LEONA QUEYROUZE (1861-1938) LOUISIANA FRENCH CREOLE POET,
ESSAYIST, AND COMPOSER
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
In partial fulfillment of the
Requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
In
The Department of English
by
Donna M. Meletio
B.A., University of Texas San Antonio, 1990
M.A., University of Texas San Antonio, 1994
August, 2005
©Copyright 2005
Donna M. Meletio
All rights reserved
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
For their support throughout this project and for their patience and love, I would
like to thank my daughters, Sarah, Maegan, and Kate, who are the breath and heart of my
life. I would also like to thank the strong and beautiful women and men who have walked
through this life journey with me: my life-long friend Dr. Denise Baskind and her
husband Steve, my sister Mary Ann Appleby and her husband Bob, Mary Siffert, Susan
and Steve Caspers, Lomeda Montgomery, Pat Nover and Greg, Eileen, and my wonderful
family: my mother, my brothers Carl, Larry, and Richard; Mike and Tami Slater, Ken
Jury, and Quintin Stansell.
While I was LSU, I met many brilliant and compassionate people in the doctoral
program, and if it were not for Shelisa Theus, Susie Kuilan, and Terri and Ryan Ruckel
who offered love, encouragement, and academic passion, this path would have been too
hard to travel. I would also like to offer my heartfelt thanks to my committee, Dr. John
Lowe, Dr. Carolyn Ware, Dr. John Rodrigue, and Dr. Qiancheng Li who made this
project possible. Last, I would like to thank one of the most remarkable teachers I have
ever met, my director, Dr. Edward White, whose humor and kindness always gave me
courage.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS….……………………………………………i
ii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….
.
.
v
I
NTRODUCTI
ON…………………………………………….
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
CHAPTERONE:BI
OGRAPHI
CALSKETCH………………………….
.
7
CHAPTERTWO:“
WHOARETHECREOLES?
”
…………………….
.
43
CHAPTER THREE: VIEUX CARRÉ…………………………………….
67
CHAPTERFOUR:THESALONCULTUREASAFOLKGROUP….
.
92
CHAPTERFI
VE:POLI
TI
CALANDSOCI
ALCONFLI
CT………….
.
126
CHAPTER SIX: QUEYROUZE IN LITERARY CONTEXT
AMERI
CANANDFRENCH……………………….
.
173
CONCLUSI
ON………….……………………………….
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
216
WORKSCI
TED……….……………………………………………….
.
.
223
APPENDI
X:POETRY………………………………………………….
.
234
VI
TA……………………………………………………………………280
iv
ABSTRACT
This new historicist study chronicles the life and work of a Louisiana French
Creole, Leona Queyrouze (1861-1938) who grew up in the turbulent era following the
Civil War. Her articles and poetry, mostly written in French, were published in the local
periodicals, L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
,Compt
e
s
-Rendus, the Picayune and the Crusader under the
pseudonyms, Constant Beauvais, Salamandra, and Adamas. She also translated plays
from French into English in New York under at the request of Harpers Bazar and wrote
two symphonies that were performed at the World Exposition in New Orleans in 1884.
Through an ever-widening critical lens, I focus upon her personal life, her ethnic
identity as a Creole, the Vieux Carré, and her salon that included such notables as writer
Mollie Moore Davis, Charles Gayarré, historian; Paul Morphy, chess player; Dr. Alfred
Mercier, novelist and dramatist; General P.G. T. Beauregard, Adrien Rouquette,
bohemian poet-priest, and Lafcadio Hearn who later became an important figure in the
fusion of eastern and western literature. Her salon functioned as a folk group, one that
created the Athénée for the preservation of French culture through its literary organ, the
Comptes-Rendus. In the symbolic acts of conservatism and dynamism, according to the
twin laws of folklore, they were instrumental in preserving the French Creole culture at
the same time they were factors in its change.
In her writing, Queyrouze addresses the key issues of the period and calls for
egalitarian reform and suffrage even as she struggled with her own elitism and
assumptions of racial hierarchy. In the final analysis, I compare her work to that of
mainstream American writers, such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Mary E. Wilkins
v
Freeman, Sarah Orne Jewett, and Kate Chopin who were calling for social reform from
within the patriarchal social structure while Queyrouze was positioning herself as an
outsider in work that was both elegiac and rebellious. Contrary to the Protestantism and
realism of her counterparts, including George Washington Cable, Queyrouze followed the
French romantic aesthetic traditions codified by Victor Hugo and Alfred de Musset, and
as such, her work challenges our notions of a monolithic American literature.
vi
INTRODUCTION
I discovered Leona Queyrouze in the summer of 1995 when I retreated from a
summer storm into a museum off Jackson Square in New Orleans. As the rain continued
to pour outside, I walked the halls of the Cabildo museum looking at portraits of kings,
bishops, statesmen, and aristocrats. After a while, I came upon the arresting face of a
serious young woman in a simple gown. Leona Queyrouze Barel-- the placard read--poet,
essayist and composer. Intrigued, I asked a woman at the desk for more information about
her, and she promised to send some to me. That moment was the beginning of a long
journey into the research of her life and work, the French Creole culture, and the history
and politics of the region. What emerged was a person as complex as the time and place
she lived. Leona grew up in a time when the face of our nation was changing and when
the conflict of the Civil War illuminated the vast ideological differences in our country. In
this time of sweeping change and growth, America was a vast flood taking all with it, and
cultures that had been dominant in certain areas of the county either became part of the
mainstream or were left behind. While many ethnic groups successfully assimilated into
American culture, the French Creoles consciously chose to separate themselves. Whether
this was due to French chauvinism or as a reaction against Anglo-Saxonism as described
byNe
l
lPa
i
nt
e
r
’
sStanding at Armageddon, the Creoles orchestrated their own demise.
Their story, however, is one aspect of American history that deserves recognition because
it demonstrates the dilemma faced by many ethnic cultures: If the French Creoles defined
themselves by their own ethnic markers and pitted themselves against the AngloAmericans, they risked marginalization, but if they did not take that risk, they faced an
untenable situation—the loss of their heritage. In the latter case, the Creoles loss is our
1
own, for we lose the depth and richness that this culture would have offered, and we also
lose the ability to see our history and our society in all of its complexity. This
intersection of conflicting dynamics between dominant and non-dominant cultures is one
worthy of investigation because it demonstrates how cultural differentiation can affect the
inclusion of an ethnic group into mainstream culture. To that end, a study of the French
Creole culture, and particularly the personal observations of one of its members in the
person of Leona Queyrouze can enhance our understanding of our own cultural and
political history. According to Marc Shell and Werner Sollors, the value of such a study
c
a
n“
br
i
nga
boutamuc
h-needed reorientation in historical consciousness [ . . . that] may
force readers to question past and current generalizations about literature and history of
t
heUni
t
e
dSt
a
t
e
s
”(
9-10). This has been the ultimate goal of my study, and the key in
achieving this objective is to focus on those who experienced the tumultuous period while
being powerless to effect any change or exert any influence other than to share their
opinions through personal correspondence and through the publication of commentary in
t
hene
ws
pa
pe
r
s
.Edwa
r
dL.Ay
e
r
spoi
nt
soutt
ha
t“
ne
wc
hr
onol
og
i
e
sa
nd issues emerge
when we look beyond the public realm, when we explore the diaries and fiction as well as
e
di
t
or
i
a
la
ndpol
i
t
i
c
a
lc
or
r
e
s
ponde
nc
e
”(
vi
i
)
.Suc
hi
st
hec
a
s
ef
orLe
onaQue
y
r
ouz
ewho
published her opinions under her own name and under the names of Constant Beauvais,
Salamandra (
Gr
e
e
k:“
Fi
r
e
-l
i
z
a
r
d,
”s
y
mbolofuns
ha
ka
bl
ec
our
a
g
ea
ndf
a
i
t
ht
ha
tc
a
nnotb
e
destroyed by fire), and Adamas (
Gr
e
e
k:“
Unc
onque
r
a
bl
e
,
”t
heme
t
a
lus
e
dt
oma
ket
he
swords for the gods; another name for a diamond).
Leona retained a love of French literature and culture while addressing the cause
of social justice, yet, she like many others, was susceptible to social prejudice. This
2
i
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
i
onofLe
ona
’
sQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sl
e
t
t
e
r
s
,poe
t
r
y
,e
s
s
a
y
s
,a
nds
hor
ts
t
or
i
e
swi
l
lr
e
ve
a
l
that her political views were more complex than the polarizing public debates of the
period, which were predominantly divided along partisan lines. She explored ideas in a
manner that was a contradiction of sympathies and allegiances, and a study of her life
reveals that she was as complicated as the Creole culture itself. She was one of the many
forgotten voices in a tumultuous historical period, a voice then can only be described as a
mosaïque of sentiments, which is understandable in someone who experienced first-hand
the political and social upheaval the late nineteenth century. The objective of this
dissertation is to retrieve a portion of our past according to the treatise set forth by
Fr
e
de
r
i
cJ
a
me
s
onwhoa
s
s
e
r
t
st
ha
tas
l
i
c
eofhi
s
t
or
ys
houl
dbe“
r
e
t
ur
ne
d to life and
warmth and allowed once more to speak, and to deliver its long-f
or
g
ot
t
e
nme
s
s
a
g
e
”(
“
On
I
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on”
19)
.I
npur
s
ui
toft
hi
sg
oa
l
,t
hi
ss
t
udywi
l
lpr
ovi
dea
ni
nt
i
ma
t
eg
l
i
mps
ei
nt
o
the life of a woman who articulates the grieving process of cultural loss though her
poetry, essays, and speeches.
There are several applications to this dissertation that serve its structure and
intent. First, because this study is a precursor to a critical biography, I have written the
first four chapters in a na
r
r
a
t
i
ves
t
y
l
ea
ndha
ver
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
oLe
onaQue
y
r
ouz
ea
s“
Le
ona
”
r
a
t
he
rt
he
nbyhe
rl
a
s
tna
me
.The
s
ec
ha
pt
e
r
sf
oc
usonhe
rwi
t
ha“
c
l
os
e
-upl
e
ns
,
”
including a biographical sketch, the definition of the term Creole, a description of her
environment, and a study of her salon as it functioned as folk group. These angles will
investigate all aspects surrounding her life, including the sights and sounds of her streets,
the headlines of newspapers, her intimate companions, her family, and the people she
loved. As my focus shifts towards the political and literary landscape-- and as the camera
3
lens widens to capture the panorama of these issues-- Leona Queyrouze becomes more
peripheral and the perspective more impersonal.
Second, I will use a new historicist infrastructure as a foundation in order to
demonstrate how Leona both defined her culture and was defined by it. Utilizing the
theoretical foundations of Michael Foucault, Gottfried von Herder, and Clifford Geertz,
as applied by Stephen Greenblatt and Catherine Gallagher, I will use the new historicist
lens to reveal how her culture becomes the text that is articulated through her work. Her
oeuvre will be contextualized as it embodies and represents a constructed zeitgeist that
cannot be separated from the value system inherent in any social system. Greenblatt and
Ga
l
l
a
g
h
e
rbe
l
i
e
vet
ha
tt
hr
oug
ht
hi
spe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
ve
,wec
a
nr
e
t
r
i
e
ve“
f
i
g
ur
e
shi
t
he
r
t
oke
pt
out
s
i
det
hepr
ope
rc
i
r
c
l
e
sofi
nt
e
r
e
s
t
,
”s
uc
ha
st
he“
l
e
a
r
ne
dwome
ne
xc
l
ude
df
r
om e
a
s
y
access to the materials of schol
a
r
s
h
i
p”(
9-10). One goal of new historicism is to bring
t
he
s
ema
r
g
i
na
l
i
z
e
dvoi
c
e
s“
i
nt
ot
hel
i
g
htofc
r
i
t
i
c
a
la
t
t
e
nt
i
on”(
11)be
c
a
us
et
he
s
evoi
c
e
s
“
di
dnots
pr
i
ngupf
r
om nowhe
r
e...t
he
i
ra
c
hi
e
ve
me
nt
smus
tdr
a
wuponawhol
el
i
f
e
wor
l
d”(
13)
.Thus
,wemus
t“
t
r
e
a
tt
he
ma
spa
r
toft
hehi
s
t
or
yt
ha
tne
e
dst
obei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
d”
(
15)
.Eq
ua
l
l
yi
mpor
t
a
ntt
omys
t
ud
yi
st
hef
a
c
tt
ha
twhi
l
ene
whi
s
t
or
i
c
i
s
mi
s“
de
e
pl
y
i
nt
e
r
e
s
t
e
di
nt
hec
ol
l
e
c
t
i
ve
,i
tr
e
ma
i
nsc
ommi
t
t
e
dt
ot
heva
l
ueoft
hes
i
ng
l
evoi
c
e
”(
16)
.
Leona Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
kwi
l
lbes
ubj
e
c
t
e
dt
of
ol
kl
or
i
s
t
i
ci
nqui
r
yt
ha
ti
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
s
not only the definition of the text, but the function it serves. Ormond Loomis states that
be
c
a
us
e“
c
ul
t
ur
ei
se
s
s
e
nt
i
a
l
l
ya
bs
t
r
a
c
ta
ndi
ne
f
f
a
bl
e
,
”wemus
tr
e
l
yon“
c
ul
t
ur
a
l
expression,t
heove
r
te
vi
de
nc
eofc
ul
t
ur
a
li
de
nt
i
t
y
”(
7)
;t
he
r
e
f
or
e
,as
t
udyofac
ul
t
ur
a
lt
e
xt
c
a
n“
s
e
r
vet
oi
nf
or
mf
ut
ur
eg
e
ne
r
a
t
i
onsoft
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
a
lpa
s
t
”(
3)Pur
s
ua
ntt
ot
hi
s
,Iwi
l
l
apply the definition of the folk group to the Queyrouze salon, as described by Dan Ben-
4
Amos, Harris Berger, Giovanna Del Negro, Richard Dorson, Alan Dundes, Barbara
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, and Elliott Oring to show that this salon was an expressive folk
group consciously attempting to safeguard its cultural markers in the face of rising
Americanization.
Third, I have inserted significant passages from original unpublished manuscripts
to serve as a departure point for other scholars who may not have immediate access to
Loui
s
i
a
naSt
a
t
eUni
ve
r
s
i
t
y
’
sHi
l
lMe
mor
i
a
lLi
br
a
r
ya
r
c
hi
ve
s
.My objective in making her
work available is to assist critical inquiry and to serve scholarship that challenges the
notion of a monolithic national literature. The overarching goal is to re-capture
marginalized voices and to retrieve the faint relics of failed social constructs.
Even though the French Creole culture ultimately failed to retain its hegemony in
Louisiana, an intimate study of this group juxtaposed against the larger canvas of
American literature reveals both common and divergent interests and themes. In viewing
the intersection of rising Americanization and the failing Creolization, one can capture
what Werner Sollors describes in Creole Echoes a
sa“
l
os
tc
ul
t
ur
a
lmome
nt
”(
xvi
i
)
.He
points out that the literature of the French Creoles has larg
e
l
yg
oneunr
e
c
og
ni
z
e
d“
f
ori
t
ha
st
e
nde
dt
obema
r
g
i
na
l
i
z
e
di
nbot
hAme
r
i
c
a
na
ndFr
e
nc
hl
i
t
e
r
a
r
ys
t
udi
e
s
,
”a
ndhe
concludes that this may have been caused by the fact that the literature of the period was
i
ma
g
i
n
e
di
nt
e
r
msof“
national l
oc
a
t
i
on,
”a
ndwr
i
t
ers who referred to themselves as
Creoles we
r
eus
i
ngana
t
i
ona
l
l
ya
n
d“
racially ambiguous t
e
r
m”(
xvi
i
)
.Heobs
e
r
ve
st
ha
t
t
he
s
ewr
i
t
e
r
s“
of
t
e
ndr
e
wonFr
e
nc
hf
or
msbuta
tt
i
me
si
nf
us
e
dt
he
m wi
t
hLoui
s
i
a
na
themes. They produced an impressive variety of highlya
c
c
ompl
i
s
he
dve
r
s
e
”a
ndwhi
l
ei
t
i
s“
i
mpos
s
i
bl
et
opr
e
s
st
he
s
ehe
t
e
r
o
g
e
ne
ouspoe
msi
nt
ot
hes
e
r
vi
c
eofa
nys
i
ng
l
e
5
ove
r
a
r
c
hi
ngi
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on”(
xvi
i
i
)
,
t
he
s
epoe
msof
f
e
rag
l
i
mps
ei
nt
oac
ul
t
ur
et
ha
tl
os
ti
t
s
place in the forward movement of American literary history. In the Preface to Creole
Echoes Nor
ma
nSha
pi
r
os
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
ma
nyoft
he
s
ea
l
mos
tunknownpoe
t
sha
dpr
oduc
e
da
s
ubs
t
a
nt
i
a
lc
a
nont
ha
tdi
dnotde
s
e
r
vet
her
e
l
a
t
i
veobl
i
vi
oni
nt
owhi
c
hi
tha
df
a
l
l
e
n”
(xxii). One of those voices belonged to Leona Queyrouze, and this study serves to retrieve
that lost voice.
6
CHAPTER ONE: BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Perhaps the most perplexing and laborious
ofa
l
lt
a
s
ks
,i
st
oa
nni
hi
l
a
t
eone
’
ss
e
l
fs
o
completely as to become qualified for
judging; and that is what must be done to
enable us to look for truth, with some safety,
at ourselves and others
--“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
”Le
ona
Queyrouze
Le
onaQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sj
our
ne
yt
owa
r
dsa
r
t
i
s
t
i
ce
xpr
e
s
s
i
onbe
g
a
nove
rac
e
nt
ur
ya
g
o
on February 23, 1861 in the parish and city of New Orleans. Mrs. Leon Queyrouze (Anne
Ma
r
i
eCl
a
r
aTe
r
t
r
ou)r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
dLe
ona
’
sbi
r
t
honMa
y24,1866wi
t
ht
hef
ul
lna
meof
Marie Leóna Queyrouze. The five year delay in the registration of her birth, according to
local historians, was customary be
c
a
us
et
het
i
met
or
e
g
i
s
t
e
rc
hi
l
dr
e
n’
sbi
r
t
hswa
sbe
f
or
e
t
he
ye
n
t
e
r
e
ds
c
hoolr
a
t
he
rt
ha
na
tt
h
et
i
meoft
he
i
rbi
r
t
hs
.Le
ona
’
smot
he
r
,Cl
a
r
aTe
r
t
r
ou
,
was a descendant of French aristocracy, the Cathelineaus, De St. James of Picardy and the
Beauvais, some of whom came to America during the reign of Louis XIV. To honor her
mot
he
r
’
sf
a
mi
l
yna
me
,Le
onawoul
da
doptt
hena
me
,Cons
t
a
ntBe
a
uva
i
s
,a
soneofhe
r
ps
e
udony
mswhe
ns
hebe
g
a
nhe
rwr
i
t
i
ngc
a
r
e
e
r
.Le
ona
’
sf
a
t
he
r
,Le
onQue
y
r
ouz
e
,wa
s
born in Beaumont in the Peregrine region of France and moved to Louisiana where he
me
ta
ndma
r
r
i
e
dCl
a
r
a
.Whi
l
ei
ti
snotc
e
r
t
a
i
nwhe
t
he
ri
twa
shi
sf
a
mi
l
yorhi
swi
f
e
’
st
ha
t
owned vineyards in France, nor is it certain how they acquired the plantation in St.
Ma
r
t
i
n’
spa
r
i
s
h,whi
ch was named Leona, records indicate that before the two Queyrouze
children were born, the family moved to New Orleans. Leon Queyrouze registered the
bi
r
t
hofLe
ona
’
sy
oung
e
rbr
ot
he
r
,
Ma
xi
m(
J
a
c
que
sMa
xi
mé
)onJ
a
nua
r
y5,1870,a
nd
records show that he was born at the family home at No. 17 St. Louis Street in New
7
Orleans on November 27, 1866. Leon opened a grocery store with a partner on St. Louis
Street near the family home. He later became a wine importer as a sole proprietor.
What survives of their time i
nSt
.Ma
r
t
i
nvi
l
l
e(
at
ownt
ha
twa
sa
l
s
oknowna
s“
t
he
l
i
t
t
l
ePa
r
i
s
”ofLoui
s
i
a
na
)c
a
nbef
oundne
xtt
ot
heSt
.Ma
r
t
i
ndeTour
sc
hur
c
h.Ne
xtt
ot
he
statue of Evangeline is the gravestone of a young Charles Tertrou, who according to
family records, would ha
vebe
e
nt
h
eol
de
rbr
ot
he
rofLe
ona
’
smot
he
r
,Cl
a
r
a
.Cl
a
r
a
’
s
ancestors were considered to have been heroes in the French revolutionary war in
Vendee. Her family had lived in Picardy, but had fled France when the head of the James
family had violated Richeli
e
u’
sba
na
g
a
i
ns
tdue
l
i
ng
.The
ye
ve
nt
ua
l
l
ys
e
t
t
l
e
di
nLoui
s
i
a
n
a
under the name of Beauvais. Clara was the daughter of Laurent Tertrou who married
Louisa Beauvais. He died in 1840, and Louisa remarried to Alexander Thenet. Years
later, Louisa Thenet would receive a letter from the French Academy of Sciences in
Bordeaux, France, praising her granddaughter, Leona, for her literary accomplishments.
Li
t
t
l
emor
ei
sknownofLe
ona
’
smot
he
ra
ndhe
rf
a
mi
l
y
,f
ormos
tofhe
rc
or
r
e
s
ponde
nc
e
or personal papers are not included in the archive material. Most documents donated by
t
hef
a
mi
l
yc
onc
e
r
ne
dLe
ona
’
spa
p
e
r
sa
ndt
hos
eofhe
rf
a
t
he
r
,Le
on.
Le
ona
’
sf
a
t
he
rwa
sbor
ni
nFr
a
nc
eonFe
br
ua
r
y3,1818,t
hes
onoft
hef
i
r
s
tof
f
i
c
e
r
ofNa
p
ol
e
on’
se
mpi
r
e
.Att
hea
g
eo
ft
we
l
vehewas sent to America under the care of his
uncle who was a prominent businessman in New Orleans, and his uncle sent him to
college in Lexington, Kentucky, and then to Havana, Cuba (in 1833) to learn Spanish.
When Leon returned to New Orleans in 1835 he went to work for his uncle. First, he
wor
ke
da
sac
l
e
r
ka
t“
Ca
r
r
i
e
r
e
,Da
r
a
n&Co.
”f
orf
i
vey
e
a
r
s
,a
ndt
he
nbe
c
a
meapa
r
t
ne
r
.
8
After his marriage, Leon Queyrouze became a wine merchant, first under the
a
us
pi
c
e
sof“
Que
y
r
ouz
ea
ndLa
ng
s
dor
f
,
”a
ndt
he
na
s“
Que
y
r
ouz
eBr
os
.
”a
t#17St
.Loui
s
Street (this is now 523-5 St. Louis). However, with the advent of the Civil War, he closed
his business. On April 12, 1861, he was appointed for a five year term as captain of the
Orleans Guard No. 5, First Division, by Thomas O. Moore, the Governor of the State of
Louisiana and commander in chief of the militia [UU-68 1:3]. He then served as major
and commander of the Orleans Guard Battalion and later became a colonel under General
P.G. T. Beauregard. During the Battle of Shiloh, he was wounded in the knee and
convalesced at Opelousas. When he returned, he was arrested by the Union Army under
General Butler who sent him to prison for two months. Refusing to sign the amnesty oath,
he fled to Cuba where he worked for a brokerage business until the following year. After
that he traveled to Matamoras where he served under General Mejia before returning to
New Orleans. Even though the Queyrouze family insists (as do the newspaper accounts
written for his obituary) that Leon did not sign the amnesty oath when he returned, there
i
sadoc
ume
nte
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Amne
s
t
yOa
t
h”da
t
e
dAug
us
t22,1865,s
i
g
ne
dbyt
hej
us
t
i
c
eof
t
hepe
a
c
eofOua
c
hi
t
apa
r
i
s
hi
nLoui
s
i
a
nawi
t
hLe
on’
ss
i
g
na
t
ur
e[Queyrouze Papers
UU-68 1:3].
Upon his return he re-established his wine importing business under a new name,
“
Que
y
r
o
uz
ea
ndBoi
s
,
”wi
t
hapa
r
t
n
e
ra
ndt
he
nwe
ntoutonhi
sowna
s“
Que
y
r
ouz
eCo.
”
Records indicate that at one time his business was also located on Tchoupitoulas Street.
Housed at the Historical New Orleans Collection is an 1887 Business directory that lists
Le
onQue
y
r
ouz
ea
sa“
Whol
e
s
a
l
eGr
oc
e
r
:I
mpor
t
e
rofWi
ne
sa
ndLi
quor
s
:Andde
a
l
i
ngi
n
a
l
lki
ndsofWe
s
t
e
r
na
ndCount
r
yPr
oduc
e
.
”Ac
c
or
di
ngt
ol
e
t
t
e
r
s
,hema
yha
vei
mpor
t
e
d
9
wine from wine merchants Delhomme Freres in Bordeaux, France. Records also indicate
that he retained ownership of his plantation and other properties after the war, which
would have been impossible unless he had signed the oath. In 1880 he sold the Leona
Plantation in St. Martin’
spa
r
i
s
ht
oEmi
l
eL.Ca
r
r
i
e
r
e
,a
nda
mongt
hef
a
mi
l
ypa
pe
r
st
he
r
e
is a certified copy of the mortgage he held on the plantation dated April 14, 1887. He also
owned property in St. Landry parish. During his lifetime, he became a prominent citizen
and became president of the 5th Ward in New Orleans; he was a member of the
Democratic Club, the Union Francais and the Casadoras Association; he was also one the
principle founders of the Athénée Louisianais, a society organized to preserve French
culture and literature. Until the time of his death he had been active and healthy, but after
a brief illness, he died at age seventy-seven on January 18, 1895. His memorials deemed
hi
m a“
s
ol
di
e
r
,me
r
c
ha
nta
ndc
i
t
i
z
e
n.
”Al
e
ng
t
hyf
une
r
a
lpr
oc
e
s
s
i
on,whi
c
hi
nc
l
ude
dt
he
surviving soldiers of the Battalion of the New Orleans Guard, followed his casket draped
with the battle flag of Shiloh.
Le
onai
nhe
r
i
t
e
dhe
rf
a
t
he
r
’
si
nde
pe
nde
nts
pi
r
i
t
,a
ndLe
ona
ndCl
a
r
anur
t
ur
e
dt
hi
s
by making certain that Leona received an extensive privately tutored education. They
wanted their daughter to learn the classics in the original languages of Greek and Latin,
and to study European literature, philosophy, science, art, and music. To that end, Leona
would awaken every morning at five to begin her lessons while her father went to work at
his store. At age fifteen, she spent time in France furthering her education. She was
c
onf
i
r
me
daCa
t
hol
i
ca
ndr
e
c
e
i
ve
dhe
rc
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
ef
r
om St
.Ma
r
y
’
sChur
c
hi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
n
s
on May 20, 1880 at the age of nineteen. By the time she was a young woman, she was
fluent in seven languages: French, English, Spanish, Italian German, Latin, Greek, as well
10
as regional Creole. Her father treated Leona as a companion, and she was an integral part
of Queyrouze salon soirées. According to Norman Shapiro in Creole Echoes Le
ona
’
s
f
a
t
he
rwa
sa
n“
ope
n-minded and intelligent man [who] frequently hosted soirées with the
c
i
t
y
’
si
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
le
l
i
t
e
.Asay
oungg
i
r
l
,Le
onawa
spe
r
mi
t
t
e
dt
oa
t
t
e
ndt
he
s
ee
ve
ni
ng
discussions, which became part ofhe
ra
l
r
e
a
dyunor
t
hodoxe
duc
a
t
i
on”(
143)
.Edwa
r
d
Larocque Tinker in Laf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n
’
sAme
r
i
c
anDay
sdescribes her education as
very different from that of the typical young person of [a] good French family.
Her father was a man of excellent education, broad-minded and tolerant and his
house was a rendezvous for the best Louisiana French minds of that day . . . . Here
they talked literature, philosophy . . . religion. . . . As she had always been the
constant companion of her father, she was well-fitted to profit by these meetings,
whi
c
hs
hea
l
wa
y
sa
t
t
e
nde
d,a
ndve
r
ys
oon,he
rf
a
t
he
r
’
sf
r
i
e
ndsa
c
c
e
pt
e
dhe
rona
basis of mental equality. Her acquisitive mind broadened and she lost all the
mental inhibitions, false modesty and fanatical religious ideas so often found in
women of her race and class in those days. In addition, she fenced, wrote poetry,
played the piano admirably and sang all the old Creole songs (263).
Some of the members of their salon included Placide Canonge, journalist, art
critic, and director of the French opera house, and Paul Morphy, the champion chess
player. He was the subject of the novel, The Chess Players written by Frances Parkinson
Ke
y
e
s
,whous
e
dLe
ona
’
sunpubl
i
s
he
dma
nus
c
r
i
pta
boutt
hel
i
f
eofPa
ula
ss
our
c
e
material. Other frequent guests were General P.G.T. Beauregard, Armand Mercier, a
surgeon, and his brother, Dr. Alfred Mercier, a novelist and historian. Paul Deschanel, a
French author, visited the Queyrouze family in 1892. (Subsequently, he was elected to the
Chamber of Deputies as a Progressive Republican in 1885, and then he became President
of the Republic in 1920.) In an interview on June 29, 1932, Leona listed many of the
11
vi
s
i
t
or
st
ohe
rhome
:“
OurhomeonSt
.Loui
ss
t
r
e
e
twa
st
heme
e
t
i
ngpl
a
c
ef
orGa
y
a
r
r
é
,
the two famous Dr. Merciers, General Beauregard—we even entertained Paul Deschanel
who became president later of France, and other celebrities”[
“
Re
ve
a
l
sNe
wHe
a
r
nDa
t
a
”
UU-71 7:52].
During salon gatherings, Leona often performed recitals for her guests, having
ma
s
t
e
r
e
dt
hepi
a
nounde
rt
het
ut
e
l
a
g
eofPa
ulMor
phy
’
smot
he
r
.Se
ve
r
a
lofhe
r
performances included an extensive catalog of works from Beethoven, Chopin, and
Gottschalk, to Weber.1 The Queyrouze Collection includes her longer works, the Victory
Military March and the Fantaise Indienne, which were written for the World Cotton
Centennial Exposition of 1884-5. These were performed by the 8th Calvary of the
Mexican Army Band under the direction of Captain Encarnación Payen on March 25,
1885 in a musical program at the Music Hall Exposition Building.
She was an accomplished woman, well-educated and well-traveled, and one of her
accomplishments included fencing. Letters in the collections indicate that she received
her training in foils from C.S. Jones in New Orleans. She was so skilled, in fact, that her
brother, Maxim, who had won the southern championship in fencing, admitted that his
older sister surpassed him in the art. Leona also spent time in France, and the invoices
and receipts from her personal papers indicate that she spent time there furthering her
education.
But it is her poetry, her essays and her letters that are of most interest, because in
these her independent spirit and her concern for political, social and cultural issues reveal
1
see the list of the sheet music in her possession in the Queyrouze Papers [X-97 9:67-89], as well
a
sh
e
rownc
ompo
s
i
t
i
ons
,i
nc
l
udi
ng“
TheSumme
rHus
ba
nd,
”“
TheLa
s
tSi
g
hoft
heDude
,
”The
Pa
s
s
e
r
by
,
”a
nd“
Att
heBa
l
l
”[
X-97 9:66].
12
themselves. She published under four names (her own, Constant Beauvais, Salamandra,
and Adamas) in a variety of publications, including the Ti
me
sDe
moc
r
at
,L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
,The
Crusader, and Le
sCompt
e
sRe
ndusdel
’
At
hé
né
eLoui
s
i
anai
s
.Her first published essay
wa
s“
Et
udeonRa
c
i
ne
”[
UU-71 8:60], and she held a reading of this for the Athénée
Louisianais at the request of the president and founder, Dr. Alfred Mercier. The event
was held at the Grunewald Hall on Baronne Street. Leona was the only woman granted
membership in the Athénée,a
ndDr
.Me
r
c
i
e
rpr
oc
l
a
i
me
d“
t
ha
the
ri
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
l
development was so rapid . . . . [that she should be] considered a fellow-scholar and
t
hi
nke
r
”[
“
ADi
s
t
i
ng
ui
s
he
dLa
dyo
ft
heCr
e
s
c
e
ntCi
t
y
”UU-71 7:52]. According to
biographical sketches in various periodical articles found in the archive, Queyrouze is
credited as the first woman to give a speech in public in the city; indeed, this was the first
time in Louisiana history that a woman had read her own work in public. She later
presented two essays in two separate conferences; the first one was entitled L’
I
ndul
ge
nc
e
[UU-71 8:60]. Presented at the Union Francaise, this speech was a plea for religious
tolerance, and it was favorably received. As a result of this conference she received the
appellat
i
on“
t
heCr
e
ol
ephi
l
os
ophe
r
,
”at
e
r
mc
oi
ne
dbyaLondonj
our
na
l
i
s
twhoha
d
attended the conference. Her work was also published in the New Orleans Spanish
language newspaper, El Moro de Paz, and the El Buscapie in Puerto Rico.
Her second conference paper,“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
”wa
spr
e
s
e
nt
e
donJ
une3,
1887 at the Continental Guards Armory on Camp Street. Under the sponsorship of Alfred
Mercier, P.G.T. Beauregard, and Placide Canonge and after an introduction by Charles
Gayarré, Leona mounted a clear and strong argument regarding the passion and prejudice
of patriotism, and she discussed the true meaning and responsibility of liberty, tyranny,
13
vi
ol
e
nc
e
,j
us
t
i
c
e
,r
e
a
s
ona
ndi
g
nor
a
nc
e[
“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
”UU-70 6:47] As with
any powerful political position, her speech received mixed reviews. Although it was a
“
phy
s
i
c
a
l
,me
t
a
phy
s
i
c
a
li
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
ont
ha
ta
s
t
oni
s
he
da
ndc
ha
r
me
d”[
“
Di
s
t
i
ng
ui
s
he
d
La
dy
”UU-71 7:52], it nevertheless resulted in a flood of controversy, and she was
accused of being too fervently patriotic and too loyal to France. Undaunted, she published
a heated response in the newspaper that defended her love of France and made no
apologies for her position.
One of her greatest accomplishments was her recognition by the Academy of
Sciences at Bor
de
a
uxi
nFr
a
nc
ef
orhe
rpoe
m“
Vision”(
Se
ea
ppe
ndi
xf
orc
ompl
e
t
et
e
xti
n
French and English). First published in the Comptes Rendus, it was later published on
July 9, 1885 in the French newspaper, le Nouveliste de la Gironde and received
recognition and acclaim. The president of the Academy, Mr. Combes applauded the
beauty of her language, saying in a published letter to M. A. Thenet dated January 28,
1885, “Ces
ontdebe
auxv
e
r
squec
e
uxquev
ousav
e
zbi
e
nv
oul
um’
of
f
r
i
rdel
apar
tde
Mlle Leona Queyrouze, votre petite-f
i
l
l
e
,e
ti
lyal
ál
’
i
magi
nat
i
one
tl
’
âmed’
unev
r
ai
poè
t
ed
el
’
é
c
ol
edeLamartine et de Vi
c
t
orHug
o”[
UU-71 7 :52]. (
“
The
s
ea
r
ebe
a
ut
i
f
ul
verses, those you have offered from Mlle Leona Queyrouze, your granddaughter, and in
them is the imagination and the soul of a true poet in the same school of Lamartine and
Vi
c
t
orHug
o.
”
)Ot
he
rpoe
mst
ha
twe
r
ewi
de
l
yr
e
a
da
ndf
a
vor
a
bl
yr
e
c
e
i
ve
dwe
r
e“
At
l
a
s
,
”
“
Cequ’
ontdi
tl
e
smont
agne
s
,
”“
Ma
g
da
l
e
na
,“
Moise,
”a
nd“
Sa
ms
on”a
mongma
nyot
he
r
s
.
Two of her sonnets, which were dedicated to the French Republic and to President SadiCarnot, were read at the French colony in New Orleans; this event was presided over by
t
heFr
e
nc
hc
ons
ul
,Bos
s
e
r
ond’
Ang
l
a
deonOc
t
obe
r13,1893,t
oc
omme
mor
a
t
et
hea
r
r
i
va
l
14
of the Russian fleet at Toulon, France. The commander of the fleet, Admiral Makaroff,
personally thanked Leona for her work.
While Leona sought recognition for her work, she also used these opportunities to
express her point of view on such issues as culture, race, politics, literature, art and music.
Her concerns ranged from her own community to those in America and in Europe, and
her correspondence included exchanges with her circle of friends, many of whom were
prominent community leaders, such as Charles Gayarré, Placide Canonge, Charles Testut
(author of poems, historical novels, and Portraits Littéraires de la Nouvelle-Orléans); Dr.
Alfred Bubos who was the editor of L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
, Alcibiade de Blanc who was a Louisiana
Supreme Court Justice, Mollie Moore Davis, who was a New Orleans novelist, and
Adrien Rouquette, the bohemian poet-priest who lived with the Indians in Saint
Tammany parish. She also corresponded with James Redpath who was a war
correspondent during the Civil War as well as an abolitionist, writer, publisher, and the
managing editor in 1886 of the North American Review, and with Sarah Bernhardt and
Emile Zola. Anatole Victor Cousins, an older man who lived on a plantation outside of
New Orleans often corresponded with Leona, and in their love affair of letters (18821889)
,hewa
sf
ondofc
a
l
l
i
nghe
r“
Ma lionne”(
myl
i
one
s
s
)
,a
na
ppe
l
l
a
t
i
ons
hea
ppe
a
r
e
d
to deserve and appreciate.
The portrait of Leona that I saw in the Cabildo museum I have learned since was
painted in 1880 by John Genin (1830-1895), an artist who had studied in Paris under the
guidance of portrait artist Leon Bonnat. In this portrait, he depicts Leona as a serious,
simply clad young woman, standing next to her desk with her bookcase behind her. Mrs.
Harold Queyrouze, who had personally known Leona, said that she was a petite woman,
15
a
bout5’
4”
.Fr
omane
ws
pa
pe
rc
l
i
ppi
ngi
nt
heQue
y
r
ouz
epa
pe
r
se
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Aut
hor
Re
c
e
i
v
e
sCopyf
r
om J
a
pa
ne
s
ePub
l
i
s
hi
ngCompa
ny
”Le
onawa
s“
de
s
c
r
i
be
di
naNe
w
Yor
kma
g
a
z
i
nea
r
t
i
c
l
ea
s‘
s
hor
t
,d
a
r
k,ve
r
yf
or
e
ign-looking with an arm on which the
flesh is hard as marble from her constant use of the fencing foils, big mystical eyes and a
ma
s
c
ul
i
nemout
h’
”[UU-71 7:52]. I
nEdwa
r
dLa
r
oc
queTi
nke
r
’
sLaf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n’
s
American Days, he describes a bracelet that Leona wore, one that inspired an admirer—or
perhaps her brother-- t
oi
mmor
t
a
l
i
z
ei
napoe
m.Ti
nke
rs
a
y
st
ha
ti
twa
sa“
g
ol
dba
ng
l
eof
c
ur
i
ousde
s
i
g
n...whi
c
hhe
rg
r
a
n
df
a
t
he
rha
dg
i
ve
nt
ohe
rg
r
a
ndmot
he
r
”(
264)
.The
significance of this bracelet is that it symbolized pride of her family as well as her
lineage. The admirer wrote about her bracelet in January of 1890:
Andt
houqua
i
ntbr
a
c
e
l
e
t
,Le
ona
’
sf
onde
s
tc
ha
r
m,
Ancestral relic of a glorious race,
Thouonc
ee
nc
i
r
c
l
e
dar
oy
a
lBr
i
t
t
on’
sa
r
m;
And even now a nobler arm grace:
Fort
houwhe
nwor
n,Le
ona
’
swr
i
s
te
mbr
a
c
e
.
Andne
’
e
rdi
d’
s
tt
houonwo
r
t
hi
e
ra
r
ms
hi
ne
-- J.S.M.
[UU-70 6:45].
