du hachish', Baudelaire describes hashish as a 'drogue délicieuse pour une certaine catégorie de dilettantistes' (delicious drug for a certain category of dilettantistes).101 The term is used as a synonym of 'amateur', and the connotation of fashionability recalls the vogue for Rossini. The 'dilettantiste' here seems to be a specific kind of Epicurean, eager to acquire new experiences; Baudelaire uses the term to denote the appreciation of different aspects of both art and life.
In Mori cœur mis à nu, written between 1859 and 1866, Baudelaire makes an intriguing reference to his own dilettantism:
C'est par le loisir que j'ai, en partie, grandi.
À mon grand détriment; car le loisir, sans fortune, augmente les dettes, les
avanies résultant des dettes.
Mais à mon grand profit, relativement à la sensibilité, à la méditation, et à la
faculté du dandysme et du dilettantisme.
Les autres hommes de lettres sont, pour la plupart, de vils piocheurs trèsignorants.102
[I grew up, in part, at leisure.
To my great detriment, because leisure, without private means, increases debts,
which in turn result in being snubbed.
But also to my great benefit, with regard to sensitivity, meditation, and the
faculty of dandyism and dilettantism.
The other men of letters are, for the most part, ugly ignorant swots.]
Baudelaire's juxtaposition of 'le dandysme' and 'le dilettantisme' reinforces the affinity between the two qualities; they are part of the same faculty, although distinct from one another. This faculty seems to refer to the ability, aided by a life of leisure, to cultivate an aesthetic appreciation of both art and life, an ability which embraces both dandyism and dilettantism. The crucial question regards the extent to which these qualities actually differ. Certain interpretations suggest that they are more or less synonymous; Brian Rigby alludes to Baudelaire's essay on Gautier when he describes Mademoiselle de Maupin as 'a pure expression of dilettantish and dandyish aestheticism and eroticism'.103 Although it is clear that 'dilettantish' does not mean 'amateurish' in this context, the exact connotations of the term remain undefined; it seems simply to be a variation on 'dandyish'. It is instructive to compare Baudelaire's references to dilettantism with his well-known definition of dandyism in 'Le Peintre de la vie moderne' as the ardent need for originality.104 He also emphasizes the dandy's need to conceal emotion.105 Dandyism is therefore an aesthetic attitude to aspects of life such as appearance and demeanour, which entails an essentially passive activity. In contrast, dilettantism for Baudelaire is active, embracing artistic creativity and the desire for different experiences. In this respect the Baudelairean dilettante (le dilettantiste) seems in fact closer to the flâneur than to the dandy, and by using the term 'dilettantisme' Baudelaire refers to the element of activity not connoted by dandyism.
This hypothesis is supported by Baudelaire's references to flânerie. In 'Le Peintre de la vie inoderne' Baudelaire explains why the painter Constantin Guys is not a dandy:
le dandy aspire à l'insensibilite, et c'est par là que M.G., qui est dominé, lui, par une passion insatiable, celle de voir et de sentir, se détache violemment du dandysme.
[the dandy aspires to insensitivity, and it it here that M.G. [Guys], who is dominated by an insatiable passion to see and to feel, violently renounces dandyism.]106
It is this passion to see and to feel that compels Guys to join the crowd as a flâneur. For Baudelaire the activity of flânerie is a leisurely activity which, crucially, is also a mode of perception; the flâneur sees, whereas the dandy wants to be seen. Baudelaire famously describes the perfect flâneur as the passionate observer who derives pleasure from experiencing existence in the crowd.107 The flâneur can therefore be seen as a dilettantiste of the crowd, able to appreciate its mixture of the ephemeral and the infinite. Baudelaire's life of leisure enabled him to indulge in these activities, which in turn helped his writing (hence the reference to other men of letters as 'vils piocheurs', presumably swotting up on the experiences which Baudelaire gained first hand). Baudelaire's distinction between his life of leisure and the activity of these lowly swots recalls the original notion of dilettantism as work for pleasure and not for profit. In this respect the faculty of dandyism and dilettantism can be seen as characteristic of an aesthetic aristocracy, whose members are superior to those who have to work for a living. By using the term 'dilettantisme' in this context Baudelaire combines elements of the original dilettanti, the Romantic notion of the artist and the belief in l'art pour l'art.