Another admirer, Ella A. Giles, describes Leona in this way:
Leona Queyrouze [is] the embodiment of literary and aesthetic culture and
philosophic learning, yet unassuming and straightforward as a child . . . . Though
surrounded by all the evidence of a highly conservative training, how frank and
fearless her speeches, how resonant with feeling her deep and melodious voice,
how unaffected and genial, yet perfectly independent and self-reliant in her
manners. There is enough reserve to maintain dignity, enough seriousness to
preserve womanly poise, but there is in her nature no dissimulation, no distrustful
16
“
s
oc
i
e
t
yuns
mi
l
i
ng
ne
s
s[
s
i
c
]
”...[
s
he
]l
i
ve
sas
e
c
l
ude
da
ndr
e
t
i
r
e
dl
i
f
e
,buti
ti
s
because she is a worker and not because she is a willing victim to inherited
principles of aristocratic aloofness
[UU-71 7:52].
While these sketches are useful in re-constructing her life, I chose to speak to
s
ome
onewhokne
wLe
ona
,s
oIc
o
n
t
a
c
t
e
dMr
s
.Ha
r
ol
dQue
y
r
ouz
e(
“
J
e
r
r
y
”
)whoi
st
he
daughter in-l
a
wofLe
ona
’
sbr
ot
he
r
,Ma
xi
m,a
ndIi
nt
e
r
vi
e
we
dhe
ra
ndt
hes
ur
vi
vi
ng
Queyrouze family in their modest home in New Orleans the summer of 1996. Jerry
related how Leona loved to wear lace dresses with high black boots and how she was
fond of wearing a comb in her hair with a lace mantilla. The furnishings in her apartment
were exquisite: There was a half table with a white marble top, and an 1840 Rosewood
desk with intricate carving with a hidden drawer. A chandelier that she had made into an
electric one lit the room, and her bed was a four-poster with a crown top.
Although Jerry had described Leona as very quiet and retiring, she was far from
that in her youth. When she was young she had been very bold, vibrant and passionate
about social causes. This passion for literature and concerns for social issues may have
been one of the reasons that in January of 1887, she struck up a friendship with Lafcadio
Hearn. Year later, he would earn worldwide fame as a translator of Japanese folktales into
Eng
l
i
s
h,a
ndhewoul
dbec
r
e
di
t
e
dwi
t
hha
vi
ng“
a
nt
i
c
i
pa
t
e
dt
hemode
r
nl
i
t
e
r
a
r
ya
nd
c
ul
t
ur
a
lc
ont
a
c
tbe
t
we
e
nt
heEa
s
ta
ndt
heWe
s
t
;
”mor
e
ove
r
,hewoul
dpl
a
y“
avi
t
a
lr
ol
ei
n
t
hef
or
ma
t
i
onofmode
r
nc
os
mopol
i
t
a
nl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
”(
Yu21)
.
At the time she met him, however, he was working as a local reporter, translator,
and commentator on literature, including works by Théophile Gautier, Guy de
Maupassant and Pierre Lot
i
.Wi
t
hLe
ona
’
sa
s
s
i
s
t
a
nc
e
,a
ndt
hehe
l
pofhe
rMa
r
t
i
ni
que
17
servant, Marie, Hearn translated Creole folktales into English. Even though his time with
Leona was brief, I will show that their friendship had a significant impact on her life and
on her writing.
Lafcadio Hearn was a reporter in Cincinnati, but after having read some of the
color sketches of the New Orleans area written by George Washington Cable, he packed
his suitcase and took passage on a steamer down the Mississippi. When he first saw New
Orleans, he was enchanted, but he was soon disillusioned when he found himself in poor
health and in dire financial straits. He finally secured a job at the Item, translating
excerpts from foreign presses and making social commentary on current events. Then he
went to work for the Times Democrat. Jackson describes him as a very observant and
insightful person, in spite of being blind in one eye and having only partial vision in the
ot
he
r
.Sher
e
l
a
t
e
st
ha
the“
ha
dbe
e
nbor
nont
heGr
e
e
ki
s
l
a
ndofSa
nt
aMa
ura, the child of
a runaway marriage between an English surgeon-major in the British army and a local
Gr
e
e
kg
i
r
l
”(
288)
.Thema
r
r
i
a
g
ee
nde
di
ndi
vor
c
ea
ndHe
a
r
n’
smot
he
rwe
ntba
c
kt
o
Greece. Soon after his mother abandoned Hearn, his father sent Hearn to live with his
a
unti
nWa
l
e
s
.J
a
c
ks
ons
ur
mi
s
e
st
ha
tt
hi
swa
st
her
e
a
s
ont
ha
thebe
c
a
me“
moody
,
di
s
t
r
us
t
f
ulofe
ve
nt
hemos
ts
i
nc
e
r
eoff
r
i
e
nds
”(
288)
.He
a
r
nt
he
nmove
dt
oEur
opea
nd
from there to New York, and then finally settled in Cincinnati. While there, he“
ma
r
r
i
e
d”
a woman of color in an unofficial ceremony, but soon thereafter, he left for New Orleans.
In a Hearn biography, American Days, Ti
nke
rr
e
l
a
t
e
st
ha
tHe
a
r
n’
sf
i
r
s
twor
ki
nNe
w
Orleans involved writing sketches about cooking, civic problems, and music-- anything
that took his fancy. He also started work for the Times –Democrat i
n1881a
nd“
of
t
e
n
t
r
a
ns
l
a
t
e
dt
hewor
ksofFr
e
nc
horSpa
ni
s
hwr
i
t
e
r
s
”i
nt
oEng
l
i
s
h(
J
a
c
ks
on289)
.I
ns
omeof
18
hi
sbookr
e
vi
e
ws
,hepr
a
i
s
e
dGe
or
g
eWa
s
hi
ng
t
onCa
bl
e
,“
Fa
t
he
rAdrien Rouquette . . .
Dr
.Al
f
r
e
dMe
r
c
i
e
r...a
ndEl
i
z
a
b
e
t
hBi
s
l
a
nd”(
289)
.He
a
r
nme
tBi
s
l
a
ndwhi
l
et
he
y
worked for the Times-Democrat, and they remained friends after she left to work at the
Cosmopolitan Magazine in New York in the late 1880s. In 1906, Bisland published a
two-volume biography of Hearn, which included letters to his friends while he was living
in New Orleans and New York.
While in New Orleans, Hearn became very close friends with a young surgeon,
Dr. Rudolph Matas, and Hearn later introduced Matas to Leona. When Hearn published
his novel, Chita (1889), he dedicated it to Matas. Forty-three years later, when Leona
wrote her memoir about her relationship with Hearn, she dedicated her book to Matas as
well, in a gesture that honors her friendship with Matas, but more significantly, reveals
her lingering literary and emotional debt to Hearn.
The immediate and close connection between Leona and Lafcadio was expressed
through their correspondence, and their passion was obliquely channeled through their
discussions of literature. While their association was brief, for Leona, at least, its intensity
lingered for a lifetime, and because of this I have chosen to give attention to this facet of
her life. This serves to inform her biography and to humanize her life work. While I will
avoid biographical fallacies, I will not assume a disconnect between her poetry and
Hearn—particularly involving those poems that were specifically addressed to him. In
addition, some specific biographical detail is necessary to address some discrepancies in
scholarship. Because of conflicting accounts as to the date of their meeting, I have used
excerpts from several sources to corroborate my facts.
19
Some scholars have noted that Leona met Lafcadio when she was in her teens;
however, she was twenty-six at the time of their first meeting. During my interview with
the Queyrouze relatives, they related that Leona may have arranged a meeting with Hearn
or was introduced to him. They said that she met him at a library on Royal Street and that
he accompanied her home. In his biography of Hearn, Jonathon Cott asserts that Leona
a
ndLa
f
c
a
di
ome
ti
nJ
a
nua
r
y1887a
t“
Four
ni
e
r
’
ss
e
c
ondha
ndbooks
hoponRoy
a
lSt
r
e
e
t
,
”
a
ndhede
s
c
r
i
be
sLe
onaa
s“
apr
e
t
t
yy
oungCr
e
ol
ewoma
nwi
t
hbl
a
c
khair and brown
e
y
e
s
”(
2
01)
.Af
t
e
rabr
i
e
fc
onve
r
s
a
t
i
on,La
f
c
a
di
oe
s
c
or
t
e
dhe
rhome
.Cot
t
’
si
nf
or
ma
t
i
on
wa
sc
l
e
a
r
l
yba
s
e
donEdwa
r
dLa
r
oc
queTi
nke
r
’
sLaf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n’
sAme
r
i
c
anDay
s
.
Ti
nke
rr
e
l
a
t
e
showHe
a
r
nme
tLe
onai
n“
Four
ni
e
r
’
sol
dbooks
hoponRoy
a
lSt
r
e
e
t
”
:
[A] young, pretty girl, unmistakably a Creole from her jet black hair and deep
brown eyes, passed the shop and seeing him inside, hesitated, then entered. Going
upt
ohi
ms
hes
a
i
d:“
Iknowy
oua
r
eMr
.He
a
r
n,Ir
e
c
og
ni
z
e
dy
ouf
r
om y
our
picture in the Times-Democrat . . . . I want to ask your advice . . . . Hearn was
captivated by her youth and enthusiasm and intrigued by the acumen of her
cascade of questions--questions which she had been saving up for months in the
hope of some such opportunity--so he was kindly and offered helpful advice . . . .
They drifted out of the shop together, and Hearn only left her when they reached
her door (262-263).
Howe
ve
r
,J
unkoHa
g
i
wa
r
as
t
a
t
e
st
ha
tt
he
yme
ta
tGa
r
c
i
n’
sbooks
t
or
e
,not
i
ngt
ha
t
“
Que
y
r
o
uz
ekne
wt
ha
tHe
a
r
nof
t
e
ns
t
oppe
dbyt
hi
sbooks
t
or
ebe
c
a
us
es
hekne
wGa
r
c
i
n’
s
da
ug
ht
e
r
”(
3)
.Whi
l
es
omes
c
hol
a
r
sc
i
t
eLe
ona
’
sa
g
ea
tt
het
i
meoft
he
i
rme
e
t
i
nga
s
fifteen, this might have been caused by some confusion between Leona and Elizabeth
Bisland, who met Hearn at the Times-Democrat when she was fifteen or sixteen. By all
20
other accounts Leona met Hearn when she was twenty-six, in 1887, the year she returned
from working in New York.
Asi
na
ny
one
’
sl
i
f
e
,t
he
r
ea
r
emome
nt
sofc
l
a
r
i
t
y
,whi
c
ha
r
er
e
me
mbe
r
e
df
ora
lifeti
me
,a
ndLe
ona
’
sr
e
c
ol
l
e
c
t
i
onsofhe
rme
e
t
i
ngwi
t
hHe
a
r
nr
e
ve
a
lt
hes
i
g
ni
f
i
c
a
nc
es
he
placed on this moment. In her memoir, The Idyl (1932), s
her
e
c
a
l
l
st
ha
t“
i
nt
heLa
t
i
n
he
a
r
to
ft
heol
dCr
e
ol
et
own,i
nt
h
ewe
l
lknowns
e
c
ondha
ndde
a
l
e
r
’
ss
hopofbooksr
are
and antique, there it was that I first met Lafcadio Hearn, on a mellow spring-like day of
J
a
nua
r
y1887,t
hel
a
s
ty
e
a
rofhi
ss
t
a
yi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
”[
UU-70 6:46]. While she admits
that time had blurred many of her memories, she says that some were so clear that they
could have happened yesterday. She vividly remembers their first meeting. This excerpt is
from her original manuscript in the archive:
...a
sIwa
l
ke
di
nt
hes
hop,Ihe
a
r
dGa
r
c
i
n’
sf
a
mi
l
i
a
rvoi
c
e
:Ah! Voici justament
ma jeune amie, Mademoiselle Leona Queyrouze, Monsieur Hearn. There was no
further introduction; and it was surely as informal as he could have wished, in his
dislike of conventionalities. His first words to me were: So you are one of the bees
that come to the garden for flowers with the golden dust to make the divine honey
and the tiny goblets of amber colored wax that hold it. I am afraid there shall be
little left for me, I replied. But the garden is large and the flowers are plentiful
[UU-70 6:46].
In several interviews, Leona describes their meeting in reverent detail, which
further underscores the significance of the moment for her. Each time she describes the
event she adds nuance:
I was a girl, romantic and poetic. I had just returned from New York where I had
been working for the Har
pe
r
’
sBaz
aarand was then writing for L’
Abe
i
l
l
eand the
old Picayune. He showed an interest in me from the beginning. He was not shy,
but full of reserve and of observing powers [UU-71 7:52].
21
I
na
not
he
ri
nt
e
r
vi
e
w,t
her
e
por
t
e
rs
umma
r
i
z
e
dLe
ona
’
sr
e
c
ol
l
e
c
t
i
onsa
ndquot
e
d
some of her exact words:
[They met] on a Spring [like] day in January [sometime] in the 1880s, in a
s
e
c
ondha
ndde
a
l
e
r
’
ss
hopi
nt
heFr
e
nc
hQua
r
t
e
r
.Shes
a
wMons
i
e
ur Jean Garcin,
t
hepr
opr
i
e
t
or
,whomHe
a
r
nha
dc
a
l
l
e
dt
he“
Ve
ndorofWi
s
dom,
”r
oa
mi
ngwi
t
h
l
or
dl
ymi
e
na
monghi
s“
I
s
l
eofbooks
,
”a
nds
hes
a
whi
m,t
heg
r
e
a
tHe
a
r
n,nott
h
e
n
g
r
e
a
t
,buty
ounga
nds
t
r
i
vi
ng
,s
t
a
ndi
ngbyt
heope
nvol
umeof“
L’
Or
i
gi
nedet
ous
les Cultes,
”ama
ns
phi
nx-l
i
ke
,wi
t
h“
t
hei
nt
r
os
pe
c
t
i
ves
t
a
r
eofas
t
a
t
ue....t
he
de
l
i
c
a
t
ef
e
a
t
ur
e
sofhi
sf
a
c
e
,t
het
hi
ns
e
ns
i
t
i
venos
t
r
i
l
s
.
”
Monsieur Garcin introduced them, and Hearn compared her to a bee that came to
this garden of flowers, and she replied the garden was big enough for him also
[UU-71 7:52].
In a different interview she described their meeting in this manner:
“
Ir
e
me
mbe
rvi
vi
dl
y
,a
l
t
houg
hIwa
sag
i
r
la
tt
het
i
me
,myme
e
t
i
ngwi
t
hHe
a
r
n...
. I was in a bookstore flipping leaves of poetry volumes when I noticed the little shriveled
man. He too was looking through books and holding the volumes close to his eyes,
almost to his nose. We were introduced and from then on he became a visitor at my
f
a
t
he
r
’
shomea
tol
dNo. 17 St. Louis street, calling frequently [UU-71 7:52].
By the time they met, Hearn had been in New Orleans for almost ten years as a
reporter for The Item and the Times-Democrat and had become disillusioned by New
Orleans society. Indeed, he had a reputation for writing rather unflattering
characterizations of French Creoles in The Item; therefore, his friendship with Leona, a
French Creole, was an unlikely alliance—perhaps for both of them. Regardless of their
cultural differences, their relationship progressed rather quickly as if they both knew that
t
he
i
rda
y
st
og
e
t
he
rwe
r
enumbe
r
e
d,s
ha
r
i
nga
sHe
a
r
nde
s
c
r
i
be
d,“
af
e
wg
r
a
i
nsofs
a
nd.
”
22
In The Idyl,s
her
e
me
mbe
r
e
dt
ha
tt
he“
f
i
r
s
tc
a
l
lwa
ss
oonf
ol
l
owe
dbya
not
he
r
,a
nd
he became a frequent visitor”(
6)
.Subs
e
que
nt
l
y
,t
he
r
ewe
r
eas
e
r
i
e
sofl
e
t
t
e
r
sa
nd
personal visits over the next five months that caused some speculation and rumors. In the
same manner as she had described their first meeting, Leona shared some of the details of
their brief relationship. In a newspaper article dated June 29, 1932, she relates how Hearn
came to see her while trying to avoid contact with other visitors at her home:
[Her] home on St. Louis Street was the meeting place for Gayarré, the two famous
Dr. Merciers, General Beauregard . . . and other celebrities. Poor Hearn would
come to see us and when he heard the chatter of visitors would turn away from the
door, leaving the servant mystified or would stick a note for me in her hand and
wa
l
khur
r
i
e
dl
yof
f [
“
Re
v
e
a
l
sNe
wHe
a
r
n”UU-71 7:52].
In Laf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n’
sAme
r
i
c
anDay
s
,Tinker explains the level of intimacy and
privacy that they both shared. During their time together, Leona taught Hearn about
Creole proverbs, and their passion was channeled obliquely through their discussion s of
literature:
Hearn found excuse[s] for coming back, and that the habit of calling was formed.
She discovered that he left immediately if any one else came in. He explained this
away by saying that he hated small talk, but she believed his sensitiveness had
even more to do with it. So it came to be tacitly understood that on certain
afternoons she was at home to him alone. They always sat on a sofa near the
window in the large high-ceilinged drawing room with its handsome old furniture,
where the light was good so he could read. Here they talked frankly and openly. . .
She helped him with his Creole proverbs . . . He often gave her invaluable literary
advice (263-4).
23
Le
ona
’
sde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
oni
nThe Idyl ofhe
rhome
,He
a
r
n’
svi
s
i
t
st
he
r
e
,a
nd his
friendship with her servant, Marie, will serve to enliven her biography with sensory
detail:
The massive porte cochère or courtyard gate opened and as it closed slowly he
walked through the spacious and shady, arched corridor or hall-way leading to the
immense court-yard all flooded with sun, and in which grew a luxuriant and
partially tropical garden between the great walls covered with creepers and vines
of all kinds. There he paused beneath the lofty arch to take a long look and then
was shown up the high stairs by Marie, our old Creole family servant who
announced in low, soft tones: Massie Lacadie, but stopped short, unable to
pronounce the rest of the name. English and Marie had never grown familiar. As
we met in the parlor, more properly speaking, the library, he said: your strong old
Spanish home and the sudden vision of the unsuspected garden, in fact sometimes
in the atmosphere makes me think vaguely of the Alhambra [UU-70 6:46].
Well into her late seventies, Leona was still able to re-capture their time together.
In an interview, she described the intensity of their discussions, which revealed an
i
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
lpa
s
s
i
onuni
mpe
de
dbyHe
a
r
n’
sr
e
que
s
tt
ha
tLe
onavi
e
whi
m onl
ya
sa
“
y
oung
e
rbr
ot
he
r
”
:
He came through the big porte cochère. He paused by the lofty arch. He went up
the high stairs. They sat in a room with a huge book case, with statues of dragons
and other monsters, with bacchantes and fauns. And they spoke of his poems
again. Precious thoughts came from his mind like a golden metal.
“
Iwoul
dl
i
kef
ory
out
ol
ookuponmea
say
oung
e
rbr
ot
he
r
,
”hes
a
i
d.The
ys
poke
of philosophy, of Hypatia. They became intellectual friends. He came again and
a
g
a
i
n.Hewoul
ds
a
y
,“
Ic
o
met
oc
l
a
i
maf
e
wg
r
a
i
nsofs
a
ndofy
ourt
i
me
.
”Heg
a
ve
her a copyofHe
r
be
r
tSpe
nc
e
r
’
s“
Fi
r
s
tPr
i
nc
i
pl
e
sofSy
nt
he
t
i
cPhi
l
os
ophy
.
”The
y
t
a
l
ke
dofHe
i
ne
’
spoe
ms[UU-71 7:52].
24
Ha
g
i
wa
r
abe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
tHe
a
r
nwa
s“
a
f
r
a
i
doff
a
l
l
i
ngi
nl
ovewi
t
hhe
r[
whi
c
h]c
a
n
be observed in his first suggestion to her when he dared to say that he wanted her to
c
ons
i
de
rhi
mabr
ot
he
r
”(
2)
.I
nhe
rpoe
m,“
Le Regret,”Le
onama
yha
vebe
e
ne
xpr
e
s
s
i
ng
the same fear tinged with regret. She describes two people who are reading together, and
a
st
he
yr
e
a
da
bout“
l
ovea
nds
ong
sofs
or
r
ow,
”t
he
yrealize their own passion even as they
knowt
ha
ti
tc
a
nne
ve
rbea
c
knowl
e
dg
e
d.Byt
hepoe
m’
se
nds
hei
sl
e
f
ta
l
onewi
t
honl
y
the busts of Scevola1 and Diana for company.
Together, they lean towards a book.
Young are these two. The old copper lamp
With its open eyes, pierces the profound darkness
Making them sparkle and shine,
Two pupils under its tawny breath.
They read together in two soft accents
Of thriving love and songs of sorrow,
Of simple things that inspire misfortune,
And the crying voice of the soul.
As he reads again to the woman beside him
One wonders, are they friends or lovers?
The blood of their hearts beat, pressing.
Their blood is the same, their homeland the same
Butdot
he
yl
i
vei
ne
a
c
hot
he
r
’
se
y
e
s
?
No, they are subject to the hand of Chance.
The future lies between them and their eyes
Will never meet, nor cross the impenetrable shadow.
Their hearts shall flee like waves on the sand,
Their happiness will bend like ocean seaweed
Unsettled by the waves; his bitter breast
Will Retreat, rolling far from the dunes.
1
Scevola was the Roman soldier who failed to kill the Etruscan king who was
blockading Rome. Upon his capture, he placed his offending left hand in a fire. So
i
mpr
e
s
s
e
dwa
sKi
ngPor
s
e
nnabySc
e
vol
a
’
sc
our
a
g
et
ha
thee
nde
dhi
ss
i
e
g
eofRome
.
25
They turn to another page,
But as he reads, his voice falters; there is a change
In him as the flood fades.
And with pure clarity the sky opens
tearing open the horizon, showing the way
Because they now know that their hands will never touch
And their lips will remain silent
For they will guard their inner secrets
And scold their hearts despairing
Even as the need to confess rises to overflowing.
Such is the searing wound, like a hot liqueur,
Before it rights itself, trembling for an instant
Before falling without a voice
Revealing nothing, and with silent eyes
They lower their eyes again to the familiar words.
In the shadow of the chamber, now there is one
Figure cast upon the wall, alone.
Nearby, the bust of the wild and menacing Scevola
Smiles at the chaste and fiery mouth
of Diana, reveling under his bronze mask
Anobs
c
ur
ea
ng
l
e
,putt
he
r
ebyt
hes
c
ul
pt
or
s
’ha
nd
1885
(C.R.A.L. 227) [UU-70 6:47].
(Appendix 267)
This poem suggests that Leona believed that there was much unspoken passion
between them, and that even though their time together was spent on reading and
discussion, for Leona, at least, there was much more than this. Her references to Diana
and Scevola symbolize dedication to coura
g
e
ouspa
s
s
i
on,j
uxt
a
pos
e
da
g
a
i
ns
tHe
a
r
n’
s
mi
s
pl
a
c
e
dpr
opr
i
e
t
y
.I
nt
hepoe
m,“
Le Désir,
”s
hede
s
c
r
i
be
st
he“
ki
s
st
ha
tne
ve
rr
e
a
c
he
s
t
hel
i
ps
/t
hewhi
ms
yofabut
t
e
r
f
l
ya
t
t
r
a
c
t
e
dt
oas
t
a
r
,
”a
ndt
he
ns
a
y
st
ha
ti
ti
sour
“
mi
s
f
or
t
unet
ol
i
vea
ndt
ol
ove
/whe
r
er
i
s
i
ngs
unsg
i
vebi
r
t
ht
oourl
os
tt
e
a
r
s
”[
UU-70
6:47].
26
While these poems indicate that Hearn affected Leona emotionally, they also
show that he had a great effect on her writing. When they first met, he told her that he had
seen one of her poems in the L’
Abe
i
l
l
eand that he had liked it. Encouraged, she asked if
hewou
l
dr
e
vi
e
whe
rne
xtpoe
m,“
ALe
g
e
ndofMa
i
nz
,
”i
fs
hel
e
f
tac
opya
tt
hebooks
t
or
e
for him to collect. He agreed, but when he responded the next week, he regretted to tell
her that he found no value in the poem, and she discarded it. What can be gleaned from
the letters between Hearn and Leona is that he discouraged her from writing poetry,
saying that it was of such poor quality that she should not pursue a writing career. He said
to her: “
Ihopey
ouwi
l
lbedi
s
c
our
a
g
e
da
smuc
ha
spos
s
i
bl
ebe
c
a
us
eIha
vet
oos
i
nc
e
r
ea
n
admiration of your power in other directions to wish to see you attempt such valueless
l
a
bor
”(
Idyl 8-11). Le
onaa
dmi
t
t
e
dt
ha
t“
t
hes
t
i
ngofhi
ss
a
r
c
a
s
mwa
ss
ha
r
pa
ndc
or
r
osive
l
i
ket
ha
toft
hewa
s
p,a
ndt
hewoundi
ti
nf
l
i
c
t
e
ds
ma
r
t
e
dl
onga
nds
or
e
l
y
,
”buta
l
s
o
a
c
knowl
e
dg
e
dt
ha
t“
hewa
sg
i
f
t
e
dwi
t
hake
e
ns
e
ns
eofhumor
”(
The Idyl 6).
I
na
not
he
ri
nt
e
r
vi
e
wLe
onade
s
c
r
i
be
dHe
a
r
na
s“
wa
sus
ua
l
l
yaha
r
dt
a
s
k-master.
He would oft
e
nr
e
a
dmypoe
msa
nde
s
s
a
y
sa
nds
a
y
,‘
Tha
t
’
snotwor
t
hmuc
h,Le
ona
,
’a
n
dI
woul
dpr
ompt
l
yt
hr
owt
he
ma
wa
y
”[
UU-71 7:52]. In The Idyl, she says that often when
s
hewa
sr
e
a
dyt
ot
hr
ows
omehe
rwor
ki
nt
hef
i
r
e
,hewoul
dt
e
l
lhe
rt
owa
i
t“
unt
i
ly
ou
have take
nouts
omel
i
ne
swhi
c
hma
ybeus
e
dl
a
t
e
r
,i
ns
omeot
he
rwr
i
t
i
ng
.
”She“
r
e
a
l
i
z
e
d
that it was as hard for him to please himself as for others to do so. His criticism of his
ownwor
kwa
sme
r
c
i
l
e
s
sunt
i
li
twa
sc
ompl
e
t
e
d”(
5)
.Hedi
d,howe
ve
r
,e
nc
our
a
g
ehe
r
prose and tried to interest her in reading one of his favorite writers, Herbert Spencer.
Significantly, Hearn offered Leona advice that if she had taken heed, might have
changed the direction and outcome of her writing career. Noting her propensity to write
27
flowery and sentimental verse, Hearn advised her against her present course and pointed
the way towards a new direction in writing—that of realism. Founded upon principles
established in French literary circles, realism was taking hold in American literature, and
it paved the way towards a new means of expression embraced by iconic American
writers, such as Mark Twain, Sarah Orne Jewett, Mary E. Wilkins Freeman, Charlotte
Perkins Gilman, Edith Wharton, Henry James, Jack London, and Stephen Crane. These,
among others, defined and dominated the American literary landscape at the turn of the
c
e
nt
ur
y
.Le
ona
’
sf
a
i
l
ur
et
out
i
l
i
z
et
h
ea
dvi
c
eof
f
e
r
e
dbyHe
a
r
nr
e
s
ul
t
e
di
ns
e
l
f
-defeating
literary endeavors. Hearn critiqued her attempts at blank verse and encouraged her to find
t
het
r
ue“
a
r
t
-s
pi
r
i
t
”ofundi
s
t
or
t
e
da
nduna
dor
ne
dde
pi
c
t
i
onsofr
e
a
l
-life experiences. He
t
e
l
l
she
rt
ha
tonl
yt
he
s
e“
f
a
i
t
hf
ulpi
c
t
ur
e
s
”wi
l
le
ndur
et
hr
oug
ht
i
me
:
We are all apt, all of us, until something suddenly reveals our error to us, of
rendering blank verse without a thought of its intrinsic value,--without any
definite comprehension of its anatomy. It lives, and it delights: we do not think of
asking why or how, any more than we think of trying to define the laws of grace
revealed in the movements of a thoroughbred . . .
What is wanted, what will succeed, what will endure, are reflections of present
existence, artistic and faithful records of what we hear, see, and feel through the
impressions made upon us by those social forces of which we form integers.
Realism . . . insures originality . . . . no two lives are absolutely alike, no two
minds alike, no two life-experiences alike, one who simply attempts to make a
faithful picture of what is . . . without trying to ornament it or exaggerate it, or
distort it, must become interesting if the true art-spirit is there
(Idyl 8-11).
As history will show, it was her misfortune not to follow his suggestions about
realism. While she did take note of his comments concerning blank verse, her resulting
rhymed verse, which adhered to the aesthetics of the Romantic period, only exaggerated
her distance from mainstream American poetry.
28
Unaware that she was disregarding valuable advice, Leona thanked Hearn for his
criticism, and he responded bys
a
y
i
ng“
Tha
nky
ouf
orwha
tIha
vene
ve
rbe
f
or
er
e
c
e
i
ve
d
,
-aki
ndl
ywor
di
nr
e
t
ur
nf
ordi
s
a
g
r
e
e
a
bl
ec
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
m”(
Idyl 18-19). Together, they began to
wor
kont
he
i
rownpr
oj
e
c
t
s
,a
nddur
i
nghi
svi
s
i
t
shebe
c
a
mea
c
qua
i
nt
e
dwi
t
hLe
ona
’
s
“
Ma
r
t
i
n
i
que
-born maid, Ma
r
i
e
,whopr
ove
dt
obee
xt
r
e
me
l
yus
e
f
ul
”i
nhe
l
pi
nghi
m
become familiar with the Creole dialect that influenced his novel Chita (Hagiwara 3). At
t
hes
a
met
i
meLe
onawa
swor
ki
ngont
hePa
ulMor
phybi
og
r
a
phi
c
a
ls
ke
t
c
h,“
TheFi
r
s
t
and Last Days of Paul Morphy
”(
t
ha
tl
a
t
e
rwoul
dbeus
e
di
nFr
a
nc
i
sPa
r
ki
ns
onKe
y
e
s
’
novel The Chess Players). This intimate working association might have been
oppor
t
uni
s
t
i
conHe
a
r
n’
spa
r
t
,f
orheha
sof
t
e
nbe
e
nde
s
c
r
i
be
dbys
c
hol
a
r
sa
sa
“
wa
nde
r
i
ngdr
e
a
me
r
,ar
oot
l
e
s
sc
os
mopol
i
t
e
, a self-styled exile, a frightened escapist, a
he
a
r
t
l
e
s
sl
ove
r
,as
ha
me
l
e
s
sf
r
i
e
nd”(
Yui
x)
.Howe
ve
r
,hea
f
f
e
c
t
e
dLe
onade
e
pl
y
,a
ndi
n
his biography of Hearn, Jonathon Cott states that when Hearn left New Orleans he left
Leona broken-hearted. When I asked the Queyrouze family if they were aware of any
romantic involvement between Leona and Hearn, they could give no definite answer
e
xc
e
ptt
os
a
yt
ha
tt
he
r
eha
dbe
e
n“
t
a
l
k.
”Appa
r
e
nt
l
yHe
a
r
nha
de
a
r
ne
dhi
ms
e
l
fabi
tofa
reputation because of his nightly excursions into disreputable parts of town accompanied
byaf
r
i
e
ndwhowa
snot
or
i
ousf
org
e
t
t
i
ngi
nt
of
i
g
ht
s
,a
nd“
r
umor
sofhi
sma
ny
i
ndi
s
c
r
e
t
i
onswe
r
ebr
oug
htt
o[
Le
o
n
a
]
,buts
hedi
dnotbe
l
i
e
vet
he
m”(
Ti
nke
r265)
.Al
l
that the Queyrouze family remembered hearing about their relationship was that Hearn
had spent many evenings at supper with the Queyrouzes and that Leona had assisted him
in translating Creole folktales into English. They believed that her wealthy French
29
Catholic family would have never approved of a romantic association with a person of
such meager means, especially someone who was not Catholic. Tinker cites other
reasons:
At first Hearn attended the reunions of this group of older men who met at her
f
a
t
he
r
’
shous
e
,buti
ti
snots
ur
pr
i
s
i
ngt
hat this did not last long. Their tempers
were too hair-triggered and his own peculiarities were too marked. When he
began to write Creole proverbs and folklore a feeling arose that he was
encroaching on a field that was theirs by right of inheritance (265).
During their brief association, Hearn avoided, if possible, any contact with the
me
nofLe
ona
’
ss
a
l
ona
ndonl
yvi
s
i
t
e
dt
heQue
y
r
ouz
ehomei
nt
hea
f
t
e
r
noons
.Le
onas
a
i
d
t
ha
t“
hedi
s
l
i
ke
dma
ki
ngne
wa
c
qu
a
i
nt
a
nc
e
s
,a
ndc
a
l
l
e
dwhe
nhet
houg
htt
he
r
ewe
r
el
e
ss
[
s
i
c
]c
ha
nc
e
sofme
e
t
i
ngout
s
i
de
r
s
.
”Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,he“
s
hunne
dt
hec
r
owde
da
ve
nue
st
o
popularity, including literary clubs which he considered like centers of mutual
a
dmi
r
a
t
i
onsora
sheonc
ee
xpr
e
s
s
e
di
tmor
ef
or
c
i
bl
y
:Pr
a
i
s
eExc
ha
ng
e
s
”(
Idyl 5). But his
pe
r
s
ona
lvi
s
i
t
st
oLe
onae
nde
d,a
c
c
or
di
ngt
oTi
nke
r
,a
f
t
e
raqua
r
r
e
l
.“
He
a
r
nha
da
l
wa
y
s
told his friends that he would never marry an intellectual woman, whether this had
a
ny
t
hi
ngt
odowi
t
hi
ti
spur
ec
onj
e
c
t
ur
e
”(
265)
.Af
t
e
rt
he
i
rdi
s
a
g
r
e
e
me
nt
,her
e
portedly
told her that he would never speak to her again, and she responded with a poem--perhaps
aimed at Hearn-- in L’
Abe
i
l
l
ee
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Sol
i
t
ude
.
”Tinker summarizes this poem:
I
ti
spr
e
c
e
de
dbyaLa
t
i
nquot
a
t
i
on,“
De Profundis Clamavi”(
f
r
omt
hede
e
psI
call), and tells how she awaits him, counting each beat of the wing of seconds,
asking whether he does not remember the agonized call for help forced from a
s
uf
f
e
r
i
ngs
oula
nxi
ousf
orl
i
f
e....“
Ne
ve
r
t
he
l
e
s
s
,y
ouha
venotc
ome
,f
ol
l
owi
ng
your path, your e
y
e
suponabook” (
266)
.
30
They must have resolved their differences soon thereafter because Tinker notes
t
ha
tHe
a
r
nwe
ntwi
t
hhe
rt
ovi
s
i
the
rf
a
t
he
r
’
spl
a
nt
a
t
i
on.Appa
r
e
nt
l
yt
he
r
ewa
sa
n
overgrown and vine-encroached garden behind the main house, which had such a sad
appearance that Hearn wrote about it as though it was a garden where the witch-like
Me
de
ag
r
e
w“
s
t
r
a
ng
ehe
r
bs[...a
ndma
de
]pot
i
onsa
ndc
ha
r
ms[
i
n]he
rha
unt
e
da
nd
s
i
ni
s
t
e
rg
a
r
de
n”(
267)
.He
a
r
nr
e
ma
r
ke
dt
ha
tMe
de
aha
dl
ur
e
dabe
e
-keeper to her island in
order to learn the secret of making honey, and that she seduced him instead—thus, it was
her own fault that she never learned to make honey. Leona responded to Hearn in
L’
Abi
e
l
l
ewith the following verses (translated):
“Ré
s
pons
e
”aL.
H.
”
Medea, you have spoken the words of truth
and have taken your name, thus, woman of somber eyes
with a heart shy yet proud, filled with rebellion and shadow
And you hold the hand of a friend named: Treason!
Poets, make your honey, for she will make it poison
With curses and prayers without end
Calling from the heavens when hope grows dim,
And her screams will shake the walls of your turret.
Shedr
i
nksde
e
pt
hede
wo
ft
her
os
e
’
st
r
e
mbl
i
ngc
ha
l
i
c
e
;
Taking the rays of morning for her own
even as she sees in the night with cold clarity
the places of tombs that give rise to hate
where she will reap her harvest while humanity sleeps
and quietly claim her own like a moth in the night
May 27, 1887 L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
[UU-70 6:45]
(Appendix 270).
31
Whe
nHe
a
r
nr
e
a
d“
Response”hewr
ot
e
,“
Me
de
ai
smuc
ht
oowe
i
r
d.Ofc
our
s
e
,s
he
is but a shadow; yet, the shadow is so fantastic that one hesitates to look towards that
whi
c
hc
a
s
ti
t
”(
Idyl). This response is significant because it serves as a glimpse into the
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
roft
he
i
rr
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
p.The
i
ra
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
ona
ppe
a
r
e
dt
obede
f
i
ne
dbyLe
ona
’
s
’
willingness to be both pupil and admirer, but when she strayed from that role, Hearn
recoiled. Others were not so put offbyt
hepowe
rt
ha
tc
a
s
tt
he“
s
ha
dow.
”Onea
dmi
r
e
r
,
Bowman Matthews, wrote this response:
To Medea!
Salve! O Medea! Enchantress of the mystic eyes
Taught by Ancient Magicians the future to Devise
Whose piercing gaze discerns the secret springs of thought,
By occult science reads the lines that Fate has wrought.
Whence comes the power, O Seer, what potent spirit dwells
Within those orbs of darkness to work its wondrous spells?
Art thou the same Medea that to Jason gave the fleece,
When the Argo came to Colchis with the hero band of Greece?
A traitorous friend was Jason, but if I prove to be untrue
Ta
keba
c
kt
he“
poe
t
’
shone
y
,
”t
hef
l
or
a
lc
upofde
w!
Give me the draught of poison, and I will drink to you!
[UU-70 6:45]
Hearn, however, s
e
e
me
dt
ober
e
t
r
e
a
t
i
ngf
r
om mor
et
he
nj
us
tLe
ona
’
swor
ds
,a
nd
as it turned out, she was the last the last friendship he made in New Orleans. Not long
afterwards he departed for Martinique, and Leona described his departure in The Idyl,
making reference to the last grains of sand that had escaped the hour glass of their time
together:
32
Grain after grain the sands have been running, carrying along the hours, days and
weeks, and June was at hand already, leading in the long and languid summer
months. He had accomplished his task of love, Chita. In one of his last visits he
told me that he was making final arrangements to leave New Orleans; and he
handed me a large envelope saying: this is not intended for the family album. It is
to remind Medea sometimes of Aristeus, the honey maker. It was his photograph
with the inscription To Miss Leona Queyrouze—with sincere wishes of her
friend.—Lafcadio Hearn,--June 1, 1887
(11).
On his last visit to her, once again, Hearn offered her advice on her writing. Leona
wr
ot
ed
o
wnhi
spa
r
t
i
ngwor
ds“
a
ss
oona
sheha
dl
e
f
tt
hehous
e
,t
opr
e
s
e
r
vet
hea
c
c
ur
a
c
y
oft
heme
a
ni
ng
”(
11)
.Heur
g
e
dhe
rt
ol
ookbe
y
ondt
hephy
s
i
c
a
lwor
l
di
nt
ot
hede
pt
hof
her psyche to find meaning and significance in her work and advised her against looking
only at earthly beauty for inspiration:
[Do not] seek inspiration merely around you in the exterior world and its powerful
vibrations which fill our senses with the ecstasy of beauty. It is in the psychical
depth of our own Se
l
ft
ha
twemus
tl
ookt
of
i
ndt
r
e
a
s
ur
ewhi
c
hAl
a
ddi
n’
sl
a
mp
never could have revealed (Idyl 12).
One has to wonder what would have happened if the tenure of their relationship
had been extended to the point where Leona would have taken his advice, for he was
inviting her to join the realists who expressed their insight in terms of everyday
experience; however, this question presumes that longevity would have granted influence
a
nddoe
snotc
ons
i
de
rLe
ona
’
ss
i
g
ni
f
i
c
a
nte
xpos
ur
et
ol
i
t
e
r
a
r
yc
i
r
c
l
e
si
nNew York. In
any event, when they parted ways, they were taking different directions in their literary
careers, one leading to recognition and the other obscurity. Hearn departed to find new
inspiration on new soil, and his farewell to Leona was both wistful and poignant, much in
the romantic style favored by Leona:
33
I
fwedon’
tme
e
ta
g
a
i
nont
hi
sl
i
t
t
l
epl
a
ne
t
,whi
c
hi
spos
s
i
bl
ebutnotpr
oba
bl
e
,we
surely will later in some other cosmic station, before we reach Nirvana, the great
Terminal. Could we not make an appointment and try to remember it?