For Baudelaire dilettantism can therefore be seen as part of his artistic development. But there is no suggestion that it is enough in itself to lead to art. An example of this can also be found in his description of Constantin Guys, whose purpose exceeds that of the 'pur flâneur'; Guys is searching for modernity, defined by Baudelaire as the poetic in the historical and the eternal in the transitory.108 If we understand it here as a form of flânerie, dilettantism is a stage towards art for Guys, but his art surpasses this stage by searching for specific qualities. The analogy with Baudelaire's poetry is clear: life in the city informs his poetry, but the sine qua non is his technical ability. Therefore dilettantism is part of the artist's development and also part of the artist's product, but it alone does not constitute art. The value of dilettantism for Baudelaire lies in the aesthetic attitude which it cultivates and the experiences it provides.
Baudelaire's reference to his own dilettantism constitutes an important stage in the term's development. Goethe does not refer explicitly to his own dilettantism because of his belief in innate artistic ability, although he recognizes the value of his activities in the sciences and visual arts for his writing. Baudelaire refers to his own dilettantism without scruple because he views it as an unequivocally positive activity. For Goethe dilettantism is ultimately a negative approach to art, based either on lack of training or lack of ability; for Baudelaire dilettantism is a positive approach. But for both writers dilettantism is valuable because their respective work benefits as a result. However, the fact that Baudelaire does not define his conception of dilettantism means that much of the research on the subject ignores him. Hugot emphasizes Baudelaire's importance to the fin-de-siècle dilettantes who followed him, referring to him as 'le maître de nos dilettantes' and arguing that Baudelaire's influence resides in the aestheticization of sensations and the simultaneous awareness of their ephemerality.109 In this respect he can be aligned with Gautier as a precursor of fin-de-siecle dilettantism. But although the affinities are clear, the difference between Baudelaire's use of the term and Bourget's concept should not be overlooked, as the next chapter will show.
Other interpretations consider the value of Baudelaire's dilettantism in itself. Kassner refers briefly to both Stendhal and Baudelaire, writing approvingly of their individual combination of experience, reflection, and imagination.110 This appraisal forms part of his general argument about dilettantism as valuable experiment, and he includes Stendhal and Baudelaire in the lineage of dilettantes after Goethe. He also discusses the relationship between the dandy and the dilettante, arguing that the dilettante's tendency towards introspection brings him nearer to the dandy than the artist.111 In Kassner's typology the dilettante can embrace both art and dandyism, but through being introspective the dilettante is closer to the dandy; the desire not to be deceived (dupe) results in introspection replacing experience. However, this reading imposes the ftn-de-siècle preoccupation with introspection and inaction on the general concept, ignoring the relationship between dilettantism and production suggested by both Goethe and Baudelaire. Federhofer argues that the dilettante is distinct from the dandy on the grounds of the dilettante's interest in human life. She shows that Baudelaire depicts Guys as an 'amateur de la vie' and 'cosmopolite' rather than a 'spécialiste', proposing that the terms 'amateur' and 'dilettante' are synonymous in this context and that the value of Guys's dilettantism resides in this refusal to specialize.112 Federhofer's reading complements my suggestion that Baudelaire's flâneur is a dilettante of life.
The most extensive exploration of Baudelaire's conception of dilettantism is by Wieler, who recognizes Baudelaire's position between earlier German views of dilettantism and French fin-de-siècle ones. Wieler argues that Baudelaire's use of the term 'Dilettantisme' in his essay on Théophile Gautier should be seen in the light of his earlier re-evaluation of the concept of Decadence.113 But the view that Baudelaire's conception of dilettantism was influenced by his view of Decadence is an extrapolation, because there is no textual evidence to suggest that this is the case; Wieler seems to be hypothesizing on the basis of an affinity between Baudelaire's association of dilettantism with Gautier and his well-known defence of so-called 'littérature de Décadence' in 'Notes nouvelles sur Edgar Poe' (1859).114 The affinity lies in the support for the ideals of l'art pour l' art in each essay. Although I would question his decision to posit the conception of the two terms in a causal relation, I agree with his argument in so far as a parallel can be drawn between Baudelaire's positive view of Decadence and his positive view of dilettantism. The danger lies in the tendency to exaggerate the affinities between the concepts. In his reading of Baudelaire's reference to his own dilettantism in Mon cœur mis à nu, Wieler's interprets the other men of letters (the 'old swots') as socially minded writers who avoid the distress of a dilettantish lack of orientation ('die Bedrängnis dilettantischer Orientierungslosigkeit').115 But there is no evidence that Baudelaire saw the activity of dilettantism as a distressful lack of orientation; Wieler interprets Baudelaire with the knowledge that dilettantism and Decadence will become closely linked towards the end of the century, which encourages an oversimplifying retrospective logic. Baudelaire's emphasis on the ephemeral ability to overcome l'ennui is clearly an influence on fin-de-siècle views of dilettantism, but the argument that Baudelaire saw dilettantism as a lack of direction is contentious. Baudelaire does not conceive dilettantism as an existential problem; in fact, he seems to conceive it as an existential benefit.
Wieler also makes an interesting observation about Baudelaire's dilettantism and the notions of travel and multiple experiences, echoing his reference to Goethe.116 Referring to the prose poem 'Anywhere out of the world (N'importe où hors du monde)', he notes that the desire for travel expressed here is not simply a desire for physical displacement but also an existential condition, which he sees as a general aspect of dilettantism.117 This condition is predicated on the need to experience the new and the different, which also applies to flânerie; Wieler does not refer to the flâneur, but he cites the prose poem 'Les Foules' as an example of the poet's desire to experience different roles. In 'Les Foules' Baudelaire writes of the poet's ability to imagine the lives of others, and Wieler associates this vicarious experience ('Anempfindung') with acting; by playing different roles, the artist is able to derive a more realistic and therefore heightened experience.118 In this respect the hypothesis that the flâneur is a 'dilettante of life' illustrates Wieler's association of dilettantism with the desire for vicarious experience.
Baudelaire occupies a pivotal position as regards the historical development of the concept. His uses of the term remove the antithesis of art and dilettantism proposed by Goethe and Schiller, asserting that dilettantism is positive as both process and product. This positive conception prefigures fin-de-siècle uses of the term by Bourget and Laforgue, among others. By employing the term to denote an aesthetic attitude and an artistic quality, he attributes a number of values to dilettantism: it is a form of criticism, a form of appreciation, a form of artistic development and a particular quality in a work of art. But the distinction between Baudelaire and Goethe is not categorical; for both writers, dilettantism and creativity can coexist harmoniously.119 In Baudelaire's conception dilettantism and creativity coexist harmoniously as parts of a unified self, and consequently he can refer positively to his own faculty for dilettantism. This coexistence is also evident in Goethe's conception of dilettantism, albeit for different reasons; for Goethe dilettantism is a separate quality, distinct from his writing although similarly beneficial. Their attitudes to dilettantism also converge with regard to a belief in the value of activity for its own sake, irrespective of its commercial gain. However, the main divergence relates to their respective attitudes towards the product of dilettantism: a parallel can be made between Baudelaire's positive evaluation of Mademoiselle de Maupin and the type of aestheticism which Goethe and Schiller rejected as Schöngeistem.