(Idyl 12).
As
hor
tt
i
mea
f
t
e
rHe
a
r
nl
e
f
thewr
ot
et
ohi
sf
r
i
e
nd,Ma
t
a
s
,onJ
ul
y1,1887:“
Ia
m
not skeptical now, but I do not know what to do, I fear to write to her. All fire and nerves
and scintillation; a tropical being in mind and physique,--I could never be to her what I
s
houl
dl
i
ket
obe
”(
Ni
s
hi
z
a
ki90-91), and apparently his fear overcame his impulse.
Regardless of the speculation as to whether this was truly a love affair,He
a
r
n’
si
mpa
c
to
n
Leona was deep and long lasting. Matas, who was a close friend to both Lafcadio and
Le
ona“
t
r
e
a
t
e
dQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sr
oma
nt
i
ci
nvol
ve
me
ntwi
t
hHe
a
r
na
sag
i
ve
n”(
Ha
g
i
wa
r
a2
)
,
and when Leona was questioned in an interview about her about her relationship with
Hearn, she responded in this way:
[She] smiled when asked if Hearn were in love with her and said in her quick
Fr
e
nc
ha
c
c
e
nt
:“
Tha
ti
sha
r
dt
os
a
y
.The
r
ewa
spe
r
ha
pss
omer
oma
nt
i
ca
t
t
a
c
hme
nt
.
But Hearn was not a man to speak of love. He had a wandering mind then and
c
oul
dn’
tf
i
ti
nt
oac
onve
nt
i
ona
lma
r
r
i
a
g
e
”[
UU-71 7:52].
Af
t
e
rHe
a
r
n’
sde
pa
r
t
ur
e
,h
es
pe
ntt
woy
e
a
r
swr
i
t
i
ngt
r
a
ve
ls
ke
t
c
he
si
nt
he
Windward Islands of British Guiana, in St. Pierre, and on the island of Martinique. From
there, he went to New York to review the final proofs of his novel Chita. In 1890 he left
for Japan, never to return (Bisland 98).
While Hearn was in New York in 1889, Leona may have been there at
approximately the same time--but this is only speculation. Leona spent a year there in
34
1886 and once again in 1888-9 to translate French and Creole plays into English for the
American stage at the request of Mary Booth, the editor of Harpers Bazar. Booth had
be
c
omea
c
qua
i
nt
e
dwi
t
hLe
onadur
i
ngt
heWor
l
d’
sI
ndus
t
r
i
a
land Cotton Centennial
Exposition in 1884. Records indicate that Leona traveled to New York several times.
Whether she saw Hearn there in 1889, however, is impossible to determine. There are
some indications that this may have occurred. In the Hearn biography, Bisland includes
numerous letters, and several in particular that Hearn wrote during this time. One is
written to an anonymous man: it reads in part:
To___________
1889
. . . I have been shivering here, and have got to get South somewhere soon,--if
only till I can get back to the tropics. I am sorry to confess it, but the tropical Circe
bewitches me again—I must go back to her (469).
Others letters are written to an anonymous woman:
--there are no more mysteries,--except what are called hearts, those points at
which individualities rarely touch each other, only to feel a sudden thrill of
surprise as at meeting a ghost, and then to wonder in vain, for the rest of life, what
lies out of soul-sight . . . .
. . . . I have been so afraid of never seeing you again
....
To______
March 7-8, 1890
. . . . I shall be very sorry not to see you again . . . .
I might say love you,--as we love those who are dead—(the dead who still shape
lives);--but . . . I cannot say. . . .
. . . . –Forgive all my horrid way, my dear, sweet, ghostly sister.
Good-bye,
Lafcadio Hearn
(Bisland 470-475).
35
Whether or not these letters were written to Leona is uncertain; indeed, this raises
t
heque
s
t
i
ona
st
owhyt
he
ywe
r
ei
nBi
s
l
a
nd’
spos
s
e
s
s
i
ona
ndnoti
nLe
ona
’
s
.Pe
r
ha
pst
he
y
we
r
eme
a
ntf
orBi
s
l
a
nd,butt
hi
sdoe
snote
xpl
a
i
nBi
s
l
a
nd’
sr
e
a
s
onsf
orl
e
a
vi
ngt
he
salutations in the letters blank when she included them in the Hearn biography.
Re
g
a
r
dl
e
s
sofs
pe
c
ul
a
t
i
on,t
he
r
er
e
ma
i
nsa
ni
nt
e
r
e
s
t
i
ngc
or
r
e
l
a
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nHe
a
r
n’
s
r
e
que
s
tf
orLe
onat
ovi
e
whi
ma
sa“
br
ot
he
r
,
”a
ndhi
sr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
ei
nt
hef
a
r
e
we
l
ll
e
t
t
e
rt
ohi
s
“
g
hos
t
l
ys
i
s
t
e
r
.
”
Hearn left New York and finally settled in Japan where he quickly assimilated.
By 1895, he already had a wife and child and had begun the task of translating Japanese
folktales into English, a life work that won him admiration and widespread fame. As for
Leona, she returned to New Orleans having found the pace and the people of New York
too fast for her. She also realized that her translation work for the New York stage was
notaf
e
a
s
i
bl
epr
oj
e
c
t“
be
c
a
us
eoft
h
ei
nc
ompa
t
i
bi
l
i
t
yofNe
wYor
ka
ndNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
c
ul
t
ur
a
la
ndt
he
a
t
r
i
c
a
li
nt
e
r
e
s
t
s
”(
Ha
g
i
wa
r
a2)
.The Queyrouze family told me that Leona
left New York, quite simply, because it was not a French town. Since only twenty years
had passed since the end of the Civil War there was still residual animosity, and Leona
retreated to the security of her traditional and parochial culture.
When Leona returned to New Orleans she seemed a changed person. No one can
say for sure what brought about this change; perhaps it was a final farewell to an
unrequited love or the repudiation of American mainstream literary culture in New York.
Whatever the reason, there was a distinct difference in her writing from that point
forward, almost as if her psyche had been split in two—between the public philanthropic
activities as evidenced by her articles and essays, and the private self as revealed in her
36
poetry. As I shall demonstrate in Chapter Six, her rhetoric articulates the stages of grief as
it vacillates between anger and resigned endurance at her perception of the usurpation of
he
rc
ul
t
u
r
ebyt
hos
es
hec
a
l
l
e
d“
Ang
l
oSa
xons
.
”He
rwor
ki
se
l
e
g
i
a
c
,a
ndhe
rve
r
s
e
sa
r
e
filled with loss and longing, not only for the loss of her culture, but for the loss of love.
One such example of this can be found in a poem Leona published seven years after
He
a
r
n’
sde
pa
r
t
ur
ee
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Fantôme D’
Oc
c
i
de
nt
:ALaf
c
adi
oHe
ar
nAuJ
apon:
”She
likens Hearn to a moon and says that once the moon is hidden, the stars can reveal
themselves. However, these stars—like pupils-- cast their lights on the water much like
Ophelia, who falls into insanity and despair after having been ignored and cast away
dur
i
ngHa
ml
e
t
’
sobs
e
s
s
i
vepur
s
ui
t
s(
muc
hl
i
keHe
a
r
n’
s
)
.
Thi
sul
t
i
ma
t
e
l
yl
e
a
dst
ohe
r
drowning—at
he
met
ha
ti
spe
r
va
s
i
vei
nLe
ona
’
soe
uvr
e
.
The golden Chrysanthemum now blossoms
unrestrained under the vast night skies
In a place of mystery, and in a strange embrace
The growing slender threads catch the light.
The ghost of the moon appears without a sound
Pretending to hide its face with its hands.
--a distant phantom, with a vague complaint
All at once it disappears, fainting away.
It comes from a country where the pure and blond Night
Can never entirely escape the bonds that tie,
Of azure blooms and white magnolias.
The moon gives birth to the trembling stars
Each one a tearful pupil, where like the shadow of Ophelia
In a deep river, they cast their veils
(L’
Abe
i
l
l
eDecember 23, 1894)
[UU-71 7:52]
(Appendix 250).
37
Li
ke
wi
s
e
,i
nt
hepoe
m,“
Le Désir,
”s
hes
a
y
st
ha
ti
ti
sour“
mi
s
f
or
t
unet
ol
i
vea
nd
to love/ where rising suns give birth to our lost tears
”(
C.R.A.L. March 1885/ Appendix
249)
.The
s
et
wopoe
msi
nc
ombi
na
t
i
onwi
t
h“
LeRe
gr
e
t
,
”and “Sol
i
t
ude
,
”indicate the
depth of her feelings for Hearn and explain the sense of reverence she feels for him even
years later when she was asked by the Hokuseido Press in Tokyo to submit The Idyl
(1932) for publication. This clearly indicates that there must have been some significant
connection between the two of them for Leona to have held onto the few brief letters
Hearn had sent to her, the ones that are included in The Idyl. This romanticized
remembrance of Hearn written before her death still holds the hallmarks of young love.
When she was finished with her manuscript, she entrusted it to a friend, and in one of
l
i
f
e
’
soddt
wi
s
t
soff
a
t
e
,“
t
hema
nwhobr
oug
hther manuscript to Hokuseido in Japan was
John Garcin, whose father had owned the New Orleans bookstore where Hearn and
Que
y
r
ouz
ef
i
r
s
tme
t
”(
Ha
g
i
wa
r
a4)
.
Her attachment to Hearn also raises the question as to whether her marriage in
1901 was one of conve
ni
e
nc
e
.Ot
h
e
rt
ha
nt
he“
BondsofMa
t
r
i
mony
”doc
ume
nt
wi
t
ne
s
s
i
ngt
he
i
rma
r
r
i
a
g
ea
tSt
.Ma
r
y
’
sChur
c
hi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsda
t
e
dDe
c
e
mbe
r26,1901,
there are no letters or keepsakes in connection with a widower Pierre Marie Etienne Barel
whom she married when she was forty-one. The only items in the Queyrouze papers are
of a legal nature, such as his will and ownership of property, succession papers, transfers
and lists of real estate, tax receipts, and the final accounting of the assets of his first
marriage to Marie Jeanne Juilliat. When I asked the Queyrouze family about Pierre, they
told me, simply, that he was a family friend who lived in the neighborhood. There is only
38
one poem written just a few weeks before her marriage that may provide some indication
of her relationship with Pierre. The poem speaks of two people who are joined in
melancholy rather than joy. There is as sense of resignation and a call for peace and
harmony. Note that the setting of the poem is similar to that in “LeRe
gr
e
t
,
”but it lacks
that same emotional intensity:
“
Noc
t
ur
ne
”
We come together at this old table in our ennui
Before the hands of ice pass over us.
Yes, a tangled golden glow of light envelops us
And serenity comes to us in this place.
Come, review this book with me. It is the one
That will ease our confusion. Here is the place.
We choose not to believe that our lives are passing, but the trace
Of our tears and the echo of our laughter tells us so.
No, our stirring should be in harmony
Attuned on a lute with radiant chords
As our spirits become an offering to the Divine Breath.
Just as my hand turns these sheets of poetry
So, too, shall we be joined in the end,
I, you, as it has always been, in infinite sweetness
[UU-71 7:54]
( Appendix 261).
Perhaps her decision to marry was also based on the loss of a family circle that
had long supported her. Many of the men in her salon had been like fathers to her, and
they all passed away in the mid 1890s: General P.G.T. T. Beauregard and Placide
Canonge died in 1893; Alfred Mercier in 1894, and her father, Leon, and Charles Gayarré
39
died in 1895. Even after further research and the final edit of her upcoming biography,
these questions might remain unanswered, but what is known for certain is that Leona
seemed to slide into a private retrograde towards the close of the century. Wrapping
herself in sentimentality instead of looking forward, she turned to her poetry and looked
to the French Romantics for her inspiration, concentrating on the themes of death and
loss. Whether this has any biographical associations is perhaps less important than the
fact that her backward inclining is something that she shared with many of her French
Creole contemporaries who constructed a mythical cultural past, imagining it to be a time
when benevolent chivalrous plantation owners enjoyed an agrarian aristocracy.
In public Leona remained socially active and involved, associating with many
members of local organizations who held tightly to their disappearing culture. One such
group was The French Society of the Fourteenth of July, which was founded in 1890, and
presided over by Mr. Romain Senac. They opened a French school for boys at 724
Duma
i
neSt
r
e
e
ti
nt
heFr
e
nc
hQua
r
t
e
r
,as
c
hoolwhi
c
hwa
st
he“
pr
oduc
toft
hel
a
bora
nd
patriotism of the member
s
.
”The
yc
hos
eLe
onaa
st
hedi
r
e
c
t
oroft
hes
c
hool
.Se
na
c
de
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
ti
twoul
dbea“
pa
t
r
i
o
t
i
ci
ns
t
i
t
ut
i
oni
ns
pi
r
e
dbyt
hel
oveofFr
a
nc
e
”a
ndc
i
t
e
d
t
hepur
pos
ea
st
he“
pr
opa
g
a
t
i
onoft
hebe
l
ove
dFr
e
nc
hl
a
ng
ua
g
ea
ndke
e
pi
tf
r
om be
i
ng
absorbed by the pr
e
va
i
l
i
ngl
a
ng
ua
g
eofc
omme
r
c
e[
“
Fr
e
nc
hSc
hool
:For
ma
lOpe
ni
ng
”
May 20, 1895. UU-71 7:53].
In addition, this society-- and many like it-- attempted to stem the rising flood of
Anglo-Saxonism by the creation of the Creole myth, which shall be discussed in Chapter
Two. This cultural bunkering sealed their fate, for as the stream of America moved
forward, the Creoles retreated into the backwater where they stagnated, preferring to
40
romanticize an imagined past, a fate that Leona shared. In many cases their cultural
blindness had an element of obstinacy that bordered on fanatic zeal, and many, such as
Charles Gayarré, his friend, Alexander Dimitry, and Placide Canonge went to their deaths
with this carefully nurtured vision. In another ironic twist of fate, Leona, who shared their
narrow vision, gradually began to lose her sight. As she advanced in years, she lost most
of her vision and spent her time as a recluse writing manuscripts with the help of a
companion and her brother Maxim.
Towards the end of her life Leona was still vital, as Jerry remembers her, but
rather quiet. She was almost blind, often kept to herself, and was fearful of strangers.
Jerry recalls that Maxim was very protective of Leona, and that she made no decisions
without him. Other than taking walks with Maxim, she remained at home. Leona did not
have a phone, for she preferred the grace and continuity of letters, and she never quite
mastered the typewriter even though her friends had urged her to do so before she went
entirely blind. In an interview she shared the writing technique she employed late in life
to compensate for her blindness and inability to concentrate for long periods of time:
I jotted down notes on bits of paper, on calendars, grocery bills, or on the back of
letters. I stuck them in my mirror or pinned them on a string stretched across my
room. All were numbered finally and put in a box. When my young friend who
lives with me got ready to type them for me into a book we sorted them out
[UU-71 7:52].
Leona could not even read the final draft of The Idyl when it was sent to her from
Japan. The Queyrouze family told me that until her death in January 1938 due to
congestive heart failure, Leona had a personal maid and one of her duties was to make
41
s
ur
et
ha
tLe
ona
’
sl
ongf
ul
l skirts did not brush against the small ornate iron coal burner
stove that was situated in the middle of the room. Thus, long into the twentieth century,
Leona remained a woman out of time and out of place, holding on to the vestiges of a
fashion and a culture that had disappeared long ago. She had failed to follow the literary
path that Hearn had urged her to follow, and in doing so, sealed her fate of obscurity. Her
life story serves as a relic of a vanished culture, and one that inhabits and gives meaning
to the concept of a lost cultural moment.
42
CHAPTERTWO:“WHO ARETHECREOLES?”
Among the great federation of States whose AngloSaxon life and inspiration swallows up all alien
immigration, there is one in which a Latin
civilization, sinewy, valiant, cultured, rich, and
proud, holding out against extinction
--George W. Cable The Creoles of Louisiana (1).
When the historical lens widens, it provides a frame to view not only individual
identity, but cultural identity as well, and in this case, grants a perspective on the
denotation and connotation of the term Creole. Leona Queyrouze was born a French
Creole in a time when Louisiana was being transformed, not only by the Civil War and
the subsequent Reconstruction, but by the changing demographics of her region. Long
before she was born, the fabric of her French Creole culture was unraveling, beginning
with the influx of Americans that began following the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, and
continuing with the flood of immigrants into the area mid-century. In effect, she became
an immigrant in her own city, New Orleans, and this sense of displacement permeates her
literary work. Throughout her essays and poems, there is a sense of loss and an obligation
to document the people and place of a quickly disappearing culture. Some historians trace
the origin of the demise of the French Creoles to the beginning of the nineteenth century
when the promise of rich soil for farming lured many Americans into the newly acquired
territory that included Louisiana. Rosan Augusta Jordan and Frank de Caro assert that the
“
c
ha
l
l
e
ng
et
oFr
e
nc
he
t
hni
che
g
e
monyha
dbe
g
un...vi
r
t
ua
l
l
ywi
t
ht
hec
omi
ngofles
américains after 1803, the resulting ethnic strife of the 1820s, and the waves of Irish and
German immig
r
a
nt
swhof
l
oode
dNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsbe
t
we
e
n1830a
nd1860”(
41)
.Ot
he
r
43
historians also point to the French Creole attitude of complacency and lack of industrious
entrepreneurship as a factor in the ultimate demise, which is described by George
Washington Cable in The Creoles of Louisiana (1884). These and many other factors
c
ont
r
i
but
e
dt
ot
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
’
sc
ul
t
ur
a
ldownf
a
l
l
,a
ndLe
onawa
sbor
ni
nt
oat
i
me
when this submergence was almost complete.
Pl
a
c
i
ngQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ki
nt
ohi
s
t
or
i
c
a
lc
ont
e
xtc
a
na
ddnua
nc
e to our
understanding of the history of the region during the aftermath of the Civil War in
southern Louisiana and can provide an intimate glimpse into the life a French Creole in
the closing years of the culture. In her, we can find one of the voices of t
he“
Si
l
e
nt
Sout
h,
”t
hos
ei
ndi
vi
dua
l
sofc
ompl
e
xi
t
ya
ndi
ns
i
g
htwhodonotf
a
l
lne
a
r
l
ywi
t
hi
nt
he
parameters of political, cultural and ethnic delineation. Such is the case with Leona
Queyrouze who is at once an American woman writer, a French poet, a composer, a
French Creole, and a Southerner. She is all of these-- and none. Her life and work defy
boundaries and encourage us to look past our preconceived notions of literary and cultural
framework and to hear a voice that speaks at the close of the century and at the end of her
cultural place in the New World. While some scholars are quick to point out the flaws in
the economic and social construction of the French Creole culture, this kind of argument
is insupportable if it rests solely on the logical basis that a culture, which is inherently
flawed, represents each individual within that culture, and if it implies that an imperfect
society is one that should be dismantled. If that is the case, then all societies and all
cultures fall within these parameters. I argue that a worthier discussion should involve
one which investigates the resistance to a dominant culture. As such, the work of Leona
Queyrouze serves to chronicle this experience, and her poetry, short stories, essays,
44
music, and articles represent a voice aware of its demise, trying to rise from the ashes of
the South and the French Creole culture, an endeavor that ultimately fails. Many stories
are written of successes, but failures have their lessons, too. Perhaps through the
telescopic lens of history, her failures can lead us to successfully learn more about what is
lost and what is gained when ethnic markers are lost in the flood of mainstream culture.
Before we can fully address the twilight of her culture, we must first understand
what it means to be a Creole. Werner Sollars in Creole Echoes describes the difficulty of
t
hi
sa
t
t
e
mptf
ort
het
e
r
mi
s“
of
t
e
nt
hes
ubj
e
c
tofde
ba
t
e
s
,a
dopt
e
dorr
e
j
e
c
t
e
dbyc
ount
l
e
s
s
authoritative-s
oundi
ngc
omme
nt
a
t
or
s
.
”Hec
i
t
e
sJ
oha
nnFr
i
e
dr
i
c
hBl
ume
nba
c
hwho
believes that the slaves who came to America from Ethiopia first used the term in the
1700s
.Sol
l
or
si
nc
l
ude
sBa
l
z
a
c
’
sde
f
i
ni
t
i
onofCr
e
ol
e
sa
smi
xe
dr
a
c
e
sf
r
om “
Eur
ope
,t
h
e
t
r
opi
c
sa
ndt
heI
ndi
e
s
”(
xvi
i
i
)
,Hea
ddst
ha
tMmeRe
y
ba
udt
houg
htt
het
e
r
m ha
dt
odo
wi
t
hone
’
sc
ompl
e
xi
ona
ndt
ha
tWhi
t
ma
nr
e
ve
l
e
di
nt
hee
xot
i
cc
onf
us
i
onofda
r
k
European and African skin tones. Others, such as Mayne Reid, denied that there was any
mixed blood. Still others, like Wilhelm von Humboldt referred to Creoles simply as
“
Ame
r
i
c
a
ns
,
”ormor
es
i
mpl
yy
e
t
,a
sGa
r
yB.Mi
l
l
ss
a
y
si
nt
heEncyclopedia of Southern
Culture, t
ha
taCr
e
ol
ei
s“
‘
a
ny
onewhos
a
y
shei
sone
’
”(
Sol
l
or
s“
For
wa
r
d”xvi
i
i
)
.
Understandably, theses viewpoints point to a persistent confusion regarding the
term, and in order to sort through this, I will focus first on the genesis of the term and
then turn to the contributions made by George Washington Cable and Charles Etienne
Arthur Gayarré who had a determinant hand in the connotation of this term. Granted,
Cable had more influence because his work was more widely read, but I will address
e
qua
l
l
ye
a
c
hma
n’
sc
ont
r
i
but
i
ont
ode
mons
t
r
a
t
et
hepol
a
r
i
t
yoft
hede
ba
t
e
.Byt
hee
ndof
45
the nineteenth century, the term Creole was used to describe an exotic culture that was
introduced to the world stage by Cable, but it was also defined by the perpetuation of the
Creole myth fostered by Charles Gayarré.
Cable begins The Creoles of Louisiana, wi
t
ht
heque
s
t
i
on,“
Whoa
r
et
heCr
e
ol
e
s
?
”
and likewise I will attempt to answer that question starting with the historical use of the
word and then describing the conflict surrounding it as the cultural demographics began
to shift after the Louisiana Purchase. In Creole New Orleans, Joseph Tregle describes the
historical misconceptions about the use of the word Creole. Some claim that the Spanish
conquistadors used the term to specify the children of white Europeans born in the New
Wor
l
d,a
ndwhe
nLoui
s
i
a
nabe
c
a
meaSpa
ni
s
ht
e
r
r
i
t
or
y
,t
het
e
r
m“
c
r
i
ol
l
o”wa
sus
e
dt
he
r
e
.
In the 1600s and 1700s the term Creole me
a
nts
i
mpl
y“
na
t
i
ve
-bor
n”(
136)
,a
ndpr
i
ort
o
Spanish control, Louisiana people also used the term in this way. Supposedly, it was the
Spa
ni
s
hwhoc
ons
i
de
r
e
d“
Loui
s
i
a
nas
l
a
ve
sa
sc
r
i
ol
l
os
”(137), but there is still debate
surrounding this account. The origin of the word is also described in the Harvard
Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups:
“
Cr
e
ol
e
”r
e
f
e
r
st
ope
opl
e
,c
ul
t
ur
e
,t
of
ood,mus
i
c
,a
ndt
ol
a
ng
ua
g
e
.Or
i
g
i
na
l
l
y
from the Portuguese crioulo, the word for a slave brought up in the owne
r
’
s
household, which in turn probably derived form the Latin creare (create), it
became criollo in Spanish and créole in French (Thernstrom 237).
While there is some debate and speculation over the origin of the word, what is
known for certain is that when Louisiana became an American possession, the French
Creoles found themselves belonging to a nation of English customs and language. In
order to differentiate themselves from the Americans, they began to strengthen their
46
cultural identity and to take measures to solidify the fluid term, Creole. The Harvard
Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups describes this process of identification:
Louisianans of French and Spanish descent began referring to themselves as
Creoles following the Louisiana Purchase (1803) in order to distinguish
themselves from the Anglo-American who started to move into Louisiana at this
time. The indigenous whites adopted the term, insisting, most unhistorically, that
it applied exclusively to them. The life of this dying group is depicted in George
Wa
s
hi
ng
t
onCa
bl
e
’
sOld Creole Days (1879) and in some of the works of
Lafcadio Hearn (Thernstrom 237).
After the Louisiana Purchase, the non-indigenous people who had lived longest in
the region felt that they had greater claim to the land, so they were quick to use the term
Creole because they had been born in the New World and wanted to preserve their
investment in the land. At this point, they did not associate the term with color or
distinguish between white and black, perhaps be
c
a
us
e“
c
ol
orne
ve
re
nj
oy
e
dpowe
rt
o
ma
nda
t
et
hel
a
ng
ua
g
eorha
bi
t
sofwhi
t
eme
ni
npr
e
wa
ry
e
a
r
s
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
139)
.Fr
om t
he
beginning, the use of the term in the New World revolved around the assertion of culture
and the pursuit of power.
This complex term has occupied the discourse of contemporary scholars because
its use touches on so many aspects of the region—its history, politics, and diversity. Their
responses demonstrate that the term is still highly contentious. Sybil Kein says that
“
Cr
e
ol
eha
sc
omet
o mean the language and the folk culture that was native to the
southern part of Louisiana where African, French, and Spanish influence was most deeply
r
oot
e
dhi
s
t
or
i
c
a
l
l
ya
ndc
ul
t
ur
a
l
l
y
”(
Ke
i
nxv)
.Al
i
c
eMoor
eDunba
r
-Nelson says that the
“
na
t
i
vewhi
t
eLouisianan will tell you that a Creole is a white man, whose ancestors
contain some French or Spanish blood [or . . . ] a Creole is a native of the lower parishes
47
ofLoui
s
i
a
na
,i
nwhos
eve
i
nss
omet
r
a
c
e
sofSpa
ni
s
h,We
s
tI
ndi
a
norFr
e
nc
hbl
oodr
uns
”
(8). Historian James H. Dormon offers this definition:
Thepr
e
c
i
s
ede
f
i
ni
t
i
onoft
h
et
e
r
m“
Cr
e
ol
e
”ha
sbe
e
nt
hes
our
c
eofune
ndi
ng
controversy in Louisiana studies. My own working definition holds the realities of
hi
s
t
or
i
c
a
lus
a
g
e
,i
.
e
.“
Cr
e
o
l
e
”me
a
nts
i
mpl
y“
na
t
i
vet
oLoui
s
i
a
na
”dur
i
ngt
he
period between circa 1720 and the outbreak of the Civil War. As such, blacks
(both slave and free) as well as free persons of color and indeed white Europeans
we
r
ea
l
lde
s
i
g
na
t
e
d“
Cr
e
ol
e
s
”i
ft
he
ywe
r
ebor
ni
nLoui
s
i
a
na
,ori
fthey descended
from those were born there (616).
The definition offered by Dorman, however, changed long before the Civil War,
and it began its transformation during the influx of other cultures in the region after the
Louisiana Purchase, most conspicuously, Americans from the northeastern United States.
At first, when the Americans freely called the locals Creole, whether black or white, the
white French Creoles would correct them as a matter of courtesy. At first the French and
Americans lived together on equal terms according to an account by Alexis de
Tocqueville in Journey to America. “
‘
TheFr
e
nc
ha
ndAme
r
i
c
a
nsma
yc
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
ee
a
c
hot
h
e
r
mut
ua
l
l
y...buta
tt
hebot
t
om t
he
r
ei
snor
e
a
le
nmi
t
y
’
”(
Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don7)
.
However, when the French Creoles began to lose their foothold in the area during the mid
1800s--both economically and politically--the Creoles began to feel threatened by the
Americanization of their city and retreated into the bastion of their parochial society.
In Creole New Orleans, Hirsch and Logsdon state that the influx of Americans
into New Orleans was a driving force behind the formation of the Creole identity and the
Creoles often magnified their identity as a buttress against the invading American
cultures. They derided the Ame
r
i
c
a
nsa
ndc
a
l
l
e
dt
he
ms
e
l
ve
s“
c
ul
t
ur
a
la
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
t
s
”a
ndt
he
48
Ame
r
i
c
a
ns“
unc
out
hba
c
kwoods
me
n”(
91)
,buta
si
na
l
lpol
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
,t
he
r
ei
ss
omet
r
ut
ha
nd
muc
hf
i
c
t
i
on.Atf
i
r
s
t
,t
heCr
e
ol
e
sf
e
l
tnot
hr
e
a
t
,“
nor
i
s
kt
ha
ts
uc
hde
f
i
ni
t
i
ona
lpa
r
t
ne
r
s
hi
p
might dimini
s
ht
he
i
rs
oc
i
a
ls
t
a
t
usorpr
e
r
og
a
t
i
veoft
hedomi
na
ntc
l
a
s
s
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e139)
.
When they began to feel the sting of associations, however, they used the term ancienne
population to separate themselves from the Americans, blacks, and the foreign French,
but the term did not have a long life, probably because it was equally confusing. Their
i
nt
e
ntwa
st
os
howt
ha
tt
he
ywe
r
et
hede
s
c
e
nde
nt
soft
he“
c
a
s
ke
tg
i
r
l
s
,
”(
pe
r
ha
ps
legendary) who came from prominent French families who sent their daughters to the
New World with all of their belongings in a trunk (casket) to wed successful Frenchmen
in New Orleans. Creoles felt this background gave them the prestige of land and of pure
bloodlines because they were not of mixed blood, nor were they newcomers like the
Americans and the newly arrived French. Paul F. LaChance further distinguishes the
Fr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
sf
r
om t
he“
For
e
i
g
nFr
e
nc
h”whowe
r
enota
swe
a
l
t
hya
st
he
i
rCr
e
ol
e
counterparts, but who were better educated.
When the Americans began settling in the area, they used the term Creole
indiscriminately, because they did not understand its importance to the locals who were
“
e
ng
a
g
e
di
ns
t
r
ug
g
l
ef
ort
heve
r
ys
ouloft
hec
ommuni
t
y
”(
141)
.Thedi
vi
di
ngl
i
ne
between the Americans and Creoles was Canal Street because it separated the downtown
area, which was predominantly French Creole, and Uptown, which was American. Each
had separate city councils and municipal courts, and each used a different language in
their businesses and schools between 1836 and 1852 (Hirsch and Logsdon 93). This
separation was not discouraged by the Creoles who disassociated themselves from the
Americans for reasons of pride and insecurity. One can imagine the position they were
49
in—they were confronted with the aggressive, entrepreneurial and industrious Americans
who showed early signs of mercantile and industrial success, and they saw their very own
French market place and government buildings being taken over by the English language.
They saw their own resources dwindling and their social circles thinning.
Even so, some Creoles still believed that the two cultures could co-exist, but all of
t
hi
sc
ha
ng
e
dwhe
n“
Ame
r
i
c
a
nsa
c
c
us
e
ds
omeoft
he
i
rCr
e
ol
er
i
va
l
sofha
vi
ngmi
xe
d
a
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”(
Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don98)
.Thi
s“
ne
wus
a
g
eoft
hewor
dCreole emerged during
the Reconstruction era when the struggle for white supremacy brought about a
fundamental and lasting rapprochement between all white conservatives, regardless of
t
he
i
ra
n
t
e
be
l
l
uma
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”(
98)
.Ev
e
nt
houg
ht
he
yha
ds
t
r
ug
g
l
e
da
g
a
i
ns
tt
he
Americanization of their city, the Creoles soon abandoned their resistance, if not their
disdain, for American culture, and aligned themselves with the Americans. Quick to hold
on to the only power they had left—their whiteness-- the Creoles actually hastened their
demise by trying to associate themselves with white Americans. In doing so, many
abandoned their own cultural history.
Upon the advent of the Civil War, Creoles were further threatened by the
inference that they were a people of a mixed blood, and as a reaction, they sought to
separate themselves socially and semantically. In the pre-Ci
vi
lwa
re
r
aNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
’
s
oc
i
a
ldi
vi
s
i
onha
dbe
e
na
l
onge
t
hni
cl
i
ne
s
:“
La
t
i
nve
r
s
usAng
l
o-Saxon, native born
against foreigner . . . Color had played no role in the confrontation [perhaps because] only
whi
t
eme
n[
we
r
e
]pol
i
t
i
c
a
lpe
r
s
ons
.
”Fr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
sha
d“
unc
ha
l
l
e
ng
e
a
bl
ewhi
t
e
s
upr
e
ma
c
y
”whi
c
hha
d“
ma
dei
tp
o
s
s
i
bl
et
oa
c
c
ommoda
t
epa
n-racial Creolism. The Civil
50
Wa
rc
h
a
ng
e
da
l
lt
ha
t
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e172)
.Att
hekni
f
e
poi
ntoft
heCivil War, the term Creole
split into two halves along the color line.
In the Strange Career of Jim Crow, C. Vann Woodward describes the pre-war
social system in New Orleans as a tripartite structure consisting of whites, free persons of
color, and slaves. Alice Moore Dunbar-Nelson explains that most ethnic groups
intermingled freely in the crowded neighborhoods of the Crescent city. Many children
we
r
ebor
noft
he
s
ea
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
ons
.J
o
a
nM .Ma
r
t
i
nnot
e
st
ha
tt
he“
s
e
xua
lr
e
l
a
t
i
onsa
mong
European settlers, African slaves, and native Americans during the period of French rule
in Louisiana (1718-1768) resulted in the creation of a third race of people neither white
norbl
a
c
ka
ndne
i
t
he
rs
l
a
venorc
o
mpl
e
t
e
l
yf
r
e
e
”(
Ke
i
n57)
.Thi
soc
c
ur
r
e
dl
a
r
g
e
l
ybe
c
a
us
e
of a miscegenation arrangement called Plaçage where quadroons would enter into longstanding relationships with white men from Europe. Plaçages were left-handed
marriages, or mariages de la main gauche.The
s
ea
r
r
a
ng
e
me
nt
s“
c
r
e
a
t
e
dat
hi
r
dr
a
c
eof
people in Louisiana . . . a separatist self-f
oc
us
i
ngc
ommuni
t
y
”(
Ke
i
n69)
.I
ta
l
s
oc
r
e
a
t
e
da
“
c
l
a
s
so
ff
r
e
epe
opl
eofc
ol
orwhi
c
hwa
swe
l
l
-e
duc
a
t
e
d,c
ul
t
ur
e
d,we
a
l
t
hy
,a
ndpowe
r
f
ul
”
(
69)
.J
oyJ
a
c
ks
onde
s
c
r
i
be
st
hi
sg
r
oup,a
s“
ha
l
f
-white, half-Ne
g
r
o”
:
who were the descendents of free person of color who referred to themselves as
colored Creoles. They were, as a whole, a prosperous, educated, French oriented
petit bourgeois faction of local society. From antebellum times they had been a
close-knit group, holding themselves aloof from the darker-skinned slaves. Most
were business and professional men, but some were poets and writers; some,
musicians who studied European music in France (277).
51
The Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups also defines this culture as one
based on a Caribbean social structure:
In the United States in the 20th century, Creole most often refers to the Louisiana
Creoles of color. Ranging in appearance from mulattos to northern European
whites, the Creoles of color constitute a Caribbean phenomenon in the United
States. The product of miscegenation in a seigniorial society, they achieved elite
status in Louisiana, and in the early 19th century some were slaveholders. Many,
educated in France, were patrons of the opera and of literary societies. . . .
Louisiana Creoles of color thus constitute a self-conscious group, who are
perceived in their locale as different and separate. They live in New Orleans and
in a number of other bayou towns. Historically they have been endogamous, and
until late in the 19th century spoke mostly French . . . . Their ethnicity is
exceedingly difficult to maintain outside the New Orleans area. Over time, a great
many have passed into white groups in other parts of the country, and others have
become integrated as blacks. This latter choice is not based wholly on appearance,
for many Creoles who choose to identify as Afro-American are white in
appearance (Thernstrom 237).
This unique social system survived in New Orleans largely because the city was a
“
c
ont
i
ne
nt
a
lc
i
t
y, most picturesque, most un-American, and as varied as the streets of
Ca
i
r
o.He
r
eonewoul
ds
e
eFr
e
nc
h,
Spa
ni
s
h,Eng
l
i
s
h,Bohe
mi
a
ns
,Ne
g
r
oe
s
,mul
a
t
t
os
”
(
J
a
c
ks
on20)
.The
r
ewe
r
ema
ny“
f
r
e
ec
ol
or
e
d”i
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
;i
nf
a
c
t
,J
ul
i
aSt
r
e
e
twa
s
named after Julia, a free woman of color (26) who owned the land. People of all races
attended the theater, and the French opera house was the first place in the country where
“
g
r
a
ndope
r
awa
she
a
r
d”(
27)byadi
ve
r
s
i
t
yofpe
opl
e
.I
twa
sa“
ve
r
i
t
a
bl
es
a
ndwi
c
hof
r
a
c
e
s
”(27). The Creoles of color sent their children to France to study; they opened
schools and owned businesses. The ethnic lines were so blurred; in fact, that it was
“
di
f
f
i
c
ul
tt
oe
nf
or
c
el
a
wsa
g
a
i
ns
tar
a
c
ewhe
ny
ouc
a
nnotf
i
ndt
ha
tr
a
c
e
”(
29)
.
52
Even though New Orleans was the site of slave auctions, most slaves who lived
within the city worked as domestic servants. With some notable exceptions (described in
Chapter Five), many were treated with more respect than those who worked on
plantations. The hardships agricultural slaves endured and the horrors they experienced
we
r
ewe
l
lknowna
mongt
hes
l
a
vec
ommuni
t
y
.I
nf
a
c
t
,t
het
hr
e
a
tofbe
i
ng“
s
e
ntdownt
he
Mi
s
s
i
s
s
i
ppi
”wa
sof
t
e
nus
e
dt
of
r
i
g
ht
e
ns
l
a
ve
si
nt
os
ubmi
s
s
i
on.Ac
c
or
di
ngt
ot
heSl
a
ve
r
y
Code of 1724, sl
a
ve
hol
de
r
st
r
e
a
t
e
ds
l
a
ve
sa
smova
bl
epr
ope
r
t
y
.Sl
a
ve
sc
oul
dn’
tc
a
r
r
y
weapons, assemble, or buy or sell property. They had no property of their own and could
not receive gifts from whites. They could not hold office or be served by the legal system
or give testimony. First time runaways were branded; the second time they were
hamstrung; the third time they were killed. After the Civil War, the Slavery Code was
r
e
pl
a
c
e
dbyt
heBl
a
c
kCodedur
i
ngawa
veof“
a
nt
i
- bl
a
c
kf
a
na
t
i
c
i
s
m.
”TheCr
e
ol
e
s
,
afraid that the
i
rr
a
c
i
a
lpur
i
t
ywoul
dbeque
s
t
i
one
di
nt
hi
sne
wr
e
g
i
meort
ha
tt
he
y“
mi
g
ht
bec
onf
us
e
dwi
t
hbl
a
c
ks
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
173)
,j
oi
ne
df
or
c
e
swi
t
hot
he
rwhi
t
e
si
nor
de
rt
or
e
t
a
i
n
their dominance in the social hierarchy.
Whereas once the danger confronting them had been humiliating loss of
Gallic identity to a devouring Anglo-Saxon homogenization, now it was
the infinitely more horrible possibility of being consigned to debased
s
t
a
t
usi
nt
he“
i
nf
e
r
i
or
”r
a
c
e
,
i
de
nt
i
f
i
e
da
sha
l
f
-brother to the black, as sort
of mixed breed stripped of blood pride as well as of any claim to social or
political preferment (173).
So strong were their fears of association by blood that, even today, one can
still detect a defensive sensitivity among some French Creoles. Virginia
53
Domínguez i
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
st
he“
l
ongh
i
s
t
or
yofs
l
a
ve
r
yi
nt
heUni
t
e
dSt
a
t
e
sa
ndof
whi
t
eowne
r
s
hi
pofAf
r
i
c
a
ns
l
a
ve
sha
sl
e
f
ti
nLoui
s
i
a
na
”a
ndnot
e
st
hepr
e
va
i
l
i
ng
“
t
r
a
di
t
i
ona
la
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
onofwhi
t
ewi
t
huppe
rs
t
a
t
usa
ndofbl
a
c
kswi
t
hl
owe
r
s
t
a
t
us
.