Baudelaire's positive conception of dilettantism was not shared by all of his contemporaries. Antoine quotes an article by Théophile Silvestre from 1858, which criticizes certain contemporary critics for what he perceives to be a lack of interest in the moral quality of a work of art:
L'idée de l'artiste, ses principes, ses émotions, la moralité de son oeuvre, importent peu à ces dilettanti de l'art pour l'art, à ces acrobates de la phrase
[The idea of the artist, his principles, his emotions, the morality of his work, matter little to these dilettanti of art for art's sake, to these acrobats of the sentence]120
Silvestre's use of the term is interesting not only because he associates dilettantism with l'art pour l' art, but also because he emphasizes the element of performance; the italics and Italian plural recall both Stendhal's use and the original Italian use, and the reference to 'acrobates' reinforces the view that these critics are performers. The original dilettanti viewed the aim of performance as delight, not money; the dilettanti of l'art pour l'art view the aim of art as beauty. The utilitarian function of art (be it earning money or imparting a moral message) is not their concern. In this respect Silvestre antecedes Alain Robbe-Grillet's observation of 1957 almost by a century:
L'art pour l'art n'a pas bonne presse: cela fait penser au jeu, aux jongleries, au dilettantisme. Mais la nécessité, à quoi l'cœuvre d'art se reconnaît, n'a rien à voir avec l'utilité.121
[Art for art's sake does not have a good press: it makes you think of a game, of juggling, of dilettantism. But the necessity which characterizes the work of art has nothing to do with usefulness.]122
The contrast between Silvestre and Robbe-Grillet's respective views of l'art pour l'art is crucial to an understanding of the relationship between dilettantism and aestheticism. If one sides with the view that art does not require a utilitarian purpose, then dilettantism has a value both as a quality of aesthetic appreciation and as an element of art. But if one believes that art cannot (or should not) be separated from utilitarian factors, then dilettantism will be seen as frivolous, self-indulgent, irresponsible and devoid of value. Baudelaire's positive conception of dilettantism epitomizes the former view. However, Silvestre's contention that these dilettanti have no interest in morality was a sign of the future; the fin-de-siècle view of dilettantism becomes increasingly concerned with the moral responsibility of the artist.
1. Goethe, HA, XII, 481.
2. See, for example, 'Myrons Kuh', in HA, XII, 130 and 136. See also references in Goethe's correspondence in Gedenkausgabe, XXI, 436 and 672. The uses in the Gespräche mit Eckermann are all negative: see Gedenkausgabe, XXIV, 138, 186, 221 and 356.
3. Goethe, HA,VIII, 284; cf. Goethe, HA, XII, 481.
4. Goethe, HA, III. 132.
5. Some translations of Faust convey this wordplay. David Luke translates 'Mich dilettiert's' as 'my dilettante duty'; see Faust: Part One, trans, by David Luke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), p. 133. David Constantine translates it as 'To raise the curtain, dilettantily', which creates an equivalent neologism; see Faust, Part I, trans, by David Constantine (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2005), p. 152.
6. See in particular Hermann Bitzer, Goethe über den Dilettantismus (Bern: Lang, 1969), and Werner Schlick, Goethe's Die Wahlvenvandtschaften: A Middle-Class Critique of Aesthetic Aristocratism (Heidelberg: Winter, 2000), especially pp. 40–58.
7. Goethe, HA,VI, 370.
8. Goethe, Elective Affinities, trans, by R.J. Hollingdale (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971) p. 166.
9. Goethe, HA,VI, 370.
10. Goethe, Gedenkausgabe, XXI, 555.
11. See Hans Joachim Schrimpf, Goethe: Spätzeit,Altersstil, Zeitkritik (Pfullingen: Neske, 1966), pp. 37–41 (P. 37).
12. Cf. Joo's interpretation of Goethe's critique of dilettantism in Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre, which is based partly on the argument that subjectivism is a central element of dilettantism.
13. Goethe, HA, XII, 720, n. 821–27.
14. SeeVaget, Dilettantismus und Meisterschaft, pp. 214–15.
15. Stanitzek, dilettant.html.
16. The concept of 'Trivialliteratur' is hard to translate: concepts such as 'light fiction' seem anachronistic, so I have opted to retain the original.
17. See Sengle, pp. 98–104.
18. Sengle, p. 98; cf. Goethe, HA.VIII, 78.
19. Sengle, p. 102.
20. Sengle, p. 102.
21. Sengle, p. 104.
22. This is the view proposed in the entry for the Biedermeierzeit in The Oxford Companion to German Literature, ed. Henry and Mary Garland, 2nd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), p. 85.
23. Koopmann, p. 182.
24. Koopmann, p. 208.
25. Vaget, 'Skizze', p. 149.
26. Franz Grillparzer,'Brief über den Dilettantismus', in Sämtliche Werke, Part I, ed. by August Sauer and others, 23 vols (Vienna: Schroll, 1909–48), XIV: Prosa II (1925), 41–42. (Henceforth 'Grillparzer'.)
27. See Grillparzer, I, XIV, 245, n. 13.
28. Grillparzer, I, XIV, 42.
29. Grillparzer, I, XIV, 42.
30. Grillparzer, I, XIV, 245.
31. Grillparzer, II, X, 150.
32. Grillparzer, I, XII, 253.
33. Vaget, 'Skizze', p. 149.
34. Arthur Schopenhauer, Sämtliche Werke, ed. by Wolfgang Frhr. von Löhneysen, 5 vols (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968),V, 566–68 (p. 566).