”Shepoi
nt
soutt
ha
t“
whi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
st
oda
y
”r
e
c
oi
lf
r
om “
t
heme
r
e
s
ug
g
e
s
t
i
onofpos
s
i
bl
eAf
r
i
c
a
na
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”be
c
a
us
ei
t“
i
nvoke
sal
owe
r
i
ngofs
oc
i
a
l
a
nde
c
onomi
cs
t
a
t
us
”(
63)
.Thus
,s
hea
r
g
ue
s
,“
t
oi
de
nt
i
f
ys
ome
onea
sCr
e
ol
ei
st
o
invoke in the course of a particular conversation historically linked connotations
of social and economic status . . . . of how things used to be and how in their
opi
ni
ont
he
youg
htt
obe
.
”Of
t
e
n,t
hi
si
sus
e
da
s“
t
hema
j
orc
r
i
t
e
r
i
onbywhi
c
h
i
ndi
vi
dua
l
sa
r
ei
de
nt
i
f
i
e
da
sCr
e
ol
e
”(
63)
.Thi
sbe
c
ome
savital distinction in
s
out
he
r
nLoui
s
i
a
na
,whe
r
e“
of
t
e
n,i
fnota
l
wa
y
s
”t
hi
sbe
c
ome
s“
t
hec
r
uc
i
a
l
variable that individual New Orleanians manipulate in making themselves
members of a group, or in identifying other as member of a group. Status, then, is
frequently more of a determining factor on group membership than genealogical
a
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”(
263)
.
This hypersensitivity about ethnicity still lingers into the 21st century—where the
term has continued to evolve. Until recently, as Tregle points out, individuals who
be
l
ong
e
dt
oa“
mi
xe
dr
a
c
e
”us
e
dt
h
et
e
r
mCreole as an adjective or used the term Creole
of color; the “
nounCr
e
ol
e
”had only for been used for white (133). In the twenty-first
century, this has changed once again, for one will find the term used by people in
Louisiana in a variety of ways. Thus, the fluidity of the term Creole persists, and its
definition remains dependent on regional, local, and personal interpretations.
54
In spite of the vagaries of the term, one individual was instrumental in influencing
the perceptions of the connotations of this social marker. George Washington Cable was
responsible, in large part, for introducing the Creole culture to the national stage. He
enjoyed immense popularity, and with his friend Mark Twain, he toured the country
giving lectures. They were part of the Local Color movement that followed the Civil War.
After his service in the war, Cable returned to New Orleans, his birthplace, and began
working as an accountant. He also worked for the New Orleans newspaper the Picayune.
After being discovered by Edward King, the editor for Sc
r
i
bne
r
’
sMagaz
i
ne
, Cable began
the serial publication of Old Creole Days (1879), a collection of short stories, and The
Grandissimes (1880), a novel describing the lives of the Grandissime brothers, one white
and the other of mixed blood. In these novels, he provided a glimpse into an exotic world
that was largely unknown to the rest of the country.
The
s
ewor
kss
e
r
ve
dt
of
ue
lt
hede
ba
t
ec
onc
e
r
ni
ngCa
bl
e
’
ss
y
mpa
t
hya
nd/
or
antipathy towards the Creoles. On the one hand, he seems to romanticize their lives,
describing their soft patois infused with the flavor of the West Indies, and the alabaster
skin and rich silks and lace of the women and the dashing good looks of the men. On the
other hand, one of the main characters of the Grandissimes, Joseph Frowenfeld offers an
indictment against the injustices of the caste system and plaçage practices in place during
the time the novel is set (1804). With vivid detail Cable describes the world of the Vieux
Carré, where historical figures walked along the same streets as their fictional
counterparts; he juxtaposes the straightforward industrious Yankee with the hedonistic
and indolent Creole.
55
La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
npr
a
i
s
e
dCa
bl
e
’
swor
k,ha
i
l
i
ngi
ta
st
he“
‘
mos
t remarkable work of
f
i
c
t
i
one
ve
rc
r
e
a
t
e
di
nt
heSout
h’
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e174)
;howe
ve
r
,t
heFr
e
nc
hLa
ng
ua
g
e
newspaper in New Orleans, L’Ab
e
i
l
l
e
,was harshly critical of Cable, even going so far as
t
oa
t
t
a
c
kCa
bl
e
’
spe
r
s
ona
le
t
hi
c
sa
ndc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
.Dr
.Al
f
r
e
dMercier, who was the founder
of the Athénée,ame
mbe
roft
heQue
y
r
ouz
es
a
l
on,a
ndape
r
s
ona
lf
r
i
e
ndofLe
ona
’
s
a
dmi
t
t
e
dt
ha
tCa
bl
e“
a
ppr
a
i
s
e
dCr
e
ol
el
i
f
edi
s
ma
l
l
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
176)
.TheCr
e
ol
el
i
f
e
s
t
y
l
e
wa
se
xpos
e
df
ori
t
swor
s
ta
t
r
oc
i
t
i
e
s
.The
s
ec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
swe
r
ea“
s
earing representation
committed to a dead past, long ago abandoned by enlightened and progressive
communities of the world . . . its hallmarks are indolence, ignorance, cruelty, superstitions
a
ndhy
p
o
c
r
i
s
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e175)
.Ca
bl
ec
ont
i
nue
dhi
se
xpos
éwi
t
hhi
s1884 The Creoles of
Louisiana a
ndi
nhi
s1885e
s
s
a
y“
Fr
e
e
dma
n’
sCa
s
ei
nEqui
t
y
.
”
Notonl
ydi
dCa
bl
e
’
swor
kbr
i
ngne
g
a
t
i
vea
t
t
e
nt
i
ont
ot
heCr
e
ol
e
s
,t
heCr
e
ol
e
s
also believed that Cable had transformed their culture into an exotic curiosity. Visitors to
New Orleans in the 1880s often looked for the characters that Cable described in
Grandissimes and Old Creole Days. Onel
oc
a
lc
ompl
a
i
ne
d,“
‘
Nor
t
he
r
npe
opl
ec
omehe
r
e
to New Orleans to study us as curiosities . . . trying to identify the localities and types of
pe
r
s
ons
”(
J
a
c
ks
on14)
.TheCr
e
ol
e
sf
e
l
tCa
bl
ea
dde
di
ns
ul
tt
oi
nj
ur
ywhe
nheus
e
dt
he
wor
d“
Creole to mean native born—including white, Negro, and those of mixed
a
nc
e
s
t
r
y
.
”The
ywe
r
ei
nc
e
ns
e
d,a
nd“
i
nor
de
rt
or
e
dr
e
s
st
heg
r
i
e
va
nc
e
swhi
c
ht
he
yf
e
l
t
Cable had inflicted upon them, numerous Creole writers and their sympathizers attacked
hi
si
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onoft
he
i
rba
c
kg
r
ounda
ndc
ul
t
ur
e
”(
J
a
c
ks
on14-15).
I
n“
Cr
e
ol
e
sa
ndAme
r
i
c
a
ns
,
”Tr
e
g
l
ede
s
c
r
i
be
showCa
bl
ewa
svi
l
i
f
i
e
dbyt
hewhi
t
e
French Creoles because of the perceived betrayal of their culture. Beginning with his first
56
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rs
ke
t
c
hof1873of“
’
Si
e
urGe
or
g
e
,
”whi
c
hde
s
c
r
i
be
dg
a
mbl
i
nga
ddi
c
t
i
ons
,Ca
b
l
e
e
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
da“
ve
r
i
t
a
bl
ef
l
oodofa
b
us
ea
ndda
mna
t
i
on...I
nne
ws
pa
pe
r
s
,pa
mphl
e
t
sa
nd
public meet
i
ng
s
”(
131)
.Buti
twa
sl
e
s
sa
boutCa
bl
et
ha
nhi
st
i
mi
ng
,be
c
a
us
ea
tt
het
i
me
hewa
spubl
i
s
hi
ng
,t
he
r
ewa
sa“
r
a
di
c
a
lt
r
a
ns
f
or
ma
t
i
onofl
ong
-established ethnic and
r
a
c
i
a
lc
o
nve
nt
i
onsi
nt
heNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsc
ommuni
t
y
”(
132)
.
[This was] challenging emerging new concepts of identity and producing
confusion in altered relationships which in many ways continues to
confound out understanding . . . [resulting] in fear and resentments
[which] drove Creole passions to formations of hardened orthodoxy . . . a
verita
bl
emy
t
hol
og
y
”...a
tt
he
i
rve
r
yc
or
es
t
a
ndt
hee
xpl
i
c
a
t
i
onofCreole
itself, rigid, absolute, and closed to any gradation of meaning, it holds that
the word can never be used except to designate a native Louisianan of pure
white blood descended from those French and Spanish pioneers who came
directly from Europe to colonize the New World. Thus, even Acadians, or
Cajuns, are rigorously excluded . . . in the specific insistence that no black
or person of mixed blood can or ever could have been correctly termed a
Creole, no matter his parentage, place of birth, language or cultural
orientation (Tregle 132-133).
When the Americans began to settle in the newly acquired region after the
Louisiana Purchase, the white French Creoles felt the necessity to affirm their separate
identity and the impulse served to foster the creation of the Creole myth. The Creoles
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
dt
he
ms
e
l
ve
sa
sa
r
i
s
t
o
c
r
a
t
sbyvi
r
t
ueof“
e
mpy
r
e
a
na
s
c
e
nda
nc
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
135)
and looked upon the Americans as commoners. They considered the Yankees to be cold
because they were not able to enjoy the simple pleasures of life such as music and dance.
Ont
heot
he
rha
nd,aCr
e
ol
ewa
ss
ome
onewhoha
d“
‘
g
r
a
c
i
ousi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
l
i
s
m,
spontaneous and fecund spirit, subtle, delicate and penetrating refinement, and an
e
xqui
s
i
t
es
ua
vi
t
y
,de
l
i
c
i
ouspe
r
f
umea
ndpa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
rc
a
c
he
t
”(
136)
.ACr
e
ol
eNe
wWor
l
d
57
a
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
tde
vot
e
dhi
st
i
met
o“
t
he
a
t
e
ra
ndope
r
a...t
hor
oug
hbr
e
dhor
s
e
s
,due
l
i
ng
,f
oi
l
s
a
ndt
hep
l
e
a
s
ur
e
sofdi
ni
nga
ndg
a
mi
ngt
a
bl
e
s
.
”Thewome
nwe
r
e“
paragons of gentility,
s
t
y
l
e
,g
r
a
c
e
,c
a
me
osofbe
a
ut
ya
ndf
l
i
r
t
a
t
i
ousc
ha
r
m”(
136)
.I
nma
nywa
y
s
,Le
ona
Queyrouze and her brother, Maxim, aspired to represent and to uphold this ideal, even
into the twentieth century.
As an essential ingredient to the formation of the Creole myth, the Creoles would
never admit that the purity of their race had ever been commingled with Africans and the
best way to do this was to deny the entire history of plaçage and miscegenation. Anthony
G.Ba
r
t
he
l
e
mye
xpl
a
i
nst
ha
t“
t
hr
e
a
tened as they were by the tarbush, white Creoles who
had previously found sexual alliances with non-whites inconsequential now discovered
t
ha
tt
he
i
rpr
e
r
og
a
t
i
ve
sl
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
yde
n
i
g
r
a
t
e
dt
he
ma
ndt
he
i
rf
a
mi
l
i
e
s
”(
Ke
i
n262)
.Rus
hi
ngt
o
protect their identity, thea
t
t
e
mpt
e
dt
o“
c
ove
rt
he
i
rt
r
a
c
ks
,t
ode
nyt
he
i
rc
ons
a
ng
ui
ni
t
y
wi
t
ht
he
i
rCr
e
ol
ebr
e
t
hr
e
nont
heot
he
rs
i
deoft
hec
ol
orl
i
ne
”(
262)
.I
nor
de
rt
o
a
c
c
ompl
i
s
ht
hi
s
,t
he
yc
r
e
a
t
e
dt
hef
a
nt
a
s
yofr
a
c
i
a
l“
pur
i
t
y
.
”Ba
r
t
he
l
e
mys
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
t
hi
s
disavowal and hypoc
r
i
s
yr
e
f
l
e
c
t
e
dwhi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
’
smos
tpr
i
me
va
lf
e
a
r
,t
ha
tt
he
ywoul
db
e
made to share inferior status and debasement with those of their own blood whom they
t
he
ms
e
l
ve
ss
oc
onde
mne
d”(
Ke
i
n263)
.Ma
nys
oug
htpr
ot
e
c
t
i
onunde
rt
hel
a
w,a
nd“
t
he
provisions that e
xi
s
t
e
di
nLoui
s
i
a
n
al
a
wt
ol
i
mi
tac
hi
l
d’
sr
i
g
htt
oknowl
e
dg
eofpa
t
e
r
na
l
de
s
c
e
nt
”be
c
a
mec
r
uc
i
a
l
l
yi
mpor
t
a
n
t
.The
s
el
a
wsha
dbe
e
n“
or
i
g
i
na
l
l
yde
s
i
g
ne
df
or
e
c
onomi
cr
e
a
s
ons
,
”butbe
c
a
me“
mor
ei
mpor
t
a
nti
npr
ot
e
c
t
i
ngwhi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
sf
r
omt
he
stigma of knowing their colored brothers, sister and collateral relatives (Kein 263).
Jackson describes how many prominent Creoles (many of whom were members of
the Queyrouze salon) were adamant in their declaration of racial purity.
58
The poet-priest Adrien Rouquette and the local French paper L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
l
e
dt
hi
sof
f
e
ns
i
ve
.Fort
he
m,“
Cr
e
ol
e
”me
a
ntawhi
t
epe
r
s
onofna
t
i
ve
Fr
e
nc
ha
ndSpa
ni
s
hs
t
oc
k.Unf
or
t
una
t
e
l
y
,t
he“
my
t
hoft
heCr
e
ol
e
,
”
which grew to full maturity as a result of this controversy, pictured the
original Creoles as polished aristocrats, free from human faults as
greed and money-grubbing, a portrait, which was far wide of the mark.
Ge
nt
e
e
ll
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
eonCr
e
ol
el
i
f
e[
t
ha
tde
pi
c
t
st
hi
s
]“
g
ol
de
na
g
e
”[
i
s
found] in the works of Grace King and Kate Chopin, as the result of
this romanticizing of the Creoles in the last twenty years of the century
(15).
Long before the Civil War, the Creoles had lost their hold on the region—the
Civil War was merely the felling blow. In spite of myth building, their world belonged to
t
hepa
s
t
.By1860,Tr
e
g
l
es
a
y
st
ha
t“
t
heCr
e
ol
e
sha
dc
l
e
a
r
l
yl
os
t
”e
ve
na
st
he“
f
i
r
s
t
generation born after the purchase came into maturity, young men such as the historian
Charles Gayarré, the playwright-editor-impresario Placide Canonge, the linguist
Alexander Dimitry, the physician Armand Mercier and the priest-poe
tAdr
i
e
nRouque
t
t
e
”
(
Tr
e
g
l
e156)
.The
s
eme
nhope
df
o
r“
La Renaissance Louisianaise,
”a
ndt
he
ywe
r
e
instrumental in engendering and fostering the romantic Creole myth. They championed
the ideas of white supremacy, and attacked and demonized George Washington Cable
whot
he
yr
e
g
a
r
de
da
s“
t
hea
g
g
r
e
s
s
i
vea
g
i
t
a
t
orf
ort
her
i
g
ht
sofNe
g
r
oe
s
”(
Woodwa
r
d
Strange Career 38). The Creoles felt that in losing the war, they had lost doubly. Their
“
hopes for political and cultural dominance had vanished in the relentless demographic
Ame
r
i
c
a
ni
z
a
t
i
onoft
hec
i
t
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e173)
.Sot
heCr
e
ol
e
sr
e
t
r
e
a
t
e
di
nt
oaf
i
c
t
i
on,
imagining themselves to be proud aristocrats who had suffered as the hands of the
Yankee hordes and had been stripped of wealth and prestige. They saw themselves as
59
tragic and valiant figures in the myth of their own making, recalling the old days when
they had ruled over the domain of sugar and cotton with the just and gentle hand of a
superior race, treating happy and content slaves like kindly father-figures and gentle
guides. Situating themselves in the fictitious world of Sir Walter Scott, the Creoles
erected a mythical Creole nobleman, a noble and kingly demigod who revered the sacred
purity of the gentle women folk; he was a man of unquestionable honor finding in fiction
a
n“
a
me
l
i
or
a
t
i
oni
nt
her
e
a
s
s
ur
a
nc
e
sofa
ni
ma
g
i
ne
dpa
s
t
”(
174)
.
As part of this fiction, the 1875 J
e
we
l
l
’
sCr
e
s
c
e
ntCi
t
yI
l
l
us
t
r
at
e
ddefines the
Creole as irrevocably white. In an 1885 public address at Tulane University, Gayarré
painstakingly and thoroughly described the etymology of the term Creole asserting that it
could only mean those of pure white blood. He also changed the term to include an
adjective to describe t
hos
ewhowe
r
ede
s
c
e
nda
nt
soft
he“
a
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
t
i
c
”a
nd“
c
hi
va
l
r
ous
”
l
i
ne
a
g
eofCr
e
ol
es
t
oc
k”(
Tr
e
g
l
e1
8
0)
.Wha
tGa
y
a
r
r
édi
dnotr
e
l
a
t
ea
tt
hi
st
i
mewa
st
he
“
heha
dhi
ms
e
l
ff
a
t
he
r
e
dac
hi
l
di
n1825byaf
r
e
ewoma
nofc
ol
or
”a
sr
e
ve
a
l
e
dbyhi
s
biographer Edwar
dM.Soc
ol
a
.Tr
e
g
l
ec
l
a
i
mst
ha
tGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
sobs
e
s
s
i
onwi
t
ht
hepur
i
t
yof
t
hebl
oodl
i
ne
swa
sbor
n“
mor
eofr
a
c
i
a
lf
e
a
r
st
ha
nofe
t
hni
cpr
i
de...[
a
nd]s
ome
tt
he
e
mot
i
ona
lne
e
dsofadi
s
t
r
a
ug
hts
oc
i
e
t
y
”(
181)
.Hi
sa
udi
e
nc
el
i
s
t
e
ne
dt
ohi
sl
onga
nd
rhetori
c
a
l
l
yove
r
bl
owns
pe
e
c
h“
TheCr
e
ol
e
sofHi
s
t
or
ya
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
sofRoma
nc
e
”a
n
d
presumably decided to believe every word.
Illustrious members of Creole society hoped for La Renaissance Louisianaise.
This group consisted of the Creole cultural elite, including Placide Canonge, Cyprien and
Numa Dufour, Charles Deléry, Victor Debouchel, Charles Gayarré and Henri Vignaud,
many of whom were members of the Queyrouze salon. They refused to see that the
60
economic system, which had supported their lifestyle, was based on human injustice. An
example of their obtuseness can be seen in an 1866 article in the Daily Crescent that
de
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
tt
he“
i
ns
t
i
t
ut
i
onofdome
s
t
i
cs
e
r
vi
t
ude
”ha
dbe
e
n“
wr
ong
f
ul
l
yde
nomi
na
t
e
d
‘
Af
r
i
c
a
ns
l
a
ve
r
y
’
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e165)
.I
nma
nywa
y
st
he
ywe
r
e trying to escape the reality of
their situation and to deny responsibility, but ultimately they could never escape their past
orde
nywha
tTr
e
g
l
ede
s
c
r
i
be
sa
sa“
ha
unt
e
dhe
a
r
t
--”f
or
e
ve
rha
unt
e
dbyt
hepa
s
t
.He
s
howst
he
mt
obepa
r
tofa“
s
oc
i
e
t
yg
r
ounde
d in the abomination of racial arrogance and
s
oc
i
a
li
nj
us
t
i
c
e...i
g
nor
a
nc
e
,mor
a
li
ns
e
ns
i
t
i
vi
t
ya
ndc
ul
t
ur
a
li
mpove
r
i
s
hme
nt
”(
178)
.
For many, the mirror that was held up to them by the progressive ideologies of the Union
was not one they wished to endorse. In their blind complacency they had refused to see
t
hes
i
g
n
sofc
ha
ng
es
oc
l
e
a
r
l
yout
l
i
n
e
di
nCa
bl
e
’
s1884Creoles of Louisiana.I
nCa
bl
e
’
s
other novels and character sketches, he exposed aspects of their culture that were difficult
to balance with the Creole assumptions of identity as the refined aristocrat. To that end,
t
he
ya
t
t
e
mpt
e
dt
o“
s
hoott
heme
s
s
e
ng
e
r
”a
ndt
ur
ne
dt
he
i
rba
c
ksons
oc
i
a
lpr
og
r
e
s
s
i
vi
s
m.
In their refusal to become a part of the future, they condemned themselves to the past.
Only the myth survived them.
TheCr
e
ol
emy
t
hbe
c
a
me“
s
ouni
ve
r
s
a
l
l
ya
c
c
e
pt
e
da
st
r
ut
ht
ha
tt
he
yf
ound
r
a
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
one
ve
ni
nt
hepa
g
e
sofot
he
r
wi
s
ec
ompe
t
e
ntpr
of
e
s
s
i
ona
lhi
s
t
or
i
a
ns
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
182). Tregle gives proof of the French Creoles success in transforming their myth into
historical fact by citing the 1915 the Louisiana State Court of Appeals ruling. The court
s
t
i
pul
a
t
e
dt
ha
t“
‘
whe
nape
r
s
oni
sc
a
l
l
e
daCr
e
ol
et
hi
se
vi
de
nc
e
sa
na
bs
e
nc
eofa
nyNe
g
r
o
bl
ood’
”(
183)
.TheLoui
s
i
a
naHi
s
t
or
i
c
a
ls
oc
i
e
t
ya
f
f
i
r
me
dt
heaccuracy of the definition
put forth by Gayarré , and in 1922, a New Orleans newspaper article gave his definition
61
ofCr
e
o
l
e
s
:“
He
r
ei
nLoui
s
i
a
naa‘
Cr
e
ol
e
’ha
sne
ve
rbe
e
na
ny
t
hi
ngbutade
s
c
e
nda
ntoft
he
original French and Spanish settlers born in Louisi
a
nai
ns
t
e
a
dofFr
a
nc
eorSpa
i
n.
”The
same article states that if the term is used in reference to black people, it is most probably
an anachronism of slave trades, and therefore was not applicable.
In the end, one must ask: Who won the claim to history? Cable or Gayarré? If one
were to ask people on the street what the term Creole means they most likely will say that
it describes a person of mixed blood—a
c
c
or
di
ngt
oCa
bl
e
’
sde
f
i
ni
t
i
on.Howe
ve
r
,i
fone
were to ask that same question in southern Louisiana, the answer might be very different
indeed—perhaps it would describe the French, the Acadians or Cajuns, or Creoles of
Color. The macaronic path of this term implies that it is as fluid and complex as the
people it describes—a people of synthesis—of language, ethnicity, culture, and politics—
indeed a mosaïque.
Le
ona
’
swor
l
dvi
e
w,howe
v
e
r
,ha
damuc
hna
r
r
owe
rf
oc
us
,a
nds
hea
t
t
e
mpt
e
dt
o
write into existence an idealized white French Creole culture and to preserve its claim to
history. For her the demise of her culture was also the loss of a dream, and she did not
blame the Creoles for this; instead, she blamed the Americans. In her unpublished work
i
nFr
e
nc
he
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Silhouettes Créoles,
”Que
y
r
ouz
ede
s
c
r
i
be
she
rc
ul
t
ur
ea
ndt
hewa
y
si
n
which it was being transformed by Americanization. In this (translated) sketch, she
s
pe
a
kst
o“
t
hos
ewhodi
dnotknowt
heNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsofa
ne
a
r
l
i
e
rt
i
me
,
”t
hos
ewhoha
ve
not“
knownhowt
os
pe
a
kt
hes
t
r
a
n
g
eCr
e
ol
el
a
ng
ua
g
e
.
”Shes
a
y
st
ha
ti
twa
ss
i
mi
l
a
rt
ot
he
West Indies French, but this original language is dying in the face of Dickens and
1
Tour
g
ue
ne
f
f
.
”
Shebe
moa
nst
ha
tf
a
c
tt
ha
t“
be
c
a
us
eofs
l
a
ve
r
y
,t
he
r
eha
sa
r
i
s
e
nba
r
ba
r
i
c
1
Ivan Tourgueneff (1818-1883), Russian Writer
62
prejudice against the character traits of the former Louisianans, the ones who at last have
disappeared.
”Shea
t
t
a
c
kst
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
,s
a
y
i
ng
:
other tyrannies no less flagrant and with abuses no less grave have succeeded here
in masses, those who are the descendents of the victorious North, those with a
feudal past. So well have they succeeded, that there are those of us who believe
that we will not survive the transformation, so firmly entrenched are they now,
t
ha
tt
he
yc
a
nnowde
c
l
a
r
e
“f
oral
ongt
i
menow,t
hi
sha
sbe
e
nourc
ount
r
y
!
”
Shes
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
t
hepe
r
i
odoft
heol
dCr
e
ol
e
sa
r
eg
onef
or
e
ve
r
,a
ndha
r
don its
r
ui
nsr
i
s
e
sa
not
he
rc
r
e
e
d:t
heoneofmone
y
,
”a
nds
hema
ke
st
hec
ha
r
g
et
ha
tt
he“
mone
yof
the old American republic is a tyrant more inexorable than that of a despotic crown, for
the empire is absolute, more than . . . the divine rights of crown or t
hr
one
.
”Thos
ewho
a
r
evi
c
t
or
i
ous
,s
hes
a
y
s
,onl
ys
uc
c
e
e
di
nput
t
i
ngdownot
he
r
s
.Thewor
dsof“
Da
nt
on1
remain true through the centuries. In truth, the revolutions are done to put down those on
top, only to make those who were at the bottom rise to the top.
”Shec
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
st
he
Americans and uses the words of Charles Gayarré, defending the term aristocracy as it is
a
ppl
i
e
dt
ohe
rc
ul
t
ur
e
.Gr
a
nt
e
d,“
t
he
r
edi
de
xi
s
ta
na
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
c
yi
nLoui
s
i
a
na
.Buthow
some apply the term now is ridiculously false . . . our society was essentially plebian and
de
moc
r
a
t
i
c
.
”Shea
r
g
ue
st
ha
t“
t
het
r
uet
y
peofCr
e
ol
ewa
sac
hi
va
l
r
ousFr
e
nc
hma
n”but
t
hi
sha
sc
ha
ng
e
dbe
c
a
us
eoft
he“
a
bs
or
pt
i
onoft
heCr
e
ol
er
a
c
ei
nt
ot
heAng
l
oSa
xon
e
l
e
me
n
t
,
not
a
bl
yt
hos
ef
r
om t
hee
a
s
t
”
:
The shape of the face lengthens . . . and sharpens . . . and loses it softness; the eyes
become more piercing and have a metallic light in them, and the voice changes as
well; one generally had a deep and vibrating tone of the Creole, then it rises . . .
into an American voice, becoming sharp and strangely pointed. At last the soft
1
George Jacques Danton (1759-94), lawyer, and leader in French Revolution—later charged
with a conspiracy to overthrow the government and was sent to the guillotine
63
French language can now only be remembered . . . now it has the rhythm of the
English language, or to be more exact, American.
Her words can be viewed as a reaction against the principle of manifest destiny
espoused by Anglo-Americans, and in her final indictment, she describes the effect this
i
de
ol
og
i
c
a
lma
nda
t
eha
suponma
r
g
i
na
l
i
z
e
dc
ul
t
ur
e
s
.Shec
ha
r
g
e
st
ha
t“
t
hei
r
r
e
s
i
s
t
i
bl
e
force of assimilation takes over rapidly with resistance—opposition; the tides rises to
s
ubme
r
g
eus
,t
hec
ur
r
e
ntdr
ownsus
”[
UU-70 6:47].
In this excerpt, Leona uses the theme of drowning, and this continues in her poem,
“
Imprecatio.
”Shes
pe
a
ksoft
he“
f
a
di
ngf
l
owe
rofourCr
e
ol
er
a
c
e
”t
ha
tha
donc
ebe
e
na
“
pr
oudr
a
c
e
.
”Shebl
a
me
st
hi
sont
he“
ot
he
rna
t
i
on”t
ha
tha
se
xi
l
e
dhe
rc
ul
t
ur
ei
nt
o
oblivion, submerging it completely:
[It] Crushes under their heels the generations
Of the French and the Latin, and the grand Spanish
And all those who knew the same passion
To love, to seek vengeance, to hate, to forgive
....................................
Cut off and exiled, we are ushered to the
Large rolling river where its heavy waves take us under
Taking all, carrying all, into the tomb of the abyss
[UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 255).
In a poem written to Leona, an admirer shares her sense of loss and refers to a
br
a
c
e
l
e
tt
ha
tLe
onawe
a
r
sa
sas
y
mbolofapr
oudhe
r
i
t
a
g
e
.Her
e
f
e
r
st
oLe
onaa
sa“
l
os
t
pr
i
nc
e
s
sofawa
s
t
e
dl
i
ne
:
”
Thyba
nd,Le
ona
,l
i
k
eol
dRome
’
spr
oudha
l
l
s
,
Whose polished columns, yield not to decay;
64
Their classic heads, served the vulgar Galls,
Themselves, their masters, even in our day,
Though Plantagenets, Tudors, and Capulets all have passed away
II
Andt
houqua
i
ntbr
a
c
e
l
e
t
,Le
ona
’
sf
onde
s
tc
ha
r
m,
Ancestral relic of a glorious race,
Thouonc
ee
nc
i
r
c
l
e
dar
oy
a
lBr
i
t
on’
sa
r
m;
And even now a nobler arm grace:
Fort
houwhe
nwor
n
,Le
ona
’
swr
i
s
t
se
mbr
a
c
e
.
Andne
’
e
rdi
d’
s
tt
h
o
uonwor
t
hi
e
ra
r
ms
hi
ne
,
Than hers, lost princess of a wasted line
--J.S.M.
January 1890
[UU-70 6:45].
These are just a few examples of the voices of a culture struggling against its
de
mi
s
e
,a
ndt
he
ys
e
r
vet
ode
mons
t
r
a
t
et
ha
tt
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
s
’dur
a
t
i
ona
sahe
g
e
moni
c
culture was as brief as it was passionate. As M. Lynn Weiss says in Cr
e
ol
eEc
hoe
s
,“this
dynamic society that began the nineteenth century as a cast-off French possession . . . .
Byt
hec
e
nt
ur
y
’
se
nd,s
a
wt
hede
mi
s
eofavi
a
bl
eFr
a
nc
ophonec
ommuni
t
y
”
(
“
I
nt
r
oduc
t
i
on”xxxi
i
i
)
.Oneoft
her
ol
e
st
ha
tLe
onaa
s
s
ume
da
ss
hebe
g
a
nhe
rwr
i
t
i
ng
career was to speak for her white French Creole culture, with the hopes that the power of
her pen could serve as a buttress against the flood of change. She was attempting to
salvage her island of aristocratic, chivalrous, and intellectual French culture—a
mythological and idealized version of a culture that existed only within the lines of
poetry. In her elitist and classist worldview, she did not acknowledge that the changes in
her beloved Vieux Carré was not a fall from grace, for the old Quarter had always been a
mixture of cultures, and many could lay claim to the term Creole. Even as she was
unable or unwilling to relinquish her dream of an idealized culture, she simultaneously
65
questioned its existence in “Agoni
e
” C’
e
t
ai
tuner
e
v
e
,he
l
asunr
e
v
et
ourc
e
l
a!( It was a
dream, alas! A dream all! (Appendix 237). In spite of her misgivings, she devoted her
writing career to the reconstruction and preservation of a time and a place, never truly
acknowledging that she was chronicling the casualties of dreams. Even so, her purpose in
writing does not mitigate the need for the study of a marginalized body of work, which
c
a
n“
c
o
n
t
r
i
but
et
oamor
ec
ompl
e
xunde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngoft
heor
i
g
i
nsofAmerican literature
a
ndc
ul
t
ur
e
”(
We
i
s
sxxxi
i
i
)
,a
ndCha
pt
e
rThr
e
ewi
l
li
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
et
heuni
quec
ul
t
ur
eof
t
he
s
epe
opl
ea
ndt
hi
sr
e
g
i
on,apl
a
c
et
ha
twa
s“
a
r
g
ua
bl
yt
hemos
tmul
t
i
c
ul
t
ur
a
lofpl
a
c
e
s
i
nNor
t
hAme
r
i
c
a
,
”onet
ha
tof
f
e
r
e
d“
c
ons
i
de
r
a
bl
eg
i
f
t
st
oAme
r
i
c
a
nl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
”(
We
i
s
s
xxxvi). This largesse can prove beneficial only if we are able to acknowledge these gifts,
and take responsibility for them—for regardless of culture and class, we share a national
past, and we must, in turn, acknowledge that without the voices of the marginalized our
national discourse is diminished by their absence.
66
CHAPTER THREE: VIEUX CARRÉ
Indeed, hospitality is a salient characteristic of the
inhabitants of Louisiana, and is inherent in them.
They do not consider it as a duty or a virtue . . . .
The Creoles of Louisiana owe their impulsive
generosity and that kindness verging even on
imprudence, greatly to their direct descent from the
Latin races, whose blood courses through their veins
--“
TheCr
e
ol
e
s
” Le
onaQue
yrouze
As the historical lens widens its perspective even further, we can see how
dependent the Creoles were upon the cosmopolitan nature of the city of New Orleans. In
many ways their environment and their identity were inseparable—their subsistence
depended upon the other in a dialectic system of self-reflexive definition. Only when this
nineteenth century city is revived in our modern imagination can we grasp what it meant
to be both Creole and an inhabitant of the Vieux Carré. To that end, this chapter will
attempt to once again breathe life into the Quarter, with the sounds and sights of the
streets, including details that will serve as descriptive detail for the Queyrouze biography.
Le
ona
’
swor
l
dwa
se
s
s
e
nt
i
a
l
l
yFr
e
n
c
h,i
nc
us
t
oms
,a
r
t
,a
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
ur
eand cuisine, but more
importantly, she believed that the continued existence of her culture depended upon the
survival of the French language and literature.
Most citizens in New Orleans were Catholic and most spoke French, but by 1855,
the use of the French language began to be overtaken by English, which was used in the
major newspapers, in most market transactions, in the government, and in the theatre. By
1860, the French dominance in the region began to subside. The free population in New
Orleans was “
99,
071,ofwhom 48,
601or40pe
r
c
e
nt
,we
r
ef
or
e
i
g
n-bor
n”i
n1860.(
Tr
e
g
l
e
67
164). The Creoles began to become fearful of the newcomers because many of them came
to Louisiana to pursue agricultural and mercantile opportunities. The Creoles perceived
this influx as a threat to the established Creole culture. Many, including Charles Gayarré,
were vocal in their dismay over the changes that were occurring in their region, and
Gayarré became the spokesperson for the sentiments of many of the Creoles. They
became fearful that their carefully nurtured culture would be eroded by the influx of other
cultures and languages, so they started their own publication in 1861 under the guidance
of Emile Hiriart. It was called La Renaissance Louisianaise: Orgame des Populations
Franc-Americaines du Sud, and it was supported by the following members:
Placide Canonge, Cyprien and Numa Dufour, Charles Deléry, Victor Debouchel,
Charles Gayarré, Henri Vignaud, and Dominique Rouquette. It was committed
passionately to a double goal, absolute victory of the Southern Confederacy and
creation . . .[of a] community whose heart, mind, and spirit was irrevocably
French
(Tregle 168).
Many of these people were individuals who would mentor Leona in later years as
she joined them in the Queyrouze salon. However, dramatic changes were about to occur
that no written document or adherence to French customs could prevent. No matter their
allegiances or loyalties, their carefully constructed world collapsed the same year that
Leona was born—1861.
The city was occupied by Union forces for fourteen years beginning with the fall
to Farragut in April 1862 and ending when the Union troops left in 1876. Louisiana had
the longest Reconstruction period of any state, and the effect of this was deep and long
lasting, but the decline of the Creole culture was also caused by the changes in language,
68
education, commerce, and government. By 1868 elementary schools could no longer
teach in French. All legal documents had to be in English. In a periodical Le Carillon,
Cr
e
ol
e
st
r
i
e
dt
ohol
dont
ot
he
i
rl
a
n
g
ua
g
ea
ndt
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
e
,de
c
l
a
r
i
ngt
ha
tFr
e
nc
hwa
s“
t
he
language of civilization which will serve forever to vanquish German Mysticism and
Anglo-Sa
xonma
t
e
r
i
a
l
i
s
m’
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e170)
.I
n“
Silhouettes Créoles”Le
onac
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
st
he
Americans for their subservience to another creed—“
t
heoneofmone
y...at
y
r
a
ntmor
e
i
ne
xor
a
bl
et
ha
nade
s
pot
i
cc
r
own.
”Emi
l
yTot
ha
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
e
st
heCr
e
ol
e
s
’s
e
nt
i
me
nt
s
r
e
g
a
r
di
n
gt
heAme
r
i
c
a
nswhe
ns
hes
umma
r
i
z
e
sKa
t
eChopi
n’
svi
e
wofac
e
r
t
a
i
n“
t
y
pe
”of
French Creole:
Thea
ng
r
y
,unr
e
g
e
ne
r
a
t
eFr
e
nc
hma
n...l
oa
t
he
de
ve
r
y
t
hi
ng“
Ame
r
i
c
a
n.
”I
nNe
w
Orleans, that meant virtually everyone who spoke English and lived outside the
French Quarter, where the old Creoles had hunkered down, grumbling about bad
times and rude upstarts (63).
The tension between the two factions was further exacerbated when Creoles were
subjected to counterattacks by American writers who questioned the purity of the Creole
bl
ooda
ndc
l
a
i
me
dt
ha
tCr
e
ol
e
swe
r
ea
c
t
ua
l
l
yde
s
c
e
nda
nt
sof“
Moor
sa
nds
l
a
ve
sbr
oug
h
t
i
nt
oGa
ulbyRoma
nl
e
g
i
ons
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e170)
.Sovi
t
r
i
ol
i
cwe
r
es
omeoft
hee
di
t
or
i
a
l
exchanges that two editors actually challenged each other in a duel. The Creoles now
f
oundl
i
t
t
l
ehumori
nt
heYa
nke
e
’
si
g
nor
a
nc
ea
boutt
het
e
r
m Creole.
Americans thought that the Creoles were still too connected to France and that
their loyalties to family excluded them from joining into the progressivism of the
Yankees. To some extent, the Creole demise was their own fault—for they were so
“
be
hi
ndi
ne
duc
a
t
i
ona
ndpol
i
t
i
c
a
le
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
”t
ha
tt
he
yc
oul
dnot“
a
s
s
ur
et
he
i
rc
ont
i
nue
d
69
he
g
e
mo
n
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e151)
.Thi
si
se
a
s
yt
ode
t
e
r
mi
nei
nhi
nds
i
g
ht
,buta
tt
het
i
me
,t
he
cultural decline of the French Creoles was not readily visible, even to outsiders. For
instance when Lafcadio Hearn saw New Orleans for the first time in 1877 from the ship,
he was enthralled by what he saw:
. . . I first viewed New Orleans from the deck of the great steamboat that had
carried me from the gray northwestern mists into the tepid, orange-scented air of
the South . . . my impression of the city [was that it was] drowsing under the
violet and gold of a November morning . . . . Even before I had left the steamboat
my imagination had already flown beyond the wilderness of the cotton-bales, the
sierra-shaped roofs of the sugar sheds, the massive fronts of refineries and storehouses (Hutson 6).
Howe
ve
r
,t
oHe
a
r
n’
sdi
s
c
e
r
ni
nge
y
e
,hec
oul
ds
e
ehi
nts of the decay. In a letter to
a friend Hearn wrote:
When I first saw it first—sunrise over Louisiana—tears sprang to my eyes. It was
like young death—a dead bride crowned with orange flowers—a dead face that
asked for a kiss. I cannot say how fair and rich and beautiful this dead South is
(Hutson 6).