35. Schopenhauer, p. 566.
36. Schopenhauer, p. 566.
37. See Vaget,'Skizze', p. 148.
38. See Oscar Bloch and Walther von Wartburg, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue française, 4th edn (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1964), p. 195.
39. Charles de Brasses, Lettres familières écrites d'ltalie en 1739 et 1740, 3rd edn, 2 vols (Paris: Didier, 1861), II, 393.
40. Quoted in Antoine, p. 162.
41. Bloch and von Wartburg, p. 195.
42. See Trésor de la langue française: Dictionnaire de la langue du XIXe et du XXe siècle (1789–1960), 16 vols (Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1971–94), VII (1979), 214. This contains an extensive collection of references to 'dilettante' and 'dilettantisme'.
43. Voltaire's Correspondence, ed. by Theodore Besterman, 107 vols (Geneva: Institut et Musée Voltaire, 1953–65), XLII (1959), 3. See also XLI (1958), 98, for a note on the work in question.
44. See Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, ed. by Victor Del Litto and others, 50 vols (Geneva: Cercle du Bibliophile, 1968–74), XXII (1968) and XXIII (1968).
45. Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, XXII, 37.
46. Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, XXIII, 120.
47. See Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, XXIII, 483–84, n. 137.
48. Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, XXIII, 139.
49. See Antoine, pp. 161–62
50. 'Notes d'un dilettante' can be found after the second volume of 'Vie de Rossini' in Stendhal, Œuvres complètes, XXIII, 283–425.
51. See Antoine, p. 163. He gives the source as Dictionnaire théâtral, ou Douze cent trente-trois Vérités.
52. See Joseph d'Ortigue, De la guerre des dilettanti (Paris: Ladvocat, 1829).
53. See Félix Clément and Pierre Larousse, Dictionnaire des Opéras, rev. by Arthur Pougin, 2 vols (Paris: n.p., 1905; repr. New York: Da Capo, 1969), I, 332.
54. Hugh MacDonald, in The New Grove Dictionary of Opera, ed. by Stanley Sadie, 4 vols (London: Macmillan, 1992), II, 598.
55. Quoted in Antoine, p. 164.
56. See Clément and Larousse, I, 332.
57. See Clive Brown, in The New Grove Dictionary of Opera, III, 50.
58. Honoré de Balzac, Lettres sur Paris, in Œuvres diverses, ed. by Marcel Bouteron and Henri Longnon, 3 vols (Paris: Conard, 1935–40), II (1938), 65–143 (p. 71).
59. Honoré de Balzac, Modeste Mignon, in La Comédie Humaine, ed. by Pierre-Georges Castex and others, 12 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, 1976–81), I (1976), 469–714 (pp. 577–78).
60. See Balzac, Modeste Mignon, p. 1392, n. 578 a.
61. George Sand, Consuelo et La Comtesse de Rudolstadt, ed. by Léon Cellier and Léon Guichard, 2 vols (Paris: Gamier, 1959), I, 16.
62. Gustave Flaubert, Madame Bovary, in Œuvres de Flaubert, ed. by Albert Thibaudet and René Dumesnil, 2 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, 1951–52), I (1951), 500.
63. Flaubert, Madame Bovary, p. 366.
64. Flaubert, Le Dictionnaire des idées reçues, in Œuvres de Flaubert, II (1952), 1006.
65. See Adolphe Jullien, Paris dilettante au commencement du siècle (Paris: Firmm-Didot, 1884).
66. Jullien, p. 339.
67. M. Boulenger, quoted in Antoine, pp. 167–68.
68. Trésot de la langue française,VII, 214.
69. Antoine, p. 162.
70. Antoine, p. 166.
71. Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, Vie, poésies et pensées de Joseph Delorme (Paris: Delangle, 1829; repr. Plan de la Tour: Editions d'aujourd'hui, 1985), pp. 226–27.
72. See Fernand Baldensperger, Bibliographie critique de Goethe en France (n.p., 1907; repr. New York: Burt Franklin, 1972), p. 196.