In many ways Hearn was seeing beyond the carefully constructed world that the
Creoles has created, a world that was quickly disappearing, for they failed to
acknowledge the surge of change that was poised to engulf them. Instead, the wealthy
French Creole citizens of New Orleans occupied their time enjoying cultural
entertainment: Theirs was a world of opera and theatre, balls, dancing, and soirees.
Today, it is hard for us to image how insulated they were, for mass communication and
70
technology have connected and homogenized our culture, but for the nineteenth-century
Creoles, their Francophone culture was carefully nurtured by French newspapers, books,
conferences, foreign education, and theatre, thus enabling them to ignore the burgeoning
culture that was overtaking their city. They were isolated in the French bastion of
“
Fr
e
nc
ht
own”orVieux Carré --what we now call the French Quarter. On the other side
of Canal Street the American contingent flourished.
To accurately perceive this consciously created world, one must look closely at
the lives they constructed for themselves, and the Queyrouze family provides an intimate
glimpse. When I interviewed the family, they recalled visits to the Bayou home of Maxim
(
Le
ona
’
sy
oung
e
rbr
ot
he
r
)whowa
sar
e
s
pe
c
t
e
da
t
t
or
ne
yi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
.The
ys
a
i
dt
ha
t
entering his home was like stepping into another world, a world filled with the art,
f
ur
ni
t
ur
e
,a
ndt
hee
l
e
g
a
ntt
r
a
ppi
ng
sofFr
e
nc
hc
ul
t
ur
e
.Suc
hwa
sLe
ona
’
swor
l
d.In order
to get a true sense of her surroundings, one can look for descriptions written during her
l
i
f
e
t
i
me
.Ane
ws
pa
pe
ra
r
t
i
c
l
ee
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Mi
s
sQue
y
r
ouz
e
:aDi
s
t
i
ng
ui
s
he
dLa
dyoft
he
Cr
e
s
c
e
ntCi
t
y
”de
s
c
r
i
be
she
rhomea
sonewi
t
h“
Spa
ni
s
ha
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
ur
ewi
t
h thick walls,
domed gates, flagged yard that leads to a winding stairs which gives entrance to a parlor
t
ha
tmi
g
htbec
a
l
l
e
dmor
epr
ope
r
l
yamus
e
um ofr
a
r
ea
r
ta
ndhi
s
t
or
i
cl
or
e
.
”I
nt
hepa
r
l
o
r
,
t
he
r
ea
r
epor
t
r
a
i
t
sove
rwhi
c
hhung“
Ge
ne
r
a
l
s
’j
e
we
l
e
ds
wor
ds, the gifts of grateful
mona
r
c
hs
,me
da
l
s
,l
e
t
t
e
r
sa
ndc
ommi
s
s
i
ons
.Ther
a
r
e
s
tofa
r
tg
e
msa
r
ei
ns
c
r
i
be
d:‘
Fr
om
y
ourf
r
i
e
nd,Na
pol
e
onBona
pa
r
t
e
.
”Le
ona
’
sf
a
vor
i
t
epl
a
c
et
os
i
twa
sont
he“
c
ha
i
ron
which Napoleon sat in council of war, and she claimed thatt
he“
onl
ye
nt
i
r
es
e
tof
furniture which was the property of Marie Antoinette that ever crossed the Atlantic
Oc
e
a
n”wa
she
rpa
r
l
ors
e
t
.
” Ea
c
hpi
e
c
ei
nt
hes
e
twa
s“
c
ove
r
e
dwi
t
ht
her
oy
a
lc
oa
tof
71
arms and stamped with the initials of the manufacturer. The silk was woven for each
1
pi
e
c
eoff
ur
ni
t
ur
e...wa
sme
l
l
owe
dbyt
i
met
oas
of
t
e
rhueofc
r
i
ms
ona
ndpur
pl
e
”
[UU-71 7:52].
Another newspaper article written by Ella A. Giles on March 3, 1889 quotes an
a
dmi
r
e
rofLe
onawhode
s
c
r
i
be
dLe
ona
’
shome:
[In] a curious old house in New Orleans [Leona] had a salon that seemed a quaint
survival of the eighteenth century. It was furnished with the regency furniture
brought from France by her ancestors, who came to Louisiana in the days of the
profligate monarch [UU-71 7:52].
Leona, as well as many other French Creoles, constructed an environment that
served to isolate them from the rest of New Orleans society. Hidden from the streets,
through arched pathways, were their Caribbean inspired courtyards, filled with tropical
plants and fountains. In many ways, this further insulated the Creoles from the
cosmopolitan diversity that filled the streets past their gates. Their enclosed society
matched the physical world within which they ensconced themselves, and Leona captured
this self-reflected environment in her descriptions of the typical homes in the Vieux
Carré, many of whom were similar to her own. In her unpublished French manuscript,
“
Silhouettes Créoles,
”s
hema
ke
ss
t
r
ongc
onne
c
t
i
onsbe
t
we
e
nhe
rc
ul
ture and the
1
A photograph of Miss Queyrouze at her writing desk can be found at the LSU Hill Memorial
Li
br
a
r
ys
pe
c
i
a
le
xhi
bi
t
s“
Cr
e
ol
e
s
.
”
72
a
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
ur
eoft
heQua
r
t
e
r
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
heFr
e
nc
ha
ndt
heSpa
ni
s
hs
t
i
l
lha
unthe
r
e
;t
he
i
r
r
i
c
hbr
e
a
t
hs
t
i
l
lmove
st
hr
oug
ht
he
s
et
hi
c
kwa
l
l
s
.
”De
s
c
r
i
bi
ngt
hehi
s
t
or
ya
ndf
or
m oft
he
s
t
r
uc
t
ur
e
s
,s
hes
a
y
st
ha
t“
t
he
s
es
i
mpl
ebui
l
di
ng
swe
r
ebui
l
t principally under the Spanish
r
e
g
i
me
.
”Be
c
a
us
ehe
re
xt
e
ns
i
vede
s
c
r
i
pt
i
onss
e
r
vet
oi
l
l
umi
na
t
emor
et
ha
na
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
ur
e
,
and define her social parochialism as well, I have included a translated excerpt in its
entirety:
The walls lean against one another, and the arcade has a wide façade with a series
of regular festoons. The balconies have iron railings, rising above the first floor.
The archways hide the inner courtyard and shade the houses during the warm heat
of the day. Ridged cords line the high ceilings of vast rooms on the ground floor.
A heavy door with ornate carvings and a door knocker closes against the street
noises and opens into an immense corridor paved with stones and bricks;
overhead there is a big arch with a simple seal of an old cloister etched into the
stone. The shade offers a fresh respite in the warm days, but can be cold in winter.
This corridor, like a long hall, is separated from the courtyard by a range of arches
that open to the first floor, the only place to enter the apartments. Between the
corridor and the courtyard, there is usually an iron gate that is always closed so
one can safely leave the door unlocked to let in the breeze during the unending,
intense and implacable heat of the day. Through this gate, one can see a courtyard
with high and impassable walls, at the base of which are several plants and
climbing vines; the tenacious vines climb the walls covering it like a cloth of
green; the glycine foliage climbs the damp green walls, and the diaphanous
clusters of lilac perfumes the air, inclining towards the ground, losing its leaves in
curls. The honeysuckle and the bamboo, similar to the Alphonse Karr1, tramples
other more fragile vines, twisting together their numerous arms, mixing their
perfume and hues. In this courtyard there are arbors and trees. Now and then, the
starry fine leaves of the tropical plants with their thin blades tremble in the
slightest breeze with a dry clicking sound and cast shadows on the white stones in
the penetrating heat. From the bottom corner of the long courtyard, the walls rise
up to the top of the cupola, with its green pointed top that catches rain water that
falls into an enclosure decorated with wide iron circles . . . . The severe and
implacable façade of these abodes exudes a physical calm, but if one were to pass
during the day, one might hear bright noises, all at once, clear and radiant, coming
from the places that these walls shelter. Over the balcony, past the opened Persian
1
a plant with the same name as Jean Baptiste Alphonse Karr (1808-1890, the
French novelist, critic and floriculturist.
73
blinds, one clearly could hear the laughs, songs, and sounds more joyous than the
mere study of the piano [UU-70 3:37].
The“
i
mpl
a
c
a
bl
ef
a
c
a
de
”s
h
ede
s
c
r
i
be
ss
e
pa
r
a
t
e
she
rs
oc
i
e
t
yf
r
om t
hebur
g
e
oni
ng
mix of cultures outside her gated courtyard, and her choice of words suggests that she
viewed her culture as one of refinement and exclusivity. In an article reprinted from The
Home Journal of New York found among the Queyrouze papers dated Sunday March 3,
1889,e
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Le
onaQue
y
r
ouz
e
,
”El
l
aA.Gi
l
e
sa
l
l
ude
st
ot
hi
sc
onne
c
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nt
he
society and struct
ur
ewhe
ns
hede
s
c
r
i
be
st
he“
t
i
g
ht
l
yc
l
os
e
dbui
l
di
ng
s
”a
ndt
he“
r
e
l
i
c
sa
n
d
a
nt
i
qui
t
i
e
sofFr
e
nc
ht
own.
”I
nhe
ra
r
t
i
c
l
e
,s
hede
s
c
r
i
be
st
hee
xot
i
chi
dde
nwor
l
doft
he
s
a
l
ona
ndobs
e
r
ve
st
ha
t“
t
he
r
ea
r
ec
e
r
t
a
i
nt
y
pi
c
a
lSout
he
r
na
ndf
or
e
i
g
n-blooded women in
New Orleans of whom it is almost impossible to make satisfactory pen-portraits as it is to
mi
r
r
ort
hepe
c
ul
i
a
rs
c
e
ne
sa
mongwhi
c
ht
he
ymove
”
:
Leona Queyrouze is such a woman. She lives on St. Louis street one of the ancient
homes whose heavy doors and high walls on all sides defy the scrutiny of the
passer-by [ . . . There is] no hint . . . of the beauty lodged in the interior of the
paint -worn and time-stained building. Upon being admitted to the dingy,
darksome place, and stepping upon the damp and slippery gray stone floor
[below] these sepulchral entrances [and] hearing the sound of singing birds and
falling waters, [one] suddenly step[s] upon a golden beam which the sun sends
shimmering down . . . . In the near distance are trim flower beds lining the stone
wall and jars of brightly blooming plants and rose-vines reaching up to the ivied
galleries. The living apartments are not on the ground floor, but up in the air,
where more birds are chirping and singing and more vines are climbing and
thrusting their tendrils through every crack and cranny, and where, leaning from
the gallery, stands another dusky figure like unto the one that swung open the
ponderous door at the pealing of the gong, and who speaks in pure Spanish as she
escorts the guest on further through mysterious passages . . . through richly carved
doors . . . [to rooms] lofty and spacious . . . filled with mammoth mirrors and rare
pictures, elegant rugs and once-gorgeous tapestry [UU-71 7:52].
74
Connecting the physical salon to the cultural one, Giles offers a sketch of the
people who often visited the Queyrouze home:
[In] the ancient drawing room . . . on Wednesday evenings gray-haired judges,
learned physicians and ancient painters [visited] . . . . Later frequenters [ . . . were]
Lafcadio Hearn, Mollie Moore Davis and others of established fame in the gifted
coterie of New Orleans writers . . . . There is a chess-board and a whole game of
Paul Morphy, used when he was only ten years old, and on which his father and
grandfather played, one of the most prized relics [UU-71 7:52].
Giles then turns her attention to the physical details, all of which are
representative of the French culture that this salon nurtured and preserved:
Thepa
r
l
or[
i
s...]f
ur
ni
s
he
di
nt
he“
Di
r
e
c
t
oi
r
e
”orBona
parte style . . . . The
tables came from the reign of Louis the Fourteenth and are direct family
heirlooms. Here is a fine old chair in which Napoleon used to sit; there upon the
wa
l
li
soneofNa
pol
e
on’
sa
ut
og
r
a
phl
e
t
t
e
r
sf
r
a
me
di
nol
doa
ka
ndt
owhi
c
hi
s
attached a decorated medal given by him to Leon Queyrouze . . . . Here is an
antiquated bronze clock . . . here is a wonderful profile of Napoleon the First
when he was consul . . . . A unique little bookcase holds ------beautifully
embellished volumes and a skull . . . . [In] the family apartments [there is . . .] a
br
onz
ebus
tofSc
e
vol
a
,who‘
bur
nthi
sha
ndnott
obe
t
r
a
yhi
sc
ount
y
.. . . [In] the
parlor used daily, which is an immense one, there is an abundance of statuary . . .
antique and modern objects of art and vertu. There are busts of Byron, Hadyn,
Mendelssohn, Gluck, Rousseau, and Voltaire. There are on the walls masques of
Augustus and Venus. On a handsome mantel stands a lovely Venus looking over
her shoulder as if eyeing the fine bust of Plato
Gi
l
e
sc
onc
l
ude
st
ha
ti
nt
hi
spl
a
c
es
hes
e
ns
e
sa“
ha
z
yc
ons
c
i
ous
ne
s
sof
c
onc
e
a
l
e
dt
r
e
a
s
ur
e
sa
nddi
ml
yf
e
l
toc
c
ul
ti
nf
l
ue
nc
e
s
”
:
75
Even the quaint door-knobs and the queer collection of bric-a-brac suggest
profound secrets . . . . Everything seems to have designs upon the imagination.
One becomes dreamy and speculative in such an atmosphere. Why is the head of
t
he“
Dy
i
ngGl
a
di
a
t
or
”de
c
or
a
t
e
dwi
t
hs
wor
ds
,f
l
a
g
s
,dr
i
nki
ngc
upsa
ndpi
s
t
ol
s
?
Why is the Bust of Soule, the French lawyer, placed between Diana and Venus?
[UU-71 7:52].
To answer Giles question, I suggest that Leona perceived her station as one of
reason and argument (Soule) situated between love and war (Venus and Diana). These
c
l
a
s
s
i
c
a
lf
i
g
ur
e
sf
e
a
t
ur
e
dpr
omi
ne
nt
l
yi
nLe
ona
’
spoe
t
r
ywhe
r
eone will find references to
Di
a
naa
ndSc
e
vol
a
,a
ndt
hes
e
t
t
i
ngoft
woofhe
rpoe
ms
,“
L’
Re
gr
e
ta
nd“
Nocturne”i
si
n
t
hi
spa
r
l
or
.Whe
nGi
l
e
snot
i
c
e
sl
y
i
ngonas
he
l
f“
a
ni
nc
ong
r
uousPuc
hi
ne
l
l
oda
ng
l
i
ngi
t
s
limbs and grinning from a corner where it has been suspended by a bright green string [ . .
. bearing] the Creole inscription Pantin tire, Pantin pas Tire (As you pull the proper
s
t
r
i
ngc
r
e
a
t
ur
e
smove
)
,
”s
hea
s
kshe
ra
bouti
t
,a
ndLe
onaa
dmi
t
s
,“
Ye
s
,Iputi
the
r
e
.
Punchinello means much to me. He is, after a
l
l
,myf
a
vor
i
t
ei
nt
hi
sbi
z
a
r
r
er
oom.
”Thi
s
unapologetic recognition suggests a self-conscious quality about the choices she has made
i
nc
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
nghe
re
nvi
r
onme
nt
,onei
nwhi
c
hs
heha
s“
pul
l
e
dt
hepr
ope
rs
t
r
i
ng
s
”t
o
create her world.
Bot
hGi
l
e
s
’a
ndLe
ona
’
sd
e
s
c
r
i
pt
i
onsoft
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
ehomec
onj
ur
ee
t
he
r
e
a
l
and mystical images, so very different from the practical ideology and architecture of late
ni
ne
t
e
e
nt
hc
e
nt
ur
yAme
r
i
c
a
.Whe
nLe
onas
pe
a
ksoft
hebr
onz
ebus
tofSc
e
vol
a
,“
who
‘
bur
nthi
sha
ndnott
obe
t
r
a
yhi
sc
ount
y
,
’
”s
hea
c
knowl
e
dg
e
st
ha
ts
he“
pl
a
c
e
dhi
m ne
a
r
the door way to guard like a sentinel the Napoleonic parlor from the influence of the
mi
xe
dp
e
r
i
od.
”Byhe
rowna
dmi
s
s
i
on,s
her
e
ve
a
l
st
ha
ts
hei
sc
ons
c
i
ous
l
ya
t
t
e
mpt
i
ngt
o
separate herself from the American culture that was taking over her city. Indeed, her
76
parlor is a relic of the past and a fortress of French culture as once described by her
a
dmi
r
e
ra
sa
n“
a
nc
e
s
t
r
a
lr
e
l
i
cofag
l
or
i
ousr
a
c
e
.
”
When I questioned the family about the fate of the belongings described in this
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
,
t
he
yt
ol
dmet
ha
tmuc
hha
dbe
e
nl
os
tdur
i
ngt
hewa
r
.The
yr
e
l
a
t
e
dt
ha
tLe
ona
’
s
brother, Maxim, had stored his living room furniture with friends but that they never
returned the items; additionally, there had been a theft at one of the homes as well: A
thief entered through the basement window on the house on DeSoto Street and stole
several things. However, some of items that Giles had described can be found at the
Loui
s
i
a
naSt
a
t
eMus
e
um.Gi
l
e
sme
nt
i
one
dt
ha
t“
t
he
re are on the walls masques of
Augustus and Venus. On a handsome mantel stands a lovely Venus looking over her
s
houl
de
ra
si
fe
y
e
i
ngt
hef
i
nebus
tofPl
a
t
o.
”I
nal
e
t
t
e
rda
t
e
dSe
pt
e
mbe
r26,1922,t
he
museum curator, Robert Glenk wrote to Leona while she was living at 1465 North
Robertson Street in New Orleans. In the letter, Glenk acknowledges the gifts to the
museum, which were the following:
Abr
onz
e
dma
s
kofDi
a
na
,
oneofVe
nus
,a
ndoneoft
heDy
i
ngGl
a
di
a
t
or
”[
a
ndt
he
l
oa
nof
]“
onel
a
r
g
epor
t
r
a
i
tofy
ourself—an oil by J. Genin, one large water color
(pastel) likeness of yourself by Rivoire, a large bronzed bust of Mesmer, two large
bronzed plaster busts—one of Beethoven and one of Schiller, with their supports
to hang against the wall, and one granite head of an idol dating from the Stone
Age in Egypt (Access No. 8247 & 48)
[UU-69 4:28].
The family had no knowledge of the whereabouts of the remaining items; perhaps
these things were sold along the way. Even today, the remnants of many gilded
possessions can be found in the antique shops along Royal Street. Try as she might to
77
r
e
s
i
s
t
,Le
ona
’
swor
l
dwa
sc
ha
ng
i
n
g
:Ca
na
lSt
r
e
e
t
,whi
c
hha
ds
e
pa
r
a
t
e
dt
heCr
e
ol
e
sf
r
om
the Americans, symbolically, became the city center. Outside her cloistered walls, New
Orleans was a city of bustling activities and commerce that was quickly becoming the
“
mi
xe
dpe
r
i
od”t
ha
tLe
onaf
e
a
r
e
d--the infiltration of Anglo culture. To read her profile of
the Quarter, one could get the erroneous impression that her world was predominantly
white French Creole, hardly the case in a city that included a 30% population of people of
color. Beyond her carefully preserved bastion of French culture was the thriving
cosmopolitan city of New Orleans whose architecture bespoke of different sensibilities
and directions.
Late nineteenth century New Orleans is described by Marie Adrien Persac (18231873), whose work is profiled by John H. Lawrence in The Historic New Orleans
Collections Quarterly. Persac was a Louisiana artist who painstakingly documented in his
drawings and gouaches (opaque watercolor) the architecture of the city. He was known as
“
ac
hr
o
n
i
c
l
e
roft
hea
nt
e
be
l
l
umpl
a
nt
a
t
i
ons
c
e
nea
ndt
hepos
t
-Civil War commercial
a
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
ur
eofNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
”(
2)
.La
wr
e
nc
ede
s
c
r
i
be
st
hedr
a
wi
ng
s“
oft
hetwo sides of
Canal Street in New Orleans stretching for the Mississippi to present-day Basin street
offer[ing] a view of post-Civil War New Orleans that showed a city undamaged by war
a
ndr
e
a
d
yf
orbus
i
ne
s
s
”(
2)
.I
nt
hes
a
mepubl
i
c
a
t
i
on,J
ohnMa
g
i
l
li
n“
Pe
r
s
a
c
’
sCa
na
l
St
r
e
e
t
”d
e
s
c
r
i
be
sPe
r
s
a
ca
sa
na
r
t
i
s
twhobr
oug
ht“
t
he19th century street to life with its
ironwork galleries and balconies, mule-drawn streetcars, stone paving blocks, gas
s
t
r
e
e
t
l
i
g
ht
s
,a
ndt
a
l
lwoode
npol
e
ss
uppor
t
i
ngt
e
l
e
g
r
a
phwi
r
e
s
”(
3)
.Magill describes the
shift in commerce away from the Quarter to Canal Street, which demonstrates the decline
in one area and the growth in the other:
78
The first few blocks were lined with small houses and manufacturers,
while past the Customs House . . . . were large clothing and hardware
dealers mingled with a few retailers. Between Chartres and Rampart Street
wa
st
hec
e
nt
e
roft
hec
i
t
y
’
sf
a
s
hi
ona
ndl
uxur
yt
r
a
de...dr
yg
oods
,
not
i
ons
,f
a
s
hi
on,a
n
dj
e
we
l
r
ys
t
or
e
s
.I
t
sc
ount
e
r
pa
r
t
swe
r
eNe
wYor
k’
s
Broadwa
ya
ndChi
c
a
g
o’
sSt
a
t
eSt
r
e
e
t....By1873Ca
na
lSt
r
e
e
twa
sa
l
s
o
the center of town. Throngs of people gathered here for events ranging
from carnival parades to political demonstrations. . . . . By the mid 1880s
electric streetlights replaced gas, and countless telephone and electric
wires tangled overhead on tall poles. Electric streetcars replaced mules,
while paving stones gave way to asphalt . . . . Although the French Quarter
was declining as a business center, Chartres and Royal Streets still
remained important shopping districts, but Bourbon Street, previously a
fashionable residential district, was being invaded by commerce. The most
important building on Bourbon Street was the French Opera House [which
was . . . ] built in 1859 (Magill 3-5).
In the Creoles of Louisiana Cable describes the vibrant world of their culture
epitomized by the boulevard known as Canal Street. His sketch suggests that the
pe
r
c
e
i
ve
d“
di
vi
di
ngl
i
ne
”be
t
we
e
nt
heFr
e
nc
hQua
r
t
e
ra
ndt
heAme
r
i
c
a
nGa
r
de
nDi
s
t
r
i
c
t
was an amalgamation of cultures, rather than the separation and insulation depicted by
Le
ona
.Ca
bl
e
’
sde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
oni
nt
e
r
we
a
ve
st
hepe
opl
ea
ndt
hepl
a
c
e
:
Here stretches out in long parade, in variety of height and color, the great retail
stores, displaying their silken and fine linens and golden seductions; and the fair
Creole and American girls and the self-depreciating American mothers, and the
majestic Creole matrons, all black lace and alabaster [ . . . along] eighteen-feet
sidewalks are loftily roofed from edge to edge by continuous balconies . . . . all the
street-car lines in the town begin and end [here]. The Grand opera house is here;
also the Art Union. The club-hous
e
sg
l
i
t
t
e
rhe
r
e....Att
heba
s
eofHe
nr
yCl
a
y
’
s
pedestal here people rally to hear the demagogues in days of political fever . . . .
Here sit the flower marchandes, making bouquets of jasmines and roses, clovepinks, violets, and lady-slippers. Here the Creole boys drink mead, and on the
balconies above maidens and their valentines sip sherbets in the starlight . . . .
Here the gay carriage parties turn northwestward . . . .here the funeral train. . . .
here the ring-politician mounts perpetual guard. Here the gambler . . . [It was a
place of tethered horses, roaming goats, and fluttering lines of drying shirts and
petticoats (266-268).
79
While this description suggests harmony, there were clear ideological differences
between the Creoles and Americans. Creoles loved to go to restaurants and dances on
Sundays, and the mostly Puritan Americans considered this practice scandalous. They
also deplored the other entertainments of horse racing and theaters that Creoles enjoyed
onSund
a
y
s
.The
yt
houg
htt
ha
t“
Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nswi
t
hi
t
sg
a
mbl
i
ngde
ns
,ba
l
l
r
ooms
,t
he
a
t
e
r
s
,
race tracks and rampant sexual permissi
ve
ne
s
ss
t
oodc
onde
mne
da
st
he‘
mode
r
n
Gol
g
ot
h
a
’
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e150)
.
In spite of the lingering tension between the two cultures, progress was being
made in the city. John Tregle and Joy Jackson describe some of these advancements: In
1879, Colonel James Buchanan Eads saw the completion of the jetties. This was a type of
dyke system laid parallel to the river that narrowed the flow of water, thus causing the
river to be self-cleansing, forcing the refuse out into the gulf rather than allowing it to
build up at the mouth. That way, it prevented the build up of refuse, logs, and silt to
replace the continually dredging. In 1876, people began taking the train, the New Orleans
and Lake Rail Road to New Lake End, a popular resort where they could swim in the lake
or have a picnic. There was also a restaurant and a hotel, and one can still see the
remnants of this today in an area some locals call Bucktown. This resort was renamed
West End Park in 1880. Another recreational site was located at the Spanish Fort where
people could stay at the newly rebuilt Ponchartrain Hotel. There was also a theater and a
casino there. The Railway Company turned it into an amusement park in 1883, but it was
closed in 1903.
With these advancements, the city retained much of the French and Spanish
cultural influence. Even as New Orleans underwent the inevitability of Americanization,
80
the newcomers who settled in the area created a unique culture that accreted the Creole
cuisine, architecture, customs and traditions into a newly formed local identity, an
inclusion that is unique to New Orleans. When the Americans built their mansions in the
garden district, they included many Creole architectural elements into their designs, and
they adopted many of the local customs and traditions as their own.
One of the major differences between the Creoles and the Americans was their
perception of change. Fearing cultural usurpation, the Creoles perceived social change
negatively and did not relish the notion of Americans adopting their customs and
tradi
t
i
ons
.AsAl
f
r
e
dMe
r
c
i
e
r
,s
a
i
d,t
he
yf
e
a
r
e
dt
he
i
rFr
e
nc
h“
wi
ne
”wa
sbe
c
omi
ng
“
di
l
ut
e
d,
”ar
e
ma
r
kr
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
ngt
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
a
le
l
i
t
i
s
m.Re
g
a
r
dl
e
s
soft
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
’
s
pe
r
c
e
pt
i
on,unt
i
lt
hel
a
t
eni
ne
t
e
e
nt
hc
e
nt
ur
y
,Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nswa
s“
a
l
wa
y
sac
os
mopol
i
t
a
n
cit
y...[
i
t
s
]mi
xt
ur
e
sofEur
ope
a
nr
a
c
e
ss
e
ti
ta
pa
r
tf
r
om mos
toft
heSout
h”(
J
a
c
ks
on
17)
.Wome
nwor
e“
f
i
neve
l
ve
t
s
,he
a
vys
i
l
ks
,c
r
e
pe
sa
ndt
a
f
f
e
t
a
s
”i
nwi
nt
e
ri
nt
he1880’
s
(
3)a
nd,ve
ndor
ss
ol
d“
estomac mulatte (a flat ginger cake with icing), both coconut and
pecan pralines, candie Tiré, (pulled candy), and rice cakes called cala. The favorite
beverage sold was La Biere Creole, abe
e
rma
def
r
om t
hej
ui
c
ea
ndpul
pofpi
ne
a
ppl
e
”(
34). Jackson explains that New Orleans retained much of the exotic ambience even during
the postbellum era and beyond:
[New Orleans] managed to carry over into its late nineteenth-century life many of
the customs, sights and sounds of antebellum days. Because it had French and
Spanish heritage in addition to its bustling American business philosophy, the
panorama it presented to visitors was unique. The architecture of the Vieux Carré
and the French Market, the quaint street vendors, and the French patois of a
sizeable part of the Negro population enthralled the visitor from the North, where
conformity was fast overcoming individuality in cities
(9).
81
While the Americans were adopting some of the French customs and traditions,
t
heCr
e
o
l
e
swe
r
ee
mbr
a
c
i
ngs
omeoft
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
’c
omme
r
c
i
a
le
f
f
i
c
i
e
nc
ya
nd
organization. In his America Revisited (1882) a visitor from England, George Augustus
Henry Sala (1828-1895), describes this amalgamation:
Occasionally in the French Quarter, you are forcibly reminded of the alldominating influence of the Anglo-Saxon language, institutions and character . . .
Still . . . street after street are French . . . I surveyed a genuine French pharmacie
in the Rue de Chartres. It seemed to have been transported . . . all was subdued,
composed, and serene. No doubt you could obtain sinapismes, and vésicatoires
and tisanes. . . . In the dim recesses of the store, you could discern rows of shelves
laden with tall old white gallipots, and about the whole place there was a gentle
soporific odour of aromatic drugs . . . . A grave and bald-headed gentleman sat in
a rocking chair . . . reading the Abeille de la Nouvelle Orléans. . . . Next . . . was
the épicier . . . [with] a plentiful supply of things alcoholic . . .absinthe and cassis,
vermouth and parfait amour—all the alcoholic frivolities of the people . . . who
never get tipsy . . . . Here you are at once reminded that the tropics are over the
way, or round the corner, so to speak. . . . The coffee made in New Orleans is the
most aromatic and the most grateful to the palate . . . there is a French café or an
estaminet . . .The cafés lack Parisian splendour, but they are neat and trim . . . and
the customers quench their thirst with orgeat, bavaroises, sirop de groseille . . .
l
i
t
t
l
eFr
e
nc
hs
t
a
t
i
one
r
s
’s
hopsa
ndcabinets de lecture . . . The very pencils and
pens are French . . . . and objects religieux
(de Caro 86-88).
Often the center of trade was the Market, and it was the place where the cultural
diversity of New Orleans converged. In the Historical Sketchbook and Guide to New
Orleans and Environs (
1885)
,i
na
na
r
t
i
c
l
epr
e
pa
r
e
df
ort
heWor
l
d’
sI
ndus
t
r
i
a
la
ndCot
t
on
Ce
nt
e
nni
a
lExpos
i
t
i
on,e
nt
i
t
l
e
d,“
TheFr
e
nc
hMa
r
ke
t
,
”Wi
l
lH.Col
e
ma
nde
s
c
r
i
be
dt
he
market. He used material from several authors, including Lafcadio Hearn:
82
As you near Jackson Square, a stream of busy-looking people appears, laden with
baskets and bundles - - - - its entrance is a marble topped stand, over which stands
the title and sign of the Café Rapide . . . Every race that the world boasts is here,
and a good many races that are nowhere else. The strangest and most complicated
mixture of negro and Caucasian blood, with negroes washed white, and white men
with mulattoes . . . The dresses are as varied as the faces . . . the floor of the
market is not at all clean . . . At the end of the market . . . eat and trade a halfdozen Indians . . . Natchez, Choctaws and Creeks; [all. . .] have melted away into
mulattoes . . . . You enter the Bazaar market . . . . evidenced by two tin cupolas . . .
. This market is the most cosmopolitan of all. The air is broken by every
language—English, French, Italian, and German, varied by gombo [sic] languages
of every shade . . . . The bright sun leaks drowsily through the spider webs . . . the
monot
onousc
r
i
e
soft
heboy
s
,“
cinq à dix sous,“t
woc
e
nt
sa
pi
e
c
e
,Ma
da
me
”....
Ata
boutt
hr
e
eo’
c
l
oc
ki
nt
hemor
ni
ngt
hes
oundsofma
nyl
oa
de
dc
a
r
t
s...c
r
e
a
k
a
ndr
umbl
e...a
st
he
yg
oupt
hes
t
r
e
e
t...not“
ki
ng
’
sEng
l
i
s
h”a
l
onei
ss
ubj
e
c
t
e
d
to pretty rough handling, but every language on the globe is slanged, docked or
insulted by uncivilized innovations . . . Nearly all trades, profession, colors and
castes are represented with baskets on their arms . . . . Strangers who come into
town late at night, bringing into the city with their rural tastes and appetites . . . .
t
he
yl
ookve
r
ymode
s
twhe
nt
he
yc
l
i
mbont
hehi
g
hs
t
ool
s...[
t
oor
de
r
]“
café au
l
ai
t
”or “c
af
énoi
r
”(Coleman 89-93).
In spite of the thriving market, most businesses were moving to Canal Street,
which was quickly becomingt
het
own’
sc
e
nt
e
ra
ndwa
sama
g
ne
tf
orpe
opl
ef
r
om a
l
love
r
t
hea
r
e
aa
ndf
r
om a
br
oa
d.J
a
c
ks
onc
i
t
e
sCha
r
l
e
sHe
nr
yWhi
t
e
’
sde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
onofCa
na
l
Street:
[It was] a great open street fringed by two and three story buildings . . . crowded
trolley cars . . . policemen . . . a wide expanse of hazy sky and yellow clouds of
dust hovering over an idle crowd [of . . . ] race track touts, bookmakers, jockeys,
commercial travelers, longshoremen, country folk in town for a day, clubmen on
their way to an afternoon at the Pickwick of Boston clubs, and sightseeing naval
personnel from visiting foreign vessels (13).
83
The city was a virtual feast of entertainment. In 1882, Mark Twain wrote that
Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nswa
s“
we
l
lout
f
i
t
t
e
dwi
t
hpr
og
r
e
s
s
i
veme
n[
a
ndt
ha
tNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns. . . ] was
the best-l
i
g
ht
e
dc
i
t
yi
nt
heUni
on”(
200)
.Hes
a
i
dt
ha
thee
nj
oy
e
dt
heme
n’
sc
l
ubsa
nd
pleasure resorts and the high quality city newspapers. All over the city was an abundance
of flowers and gardens, and the lavish Mardi Gras celebrations and carnival balls of 1880
brought in an estimated 40,000 visitors who came to celebrate the season. Travelers could
stay at hotels or at Pension Privee (a type of bed and breakfast featuring Creole food) or
rent a room (chambres garnies /chambres a louer). For entertainment, visitors could also
go to baseball games, dances, the racetrack or gambling establishments. There were four
theaters: Grand Opera House, French Opera House, St. Charles Theater and the Academy
ofMus
i
c
.Wa
g
ne
r
’
sope
r
a
swe
r
epe
r
f
or
me
da
tthe Grand Opera House Leona often
attended the opera with Placide Canonge and published her observations about the
performances in the local newspapers.
Not only did the city center offer much entertainment, there were attractions
outside the central city as well. Lake Ponchartrain had two resorts, the Spanish Fort and
the West End. There one could eat or stay at a hotel, visit the gardens, listen to a German
band, see the nightly fireworks, or see vaudeville acts. This area was internationally
popular and as evidence of this, Oscar Wilde lectured at the Spanish fort in 1882 (Jackson
23-24). Before 1900, visitors could also see cockfights and dogfights on the outskirts of
town. In 1883, the Southern Pacific Railroad was finally completed from New Orleans to
California, which made its commerce and attractions even more readily available across
the continent.
84
Be
g
i
nni
ngi
nDe
c
e
mbe
ro
f1884,Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nshos
t
e
dt
heWor
l
d’
sI
ndus
t
r
i
a
la
n
d
Cot
t
onCe
nt
e
nni
a
lExpos
i
t
i
on,whe
r
eQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sSymphony Indienne was played by the
Mexican Army Band. Burke was director-general of the Exposition held at the Upper City
Park (now Audubon Park). The primary purpose of the Exposition was to celebrate the
anniversary of the first time that a bale of cotton had been exported from America (from
Charleston South Carolina) to a foreign port in 1784. Unfortunately, the exposition closed
in June of 1885 with a deficit after having lost money over its six month run. In spite of
this set back, the city moved forward, and there were advancements in education,
particularly for women. Tulane University was founded in 1884, taking over the buildings
of University of Louisiana, and Newcomb College opened in 1886 for women and
focused on physical education and the arts, especially ceramics.
Women married young in the 1880s, but the nineteen year old Leona was not
i
nc
l
i
ne
dhe
rt
obe
c
omeawi
f
ea
ndmot
he
r
.Shes
pe
a
ksoft
hi
si
nhe
rpoe
m,“
Lolotte”
Happy little Lolotte
With her head in the air
And the heart of a butterfly!
In the mirror she dances
and looks with satisfaction
at the gilded splendor of her hair.
In the street she imagines
that her every steps captivates
all the handsome boys she sees.
At the dance she acts the ingénue
and responds without acknowledgement
to the compliments she receives.
Little happy Lolotte.
So loved, so pampered;
she charms purely for the pleasure of it all.
So why then, at the flower of her age
85
does she enter into marriage,
when she had all the time to choose?
(Appendix 259).
In 1885, Jackson not
e
st
ha
ts
out
he
r
nbe
l
l
e
swoul
d“
‘
r
e
a
dc
l
e
ve
rbooks
,a
nddi
s
c
us
s
their fingernails; they are shocked at the conversational appearance of the word leg, but
are enthusiastically devoted to the ballet. A young lady could receive a gentleman alone
or go for a drive in his carriage, but the couple had to be escorted by a chaperone to
t
he
a
t
e
r
,c
onc
e
r
t
s
,orba
l
l
s
’
”(
16)
.Th
e“
Soc
i
e
t
yBe
e
”c
ol
umni
nt
heDaily Picayune
r
e
por
t
e
dont
hes
oc
i
a
le
l
i
t
e
.Aspr
oba
bl
er
e
f
e
r
e
nc
et
ot
hi
sort
oLe
ona
’
spubl
i
c
a
t
i
onsi
n
L’
Abe
i
l
le,La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
nr
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
ohe
ra
soneoft
he“
be
e
s
”whe
nhef
i
r
s
tme
the
r
.But
she turned the image of a flighty social bee into a darker and more powerful one in her
poe
mt
oHe
a
r
na
boutMe
de
a
,e
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Response.
”Fa
rf
r
ombe
l
ong
i
ngt
oag
r
oupof
women who were concerned with superficial appearance, Leona projected a powerful
i
ma
g
et
hr
oug
hhe
rMe
de
awho“
r
e
a
p[
s
]he
rha
r
ve
s
twhi
l
ehuma
ni
t
ys
l
e
e
ps
/
a
ndqui
e
t
l
y
c
l
a
i
m[
s
]he
rownl
i
keamot
hi
nt
heni
g
ht
.
”Shewa
r
ne
dHe
a
r
nt
ha
ts
hewa
saf
e
a
r
s
ome
entity:
Poets make you honey, for she will make it poison
with her curses and cries without end,
falling from the heavens, and when hope grows dim,
her screams will tremble the walls of your prison.
Shedr
i
nksde
e
pt
hede
wf
r
om t
her
os
e
s
’t
r
e
mbl
i
ngc
ha
l
i
c
e
s
And take
st
her
a
y
sofmor
ni
ng
’
sg
l
or
yf
orhe
rown
But she also rules the night.
[UU-70 6:45].
(Appendix 270).
86
Clearly, Leona was making a strong public statement about the power of women,
even if Hearn chose to recoil from it. This was the voice of Leona at her most
impassioned and forceful, and it can be found in her poems and articles in defense of her
Creole culture that will be discussed in detail in Chapter Six.
At the same time that Leona was taking issue with the prevailing perception of
women, laborers in the region also sought to affect changes in the work place. Unions
be
g
a
nt
og
a
i
ns
t
r
e
ng
t
hi
ni
t
sme
mb
e
r
s
hi
pa
nda
c
t
i
vi
s
mi
nt
hel
a
t
e1800’
s
,a
ndt
he
r
ewe
r
e
s
e
ve
r
a
ls
t
r
i
ke
sf
orbe
t
t
e
rwa
g
e
sa
ndwor
ki
ngc
ondi
t
i
ons
.I
n1887,t
heLoui
s
i
a
naFa
r
me
r
’
s
Alliance and Cooperative Union was officially established, designed to protect farmers
from fraud and to join together to become a political force. Also active at the time were
the Knights of Labor who were equally concerned with labor issues, and they accepted
blacks into their organization.
In many ways, however, the French Creoles separated themselves from the
burgeoning contemporary society surrounding them, and it is difficult to find references
in their writing about other social groups—other than Anglo-Americans. In the
construction of their cultural island, they excluded from purview the people in the other
districts of the city. These other ethnic groups were busy creating their own culture and
entertainment, and as is commonly known, from their ranks jazz was born. At dance
halls, early jazz musician got their start, and in Jazz Masters of New Orleans Martin
Williams theorizes that jazz evolved because the classically trained Creoles of color
played in local bands, sometimes made up of freedmen, and the combination of passion
87
and education gave birth to Jazz in the 1890s. The fact that such an important movement
is notably absent in the French Creole writing indicates a current of cultural isolation.
Regardless of cultural divisions, all citizens in New Orleans dealt with local
problems in varying degrees. In the 1880s, the city was rife with disease, such as yellow
fever, diphtheria, typhoid, small pox. In the fall of 1890 the police chief, David
Hennessey, was assassinated, and many suspected that the killers had been hired by
powerful Italian families. Nineteen suspects were jailed, and even though several were
acquitted, a cadre of outraged citizens stormed the jail and killed several of the inmates
and dragged others out to be hung. This incident made international headlines in March,
1891, and was a source of shame and embarrassment for law abiding citizens. In 1894,
there was a riot on the docks because the British cotton shippers tried to hire black
screwmen (those who secured bales of cotton in the cargo areas of a ship before it sailed)
a
tl
owe
rwa
g
e
st
ha
nwhi
t
e
s
.Thewh
i
t
ewor
ke
r
sr
e
t
a
l
i
a
t
e
dbyt
hr
owi
ngt
hebl
a
c
kwor
ke
r
s
’
tools overboard; several were beaten and some drowned. The violence continued until
Governor Foster sent the militia in 1895 to keep the peace.
There were now more visible signs of the demise of the French Creole culture. In
the Quarter, most were surviving rather than thriving:
[Many were] eking out an existence. . . the family plate, mahogany, and crystal
had long sinc
epa
s
s
e
dt
hr
o
ug
ht
hede
a
l
e
r
s
’ha
ndsi
nRoy
a
lSt
r
e
e
t....
f
r
om t
he
1880s on, the Creoles were a declining ethnic group and no longer a vital factor in
politics . . . in its twilight hours
(Jackson14).
By the time that Cable described the Creole culture and the Vieux Carré, Jackson
s
a
y
s
,t
he
i
r“
wa
yofl
i
f
ewa
sonl
yamus
e
um pi
e
c
ewhi
c
hwoul
dpa
s
soutofg
e
ne
r
a
l
88
e
xi
s
t
e
nc
ewi
t
hi
nt
hi
r
t
yy
e
a
r
s
”(
14)
.Theus
eoft
heFr
e
nc
hl
a
ng
ua
g
ewa
sf
a
di
ngi
nt
he
1890s. Many of the once beautiful homes were being replaced by the turn of the century
shotgun houses and double tenement houses. By the end of the century, Jackson Square
was little more than a slum. On September 29, 1915, there was a hurricane that almost
destroyed the Old St. Louis Exchange Hotel, which was then torn down; it also destroyed
t
heWo
r
l
d’
sFa
i
rbui
l
di
ng
sa
tAudubonPa
r
k—the place where Leona had heard her
symphony played by the Mexican Army Band only 30 years before.
Leona was witness to all of this and to the gradual disappearance of all that had
been familiar-- the remnants of the life she cherished. Bourbon Street was a seedy
commercial district; her beloved French Opera house had burned down; the French
Quarter was often the site of criminal mischief, and the exhibition site where her
symphony had been performed in 1884 was marked by nothing more than a stone, much
l
i
keahe
a
ds
t
oneont
heg
r
a
veofhe
rc
ul
t
ur
e
.I
n“
Imprecatio”s
hee
xpr
e
s
s
e
st
hi
sl
os
swh
e
n
s
hes
a
y
st
ha
t“
Oura
nc
e
s
t
or
s
’l
a
ng
ua
g
e
/I
snowde
ni
g
r
a
t
e
da
ndonl
yf
oundonhe
a
ds
t
one
s
”
(L’
Abe
i
l
l
eMay 3, 1891—Appendix 22). This sentiment is clearly expressed again in her
1911poe
m“
Agoni
e
:
”
Once my soul held a cherished vision
and like a tree, it grew in strength and love
and its very summit held the skies aloft
with branches blooming into stars
And the night sky opened for the daughter of Ionie
and the tender violets bloomed without fear
to hope and was blessed by light-So when were the dreams of souls broken?
89
What insidious worm began to gnaw at its core?
Which parasite drank up the sap of its heart?
And silenced the music of the heavens?
And leave my soul in the darkness of tombs
with its stars extinguished and blossoms closed-Was it all a dream-- a dream all?
[UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 237)
The decline in culture and fortune followed the Queyrouze descendents. When I
asked the family to describe the homes the family had occupied after they left St. Louis
St
r
e
e
t
,Ade
l
eCr
e
s
s
y
,Ma
xi
m’
sg
r
a
ndda
ug
ht
e
r
,r
e
s
ponde
dt
omei
nal
e
t
t
e
r
:
The house on Villere is long gone. The City bought the whole square and
built a school. The house was a typical New Orleans shotgun single with
boxwood steps and a wonderful side porch in the back and a brick alley. It
had 4 rooms plus a kitchen and a bath had been added beyond the kitchen.
We lived there during the 2nd World War. After that we moved to De Soto
St. and lived with my grandfather.
--August 5, 1996.
While no one can understate the necessity for sweeping social changes in the
closing decades of the nineteenth century, one must acknowledge that the demise of any
ethnic culture affects us all. We lose the ability to recognize the sources of influences and
infusion of other sensibilities into our national culture. In order to understand who we are
as a people, we must understand those who left their imprint upon us. But in order to
experience their lives, we must also experience their deaths and find empathy for the
f
e
e
l
i
ng
sofl
os
sofape
opl
ea
ndapl
a
c
e
,wi
t
h“
i
t
ss
t
a
r
se
xt
i
ng
ui
s
he
da
ndbl
os
s
omsc
l
os
e
d
.
”
While we can visit the places where they once lived and see the remnants of their culture
90
in the architecture and customs, unless we understand what those relics represent, we will
treat them as superficial exoticisms and fail to see their true significance. One way to
understand the vision that the Creoles cherished is to study the places they inhabited, and
while time has separated the people from the place, one cannot understand one without
the other, for they are inextricably linked. The enclosed tropical courtyards, the bustling
French market, the balconies where Creole beaus drank their mead, and the narrow streets
where alabaster Creole matrons marshaled their daughters are still there, but the French
Creoles have disappeared into America. The festivals and foods are still celebrated, but
the people of the French Creole culture that created them are no longer clearly
identifiable. What remains behind indicates the extent of the cultural development of this
French colony—truly a foreign country—on Americ
a
ns
oi
l
,a
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
s
’a
t
t
e
mptt
o
remain a separate region by retreating into their secluded courtyards and practicing their
French customs and language could not stem this tide of change. Outside their shuttered
windows, New Orleans was slowly became increasingly Americanized. Granted, the
i
ns
ul
a
t
e
dwor
l
dt
he
yc
r
e
a
t
e
dbe
c
a
mel
e
s
sar
e
a
l
i
t
ya
ndmor
e“
a
l
ladr
e
a
m”a
st
he
nineteenth century progressed, but the fact remains that many Creole writers chronicled
their experiences during the disappearance of their social construct, and their work can
prove beneficial for anthropological study. Even as they recognized that their efforts to
preserve their culture were in vain, they joined together in their salons, which were folk
groups trying to conserve the last vestiges of their French heritage. As I will demonstrate
in Chapter Four, in their concerted attempts to safeguard their culture, they ultimately
became instrumental in its transformation.
91
CHAPTER FOUR: THE SALON CULTURE AS A FOLK GROUP
Our country is our security as home is our
shelter; it is dependent on us as we are
dependent on it, and thus a state of reciprocal
custody is established. It is not a solid, compact
whole, but a mosaic, an aggregation of interests
welded together, and whose homogeneity
insures its duration –“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
”
Leona Queyrouze
Several prominent Creole community leaders tried to preserve the French Creole
c
ul
t
ur
e
,
ma
nyofwhom we
r
eLe
ona
’
sc
l
os
e
s
tf
r
i
e
ndsa
ndme
mbe
r
sofhe
rs
a
l
onc
i
r
c
l
e
.She
was supported and mentored byt
hi
sg
r
oupofme
nag
e
ne
r
a
t
i
ona
pa
r
tf
r
omhe
r
.“
Fr
om a
n
early age, Leona Queyrouze was surrounded by older men who were at the same time her
me
nt
or
s
,c
onf
i
da
nt
sors
ui
t
or
s
”(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
s
”9)
.The
s
eme
nwe
r
epr
omi
ne
nt
figures: General P.G.T. Beauregard, Placide Canonge, Charles Gayarré, Drs. Armand and
Alfred Mercier, Rudolph Matas, and Paul Morphy. Each one of these men influenced her,
and a close look at each one of them will assist in understanding the part that they played
in her life. While George Washington Cable was not one of her associates, his literary
representation of the Creoles proved to be instrumental in the formation of their identity;
therefore, a discussion of his work will be included because it represented an antithesis to
the positions held by Gayarré, and many other Creoles.
In this chapter, I will widen the historical lens to encompass the members of the
Queyrouze salon as a folk group because each contributes to its shared sense of identity.
Their habits and customs reveal much about their underlying belief systems and their
worldviews, which is vital to this project. Richard M. Dorson expresses the importance of
t
hi
ski
ndofs
t
udybys
t
a
t
i
ngt
ha
t“
al
ongs
t
e
pf
or
wa
r
di
nAme
r
i
c
a
nf
ol
kl
or
es
t
udi
e
sc
a
nbe
92
made if folklore in the United States is seen in its proper relation to major periods and
t
he
me
si
nAme
r
i
c
a
nhi
s
t
or
y
”(
115)
.The“
e
ve
r
y
da
yl
i
f
e
”t
ha
ta
nt
hr
opol
og
i
s
t
sa
nd
folklorists study re-captures the spirit of the people who practiced and preserved their
customs and traditions, expressing what Gottfried von Herder calls the spirit of the
herrenvolk, the mystical bonds of blood, tongue, culture and tradition. Harris M. Berger
a
ndGi
ova
nnaP.De
lNe
g
r
obe
l
i
e
vet
ha
tt
he
s
e“
e
ve
r
y
da
ypr
a
c
t
i
c
e
sma
ypr
oduc
epowe
r
relations [and . ..]r
e
s
i
s
ta
ndt
r
a
ns
f
or
mt
he
m”(
7)a
ndt
hi
si
ske
yi
nas
t
udyofa
ne
t
hni
c
culture engaged in a power struggle to survive. This also answers the new historicist
ma
nda
t
et
oi
nc
l
udeg
r
oupst
ha
tha
d“
hi
t
he
r
t
obe
e
nma
r
g
i
na
l
i
z
e
d,ha
l
fhi
dde
n,ore
ve
n
entirelye
xc
l
ude
df
r
om t
hepr
of
e
s
s
i
ona
ls
t
udyofl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
”(
Gr
e
e
nbl
a
t
ta
ndGa
l
l
a
g
he
r1
1
)
.
El
l
i
ot
tOr
i
ngde
f
i
ne
s“
me
mbe
r
sofa
ne
t
hni
cg
r
oup”a
st
hos
ewho“
s
ha
r
ea
ndi
de
nt
i
f
ywi
t
h
a historically derived cultural tradition or style, which may be composed of both explicit
be
ha
vi
o
r
a
lf
e
a
t
ur
e
sa
swe
l
la
si
mp
l
i
c
i
ti
de
a
s
,va
l
ue
sa
nda
t
t
i
t
ude
s
”(
24)
.Af
ol
kg
r
oupi
sa
microcosmic unit differentiated from the larger social system. Its members often share
many of the same fears and beliefs handed down through generations, while consciously
retaining their customs and traditions in order to preserve their sense of community. Thus,
the group is maintained through a socially constructed process and is measured by an
established, if often unspoken, criteria. Their social ties are strengthened when they
i
nt
e
r
a
c
twi
t
ht
hel
a
r
g
e
rs
oc
i
a
ls
y
s
t
e
m,a
se
vi
de
nc
e
dbyt
heCr
e
ol
e
s
’r
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pwi
t
ht
he
Americans. Indeed, the fact they did not consider themselves to be Americans illustrates
this point.
93
Some critics might assert that the Queyrouze salon does not fall clearly within the
parameters of a folk group because its transmissions were not based on oral traditions and
material culture and its reliance upon customary practices was not primary. Added to this
is the fact that the members of the salon belonged to an elite class rather than popular or
folk classes, but folklore does not belong solely to a class, it belongs to any group that has
features in common, such a religion, ethnicity, region, or occupation. The members of the
Queyrouze belonged to a self-professed elite class, but they shared a common heritage,
faith and community, and were united in the bonds of a common purpose. To stave off
the influences of Anglo-American culture, the group directed its efforts towards
preserving French traditions. Leona believed in this endeavor, and with the members of
her salon, she pursued her passion for opera, music, and literature. What differentiates the
Queyrouze salon from other white French Creole salons in New Orleans was the extent of
their involvement in preserving French literature through the Athénée.
Her published essays were often an outgrowth of these associations, and at times
she echoed the sentiments of Gayarré. He believed that the Creoles, who were racially
pure, intellectually sophisticated, agrarian aristocrats, were beleaguered and
misunderstood. At other times, Leona departed from Gayarré when she spoke out against
social injustice in The Crusader under the pseudonyms, Salamandra and Adamas—names
that symbolized unwavering and unassailable ideals. On many occasions, her subject
matter dealt with current political debate, and in some cases, her editorials and poetry
were dedicated or addressed to group members.
The formation of her personal and social identity was inextricably tied to her
association with her folk group. Rosan Augusta Jordan and Frank De Caro describe the
94
“
r
ol
ep
l
a
y
e
dbyf
ol
kl
or
ei
ne
s
t
a
bl
i
s
hi
ngi
de
nt
i
t
ywhe
t
he
rpe
r
s
ona
lors
oc
i
oc
ul
t
ur
a
l
”(
31)
,
a
ndEl
l
i
ot
tOr
i
nga
ddst
ha
t“
i
de
nt
i
t
yha
sa
l
wa
y
sbe
e
nacentral issue in folklore studies,
e
ve
nwhe
nt
het
e
r
m wa
snots
pe
c
i
f
i
c
a
l
l
yus
e
d”(
31)
.Ana
ppl
i
c
a
t
i
onoft
he
s
ec
onc
e
pt
si
s
particularly relevant when investigating folk groups who demonstrated intentional
isolation, such as the French Creoles in Louisiana.
Jordan and de Caro assert that Louisiana offers a unique opportunity to observe
t
hewa
y
si
nwhi
c
ht
hes
t
udyoff
ol
kl
or
es
e
r
ve
st
he“
ne
e
dt
oe
s
t
a
bl
i
s
hi
de
nt
i
t
i
e
si
nt
e
r
m of
r
a
c
e
,c
l
a
s
s
,a
nde
t
hni
c
i
t
y
”(
33)
.The
yf
oc
ust
he
i
rdi
s
c
us
s
i
onont
he“
de
ve
l
opme
ntof
folklore studies in Louisiana in which a concern with racial and class identity is an
i
mpor
t
a
ntf
a
c
t
or
,
”a
ndt
he
yl
ookc
l
os
e
l
ya
tt
heAme
r
i
c
a
nFol
kl
or
eSoc
i
e
t
yofNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
i
nt
he1890sa
ndt
hewor
kofLy
l
eSa
xona
ndLoui
s
i
a
na
’
s“
r
i
c
hmé
l
a
ng
eofc
ul
t
ur
e
s
”(
32)
.
Be
c
a
us
eLoui
s
i
a
na
’
spopul
a
t
i
onha
ds
uc
ha“
l
onghi
s
t
or
yofne
g
ot
i
a
t
i
nga
ndmodul
a
t
i
nga
va
r
i
e
t
yofi
nf
l
ue
nc
e
s
,
”i
twa
sf
e
r
t
i
l
eg
r
oundf
ort
hi
ski
ndofs
t
udy
.J
or
da
na
nddeCa
r
oc
i
t
e
the large artistic and intellectual community within the environs of the city that included
t
heFr
e
nc
h,a
ndt
he
yf
oc
uson“
Th
eLoui
s
i
a
naAs
s
oc
i
a
t
i
onoft
heAme
r
i
c
a
nFol
k-Lore
Society [which] was founded . . . [in] 1892 in New Orleans, largely through the efforts of
Alcée Fortier, a Tulane University scholar of Romance languages and a potent force in
Loui
s
i
a
nai
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
la
f
f
a
i
r
s
”(
33)
.I
t
sme
mbe
r
s
hi
pwa
sc
ompr
i
s
e
dofma
nyoft
hea
l
l
white (mostly female) social and intellectual elite in New Orleans, both American and
Creole. Some of the members that Fortier recruited were his colleagues at Tulane. This
g
r
oup“
p
r
ompt
e
da
ni
nt
e
r
e
s
ti
nf
ol
kl
or
ea
mongt
hef
l
our
i
s
hi
ngc
ommuni
t
yofi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
l
,
wr
i
t
e
r
sa
nda
r
t
i
s
t
st
ha
tha
de
me
r
g
e
di
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsdur
i
ngt
hepr
e
vi
ousde
c
a
de
.
”Oneof
t
hef
ounda
t
i
onsf
ort
hi
smove
me
ntwa
sa“
na
tional revival of interest in the South (which
95
wa
sc
o
nc
e
pt
ua
l
i
z
e
di
nt
hemos
tr
o
ma
nt
i
ca
nde
xot
i
ct
e
r
ms
)
”a
ndt
hi
s“
he
l
pe
dc
r
e
a
t
ea
na
t
i
ona
lma
r
ke
tf
orSout
he
r
n‘
l
oc
a
lc
ol
or
’wr
i
t
i
ng
.
”Thi
ss
pur
r
e
dt
he“
l
i
t
e
r
a
r
yc
a
r
e
e
r
sof
writers like George Washington Cable and Lafcadio Hearn, whose writing incorporated
di
a
l
e
c
ta
ndqua
i
ntl
oc
a
lc
us
t
oms
”a
ndt
hedi
s
s
e
mi
na
t
i
onf
ort
he
i
rwor
k“
he
l
pe
dc
r
e
a
t
ea
n
d
publicize a romantic image of New Orleans, with its lush semitropical climate and its
culturally distinctive inhabitants, notably the white Creoles and Afro-French Creoles of
color (33). This romantic image (in its most benign form) was encouraged by the Creoles,
and by their participation, they brokered the commoditization of their own culture.
Fr
omt
oda
y
’
spe
r
s
pe
c
t
ive, many of their activities now appear elitist and racist, as
they appropriated the dialect of African Americans and portrayed them as an exotic
species—and used them as an outlet for their creative impulses. Jordan and deCaro point
out that perhaps this f
oc
usont
hebl
a
c
kc
ul
t
ur
ewa
sawa
yt
ous
e“
f
ol
kl
or
e
,howe
ve
r
unc
ons
c
i
ous
l
y
,t
oma
r
kt
he
i
rowns
e
ns
eofwhi
t
ei
de
nt
i
t
y
”a
nds
oc
i
a
ls
upe
r
i
or
i
t
y
,c
r
uc
i
a
la
t
a“
t
i
mewhe
nt
odos
owa
spol
i
t
i
c
a
l
l
ya
ndps
y
c
hol
og
i
c
a
l
l
yi
mpor
t
a
ntf
orSout
he
r
nwhi
t
e
s
”
(39-40). Spe
c
i
f
i
c
a
l
l
yf
ort
heCr
e
ol
e
s
,t
he
i
r“
a
nxi
e
t
yma
yha
vebe
e
nmor
ebr
oa
dl
yba
s
e
don
f
e
e
l
i
ng
st
ha
tt
he
i
re
t
hni
cc
ul
t
ur
ewa
sunde
rs
i
e
g
e
,
”a
ndt
hi
sma
yha
vei
nc
r
e
a
s
e
dt
he
i
r
“
ne
e
dt
of
i
nddi
s
t
a
nc
ef
r
om t
hemos
tma
r
g
i
na
le
t
hni
cg
r
oupofa
l
l
,t
heAf
r
i
c
a
nAme
r
i
c
a
ns
”
(41-42) as well to a means to cleanse themselves of the stain of their slave-holding past.
Muc
hoft
hema
t
e
r
i
a
lt
hea
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
ong
a
t
he
r
e
dwa
sus
e
dt
o“
e
s
t
a
bl
i
s
ht
hea
nt
e
be
l
l
um
pl
a
nt
a
t
i
onwor
l
da
ti
t
sbe
ni
g
nbe
s
t
”(
44)
.Howe
ve
r
,i
nt
he
i
rbi
dt
os
e
pa
r
a
t
et
he
ir identity
from the black population, they undermined their intentions, for the stories they related
we
r
ei
ne
xt
r
i
c
a
bl
yt
i
e
dt
os
l
a
ve
r
y
.Thes
t
or
i
e
sof
t
e
npor
t
r
a
y
e
dt
he“
ha
ppyc
oe
xi
s
t
e
nc
e
”of
96
t
he“
pe
c
ul
i
a
ri
ns
t
i
t
ut
i
on”ofs
l
a
ve
r
ya
ndi
t
sf
a
l
s
es
e
ns
eofha
r
mony
,a
ndt
hi
s“
nos
t
a
l
g
i
aa
nd
a
pol
og
i
a
”c
ount
e
r
ba
l
a
nc
e
dt
heCr
e
ol
ene
e
dt
os
e
pa
r
a
t
e(
44)
.
Leona engaged in this nostalgic myth-building in her abbreviated English version
of“
Silhouettes Créoles”e
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
TheCr
e
ol
e
s
.
”Li
s
t
i
ngt
hepos
i
t
i
vec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
cs of the
Creoles, she portrays them as victims of the commercially savvy Anglo-Americans who
t
a
kea
dva
nt
a
g
eoft
he
m.Shenot
e
st
ha
t“
hos
pi
t
a
l
i
t
yi
sas
a
l
i
e
ntc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
coft
he
i
nha
bi
t
a
nt
sofLoui
s
i
a
na
,a
ndi
si
nhe
r
e
nti
nt
he
m.
”TheCr
e
ol
e
sha
vea
n“
i
mpulsive
g
e
ne
r
os
i
t
ya
nd...ki
ndne
s
s
,
”a
nds
hel
i
s
t
st
he
i
r“
c
hi
va
l
r
oust
r
a
di
t
i
ons
”a
ndt
he
i
r“
br
a
ve
r
y
which soon grows to be temerity and rashness when the apparently peaceful but in reality
f
i
e
r
c
et
e
mpe
roft
heCr
e
ol
ei
sr
ous
e
d.
”Whi
l
es
hea
c
knowl
e
dg
e
st
ha
t“
t
he
i
rs
upr
e
mef
a
u
l
t
a
saf
r
a
c
t
i
onoft
heAme
r
i
c
a
nna
t
i
oni
st
obes
ol
i
t
t
l
epr
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
,
”s
hebl
a
me
st
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
f
ort
he
i
rf
a
i
l
ur
et
ot
hr
i
ve
.Thef
a
c
tt
ha
tt
heCr
e
ol
e
sha
d“
nos
pe
c
i
a
lg
e
ni
usf
ors
pe
c
ul
a
t
i
on,
a
nda
r
en
ots
ki
l
l
e
di
nc
omme
r
c
i
a
lt
r
i
c
ks
”i
s characterized as a virtue—indeed, they
be
c
a
mei
nnoc
e
ntvi
c
t
i
msbe
c
a
us
et
he
ywe
r
e“
l
i
a
bl
et
obede
c
e
i
ve
di
nma
nywa
y
s
.
”
Mor
e
ov
e
r
,t
heCr
e
ol
e
sdi
dnot“
de
s
e
r
vet
her
e
put
a
t
i
onofc
r
ue
l
t
ye
s
t
a
bl
i
s
he
df
ort
he
mb
y
outsiders, more or less interested in doing so, and who found credulous and enthusiastic
dupes to echo their rhetorical lamentations about the pitiful condition of slaves in the
Sout
h”[
UU-70 6:48]. However, her defense is logically flawed, if not consummately
elitist. She creates an equivocation by s
t
a
t
i
ngt
ha
tt
heCr
e
ol
e
swe
r
e“
l
i
a
bl
et
obe
de
c
e
i
ve
d”(
dupe
d,i
fy
ouwi
l
l
)be
c
a
us
eoft
he
i
rvi
r
t
ue
s
,whi
l
ea
c
c
us
i
ngot
he
r
sofbe
i
ng
i
g
nor
a
ntdupe
sf
orbe
l
i
e
vi
ngt
ha
ts
l
a
ve
se
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
d“
pi
t
i
f
ulc
ondi
t
i
ons
.
”
She substantiates her claim against the negative perceptions of her culture by
recounting the legend of the slave Christine who was purchased for one thousand dollars.
97
So devoted was Christine to her kind mistress that when she was freed, she asked to be
sold for one thousand dollars so that she could return the money to her mistress.
Assuming that this legend would contravene any historical claims to the contrary, Leona
c
l
os
e
she
ra
c
c
ountbys
a
y
i
ngt
ha
ts
hec
oul
d“
quot
enot
hi
ngbe
t
t
e
rt
ha
nt
hi
si
nde
f
e
ns
eof
the so dreadfully calumniated slave owners inLoui
s
i
a
na
”[
UU-70 6:48]. Her goal in this
excerpt appears to cleanse the historical record and to make the Americans culpable for
maligning the Creoles.
Thi
sa
l
l
e
g
i
a
nc
et
oaf
ol
kmy
t
hi
si
ndi
c
a
t
i
veoft
he“
va
r
y
i
ngmot
i
ve
sa
nd
pe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
ve
s
”ofaf
ol
kg
roup ( Jordan and de Caro 46), and in order to study the
Queyrouze salon I have deconstructed its components into biographical sketches in order
to arrive at a sense of how it functioned and the purpose it served. Oring points out that
folk groups are ofte
nt
he“
ot
he
r
”a
sdi
s
t
i
ng
ui
s
he
df
r
om t
hel
a
r
g
e
rs
oc
i
a
ls
y
s
t
e
m,a
ndt
hi
si
s
clearly the case for the Creoles in relation to mainstream America. This kind of folk
g
r
oup,e
xpl
a
i
nsOr
i
ng
,“
s
ha
r
ea
ndi
de
nt
i
f
ywi
t
hahi
s
t
or
i
c
a
l
l
yde
r
i
ve
dc
ul
t
ur
a
lt
r
a
di
t
i
on
and style, which may be composed of both explicit behavioral features as well as implicit
i
de
a
s
,va
l
ue
s
,a
nda
t
t
i
t
ude
s
”(
24)
.Et
hni
c
i
t
y
,t
he
n,i
ss
pe
e
c
h,t
houg
ht
,a
nda
c
t
i
onba
s
e
don
as
e
ns
eofi
de
nt
i
t
y
.The
s
eg
r
oupsa
r
euni
t
swi
t
hi
na“
br
oa
de
ror
g
a
ni
z
a
t
i
onofsocial
r
e
l
a
t
i
ons
”(
30)
,a
ndt
hi
sc
ont
r
a
s
ts
t
r
e
ng
t
he
nst
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
a
lt
r
a
di
t
i
ons
.Or
i
ngf
ur
t
he
rs
hows
t
ha
tt
he“
c
ul
t
ur
a
lc
ont
e
xte
nc
a
ps
ul
a
t
e
sas
y
s
t
e
m ofi
de
a
s
,s
y
mbol
s
,be
ha
vi
or
s
,a
ndt
he
social context is a set of principles governed by interrelationships and sets of behaviors in
t
hec
ompa
r
a
t
i
vec
ont
e
xt
”(
140)
.
One of the most important elements found within a folk group is a shared belief
system, and this can be seen the fierce ethnic pride of the French Creoles. Other elements
98
at work are the twin laws of Folklore—those of conservatism and dynamism. An ethnic
group-- such as the Queyrouze salon-- is one that upholds cherished traditions and
practices—hence its conservatism. At the same time it serves as a chronicle of social
changes and the angst that these changes caused, thus demonstrating the dynamism of a
folk group. When they told their stories and paid service to the myth of the Creole, they
were engaged in the twin acts of preservation and creation. The self creation of lore
reveals a distinct point of view—one that is created for and by the larger community or
social group. In the case of the Creoles, this lore was a way to preserve their past, to hold
onto their present, and to attempt to secure a position in the future.
This identification process was intensified through American and Creole
interactions. Barbara Kirsheblatt-Gi
mbl
e
t
tde
s
c
r
i
be
st
he “
f
ol
kl
or
i
s
m e
f
f
e
c
t
,
” whi
c
h
postulates that an object changes when it is observed (152) and Regina Bendix explains
the role the tourist plays, to a cert
a
i
nde
g
r
e
e
,a
sa
n“
a
g
e
ntofc
ha
ng
e
”upont
heh
o
s
t
c
ul
t
ur
ea
ndt
he“
de
g
r
e
eofc
ul
t
ur
a
lr
e
s
i
l
i
e
nc
e
”t
hehos
tc
ul
t
ur
ee
xhi
bi
t
si
nt
hepr
oc
e
s
sof
ne
g
ot
i
a
t
i
ngt
heout
s
i
de
r
’
sg
a
z
e
.(
143)
.I
nt
hec
a
s
eoft
heCr
e
ol
e
s
,t
heAme
r
i
c
a
ng
a
z
e
created within them a self-awareness that forced them to make more reflective choices
about their behavior. They found themselves placed on public display—not merely going
about their private lives--and this self-consciousness transformed them into an exotic host
culture. Many Creoles complained that tourists would travel to the Quarter with a copy of
Ca
bl
e
’
sGrandissimes i
nt
he
i
rpoc
ke
t
swhi
l
el
ooki
ng f
ort
he“
r
e
a
ll
i
f
e
”c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
s
described in the novel. The Creoles became incensed at their commoditization into an
exotic curiosity. Even more troubling for them was the fact that under the microscopic
lens, their foibles became magnified.
99
However, there were some benefits derived from this attention, for it served to
preserve some Creole customary festivals. Bendix explains how economics play a factor
in the objectification of a culture. Using the example of a Swiss Interlaken festival, she
demonstrates how local customs and traditions create an economic boon and these are
“
ope
nf
ors
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
cus
e
”byt
hehos
ts
oc
i
e
t
ya
same
a
nst
operpetuate its culture (143). An
example of this theory in practice in New Orleans is the Mardi Gras celebration, which is
not only a stimulus to the local economy but a means to display and therefore preserve a
unique culture. While this may raise some question about the authenticity of a culture-one that self-consciously produces traditions for tourist display-- the host culture may
consider that the benefit of self-preservation overrides other considerations.
The value of applying a folklore lens to the Queyrouze salon is that it can reveal
the values, fears and beliefs of microcosmic culture, one that was consciously selfdefining and self-preserving. As such, the salon is a social document constructed by its
own ideology, trying to affect change and preserve tradition, thereby abiding by the twin
laws of folklore. This also underscores the need to approach their culture from a new
historical perspective where their social system is seen in context, enabling us to explore
not only what it is, but what is does-- how it functions within the larger framework of
New Orleans society, its contact with American values, and the political, economic and
ethnic framework within which it existed.
Each member of the Queyrouze salon contributed to the construction and
perpetuation of their folk group in a mutually influential and defining system. As I
interpret this group, I acknowledge that by observing it from the present, as Richard
100
Handler and Jacklyn Linnekin indicate, my mediated perceptions are compromised for I
a
m“
di
s
t
a
nc
e
dora
pa
r
tf
r
omt
heobj
e
c
tr
e
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
d”a
ndIa
c
knowl
e
dg
et
ha
tIa
m
e
ng
a
g
e
di
na“
pr
oc
e
s
sofi
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on”t
ha
tma
ke
s“
me
a
ni
ngi
nt
hepr
e
s
e
ntt
hr
oug
h
ma
ki
ngr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
e
st
ot
hepa
s
t
”(
287)
.I
ns
pi
t
eoft
he
s
el
i
mi
t
a
t
i
ons
,Iwi
l
lr
e
-assemble the
g
r
oupwi
t
hbr
i
e
fbi
og
r
a
phi
c
a
ls
ke
t
c
he
si
nor
de
rt
os
howhowe
a
c
honei
nf
or
me
dLe
ona
’
s
worldview. The salon members were from an elite class: Mollie Moore Davis (journalist),
Paul Morphy (chess champion), P. G. T. Beauregard (Confederate General and
politician), Placide Canonge (novelist and dramatist), Alfred Mercier (physician), Adrien
Rouquette (clergy), and Charles Gayarré (historian). These people would later mentor
Leona, and through descent, she inherited many of their values, beliefs and assumptions.
However, just as every new generation brings its own perspective to society, so does
Leona bring her own unique viewpoint.
Whi
l
eLe
ona
’
ss
a
l
onwa
sd
o
mi
na
t
e
dbyme
n,t
he
r
ewa
sonenot
a
bl
ee
xc
e
pt
i
on,
Mollie Evelyn Moore Davis. She was also a member of the Louisiana Association of the
American Folk-Lor
eSoc
i
e
t
ya
nds
e
r
ve
da
sama
g
ne
tf
ort
heCr
e
s
c
e
ntc
i
t
y
’
ss
oc
i
a
le
l
i
t
e
.
Jordan and de Caro state that she and her husband, a journalist, came to New Orleans in
1879:
Lacking funds for impressive living quarters, the Davises took up residence of
Royal Street in the French Quarter, taking advantage of cheap rents in what was
then a rather shabby residential area. But the Davises had the vision to recognize
in the French Quarter houses . . . the potential for creating an interesting and
r
oma
nt
i
ce
nvi
r
onme
nt...He
rpa
r
t
i
e
swe
r
et
hes
oc
i
a
lc
e
nt
e
rf
ort
hec
i
t
y
’
s
intellectual and artistic elite (34).
101
Davis was a regular contributor to the Folk-Lore society and wrote several
volumes of poetry, short stories and sketches, some of which were published in the
Journal of American Folklore. Sh
ea
l
s
ot
r
a
ns
l
a
t
e
doneofLe
ona
’
spoe
ms
,“
Response:”
Medea, hast thou said, and rightly thou
Hast named her, this proud woman with sad eyes
And savage heart where dark rebellion lies;
And who in each loved hand sees treason glow!
Poet, thy honey sip! The poison slow
Is hers of curses wild, and hopeless cries,
And prayers unheard from anguished hearts that rise,
And shrieks that shake the donjon to and fro.
Drink thou the dew from trembling chalices,
Ta
kef
ort
hi
neownt
hemor
ni
ng
’
smy
s
t
e
r
i
e
s
;
But leave to her the midnight wan and chill
Where blessings fell there grow the flowers of hate;
There is her harvest, there, when all is still,
And, mist-like, flies the night-moth desolate
(L’
Ab
e
i
l
l
eMay 27, 1887) [UU-70 6:45]
While there is no correspondence between the women to be found in the
Que
y
r
ouz
ec
ol
l
e
c
t
i
on,Da
vi
s
’pos
i
t
i
oni
nCr
e
ol
es
oc
i
e
t
ywa
sonet
ha
twoul
dha
vebr
oug
ht
her into close association with Leona. Perhaps Davis was received by the Creoles because
she and her husband chose to live in the French Quarter and because they shared a similar
l
oveofl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
.Le
ona
’
sa
c
c
e
pt
a
n
c
eofDa
vi
si
ndi
c
a
t
e
st
ha
tLe
ona
’
sr
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
et
o
Americans was more general than particular and that she crossed that cultural divide
whe
ns
hee
nc
ount
e
r
e
ds
ome
onewhowa
saki
ndr
e
ds
pi
r
i
t
.Howe
ve
r
,Le
ona
’
sa
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
on
with women seems to be more the exception than the rule, and this sense of isolation
filters into her work, as I shall demonstrate in Chapter Six. Unlike other women writers in
102
the period who shared a literary discourse and a sense of commonality, Leona seems to
have had little of this kind of companionship. Hers was a world of men.
Thema
nwhowa
sc
l
os
e
s
tt
oLe
ona
’
sa
g
ewa
sPa
ul Morphy (1837-1884), and he
was twenty-four years her senior. Leona took piano lessons from his mother at their house
a
t417Roy
a
lSt
r
e
e
t(
pr
e
s
e
ntl
oc
a
t
i
onofBr
e
nna
n’
sRe
s
t
a
ur
a
nt
)
.Att
hey
ounga
g
eof
thirteen, Morphy was already famous for his skill at Chess, and in 1850 he defeated
reigning chess master Janos Lowenthal of Hungary. By 1857 he had defeated all the
American chess players, and then approached Howard Staunton of England who refused
the challenge. Morphy then tackled the French champions. Even thought he was
blindfolded, he still managed to beat them after ten hours of play. He returned to his
home in New Orleans in 1859. After failing to inspire anyone else to join him in
competition, he retired from public life in 1860.
During his lifetime, he garnered much praise and attention and had many women
admirers, but he later told Leona that he did not give much credit to his fame. Leona
r
e
me
mb
e
r
st
ha
thi
s“
mos
ts
a
l
i
e
ntc
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
ca
l
wa
y
swa
sa
ni
nvi
nc
i
bl
ea
ve
r
s
i
ont
o
popularity, which graduall
yde
ve
l
ope
di
nt
oa
nunus
ua
ldi
s
da
i
nofc
e
l
e
br
i
t
y
”(
We
i
s
e9)
.
Morphy died in 1884 of apoplexy at the age of forty-seven after a long bout with mental
illness. At the time of his death, Leona was twenty-three, and when she met Hearn three
years later, he encouraged her in her writing of the Morphy biography. (This unpublished
manuscript can now be found at the Williams Research Center in New Orleans). Hearn
c
ons
i
de
r
e
dhe
r“
Mor
phySke
t
c
h”t
obea“
‘
ps
y
c
hol
og
i
c
a
lwor
k’r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
ngnotonl
y
Morphy, but Queyrouze a
swe
l
l
”(
Wi
e
s
e9)
.I
nt
hi
ss
ke
t
c
h,Le
onal
a
vi
s
hl
ypr
a
i
s
e
s
Mor
hpy
’
sbr
i
l
l
i
a
nc
ea
nds
ki
l
l
,a
ndh
e
rf
ondne
s
sf
orhi
mi
se
vi
de
nt
.He
a
r
n’
sa
s
s
e
s
s
me
nti
s
103
a
c
c
ur
a
t
e
,f
ort
hi
swor
kr
e
ve
a
l
sLe
o
n
a
’
sde
s
i
r
et
oi
de
a
l
i
z
ea
ndr
oma
nt
i
c
i
z
et
hos
es
hehe
l
d
in high esteem. This same idealization and sentimentalism surfaces in her memoir about
her relationship with Hearn, one that she wrote towards the end of her life, and the Idyl
reveals as much about Leona as it does Hearn. A common thread throughout her oeuvre is
a tendency to romanticize her loved ones, and this ideality extended to her own culture.
Another influential member of her salon was Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard
(1818-1
8
93)
,whowa
sLe
onQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
l
os
ef
r
i
e
nd.Ana
t
i
veofNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
,
Beauregard served in the U.S. Army until February 1861. He then joined the Confederate
Army and had an illustrious career. During the war, he directed the attack on Fort Sumter,
served as second in command in the First Battle of Bull Run, and took command at
Shiloh. In 1863 he defended Charleston, and in 1864 he defeated General Butler at
Dr
ur
y
’
sBl
udd,Vi
r
g
i
ni
a
.Whe
nher
e
t
ur
ne
dt
oNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsa
f
t
e
rt
heCi
vi
lWa
ri
n1866
,
he tried his hand, unsuccessfully, at several business ventures. After a failed attempt to
secure a Foreign Service appointment or to garner a commission, he resorted to working
the state lottery, and he was often criticized for his connections with this program.
Beauregard was one of the members of the Athénée, a social organization created
to provide a literary outlet for its members, a
ndhee
nc
our
a
g
e
dLe
ona
’
swr
i
t
i
ngc
a
r
e
e
r
.
The Athénée wa
sc
ompr
i
s
e
dofa
l
lma
l
eme
mbe
r
s
,butbe
c
a
us
eofLe
ona
’
si
mpr
e
s
s
i
ve
intellectual and literary skill, the group invited her to join, and she became the only
female membe
roft
hi
ss
oc
i
e
t
y
.Whe
ns
hepr
e
s
e
nt
e
dhe
rs
pe
e
c
h“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
,
”
Beauregard was one of her sponsors, and because of him, she became the first woman in
New Orleans to read from her own work in public. Through him, she became acquainted
with local and state politicians, and he introduced her to the president of Mexico when he
104
a
t
t
e
nde
ddi
nne
ra
tBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d’
shome
.Thus
,hepr
ove
dt
obeas
uppor
t
i
vea
ndwe
l
l
connected member of her salon who aided her in furthering her career and providing
access to influential political figures.