73. See Fernand Baldensperger, Goethe en France, rev. edn (Paris: Hachette, 1920; repr. New York: Burt Franklin, 1972), passim.
74. Charles Nodier, Histoire du roi de Bohême et de ses sept châteaux (Paris: Delangle, 1830; repr. Paris: Plasma, 1979) p. 73.
75. Nodier, p. 73.
76. See A. Richard Oliver, Charles Nodier: Pilot of Romanticism (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1964), p. 197.
77. Oliver, p. 197.
78. Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, 'M. de Sénancour', in Portraits contemporains, 5 vols (Paris: Levy, 1869–76), I (1869), 143–97 (pp. 161–62).
79. See Antoine, p. 168.
80. See Barstad and Federhofer, pp. 7–15.
81. Jules-Amédée Barbey d'Aurevilly, Memoranda, in Œuvres romanesques complètes, ed. by Jacques Petit, 2 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, 1964–66), II (1966), 737–1124 (p. 973).
82. Barbey, p. 953; cf. pp. 903–04.
83. Théophile Gautier, Albertus', in Émaux et camées, ed. by Claudine Gothot-Mersch (Paris: Gallimard, 1981), 151–213 (P. 167).
84. Gautier,'Albertus', p. 209.
85. Gautier,'Albertus', p. 211.
86. See Richard B. Grant, Théophile Gautier (Boston:Twayne, 1975), p. 23,
87. Goethe, Faust et le second Faust, trans, by Gérard de Nerval (Paris: Gamier, 1969), p, 168; cf. p. 63 infra.
88. Théophile Gautier, Mademoiselle de Maupin, ed. by Adolphe Boschot (Paris: Garnier, 1966), p. 24.
89. Gautier, Mademoiselle de Maupin, p. 24.
90. See Théophile Gautier, Mademoiselle de Maupin, ed. by Jacques Robichez (Paris: imprimerie nationale, 1979), p. 404, n. 2 (p. 58).
91. Théophile Gautier, La Préface de Mademoiselle de Maupin, ed. by Georges Matoré (Geneva: Droz, 1946), p. lxiv, n. 2.
92. Matoré, pp. lxiv–lxv, n. 2.
93. See Hugot, pp. 21–23.
94. See the notes by Claude Pichois in Charles Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, ed. by Claude Pichois, 2 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, 1975–76), II (1976), 1425.
95. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 103-28 (p. 111).
96. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, no-n.
97. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, no.
98. Charles Baudelaire, Correspondance, ed. by Claude Pichois with the collaboration of Jean Ziegler, 2 vols (Paris: Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, 1973), I, 675.
99. See Trésor de la langue française,VII, 214.
100. See Baudelaire, Correspondance, I, 1081–82, n. 2.
101. Baudelaire, Paradis Artificiels, in Œuvres complètes, I, 377–519 (p. 387).
102. Baudelaire, Mon cceur mis d nu, in Œuvres complètes, I, 676–708 (p. 697).
103. Peter France, ed., The New Oxford Companion to Literature in French (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), p. 483.
104. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 683–724 (p. 710).
105. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 712.
106. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 691.
107. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 691.
108. Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, II, 694.
109. Hugot, pp. 320–21.
110. Kassner, p. 37.
111. Kassner, pp. 27–28.
112. Barstad and Federhofer, pp. 9–10.
113. Wieler, p. 25.
114. See 'Notes nouvelles sur Edgar Poe', in Baudelaire, Œuvres completes, II, 319-37.
115. Wieler, p. 29.
116. See pp. 57–58 infra.
117. Wieler, p. 95; see also Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, I, 356-57 (p. 356).
118. Wieler, p. 78; see also Baudelaire, Œuvres complètes, I, 291-92 (p. 291).
119. Wieler, p. 78.
120. Théophile Silvestre, quoted in Antoine, p. 169.
121. Alain Robbe-Grillet, Pour un nouveau roman (Paris: Minuit, 1961), p. 42.
122. The word 'jonglerie' also connotes meretricious posturing, with elements of charlatanism. Barbara Wright translates it as 'humbug'; see Snapshots and Towards a New Novel, trans, by Barbara Wright (London: Calder and Boyars, 1965), p. 73.