Leona was very loyal to the members of her salon, and when James Redpath,
J
e
f
f
e
r
s
o
nDa
vi
s
’bi
og
r
a
phe
r
,l
a
unc
h
e
da
na
t
t
a
c
ke
da
g
a
i
ns
tBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d’
sc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
,Le
on
a
wa
squi
c
kt
ode
f
e
ndhi
m.I
n1890s
het
ooke
xc
e
pt
i
ont
oRe
dpa
t
h’
s claim that Jefferson
Da
vi
sha
dt
he“
ut
mos
tc
ont
e
mptf
ort
ha
tf
r
i
vol
ousl
i
t
t
l
eFr
e
nc
hma
nBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d.
”She
a
dmoni
s
he
dRe
dpa
t
h,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
ode
s
t
r
oyi
saf
a
re
a
s
i
e
rt
a
s
kt
ha
nt
oc
r
e
a
t
e
.Shec
i
t
e
d
Be
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d’
si
nt
e
g
r
i
t
y
,a
ndc
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
dDa
vi
s
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tape
r
s
onwho“
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
shi
s
opi
ni
ons
,wor
ds&ma
nus
c
r
i
pt
st
ot
hef
ourwi
nds
,r
e
a
l
l
ys
pe
a
ksc
onf
i
de
nt
l
yt
onoone
”
[UU-68 2:17]. Her defensive response indicates her inability to countenance any slights
against those she idealized, a quality that permeates her work
Perhaps her closest companion in the salon was Louis Placide Canonge (18221893), even though he was almost forty years her senior. Placide was born into a
pr
omi
ne
ntCr
e
ol
ef
a
mi
l
ypr
of
i
l
e
di
nGr
a
c
eKi
ng
’
sCreole Families of New Orleans
(1921). Hi
sg
r
a
ndf
a
t
he
rha
dbe
e
napr
omi
ne
ntj
udg
ea
ndha
df
ours
ons
:“
Al
lwe
r
e
e
duc
a
t
e
di
nPa
r
i
sa
tt
heCol
l
é
g
eLoui
sl
eGr
a
nd”[
Lycée Louis le Grand ] (King 395).
Placide returned from France a very cultured young man and quickly became involved in
New Orleans s
oc
i
e
t
y
.Hewa
sa
n“
e
l
e
g
a
ntma
n,knownf
orhi
ss
ha
r
pwi
t....Be
c
a
us
eof
his worldly interests, refined opinions and sophisticated tastes, New Orleans came to
r
e
g
a
r
dhi
ma
st
hepr
ot
ot
y
pi
c
a
lFr
e
nc
hma
n”(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
s
”11:
5)
.Gr
a
c
eKi
ng
describes him:
105
. . . for half a century [he was] was the bright light of literature in New Orleans.
Hewa
st
hebr
i
l
l
i
a
ntc
ol
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
ori
nt
he“
Abe
i
l
l
e
,
”t
heonl
yFr
e
nc
hne
ws
pa
pe
ri
n
Louisiana, and infused into it a vitality that it lost at his death. He was also the
hero of his time in the gay world of society. He wrote light comedies and proverbs
in prose and in verse, which under his direction were acted in the private and
exclusive salons of the society leaders, the roles being filled by the beaux and
belles of the “
be
a
umonde
”(
396)
.
His passion for theater and opera was well known, and he served as director of the
French Opera House or two years (1873-1875). He also loved to write plays, and Le
Comte de Carmagnola “
de
but
e
di
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsi
n1852a
ndl
a
t
e
rha
darun of one
hundred performances in Paris. Canonge created two amateur theater clubs and served as
ma
na
g
e
roft
heOr
l
e
a
nsThe
a
t
e
ri
n1860”(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
s
”11:
5)
.Hewa
sknownf
orh
i
s
out-spoken nature, and because of this was involved in several duels. During the war, and
was forced to leave New Orleans because he was openly hostile towards the Union in his
role as the editor of Courier Louisianais. When the war was over, he began his
journalism career once again, first attempting to start his own newspaper, L’
é
poque
,and
then finally working for L’
Abe
i
l
l
ein 1882 at the age of sixty. He would continue his work
there, often writing under the nom de plume, Réne, for the next eleven years until his
death in 1893 at the age of seventy-one. During his lifetime, Placide encouraged and
s
uppor
t
e
dLe
ona
’
sl
i
t
e
r
a
r
yc
a
r
e
e
r
.Ase
di
t
orofL’
Abe
i
l
l
e
, he offered an outlet for her
work, at the same time he inspired her poetry.
Leona and Canonge wrote to each other regularly and his letters to her can be
found among the Queyrouze papers: eight letters in 1887, sixteen letters in 1888, thirteen
letters in 1889, and thirty-five in 1890-1891. A study of these and the letters, and the ones
106
to his dear friend in Paris, Henri Vignaud, reveal a man who was sensitive and
vulnerable, a condition belied by his polished social grace. As a long-time friend and
companion, one who often accompanied him to the opera, Leona was privy to this private
s
i
def
orCa
nong
e
.Thec
l
os
e
ne
s
soft
he
i
rr
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pi
sr
e
ve
a
l
e
di
nhe
rpoe
m,“
á
L’
Ope
r
a,
”that she dedicated to him.
Thi
spoe
m wa
si
ns
pi
r
e
dbyVe
r
di
’
sope
r
a
,La Traviata, which tells the story of
Violetta Valéry, a kept woman who falls in love with Alfredo Gremont, a man who truly
loves her. She leaves her reprobate life and begins her idyllic days with him only to have
these shattered by the disapproval of his family. Forced to leave him, she falls into
poverty and sickness, and when he finally comes her to reclaim her, it is too late.
Catherine Clément believes that the social injustice portrayed in this opera have
to do with the victimization of the female heroine on two levels: one is at the hands of the
family and the other at the disposal by her society. In her family, Violetta is subjected to
“
ha
r
s
hf
a
mi
l
i
a
ll
a
w”a
nds
heha
dn
owa
youtoft
hi
sbutt
of
ol
l
owa“
de
a
dl
yr
i
t
eof
s
a
c
r
i
f
i
c
e
”(
60)
.Shea
l
s
o“
e
mbodi
e
st
hes
e
c
r
e
ts
c
he
me
soft
hes
e
a
t
e
dbour
g
e
oi
s
i
e
,who
a
dor
nh
e
r
,dr
e
s
she
r
,undr
e
s
she
r
,a
ndpr
os
t
i
t
ut
ehe
r
”(
61)
.
These themes underscore the message of injustice when Leona asks the question,
i
nhe
rpoe
m“
al
’
Ope
r
a”
:“
Quin’
spl
e
ur
e
,s
ouf
f
e
r
t
?Et
,quil
’
os
eav
oue
r
”(For whom do
we weep? And for what do we dare to claim?). Sharing how deeply the opera affected
her, she describes her awakened pain and sadness, which indicates a level of trust and
intimacy in her relationship with Canonge:
107
AL’
Ope
r
a
dedicated to Placide Canonge
Our chairs were touching as the soft accents of
Vi
ol
e
t
t
a
’
ss
ongdi
s
t
ur
be
dt
h
es
pa
c
ebe
t
we
e
nus
,
Her hymn learned too late burned into our hearts,
Embracing us both with powerful sweetness
Entering our sleep, awakening the pain.
...................................
At one time we believed that nothing could affect us
To the bottom of our being, that all was silence.
But the art of the archer is to make us quiver.
Pulling like a golden chain to places where silence moans
And we find the strength to live again only to suffer
[UU-71 7:56]
(Appendix 262).
Thi
spoe
mc
ompa
r
e
sVi
ol
e
t
t
a
’
se
xpe
rience to their own, cloaking both in a robe of
victimization. The grief she shares with Canonge intensifies when she writes her eulogy
for him in 1893.
“I
nGr
ae
c
i
am”
Hommage douloureaux rendu á Monsieur L. Placide Canongel
’
amit
ant
regretté, mort le 22 Janvier 1893.
The hand let go and dropped the fragile vessel
Once so full of mead, and the echoing vase
Is broken, spilling its fragrant liqueur . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
With its perfume, I will write my sacred poem to you,
And from my memories I will pluck
My verse, soft and sad, in this diaphanous hour
.............................................
Suddenly a strange cold comes over me
Blowing against the flame and against the phalanx
Where the flare of tombs ignites the granite
Which towards you inclines, and I resist and curse
For I saw the thunderbolt strike the trees
Illuminating how cold, how heavy, is this white coat of marble.
108
Three times the Angelus repeated the word, and my song begins its ending with a
sob
[UU-71 7:55] (Appendix 252).
In this poem she situates Canonge within the realm of the gods, which serves as
another example of her predilection to idealize her loved ones. For her, Canonge was the
quintessential Frenchman, a man of grace, intellect, and refinement.
Pe
r
ha
psl
e
s
si
nt
i
ma
t
e
,butnol
e
s
si
nf
l
ue
nt
i
a
l
,i
nLe
ona
’
sl
i
f
ewa
sAl
f
r
e
dMe
r
c
i
e
r
(1816-1894). He was a Creole born of French parents who moved to Louisiana. Like
Placide Canonge, Mercier was educated at the Collége Louis le Grand in Paris. He
r
e
t
ur
ne
dt
oLoui
s
i
a
na
,butl
e
f
tonc
ea
g
a
i
nt
os
pe
ndt
i
mei
nBos
t
onbe
f
or
et
a
ki
nga“
Gr
a
n
d
Tour
;
”t
hi
si
nc
l
ude
df
i
vemont
hsi
nI
t
a
l
ya
ndSi
c
i
l
ybe
f
or
er
e
t
ur
ni
ngt
oFr
a
nc
e
.While
there, he provided news of the 1848 Revolution to newspapers in New Orleans. After he
married, he began studying medicine, and after he graduated he brought his family to
Louisiana and opened his practice in New Orleans. When the Civil War broke out, he
returned to Paris and while there tried to garner support for the Confederate cause. After
the Civil War, he again returned to New Orleans and began his writing for the New
Orleans Picayune and Les Comptes-Re
ndusdel
’
At
hé
né
eLoui
s
i
anai
s
.
Mercier wrote against the pr
a
c
t
i
c
eofmi
s
c
e
g
e
na
t
i
ona
ndque
s
t
i
one
dt
hec
hur
c
h’
s
dictates regarding the celibacy of priests. He wrote love stories as well. His publications
are as follows: Le Fou de Palerme (The Fool of Palermo 1873), which had been inspired
by his sojourn in Italy and Sicily, La fille du prêtre (ThePr
i
e
s
t
’
sDaught
e
r1877), which
c
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
dt
heCa
t
hol
i
cChur
c
h’
ss
t
a
nc
eonc
e
l
i
ba
c
y
,a
ndL’
Habi
t
at
i
onSai
ntYbar
s( The
109
Saint Ybars Plantation 1881), much of it written in Creole patois. In 1885 he was
honored with the distinction of being elected as an officer of the Legion of Honor by the
French government.
Like Placide Canonge, he loved the theater and opera and contributed several
r
e
vi
e
wsofpe
r
f
or
ma
nc
e
sa
tt
heFr
e
nc
hOpe
r
aHous
e
.I
n1876hebe
c
a
me“
af
ounding
member of l
’
At
hé
né
eLoui
s
i
anai
s
.This group created the Compt
e
sRe
ndusdel
’
At
hé
né
e
Louisianais, which served as a vehicle for the publication of local French writers.
Queyrouze often published her poetry and essays in the Comptes-Rendus, a“
c
ol
l
e
c
tion of
l
i
t
e
r
a
r
ya
nds
c
i
e
nt
i
f
i
cpa
pe
r
s
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e183)
.Me
r
c
i
e
rs
e
r
ve
da
st
heor
g
a
ni
z
a
t
i
on’
s
secretary and treasurer until his death in 1894 at age seventy-e
i
g
ht
.
”(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
s
”
9:
2)
.Ast
he“
f
ounde
roft
heAthénée Louisianais for the preservation of t
hec
i
t
y
’
s
cultural heritage [Mercier was] its guiding spirit from 1876 to his death [on May 12]
1894”(
Tr
e
g
l
e183)
.Howe
ve
r
,e
ve
na
tt
het
i
met
ha
tt
heComptes Rendus was publishing
t
hewor
kofFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
s
,i
twa
sbe
c
omi
ngar
e
l
i
coft
hepa
s
t
,no“
mor
ethan a nostalgic
r
e
mna
n
ti
nt
hemi
ds
tofa
nAme
r
i
c
a
nc
i
t
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e184)
.
Mercier tried to keep his culture alive but not-- as some critics argue--at the
e
xpe
ns
eofot
he
re
t
hni
cg
r
oups
.Tr
e
g
l
ea
s
s
e
r
t
st
ha
tMe
r
c
i
e
rdi
dnotbe
l
i
e
vei
n“
Cr
e
ol
e
‘
a
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
c
y
’orc
ul
t
ur
a
ls
upe
r
i
or
i
t
y
.
”Ra
t
he
r
,he“
f
ounds
i
mpl
es
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
oni
nt
hes
i
mpl
e
j
oyofke
e
pi
nga
l
i
vet
hee
nda
ng
e
r
e
dus
eoft
heFr
e
nc
ht
ong
ue
”(
184)
.Me
r
c
i
e
rwa
s
instrumental in preserving the Creole discourse and as such demonstrates the
Conservative law of the Twin Laws of Folklore. But his hopes to keep the French literary
culture alive in New Orleans failed, primarily because many Creoles did not take the time
to read, write, and publish. Leona was an exception, of course, but when French
110
bookstores were going out of business because of lack of patronage, and when the
Athénée meetings were attended by fewer and fewer people, Mercier could see that they
were losing the battle of cultural preservation. By the 1890s, the Athénée meetings only
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
e
d“
f
e
we
rt
ha
nf
i
f
t
e
e
n”(
Tr
e
g
l
e184)
,a
ndFr
e
nc
hf
or
e
i
g
nvi
s
i
t
or
swe
r
eg
r
e
e
t
e
dby
fewer of their kindred spirits. When Mercier died at age seventy-eight in 1894, the
Athénée, for all practical purposes, died with him. Although it was revived by Alcée
Fortier in the 1900s, it essentially ceased to exist until its resurgence one hundred years
l
a
t
e
ri
n1980s
.I
na
na
r
t
i
c
l
e“
Pr
og
r
e
s
soft
heFr
e
nc
hLa
ng
ua
g
e
”(
“
Progrés de la langue
Francaise”
)wr
i
t
t
e
nf
orLes Compte-Rendus in 1883, Mercier wrote:
The day when we will no longer speak French in Louisiana . . . . there will no
longer be Creoles; the original and powerful group they formed in the great
national family of the United States will have vanished, just a wine poured into a
running river loses it flavor and color
(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lCol
l
e
c
t
i
ons
”9:
2)
.
Mercier, like Leona, could see that the transplanted culture in New Orleans was quickly
becoming devoured by the surge of Americanism, and he used similar imagery to
describe the experience.
Another avid defender of the French Creole culture was abbé Adrien Rouquette
(1813-1887). He was not a member of the Queyrouze salon, per se, but he is included
here because of several associative factors: his adherence to romantic literary traditions in
his work, his friendship with Lafcadio Hearn, his correspondence with Leona in 1885,
and his vociferous attacks against George Washington Cable. Rouquette, like Leona, was
pa
r
toft
h
el
oc
a
la
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
c
ya
ndwr
ot
epoe
t
r
y
,“
i
ns
pi
r
e
dbyFr
e
nc
hRoma
nt
i
c
i
s
m”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
111
289)
.Hi
s“
l
i
f
ea
ndwor
kwere living examples of French Romanticism transplanted to a
Louisiana setting and thriving vigorously long after Romanticism had ceased to be a vital
f
or
c
ei
nEur
ope
a
ni
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
lc
i
r
c
l
e
s
”(
290)
.Hewa
sbor
ni
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsa
ndwa
st
he
child of a Frenchman who had settled in New Orleans and had pursued the same
occupation as Leon Queyrouze, as a wine merchant. Rouquette attended school in New
Orleans at the Col
l
é
ged’
Or
l
é
ans
, and later continued his education in Kentucky, New
Jersey, and then in Nantes and Renne in France. He returned to the states in 1883 and
began living with a Native American tribe on the Bayou Lacombe, but he often visited
Fr
a
nc
e
.Hee
nt
e
r
e
dt
hepr
i
e
s
t
hoodi
n1841a
t“
t
hePl
a
t
t
e
nvi
l
l
es
e
mi
na
r
yi
nAs
s
umpt
i
on
parish and was ordained a pries
ti
n1845”(
“
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
”10:4)
.Forf
our
t
e
e
ny
e
a
r
she
served at the St. Louis Cathedral in New Orleans where he became a vicar. It was during
this time that he befriended Lafcadio Hearn. However, he retreated from the pressures of
a large parish to lead a monastic life, choosing to serve in a small chapel at Bayou
Lacombe. He succumbed to a mental illness late in life and died in 1887 at the age of
seventy-four, the same year the Hearn departed New Orleans.
As a member of the same folk group, he shared with Leona many of the same
values, beliefs, and fears. Their social values descended from a very similar family
background and education, and their writing styles favored the aesthetics of the French
Romantic tradition. Moreover, they both wrote in defense of their culture, which was
spurred by an underlying fear that their way of life was under assault—one fueled by the
wr
i
t
i
ngofGe
or
g
eWa
s
hi
ng
t
onCa
b
l
e
.Rouque
t
t
e“
bi
t
t
e
r
l
yc
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
dCa
bl
e
’
spor
t
r
a
y
a
l
s[
of
Creoles] and refuted [these] in the columns of the French daily, L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e290)
.
112
Rouque
t
t
ea
ndLe
onawe
r
ej
oi
ne
di
nt
he
i
re
f
f
or
t
st
oc
ount
e
r
a
c
tCa
bl
e
’
sde
pi
c
t
i
onoft
he
i
r
culture by the venerable historian, Charles Etienne Arthur Gayarré.
Charles Gayarré (1805-1895) became the most vociferous defender of the Creole
culture. In The Great South, Edwa
r
dKi
ngde
s
c
r
i
be
dGa
y
a
r
r
éa
sa“
‘
pr
omi
ne
nthi
s
t
or
i
a
n
a
ndg
e
nt
l
e
ma
nofmos
thonor
a
bl
eCr
e
ol
ede
s
c
e
nt
’
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e171)
.Hewa
sc
ons
i
de
r
e
dt
obe
t
he“
Fa
t
he
rofLoui
s
i
a
nahi
s
t
or
y
,
”a
ndGr
a
c
eKi
ngde
s
c
r
i
be
dhi
ma
s“
notonl
yt
he
hi
s
t
or
i
a
nofLoui
s
i
a
nabutt
hehi
s
t
or
yofi
ta
swe
l
l
.
”Whe
nhedi
e
d“
ag
r
e
a
ta
ndag
ooda
nd
useful life had ceased to exist in the community . . . and a great, good and useful volume
ha
dbe
e
nc
l
os
e
d”(
269)
.
Thes
onof“
Ca
r
l
osGa
y
a
rré and the youngest daughter of sugar planter Etienne de
Bor
é
,
”Ga
y
a
r
r
é“
wa
sr
a
i
s
e
di
nwe
a
l
t
ha
ndCr
e
ol
epr
i
vi
l
e
g
e
”(
J
a
c
ks
on299)
.Hewa
sbor
n
i
nJ
a
nua
r
yof1805a
ndg
r
e
wuponhi
sg
r
a
ndf
a
t
he
r
’
spl
a
nt
a
t
i
on,whi
c
hwa
ss
i
t
ua
t
e
daf
e
w
miles from New Orleans (
299)
.Hewe
ntt
oapr
i
va
t
es
c
hoola
thi
sc
ous
i
n’
s(
Four
c
he
r
)
plantation and then left for boarding school at the College of Orleans. After his
graduation in 1825, he left to study law in Philadelphia and passed the Pennsylvania bar
in 1828 before returning to New Orleans to practice law. He quickly ascended the
political ladder, first becoming a representative in the legislature in 1830, then serving as
Attorney-General before becoming a senator for the United States. After his marriage to
Ann Buchannan of Mississippi, he began completing his history of Louisiana, utilizing
archive material he had collected during the previous eight years. During his tenure as
Secretary of State, he was instrumental in procuring and disbursing funds that provided
for the erection of the statue of Washington in the State House Rotunda and the statue of
Jackson in Jackson Square.
113
During the Civil War, some New Orleans citizens left for the countryside, and I
assume that the Clara Queyrouze took her infant daughter to Leona plantation near St.
Martinville while her husband was as war. Likewise, Gayarré retreated to his rural home
Roncal “
na
me
df
ort
heol
dhomeoft
heGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
si
nSpa
i
n”(
Ki
ng187)
,buti
ns
pi
t
eof
this self-protective move, he nevertheless lost most of his fortunes during the war. He and
his wife took measure to keep their valuables safe:
[
The
ybur
i
e
d]hi
swi
f
e
’
sj
e
we
l
r
ya
nddi
a
mondsa
ndhi
st
r
e
a
s
ur
e
dhe
i
r
l
ooms
;t
he
shoe buckles and sword hilt studded with brilliants that belonged to his father; his
grandmother
’
smi
ni
a
t
ur
ei
naf
r
a
mes
ur
r
ounde
dwi
t
hdi
a
monds
;deBor
é
’
s
snuffbox; in short, all the priceless innumerable trinkets of generations of his
family
(King 288).
However, his valet, William, spied on them, stole their belongings, and sold them.
Ga
y
a
r
r
és
a
i
dt
ha
tWi
l
l
i
a
m wa
s“
‘
t
hemos
ta
c
c
ompl
i
s
he
dva
l
e
ta
ndr
a
s
c
a
li
nt
hewor
l
d’
”
a
ndt
ha
thewa
sa
bl
et
o“
l
i
veont
hepr
oc
e
e
ds
”f
orma
nyy
e
a
r
st
he
r
e
a
f
t
e
r(
Ki
ng288)
.
After the war Gayarré served as a reporter for the Supreme Court Judges in
Louisiana, and throughout the rest of his life, he often had to rely on his writing for
economic support. He completed the History of Louisiana Volume I in 1846, which was
“
t
heof
f
i
c
i
a
lhi
s
t
or
yofLoui
s
i
a
naf
r
om i
t
sc
ol
oni
z
a
t
i
onbyI
be
r
vi
l
l
et
oi
t
sc
e
s
s
i
onby
Fr
a
nc
et
oSpa
i
n”(
Ki
ng80-182). (He completed Volume II French Domination in 1847,
Volume III The Spanish Domination in 1854, and Volume IV The American Domination
in 1866). In addition, he wrote several historical articles, lectures, and sketches. When
as
ke
db
yNe
wOr
l
e
a
n’
s“
Pe
opl
e
’
sLy
c
e
um”t
og
i
veal
e
c
t
ur
e
,heof
f
e
r
e
d“
ThePoe
t
r
ya
nd
Roma
nc
eoft
heHi
s
t
or
yofLoui
s
i
a
na
,
”onet
ha
twa
sc
ul
l
e
df
r
om al
a
r
g
e
rbodyofwor
k
entitled The American Domination, comprised of several lectures.
114
Ga
y
a
r
r
é
’
swor
ks
e
r
ves as an example of both of the Twin Laws of Folklore,
Conservatism and Dynamism. In the act of attempting to preserve his culture, he was
also constructing a self-defining narrative. Oring describes this dynamic: when folk group
members attempt to define their culture, they are simultaneously preserving and changing
i
tbe
c
a
u
s
et
hea
t
t
e
mpt“
g
oe
sbe
y
onds
oc
i
e
t
ya
ndc
ul
t
ur
e
,a
ndi
nf
or
msa
na
l
y
s
i
sa
nd
i
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on”(
140)
.Ga
y
a
r
r
é
’
ss
p
e
e
c
h“
TheCr
e
ol
e
sofHi
s
t
or
ya
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
sof
Roma
nc
e
”g
i
ve
na
tTul
a
ne
,Iargue, was an example of this dynamic. He was articulating
“
as
y
s
t
e
m ofi
de
a
s
,s
y
mbol
sa
ndb
e
ha
vi
or
s
”i
na“
s
oc
i
a
lc
ont
e
xt
”(
140)a
ndt
r
a
ns
f
or
mi
ng
it at the same time. By carefully constructing his vision of a Creole he contributed to the
Creole myth. By this act he was attempting to resurrect a mythological past and to lay
claim to the future interpretations.
Gr
a
c
eKi
ngde
s
c
r
i
be
sGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
sme
t
hodofc
r
e
a
t
i
ngac
a
r
e
f
ul
l
yc
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
d
narrative. She often visited Gayarré at his home, and even though she admired him, she
had reservations regarding the accuracy of some of his accounts in his lectures. Gayarré
a
dmi
t
t
e
dt
ha
ti
fhe“
g
i
l
de
d”t
hef
a
c
t
sabi
t
,hec
oul
dl
ur
ehi
sr
e
a
de
r
si
nt
ol
i
s
t
e
ni
ng
,butt
h
e
disadvantage of this was that his slanted truths became perpetuated errors, as they were
repeated and retold. King, however, does defend the practice by saying that some benefit
wa
sde
r
i
ve
doft
hi
spr
a
c
t
i
c
e
.I
nGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
sa
c
c
ount
s“
t
het
hi
ng
soft
hehe
a
r
tbe
c
a
me
confused with the things of the mind, [but] the gain has been that . . . the history of the
St
a
t
ei
svi
vi
da
ndpi
c
t
ur
e
s
que
”(
Ki
n
g282)
;howe
ve
r
,Ki
ngde
pl
or
e
dt
hef
a
c
tt
ha
t
Ga
y
a
r
r
é
’
s“
poe
t
i
cs
e
nt
i
me
nt
”ha
dma
dei
t
swa
yi
nt
ot
he“
e
duc
a
t
i
ons
y
s
t
e
msoft
oda
y
.
”
I
nde
e
d,s
hes
a
y
s
,“
i
tha
sbe
e
ni
nt
r
ut
ht
oog
e
ne
r
ous
l
ypr
ol
i
f
i
c
”(
282)
.Shepoi
nt
soutt
ha
t
“
ourhi
s
t
or
i
c
a
lque
s
t
i
onswe
r
et
ohi
mque
s
t
i
onsofme
mor
y
,a
ndhi
sme
mor
i
e
sha
ve
115
be
c
omehi
s
t
or
i
c
a
ldoc
ume
nt
s
”(
271)
.Shea
dmi
t
st
ha
te
ve
ni
twa
spos
s
i
bl
et
or
e
da
c
tt
he
s
e
sentimental contributions to history, ther
e
s
ul
t“
woul
dpr
oduc
ei
nde
e
ds
ome
t
hi
ngl
i
kea
collapse in our native pseudo-hi
s
t
or
i
c
a
ll
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
”(
Ki
ng282)
.Thi
si
ndi
c
a
t
e
showmuc
h
this folklore structure relied upon his narrative.
In the waning years of his life, Gayarré became increasingly bitter about his
failure to mitigate the negative perceptions of his culture. Worse still, he witnessed the
disappearance of his way of life and felt that he was powerless to stop it. Like many
Creoles, he felt that he had become an unwilling immigrant upon his native soil. During
hi
sl
i
f
e
t
i
me
,heha
d“
s
e
e
nt
het
r
a
ns
pl
a
nt
e
df
l
a
g
,l
a
ng
ua
g
e
,a
ndg
ove
r
nme
ntbe
c
omehome
br
e
dt
ot
hes
oi
l
”(
Ki
ng270)
.Hedi
da
c
knowl
e
dg
e
,howe
ve
rg
r
udg
i
ng
l
y
,t
ha
tt
heCr
e
ol
e
s
were partially responsible for their own demise, although he places the greater burden of
blame upon the shoulders of the Union. In an 1873 interview with Edward King for
Sc
r
i
bne
r
’
sMont
hl
y
,Ga
y
a
r
r
és
a
y
st
ha
t“
‘
t
heRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
onha
de
ng
e
nde
r
e
ds
uc
hmi
s
e
r
y
,
a
ndf
e
a
rof‘
ne
g
r
og
ove
r
nme
nt
’wa
ss
owi
de
s
pr
e
a
d,t
ha
tLoui
s
i
a
na
’
swhi
t
epopul
a
t
i
on
s
t
oodr
e
a
dyt
oe
mbr
a
c
ea
nyc
ha
ng
ei
na
ut
hor
i
t
ya
nds
ubmi
t...t
o‘
a
nyot
he
rs
pe
c
i
e
sof
de
s
pot
i
s
m’
”(
Ha
i
r107)
.Wi
t
hr
a
nc
or
,hebl
a
me
st
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tt
he
r
ewa
s“
‘
no
hopef
o
rs
a
l
va
t
i
on’a
sl
onga
st
heYa
nke
e
ske
pt‘
t
he
i
rs
t
i
nki
ngpur
i
t
a
nf
ootonourbr
e
a
s
t
’
”
(qtd in Tregle 170).
Le
onas
ha
r
e
ds
omeofGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
ss
e
nt
i
me
nt
s
,a
ndi
nhe
rwr
i
t
i
ng
,onec
a
nf
i
nd
similar rancor. As she had with Beauregard, she was quick to defend her dear friend,
Gayarré, for he had supported her and encouraged her career throughout her life, and
when she stood before a podium at the armory of the Continental Guards to present her
l
e
c
t
ur
eon“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
,
”Ga
y
a
r
r
éha
ds
t
oodbyhe
rs
i
dea
ndha
di
nt
r
oduc
e
d
116
her. Later, when Gayarré came under fire for his romanticized views of the Creole
c
ul
t
ur
e
,
s
her
us
he
dt
ohi
sde
f
e
ns
e
.Shebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
thewa
sa
n“
i
mpa
r
t
i
a
lLoui
s
i
a
na
hi
s
t
or
i
a
n,
”a
ndquot
e
shi
svi
e
wsr
e
g
a
r
di
ngt
heCr
e
ol
ec
ul
t
ur
ei
nhe
r“
Silhouettes Creoles”
:
The appellation of aristocracy is one that suits us well to employ for there did
exists an aristocracy in Louisiana. But how some apply the term now is
ridiculously false, for how it existed is nothing similar to the shadow it casts; our
society was essentially plebian and democratic [UU-70 6:47].
Shea
ddst
ohi
sde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
onoft
he“
t
het
r
uet
y
peofCr
e
ol
e
”bys
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tt
he
qui
nt
e
s
s
e
nt
i
a
lCr
e
ol
ewa
sa“
c
hi
va
l
r
ousFr
e
nc
hma
na
ndSpa
ni
a
r
d.
”Li
keGa
y
a
r
r
é
,s
he
casts the blame for their social afflictions upon the Americans: The change, she says, had
be
e
nc
a
u
s
e
dbyt
he“
a
bs
or
pt
i
onoft
heCr
e
ol
er
a
c
ei
nt
ot
heAng
l
oSa
xone
l
e
me
nt
,not
a
bl
y
t
hos
ef
r
o
mt
hee
a
s
t
”[
UU-70 6:47]. The underlying assumption in this statement is that
t
he“
pu
r
e
”Fr
e
nc
hwe
r
ebe
i
ngdi
l
u
t
e
da
ndde
l
ug
e
dbyt
hef
l
a
vor
less and relentless flood of
Ame
r
i
c
a
,a
dopt
e
dGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
sr
ol
ea
sde
f
e
nde
roft
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
e
.
Gayarré died at age ninety on February 11th 1895,t
hes
a
mey
e
a
ra
sLe
ona
’
sf
a
t
h
e
r
.
According to King, Gayarré continued to write until a year before his death. However, his
“
c
i
r
c
l
eo
ff
r
i
e
ndsg
r
e
ws
ma
l
l
e
ra
shel
i
ve
don,out
l
i
vi
ngt
he
m”(
290)
.Hewa
ss
ur
vi
ve
dby
his wife who passed away in 1914. At the time of his death, he lived in a small house on
Prieur and Kerlerec (Leona also lived in a house on Kerlerec) and he was buried in the
ol
dSt
.Loui
sCe
me
t
e
r
yi
nhi
sg
r
a
ndf
a
t
he
r
’
st
omb.Le
onapubl
i
c
l
ya
c
knowl
e
dg
e
shi
mon
Ma
y2,1891,di
s
c
us
s
i
ng“
howourr
i
ve
rde
s
t
r
oy
ss
omuc
h,i
nc
l
udi
ngt
heol
dc
e
me
t
e
r
i
e
s
where our beloved ancestors lie in rest, so many of old Creole famil
i
e
s
.
”Shel
a
me
nt
st
he
pa
s
s
i
ngoft
he“
s
a
c
r
e
dt
r
a
di
t
i
ons
”t
h
a
ta
r
e“
a
l
lweha
vel
e
f
t
.
”Shebe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
tt
r
a
di
t
i
oni
s
117
t
he
i
r“
o
n
l
yi
nhe
r
i
t
a
nc
e...a
ndourhonort
ha
twebr
oug
htf
r
om ourhome
l
a
nd.
”The
r
e
f
or
e
,
with the passing of Gayarré, she says that she i
swi
t
ne
s
s
i
ng“
oneourt
hel
a
s
tkni
g
htofour
Creole race—this historian
Votre humble et fidéle ami
[UU-71 8 :60].
With equal fervor, Leona joined with the other Creoles in their passionate
rejection of George Washington Cable. He proved to have a deep impact on the Creoles
and was instrumental (as was Gayarée) in the development of the Creole identity. Cable
depiction of the Creole culture functioned as a counter-narrative to the one created by the
Creoles, and thus served as a key component in their construction of the folk group
identity. By negation, he aided the Creoles in defining their identity. In other words, he
described characteristics that the Creoles sought to reject from their composite structure,
and thereby provided a contrast that helped delineate the folk group.
Two of the many ways a group defines itself are by contrasting its structure to
another and by making self-conscious choices about its behavior when subjected to the
gaze of others, and Cable facilitated the group in both of these areas. Another benefit he
provided was to strengthen the social connections within the subject group, particularly
because the Creoles felt that their ethnic culture was under attack. Overall, the folk
g
r
oup’
sa
t
t
i
t
ude
s
,be
l
i
e
f
s
,a
ndva
l
ue
swe
r
emor
ec
l
early articulated within this context.
The Creoles felt that they were fighting a battle for survival, and with pen and ink they
dueled for the right to write history. Cable, they believed, was an outsider who did not
have the right to claim their story.
In“
Cr
e
ol
e
sa
ndAme
r
i
c
a
ns
,
”Tr
e
g
l
epoi
nt
soutt
ha
te
ve
nCa
bl
ewa
sbor
ni
nNe
w
Orleans, his family was from Virginia, and that distinction proved to be very important to
t
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
s
.J
oyJ
a
c
ks
ons
a
y
st
ha
tCa
bl
ewa
s“
notat
y
pi
c
a
lNe
wOr
l
e
a
ni
a
n—if
118
such a figure really existed. His father was a Virginian; his mother, of New England
a
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”(
284)
.Whi
l
emos
tFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
swe
r
eCa
t
hol
i
c
,Ca
bl
e“
wa
sde
vout
l
y
Presbyterian, taught Sunday school, and refused to do any work or follow any frivolous
amusement onSunda
y
.Hewa
sa
l
s
ode
e
pl
yi
mbue
dwi
t
hahuma
ni
t
a
r
i
a
nz
e
a
l
”(
284)
.
His background alone was not the issue that divided him from his fellow citizens
in New Orleans, but rather his depiction of their culture in his novels. To give his work
verisimilitude,dur
i
nghi
s“
wa
l
kst
hr
oug
ht
heVieux Carré, he carefully selected
picturesque buildings to use as the settings for his stories . . . copying down the broken
Eng
l
i
s
hwhi
c
hhehe
a
r
da
mongt
hehumbl
e
rr
e
s
i
de
nt
s
”(
J
a
c
ks
on285)
.Whe
nheus
e
dt
hi
s
dialect to gi
vevoi
c
et
ohi
sc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
s
,he“
i
nf
ur
i
a
t
e
dt
hea
r
i
s
t
oc
r
a
t
i
c
,uppe
re
c
he
l
onof
Cr
e
ol
e
s
”whof
e
l
thede
me
a
ne
dt
h
e
m.Whi
l
et
hi
spr
ove
dt
obeuns
e
t
t
l
i
ngf
ore
l
i
t
i
s
t
s
,t
he
i
s
s
uet
ha
twa
smos
ti
nf
l
a
mma
t
or
ywa
sCa
bl
e
’
s“
i
ndi
s
c
r
i
mi
na
t
eus
eoft
hewor
dCreole to
include the colored Creoles and well as white French-s
pe
a
ki
ngNe
wOr
l
e
a
ni
a
ns
.
”Thi
s
pr
ove
dt
obe“
t
hes
or
e
s
tpoi
ntofa
l
l
”(
286)
.
In Grandissimes Ca
bl
ede
p
i
c
t
e
dt
he“
Cr
e
ol
es
oc
i
e
t
ya
sa
na
be
r
r
a
t
i
onofhi
s
t
or
y
,
committed to a dead past long ago abandoned by enlightened and progressive
c
ommuni
t
i
e
s
.
”The
ywe
r
epr
onet
o“
whi
t
es
upr
e
ma
c
y[
i
de
ol
og
y
]a
ndme
a
ni
ng
l
e
s
sf
a
mi
l
y
pr
i
de...i
ndol
e
nc
e
,i
g
nor
a
nc
e
,c
r
u
e
l
t
y
,s
upe
r
s
t
i
t
i
ona
ndhy
poc
r
i
s
y
”(
175)
.Ca
bl
er
e
ve
a
l
e
d
the evils of miscegenation and of slavery in his description of the death of Bras Coupe in
a“
s
we
e
pi
ngc
onde
mna
t
i
onoft
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
e
”(
175)
.Thei
s
s
uet
ha
twa
smos
ti
nc
e
ndi
a
r
yf
or
t
heCr
e
o
l
e
swa
se
xpr
e
s
s
e
di
nCa
bl
e
’
sThe Creoles of Louisiana (1884), which inferred
that the Creoles did not have pure bloodl
i
ne
s
.Tr
e
g
l
epr
ovi
de
se
vi
de
nc
eofCa
bl
e
’
sl
ow
opi
ni
onofCr
e
ol
e
sbyc
i
t
i
nghi
swo
r
k“
Cr
e
ol
eSl
a
veSong
s
.
”I
ni
t
,Ca
bl
ede
s
c
r
i
be
s“
‘
l
ow
119
white Creoles—not milk white or lily white or even probably white, but just white
enough to make them ten thousand time
sbe
t
t
e
rt
ha
nane
g
r
o’
”(
176)
.Wi
t
ht
hi
ski
ndof
rhetoric, it is not surprising that many Creoles took offense given their heightened
insecurities about ethnic identity. Grace King felt that Cable sacrificed the Creoles on the
altar of the Yankee dollar. Shee
mpha
t
i
c
a
l
l
ybe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
tCa
bl
es
i
mpl
y“
di
dnot
unde
r
s
t
a
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
s
”(
J
a
c
ks
on286)
.
Dr. Alfred Mercier who founded the Athénée Louisianais de
pl
or
e
dCa
bl
e
’
s
indictments, but admitted that the situation might be even worse than imagined. Exposed
to the world, the Creoles could no longer hide their deficiencies and questionable
practices in the relative obscurity of an isolated cultural island. They never forgave Cable
for holding up a mirror that reflected their secret foibles, deficiencies, injustices, and
indolence. Cable so upset the Creoles that in 1879 Gayarré declared that even God had
putac
u
r
s
eont
he
i
rc
ommuni
t
y
.Th
i
sc
ur
s
ei
sde
s
c
r
i
be
dbyCa
bl
ea
st
he“
ha
unt
e
d
he
a
r
t
”
—a heart haunted by the sins of the past, and in 1885 he declared that only evil
c
oul
dc
o
mef
r
om “
as
oc
i
e
t
yg
r
oun
d
e
di
nt
hea
bomi
na
t
i
onofr
a
c
i
a
la
r
r
og
a
nc
ea
nds
oc
i
a
l
i
nj
us
t
i
c
e...i
g
nor
a
nc
e
,mor
a
li
ns
e
ns
i
t
i
vi
t
ya
ndc
ul
t
ur
a
li
mpove
r
i
s
hme
nt
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e178)
.
Even though Cable attacked those he believed were guilty of injustice, he
nevertheless felt that there were those in the South who believed as he did—that the
Cons
t
i
t
u
t
i
ona
l
l
owe
df
ore
qua
l
i
t
yf
o
ra
l
l
.“
I
ns
pi
t
eoft
hea
bus
ehe
a
pe
duponhi
m,hewa
s
c
onvi
nc
e
dt
ha
tt
he
r
ee
xi
s
t
e
da“
Si
l
e
ntSout
h,
”ag
r
e
a
tbodyofpubl
i
copi
ni
onwhich
s
e
c
r
e
t
l
ya
g
r
e
e
dwi
t
hhi
m”(
11)
.Hebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
sofj
us
t
i
c
e[
we
r
ebe
i
ng
]
vi
ol
a
t
e
d,
”a
ndhe“
pl
e
a
de
dwi
t
ht
heSout
hnott
ode
me
a
n,i
ns
ul
ta
ndpe
r
ma
ne
nt
l
yde
g
r
a
de
t
heNe
g
r
obe
c
a
us
ei
twa
smor
a
l
l
ya
nde
t
hi
c
a
l
l
ywr
ongt
odos
o”(
12)
.Cha
r
l
e
sWynes,
120
howe
ve
r
,poi
nt
soutt
ha
tt
hi
sma
yh
a
vebe
e
nna
i
ve
t
éonCa
bl
e
’
spa
r
t
,f
or“
t
he
r
ewa
sne
ve
r
a
nyg
r
e
a
tbodyofpubl
i
copi
ni
onc
ons
t
i
t
ut
i
ngt
he‘
Si
l
e
ntSout
h’
”(
5)
.Wy
ne
sr
e
mi
ndsus
of the risk involved in speaking against prevailing sentiments and point
soutt
ha
t“
onl
y
the most courageous or economically and socially secure dared to speak out in a vein
boundt
oi
nc
urt
hec
e
ns
ur
eoft
hema
j
or
i
t
y
”(
5)
.I
nde
e
d,e
ve
nf
r
om hi
spos
i
t
i
onof
strength, Cable proved to be fallible. The attacks upon Cable intensified at the time that
Ga
y
a
r
r
é
’
sf
r
i
e
nd,Al
e
xa
nde
rDi
mi
t
r
y
,di
e
di
n1882.Ga
y
a
r
r
ét
ur
ne
dhi
sg
r
i
e
fa
nda
ng
e
r
upon Cable primarily because Cable had credited Dimitry with giving him information
about Creoles. Incensed, Gayarré launched an attack against Cable in 1885 in the TimesDemocrat. He also defended the integrity of the Creole culture in a speech at the
Athénée c
a
l
l
e
d“
La race Latine en Louisiane.”I
na
not
he
rl
e
c
t
ur
e
,“
Les Grandissimes”h
e
declared that Cable's novel was profoundly untrue.
The att
a
c
ksa
g
a
i
ns
tCa
bl
er
e
a
c
he
ds
uc
hf
or
c
et
ha
the
,whoha
dbe
e
na“
di
s
c
e
r
ni
ng
a
ndf
or
e
mos
ts
oc
i
a
lc
r
i
t
i
coft
heSout
h”(
6)
,wa
s“
a
l
mos
tdr
i
ve
nf
r
om hi
sna
t
i
vel
a
nd”(
8)
.
Af
t
e
r1892,hee
xpr
e
s
s
e
dhi
svi
e
ws“
l
e
s
sope
nl
y
,
”e
ve
nt
ua
l
l
ywr
i
t
i
ng“
not
hi
ngf
ur
t
he
ron
t
heNe
g
r
o”(
8)
.Byt
ha
tt
i
me
,t
heCr
e
ol
emy
t
hha
dbe
c
omede facto for most Creoles.
The Creoles continued their attempts to preserve their culture and to dynamically
l
a
yc
l
a
i
mt
of
ut
ur
ei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onsoft
he
i
rs
oc
i
e
t
ya
c
c
or
di
ngt
oFol
kl
or
e
’
st
wi
nl
a
ws
.On
Apr
i
l25,1885,t
hee
i
g
ht
yy
e
a
rol
dGa
y
a
r
r
ég
a
vea
na
ddr
e
s
sa
tTul
a
nee
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
The
Cr
e
ol
e
sofHi
s
t
or
ya
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
sofRoma
nc
e
”wi
t
hi
nwhi
c
hheg
i
ve
sa“
me
t
i
c
ul
ous
account of the term Creole ...wi
t
hc
ons
t
a
ntr
e
a
f
f
i
r
ma
t
i
onoft
he‘
pur
ewhi
t
e
’bl
ood of
a
l
lt
hos
ee
nt
i
t
l
e
dt
ot
hena
me
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e
180)
.Howe
ve
r
,i
twa
swi
de
l
yknownt
ha
tGa
y
a
r
r
é
121
“
ha
dhi
ms
e
l
ff
a
t
he
r
e
dac
hi
l
di
n1825byaf
r
e
ewoma
nofc
ol
or
”a
c
c
or
di
ngt
oGa
y
a
r
r
é
’
s
biographer, Edward M. Socola (Tregle 181).
In 1886, the Creoles formed a s
oc
i
e
t
yi
nor
de
rt
oc
omet
ot
he“
‘
Mut
ua
lAi
d.
As
s
i
s
t
a
nc
e
,a
ndPr
ot
e
c
t
i
on’
”oft
he
i
rc
ul
t
ur
e(
Tr
e
g
l
e182)
,a
ndVi
c
ePr
e
s
i
de
ntCha
r
l
e
s
Villére declared that they were fighting for their survival and warned that their hold on
their region was slipping away. The land that they loved and had invested so much was
nol
ong
e
rt
he
i
r
s
.Eve
nwhe
nVi
l
l
é
r
ec
r
i
e
d“
‘
Thi
si
sours
oi
l
.Wea
r
ei
nt
hehous
eofour
f
a
t
he
r
s
,
’
”i
twa
st
ool
a
t
e(
Tr
e
g
l
e182)
.Le
onade
s
c
r
i
be
si
n“
Silhouettes Créoles”howt
he
period of the Creoles was“
g
onef
or
e
ve
r
,
”a
ndt
hene
wc
r
ywa
snotf
r
omt
heCr
e
ol
e
s
,but
from the Americans. She says that the Americans have appropriated their land, declaring
t
ha
t“
t
hi
si
snowmor
eourc
ount
r
y
!
”
Whe
nGa
y
a
r
r
éwr
ot
e“
Cr
e
ol
e
sofHi
s
t
or
ya
ndCr
e
ol
e
sofRoma
nc
e
”
--which
solidified the historical myth--he was mounting a counter-narrative that served as an
antithesis to Cable. Oddly enough, both men were romanticizing the identity of the
Creole—painting the culture with one brush—the sepia tones of past remembrances,
which in any pursuit of truth is flawed because it attempts to describe an entire culture as
homogeneous. Viewed through the prejudicial lens of recent reflection and un-tethered
from the influence of close chronological proximity, neither version is a complete and
accurate representation of the Creole. The diversity of the Queyrouze salon serves as
evidence that the Creoles were not homogeneous, even if they were often united in the
common cause of group preservation, battling for the rights to impose their story over
Ca
bl
e
s
’r
e
pr
e
s
e
nt
a
t
i
on.
122
Unt
i
lWoodwa
r
d’
s1951Origins of the New South, most historians upheld
Ca
bl
e
’
spe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
veoft
heCr
e
ol
e
s
,butne
whi
s
t
or
i
c
i
s
t
ss
e
eamor
ec
ompl
e
xmosaïque.
Most would agree, however, that the elite Creoles were attempting to save the vestiges of
t
he
i
rs
e
p
a
r
a
t
ei
de
nt
i
t
ya
ndt
ha
tt
he
ywe
r
ef
i
g
ht
i
ngal
os
i
ngba
t
t
l
e
.Tr
e
g
l
es
howst
ha
t“
t
he
Cr
e
ol
e
sha
dc
l
e
a
r
l
yl
os
t
”l
ongbe
f
or
et
he
i
rba
t
t
l
ewi
t
hCa
bl
e
.I
nf
a
c
tt
he
yha
dl
os
tt
he
i
r
c
l
a
i
mby1860,e
ve
nbe
f
or
et
he“
f
i
r
s
tg
e
ne
r
a
t
i
on born after the Purchase came into
maturity, young men such as the historian Charles Gayarré, the playwright-editorimpresario Placide Canonge, the linguist Alexander Dimitry, the physician Armand
Mercier and the priest-poe
tAdr
i
e
nRouque
t
t
e
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e156). When Gayarré died in his
home on North Prieur on February 11, 1895 there were few left to mark his passing, save
his closest friends, Leona among them. Grace King also attended his funeral and
remarked in a letter on February 17, 1895 that when the funeral procession entered the
c
a
t
he
dr
a
l
,“
t
he
r
ewe
r
ema
nyc
a
ndl
e
sl
i
g
ht
i
ngt
hec
hur
c
h,butt
hemour
ne
r
swe
r
enott
he
r
e
”
(Tregle 185). The battle he had waged as a spokesperson for his culture had been in vain,
and there were few left to mourn the loss. Even with his volumes of history, Gayarré was
noma
t
c
hf
ort
hepowe
rofCa
bl
e
’
sr
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
cf
i
c
t
i
on.
In defending their culture, the Creoles shared a similar belief system and a
common goal, and this served to strengthen their cultural bonds as a folk group. The
criteria for membership to this group was a belief in the superiority of French culture and
a commitment to its preservation, absolute fealty to group members, active participation
in social, cultural, and literary pursuits, and a shared sense of victimization and struggle.
As a member of this group, Leona adhered to these culturally-derived traditions, and
explicit and implied socially-c
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
dc
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
.Fore
xa
mpl
e
,i
nhe
r“
Silhouette
123
Cr
é
ol
e
s
”she listed the sterling characteristics of the French Creoles, such as their
“
ki
ndne
s
s
,
”“
g
e
ne
r
os
i
t
y
,
”a
nd“
br
a
ve
r
y
,
”a
nds
her
us
he
dt
ot
hede
f
e
ns
eoft
hos
ei
nhe
r
group, specifically Beauregard and Gayarré, in a manner that was quixotic. Her patronage
of cultural productions, such as those presented at the French Opera House, and her
literary contributions to L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
,Compt
e-Rendus, and other local publications indicated
her support of her culture through active participation. She perceived her role to be the
de
f
e
nde
rof“
s
a
c
r
e
dt
r
a
di
t
i
ons
”t
ha
tha
dbe
e
nbr
oug
htf
r
omhe
r“
home
l
a
nd,
”one
st
ha
t
were endangered by the Americanization of her region, and she joined Gayarré in
defending against the perceived assault mounted by Cable. When she dedicated her poem
to Canonge, she referred to her failed cause, admittingt
ha
t“
a
tonet
i
mewebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t
not
hi
ngc
oul
da
f
f
e
c
tus
,
”whi
c
hs
poket
ot
hes
ha
r
e
ds
e
ns
eofvi
c
t
i
mi
z
a
t
i
ona
ndl
os
s
.
The Creoles knew that they were fighting a losing battle even as they pursued
their dream of conservation; thus, their work can be viewed as a reaction manifested by a
self-c
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
dwor
l
d.J
a
me
s
onde
s
c
r
i
be
st
hi
st
y
peofdy
na
mi
ca
sa“
s
y
mbol
i
ca
c
t
”t
ha
t
“
be
g
i
nsbyg
e
ne
r
a
t
i
nga
ndpr
oduc
i
ngi
t
sownc
ont
e
xti
nt
hes
a
memome
ntofe
me
r
g
e
nc
e
.
”
Heus
e
sa
sa
ne
xa
mpl
e
,Bur
ke
’
s“
dr
e
a
m”a
same
a
nsof“
doi
ngs
ome
t
hi
ngt
ot
hewor
l
d”
a
nda
s
s
e
r
t
st
ha
t“
t
hel
i
t
e
r
a
r
ywor
korc
ul
t
ur
a
lobj
e
c
t...br
i
ng
si
nt
obe
i
ngt
ha
tve
r
y
s
i
t
ua
t
i
ont
owhi
c
hi
ti
sa
l
s
oa
tonea
ndt
hes
a
met
i
me
,ar
e
a
c
t
i
on,
”i
nde
e
d,t
heve
r
y
“
pr
oj
e
c
toft
r
a
ns
f
or
ma
t
i
on”(
81-2) that I align with the laws of folklore. The Creoles were
attempting to resist change at the same moment that they were striving to transform the
historical accounts that were emerging. Perceiving the historical narrative as still fluid,
they concentrated their efforts on incorporating their own accounts. Jameson would
de
s
c
r
i
b
et
hi
sa
sa
n“
oppos
i
t
i
ona
lc
u
l
t
ur
e
”t
ha
tus
e
ds
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
st
o“
c
ont
e
s
ta
ndunde
r
mi
ne
124
t
hedomi
na
nt‘
va
l
ues
y
s
t
e
m,
’
”i
no
r
de
rt
ol
e
g
i
t
i
ma
t
i
z
ei
t
sown,a
ndt
ha
tt
he“
di
a
l
og
ueof
c
l
a
s
ss
t
r
ug
g
l
e
”i
s“
essentially an antagonistic one
”(
84)
.I
nt
hee
nd,t
heCr
e
ol
e
sl
os
tt
hi
s
class struggle, and they found the fault, not within their own ranks, but within the
dominant American culture.
125
CHAPTER FIVE: POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONFLICT
Republicanism, Democracy, and similar words
conveying a wide sense of freedom flatter our
instinct of independence . . . .Man fights with the
most fervent enthusiasm for what he understands
the least. There have been apostles and martyrs for
all opinions and creeds. Error and truth alike have
altars and victims . . . .. Words and their
interpretation have armed man against his Kind and
Kin . . . . Diversity of interest violently divides a
nation and breeds civil war . . . . —“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
nd
Wa
g
ne
r
”Le
onaQueyrouze
Queyrouze was born the same year that the Civil War began and because she grew
up during this period of conflict and transformation, her life cannot be separated from the
events that surrounded her. A comprehensive study of her life, therefore, must include a
segment that situates her within a political context. To that end, an overview of the social
and political upheaval of the region will be addressed. In this case, the historical camera
lens will focus on the political scene with Queyrouze as a peripheral figure in the
composition, but one whose affiliations and political commentaries provide a personal
perspective on some of these events. While many of the events leading up to the Civil
War are common historical record, a brief summary that serves as a foundation will assist
in understanding the political world Queyrouze entered. This political history will be
incorporated into her biography thus making its inclusion in the dissertation necessary.
She was closely associated with many military and political figures. For instance, her
father, Leon Queyrouze, and his close friend, General Beauregard, served in the
Confederate Army. Through Beauregard she became acquainted with Governors Nicholls
a
ndWa
r
mot
h,a
ndt
hr
oug
hhe
rmot
he
r
’
sf
a
mi
l
y
,s
hec
laimed connections to Louisiana
126
state officials. (Her grandmother, Louisa Beauvais Tertrou, had a relative, Armand
Beauvais, who had been president of the Louisiana Senate. When Governor Pierre
Derbigny died in office, he replaced him as governor in 1829-1830). Several of
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sa
c
qua
i
nt
a
nc
e
swe
r
eme
mbe
r
soft
heFour
t
e
e
nt
hofJ
ul
ySoc
i
e
t
ya
nds
ome
were members of the White League who were involved in the Battle of September 14th in
1874. This confusing medley of associations further underscores the need to investigate
the complex nature of political alliances of this era. When Queyrouze reached adulthood,
she entered this political discourse, and her personal observations can add nuance to our
understanding of the complexities of the public debates of the period. Overall, her
political commentary is predominantly articulated in abstract terms, rather then specific
issues, which simultaneously indicate, as I will demonstrate, elements of transcendent
objectivity and submergent elitism.
During the sixty years prior to her birth in 1861, the Democratic Party dominated
the political landscape, and they were what we would consider today in modern
nome
nc
l
a
t
ur
ea
s“
c
ons
e
r
va
t
i
ve
.
”Be
f
or
et
hewa
r(
a
nda
f
t
e
r
)
,e
l
e
c
t
i
onsi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
were often rife with fraud and corruption, whether it was the Whigs, Democrats, or Know
Nothings, but overall the Creoles usually favored the Democrats and voted to secede.
However, many people in New Orleans did not want to secede from the Union because
they were loyalists, but this may have been influenced by the fact that they lived in a port
city, and if they could not trade with the states in the Midwest, their economy would
crumble.
The night before New Orleans fell to the Union, several dry docks were sunk and
steamboats set on fire; many state and city government documents were moved, and the
127
governor and other officials abandoned the city. After the city fell to Farragut, General
Benjamin Butler took over as military commander (with 18,000 troops) for seven months.
During his tenure, he required the citizens to sign an amnesty oath in order to keep their
pr
ope
r
t
y
.I
twa
sdur
i
ngt
hi
st
i
met
ha
tLe
ona
’
sf
a
t
he
r
,whor
e
f
us
e
dt
os
i
g
nt
heoa
t
h,f
l
e
dt
o
Havana, Cuba and then later to Matamoras on the border of Mexico to serve as an
advisor under General Mejia. Like many other wealthy citizens of New Orleans, Clara
Queyrouze, more than likely, took Leona and left for their plantation near St. Martinville.
Leon eventually returned and signed the oath on August 22, 1865. Others, such as the
councilmen in New Orleans, were forced to sign the oath. In A Confederate Girls Diary
(1913) Sarah Morgan Dawson from Baton Rouge describes some of the emotions many
must have felt when they were forced to sign the oath. When Dawson entered New
Orleansa
nda
r
r
i
ve
da
tac
a
na
la
tHi
c
koc
k’
sLa
ndi
ngs
hes
a
wt
we
nt
ys
ol
di
e
r
swhoms
he
de
s
c
r
i
b
e
da
s“
t
hea
ni
ma
lnows
ol
onguns
e
e
n,t
heYa
nke
e
”(
DeCa
r
o263)
.Whe
nt
he
s
a
mes
ol
di
e
rpr
e
s
s
e
dhe
rmot
he
rt
opl
e
dg
et
heoa
t
h,s
heobj
e
c
t
e
ds
a
y
i
ng
,“
Iha
vet
hr
e
e
sons fight
i
nga
g
a
i
ns
ty
ou,a
ndy
ouha
ver
obbe
dme
,be
g
g
a
r
e
dme
!
”(
265)
.
While this incident describes mild resistance, many citizens of New Orleans had
not been so circumspect. As a result of the treatment of his soldiers, on May 15, 1862,
General Butler issued the General Order No 28 directed to the women of the city:
when any female shall, by word, gesture, or movements, insult or show contempt
for any officer or soldier of the United States, she shall be regarded and held liable
to be treated as a woman of the town plying her avocation.
As one can imagine, this insult was never forgiven. C. Vann Woodward relates
t
ha
tt
heSout
he
r
nr
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
et
ot
heRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
onwa
s“
ope
n,de
f
i
a
nt
,or
g
a
ni
z
e
da
nd
128
effective. White southerners repeatedly insulted, persecuted and sometimes murdered
Fe
de
r
a
lof
f
i
c
i
a
l
s
,a
r
myof
f
i
c
e
r
si
nc
l
ude
d”(
194)
.Al
t
houg
hBut
l
e
rt
r
e
a
t
e
dt
hec
i
t
i
z
e
nswe
l
l
in some areas, such as attending to the needs of public works and provisions, he
nevertheless took advantage of the Second Confiscation Act of 1862 to seize property
from those who refused to sign the Amnesty Oath. In effect, this encouraged many
Northerners to come south to take advantage of the situation, for they could buy the
confiscated property on the cheap and sell it for a handsome profit.
Butler was replaced by General Nathaniel P. Banks who tried to handle the
growing animosity with more diplomacy, but in the face of the continued defiance, he
eventually had to take a more intractable stance as had his predecessor. In 1862 The
Homestead Ac
twa
spa
s
s
e
d,a
ndb
e
t
we
e
n1862a
nd1878,“
mor
et
ha
nha
l
ft
het
ot
a
la
r
e
aof
t
hena
t
i
on”wa
sma
dea
va
i
l
a
bl
e
,be
g
i
nni
ngt
he“
g
r
e
a
te
r
aofpubl
i
cl
a
nddi
s
t
r
i
but
i
onbyt
he
f
e
de
r
a
lg
ove
r
nme
nt
,
”buti
ne
f
f
e
c
t
,mos
twe
ntt
ot
her
a
i
l
r
oa
dsa
nds
pe
c
ul
a
t
or
s
,a
ndonl
y
the poorest land went to individual families (Woodward 191-192). Worst of all, the new
promise of freedom and equality that the Civil War and Reconstruction had offered black
people began to become a nightmare instead. Bell explains:
Wi
t
hLi
nc
ol
ns
’a
s
s
assination in April 1865, Johnson assumed the presidency with
an entirely new set of political objectives [and . . . ] entered into secret
negotiations with northern Democratic leaders and moved to reconstitute the
southern wing of his old party by restoring the planter elite to political and
economic dominance . . . . In his Amnesty Oath Proclamation of May 29, 1865,
the new president offered full pardons with restoration of confiscated lands to all
former Confederates who would take the oath of allegiance to the national
government (150).
129
The subsequent U.S. administrations took measures to achieve political
synchronicity with white southerners, and in doing so, essentially abandoned the newly
freed slaves. There are some notable exceptions, and one wa
st
heFr
e
e
dme
n’
s
’Bur
e
a
u.
John C. Rodrigue describes their contribution:
Fr
e
e
dme
n’
sBur
e
a
ua
g
e
nt
swe
r
ene
i
t
he
rpa
s
s
i
ves
pe
c
t
a
t
or
snorobj
e
c
t
i
ve
me
di
a
t
or
s
.I
ns
t
e
a
d,t
he
ypl
a
y
e
da
na
c
t
i
ver
ol
ei
nf
r
e
el
a
bor
’
sde
ve
l
opme
ntby
working to secure a legitimate free market in labor, seeing that freedmen enjoyed
t
her
i
g
ht
soff
r
e
ewor
ke
r
s
,
a
ndi
nt
e
r
ve
ni
ngonf
r
e
e
dme
n’
sbe
ha
l
fwhe
ne
mpl
oy
e
r
s
tried to cheat them or intimidate them with threats and violence (194).
Whi
l
ei
ti
st
r
uet
ha
tt
heFr
e
e
dme
n’
sBur
e
a
u“
pl
a
y
ed a central role in the
development of the free-l
a
bors
y
s
t
e
mt
ha
tc
a
met
opr
e
va
i
li
nt
heLoui
s
i
a
nas
ug
a
rr
e
g
i
on
”
(
211)
,i
tf
a
i
l
e
di
not
he
ra
r
e
a
s
.Whe
nt
heBur
e
a
u’
sf
or
t
y
-acres program was dismantled,
Pr
e
s
i
de
ntJ
ohns
on’
s“
dr
i
vet
og
ua
r
a
nt
e
ewhi
t
edomi
na
nc
ei
nt
hes
t
a
t
e
’
si
nt
e
r
na
la
f
f
a
i
r
s
wa
sne
a
r
l
yc
ompl
e
t
e
”(
Be
l
l153)
.Be
l
lbe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
tt
heBur
e
a
u“
he
l
pe
dt
os
us
t
a
i
nt
he
pr
e
va
i
l
i
ngs
y
s
t
e
m ofbl
a
c
ke
c
onomi
cs
ubs
e
r
vi
e
nc
e
”a
ndt
ha
tt
hey
e
a
r
sof“
c
ompul
s
or
y
yearly contracts, fixed minimal wages, and a repressive pass system prepared the way for
f
a
i
l
ur
e
”(
153)
.
The War and Reconstruction period lasted fourteen years, the longest of any other
state in the South, and it affected Louisiana adversely, perhaps more so than any other
state, in spite of the fact that during the opening years of Reconstruction, Louisiana had
garnered a large share of federal funds for public works. Unfortunately, Louisiana had
be
e
n“
t
hemos
tunl
uc
kyofa
l
lSt
a
t
e
s
’
”(
Ha
i
r14)be
c
a
us
eoft
hee
xt
e
ntoft
hec
or
r
upt
i
on
and the animosity. TedTunne
lnot
e
st
ha
tt
he“
Nor
t
hr
e
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
dLoui
s
i
a
nanotonc
e
,or
130
twice, but three times . . . . nowhere did the length and complexity of events surpass the
Loui
s
i
a
nae
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
”(
2)
.Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nswa
sde
e
pl
ya
f
f
e
c
t
e
de
c
onomi
c
a
l
l
y
,f
ori
t
st
r
a
de
with Europe and particularly with France and England was impeded by the cotton
embargo.
Reconstruction affected the Creoles of New Orleans, not only economically, but
socially, as well. The social impact revolved around their ethnic identity. Tunnel
describes some of these effects:
Radical reconstruction raised vital issues that cut across the entire political
economy of Louisiana and the South. The crux of the matter, however, was a
question of cultural identity. The Reconstruction Acts, the Louisiana Constitution
of 1868, and the laws of the Radical legislation defined Louisiana as a biracial
society belonging to white and black alike. Louisiana whites at every social level
recoiled in horror (5).
The Creole resistance to these changes may have been spurred by the fact that
New Orleans had long been comprised of a tripartite social structure and Reconstruction
re-drew those lines into white and black. Fearing a loss of authority, the Creoles quickly
aligned themselves with those in power, but many feared the sweeping changes that the
new federal and state legislation would bring. In 1867, the Reconstruction Acts were
passed; the fourteen Amendment was ratified in 1868, and the fifteenth Amendment in
1870. In 1868, the Louisiana constitution desegregated education, prohibited racial
discrimination, and eliminated French language schools. This same year, the Louisiana
Lottery Company was started, and Henry Clay Warmoth of Illinois became governor. A
complicated figure, Warmoth was a masterful politician who won both admiration and
c
onde
mn
a
t
i
on.Whi
l
ehes
t
oodf
or“
uni
ve
r
s
a
ls
uf
f
r
a
g
ea
ndl
oy
a
lg
ove
r
nme
nt
”(
Tunne
l
131
152)
,hewa
sa
l
s
oc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
da
s“
‘
t
heg
r
e
a
ts
t
umbl
i
ngbl
oc
k’t
oNe
g
r
or
i
g
ht
si
nt
he
s
t
a
t
e
”(
169)
.Ove
r
a
l
l
,hewa
sac
ompl
e
xa
ndpowe
r
f
ulpol
i
t
i
c
a
lf
i
g
ur
e
.
The Creoles, who feared the loss of privilege caused by associations with the
disfranchised, took measures to align themselves with those in power in the hopes that
they could re-stabilize and recover some of their way of life. Through their associations
with conservative whites, they hoped to achieve some distance from Blacks who were
targeted as the cause of the rift between the North and the South.
In New Orleans, The Crescent City White League was formed in 1874, and Tregle
describes this group as onewi
t
ha“
pr
e
di
c
t
a
bl
ec
ons
e
que
nc
e
sofvi
ol
e
nc
e
”(
172)
.The
mouthpiece for this organization was the white supremacist newspaper, the Carillon that
de
c
l
a
r
e
d“
‘
wemus
tbee
i
t
he
rWhi
t
eorBl
a
c
k”(
172)
.Ase
xpe
c
t
e
d,vi
ol
e
nc
ebr
okeouton
September 14, 1874. Younga
ndol
da
l
i
keme
tonCa
na
lSt
r
e
e
tunde
rHe
nr
yCl
a
y
’
ss
t
a
t
ut
e
to meet with General Frederick N. Ogden, and according to Joy Jackson, whatever their
political allegiance had been prior to the war, they felt a sense of unity under the White
League and its conservative sentiments, even if for a short time (30). The clash that
e
ns
ue
db
e
c
a
meknowna
st
he“
Ba
t
t
l
eofLi
be
r
t
yPl
a
c
e
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e172)
,af
a
i
l
e
da
t
t
e
mptt
o
take over the government.
In January 1877, Francis Tíllou Nicholls (an ex-confederate who had lost his left
arm and leg during the war) was elected governor and served for two years (he was reelected and served a second term from 1888-1892). Louisiana agreed not to contest the
Rutherford B. Hayes election in exchange for their right to elect their own governor
without the strong-arming of Federal troops. This concession regarding electoral votes
wa
sknowna
st
heCompr
omi
s
eof1
877,r
e
s
ul
t
i
ngi
nt
he“
Ne
wDe
pa
r
t
ur
e
.
”Ha
y
e
shope
d
132
for good will between the Northern Republicans and the Southern Democrats who
currently served in Congress. He looked forward to an era of peace between the races and
pol
i
t
i
c
a
lpa
r
t
i
e
s
,de
c
l
a
r
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
hepa
r
t
yofLi
nc
ol
na
ndGr
a
ntwa
snol
ong
e
rhos
t
i
l
et
o
t
heSout
h”(
Ha
i
r16)
.Hehope
dt
ha
tt
he“
Ne
wDe
pa
r
t
ur
e
”Re
publ
i
c
a
nswoul
d be favored
by blacks because this party had freed them, and he anticipated that the wealthy
southerners would support the party because they wanted to be associated with a party
t
ha
twa
sf
a
vor
a
bl
et
ot
hei
nt
e
r
e
s
t
sof“
pr
ope
r
t
ya
ndpr
i
vi
l
e
g
e
”(
Ha
i
r17)
.However, the
problem of realizing this vision for Louisiana was twofold: First, Louisiana had
experienced Reconstruction the longest, and its scars were still deep and visible; Second,
Louisiana was composed of such diverse cultural, racial, and political elements that this
optimistic outlook was unrealistic. In the New Orleans area alone, the economy steeply
declined, especially in the last three years of federal control. Still suffering from the
losses of property and wealth, many favored a traditional approach that would restore
much of what they had lost. Often, political allegiances divided the population into
demarcated factions, but for several years after Nicholls was elected governor in 1877, the
s
t
a
t
el
e
a
de
r
s
hi
pl
a
c
ke
da“
l
i
be
r
a
l
”e
l
e
me
nt
,a
ndt
heLoui
s
i
a
na
’
sDe
moc
r
a
t
i
cpa
r
t
ywa
s
“
di
vi
de
di
nt
ot
hr
e
ema
j
orf
a
c
t
i
ons
:
”The
r
ewe
r
e“
t
hepa
t
r
i
c
i
a
n(
ornoblesse oblige)
conservatives, the Bourbon reactionaries, and the Lottery-New Orleans machine interests.
There was no really liberal faction (Hair 21-22).
Because Nicholls did not wholeheartedly endorse their political ideology, the
Bourbons did not consider him one of their own, and they systematically schemed to
discredit him and remove support from him. The Bourbons rejected anyone who did not
133
serve to uphol
d“
t
r
ue
”Sout
he
r
ni
de
a
l
sofwhi
t
es
upr
e
ma
c
y
,butt
he
ydi
dnotc
ons
i
de
r
t
he
ms
e
l
ve
spa
t
r
i
c
i
a
n,e
i
t
he
r
.Bour
bons“
e
mbr
a
c
e
dt
hes
or
tofNe
g
r
ophobi
awhi
c
h
e
l
s
e
wh
e
r
ewa
sus
ua
l
l
ya
t
t
r
i
but
e
dt
oi
g
nor
a
ntpoorwhi
t
e
s
”(
Ha
i
r24)
,a
ndt
he
ybl
a
me
d
blacks for the “
s
c
our
g
e
”ofRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
on.The
ya
l
s
ol
obbi
e
df
ort
hei
nt
e
r
e
s
t
soft
he
Lottery. While the Bourbons opposed the Lottery at first, they subsequently supported it
for its capacity to fund their political interests. Hence, the Lottery-Bourbon Alliance was
created.
The years following the end of Reconstruction were fraught with political intrigue
and subterfuge. The1879 the Redeemer constitution was essentially written by the
Bourbon-Lottery forces. At one point they considered re-addressing the question of voting
rights, but fearing that more blacks would leave the state and further depress their
agricultural economy, they tabled the issue. The seat of government was moved back to
Baton Rouge where it had been prior to the war. More significant was the increase in
powe
ra
wa
r
de
dt
heg
ove
r
nora
ndt
hede
c
r
e
a
s
ei
npowe
ra
f
f
or
de
dt
hel
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
ur
e
.Ni
c
hol
l
s
’
term, as well as those of other state officeholders, was effectively shortened by one year.
Wi
l
t
zwa
se
l
e
c
t
e
dg
ove
r
nor
,a
ndwi
t
hhi
mc
a
me“
r
a
di
c
a
ll
a
wa
ndpa
t
r
i
c
i
a
nc
ons
e
r
va
t
i
s
m”
(Hair 99). This was a time period (1880-1890) that Hair describes as rife with a
“
me
l
a
n
c
hol
ypa
t
t
e
r
nofs
oc
i
a
lne
g
l
e
c
t
”(
120)
.Themone
yt
ha
twa
ss
uppos
e
dt
og
ot
ot
h
e
schools and teachers was pilfered away through misappropriation and poor accounting,
and the common person in Louisiana became the most under-educated in the nation; in
f
a
c
t
,ma
nywe
r
ei
l
l
i
t
e
r
a
t
e
.The“
Popul
i
s
tr
e
f
or
me
r
si
nt
he1890’
s[
f
e
l
t
]t
ha
tt
heBour
bon
De
moc
r
a
t
sde
l
i
be
r
a
t
e
l
ys
a
bot
a
g
e
dLoui
s
i
a
na
’
ss
c
hools
y
s
t
e
m ...to keep rural people of
bot
hr
a
c
e
sdoc
i
l
ea
ndi
g
nor
a
nt
”(
Ha
i
r124)
.TheLot
t
e
r
y
,howe
ve
r
,wa
sve
r
ypr
of
i
t
a
bl
ef
or
134
the Bourbons, and they used well known Creoles—one a member of the Queyrouze
salon-- to give the Lottery a sense of respectability.
Monthly drawings, which were presided over by Confederate luminaries General
P.G.T. Beauregard and General Jubal A. Early, attracted more attention than the
daily drawings and were held in theatrical settings . . . General Beauregard,
dressed in a dark suit was . . . dignified, of handsome military bearing [with . . . ]
“
i
mma
c
ul
a
t
el
i
ne
nwr
i
s
t
ba
n
dsdoneove
rhi
sha
nds
”
—a gesture of preciseness and
perhaps aloofness (Jackson 113-114).
In 1892, the state voted on whether or not to continue the lottery drawings. At
the time, the Populist movement was gaining strength, and the Bourbon faction was now
characterizing their platform as one that sought to educate the people of Louisiana, using
Lottery money, of course. This must have proved to be a challenging time for many
Creoles who were forced to make difficult choices. On the one hand, the Lottery
s
uppor
t
e
dma
nye
nt
e
r
pr
i
s
e
s
,i
nc
l
udi
ngmi
l
l
sa
ndba
nks
,a
ndi
ts
uppor
t
e
dt
he“
Fr
e
nc
h
ope
r
aHous
e
,t
her
e
nde
z
vousoft
hec
i
t
y
’
ss
oc
i
e
t
ys
e
t
”(
J
a
c
ks
on121-122). However, this
brought them into alliances with certain political figures that they would have scorned
just a few decades before. Thus it would seem that necessity and dignity were not always
easy companions.
Towards the close of the century, with the conservative political factions in place,
t
her
e
p
r
e
s
s
i
onofbl
a
c
ksi
nc
r
e
a
s
e
dr
a
t
he
rt
ha
na
ba
t
e
d.I
n1898,t
he“
s
e
pa
r
a
t
ebute
qua
l
”
disfranchising statute was incorporated into the state constitution, which denied blacks
the rights to public accommodations and eventually the right to vote because of language
i
nt
he“
g
r
a
ndf
a
t
he
rc
l
a
us
e
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e183)
.Asar
e
qui
r
e
me
ntt
ovot
e
,oneha
dt
o
demonstrate the ability to read and write or own property worth over $300.00. However,
135
i
foneha
dvot
e
dpr
i
ort
o1867orh
a
da“
f
a
t
he
rorg
r
andfather who had voted, [this person
wa
s
]e
xe
mptf
ort
hea
bover
e
qui
r
e
me
nt
s
”(
Ha
i
r276)
.I
ne
f
f
e
c
t
,t
hi
se
xc
l
ude
dt
hebl
a
c
k
voter.
On the local level, New Orleans was dealing with the changes in the state laws as
well as wrestling with local issues. The eighteen-year-old Queyrouze witnessed many
challenges facing her city. New Orleans tackled the issues of a shifting social structure,
fractious local politics, and problems of sanitation and disease. However, there was
pr
og
r
e
s
sa
swe
l
l
.The“
c
ompl
e
t
i
onoft
he jetties at the mouth of the Mississippi River by
engineer/captain James B. Eads in 1879 deepened the passes into the Gulf and opened the
r
i
ve
rt
ol
a
r
g
e
r
,oc
e
a
ng
oi
ngve
s
s
e
l
s
”(
J
a
c
ks
on4-5). That same year Southern University
was established for blacks. In December of 1884, New Orleans held the Cotton
Ce
nt
e
nni
a
lExpos
i
t
i
onwhe
r
eQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sSy
mphony"
Fantaise Indienne" was played by
the Mexican Army Band. Local citizens formed groups between the years 1884 and 1888,
such groups as the Committee of One Hundred, The Law and Order League, and the
YoungMe
n’
sDe
moc
r
a
t
i
cAs
s
oc
i
a
t
i
onwhomoni
t
or
e
dt
hepol
l
i
ngpl
a
c
e
st
oa
s
s
ur
eaf
a
i
r
e
l
e
c
t
i
on
.Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sbr
ot
he
r
,Ma
xi
m,wa
same
mbe
roft
hi
sAs
s
oc
i
a
t
i
on.
In spite of the attempts of these organizations to deal with fraud and corruption, in
1890, New Orleans earned international notoriety when the Police chief of New Orleans,
David C. Hennessy, was murdered, and the Italian Mafia was accused. Hennessy had
been shot several times on October 15, 1890 on Basin Street, but before he died he told
investigators that the men who had run off after the shooting were Italians. On March 1,
1891, nine Italian men were put on trial for organizing and executing the murder. Several
were acquitted. Two weeks later, however, while legal proceeding were still underway, a
136
mob of vigilantes stormed the Parish Prison (located at the site for present day Armstrong
Park), and nine Italians were shot and two were hanged. Those who condoned such
violence felt justified because they believed that the legal system was incapable of
convicting the men due to jury tampering. Most deplored the brutal lawlessness, and in
her correspondence, Queyrouze sympathized with the Italians. This incident made
international headlines, and embarrassed and shocked, President Benjamin Harrison paid
restitution to the Italian government.
Queyrouze wrote letters about this incident, and received a response from Ione
Perry of Paris, France and David Marx of Cincinnati, Ohio, among others.
Marx writes to her on April 15th, 1891:
I was sorry to hear of the late trouble in New Orleans, for although I see the
necessity of some action being necessary to strike terror into the hearts of the
dreaded and dreadful Mafia, yet I always hate to hear of peaceful citizens having
recourse to such procedure [UU-68 2:17].
Perry writes to Leona on May 26, 1891:
You did not say in your letter what sort of men these Italians were, but I infer
from your sympathy for them that they were innocent harmless men. Their only
fault—if it could be called such, was to kill the Chief of police, known to be an
assassin together with his father and all his family, consequently having many
enemies. What surprises me immensely is that a man with such a record & so
much hated, should through his violent death (even making allowance for the
influence of the leaders of the ignorance and prejudices of the populous) aroused
30,000 men to avenge his murder on eleven poor Italians; and also that the
instigators in this . . . shocking violence to law & justice should have been men of
good social standing . . . . I cannot thinks that the U.S. government with all its
many faults, still the best the world has yet known, would allow anarchy to prevail
. . . . It was kind of you my beloved Leona to give me so full an account. I read it
with much interest fearful as it was & I could sympathize how deeply you felt the
disgrace that came upon your native city [UU-68 2:17].
137
I
nhe
rpoe
m,“
A Magda,
”t
r
a
ns
l
a
t
e
dbyNor
ma
nR.Sha
pi
r
oi
nCreole Echoes, she
responds to this incident:
Then will you see those bronze and granite shades
Quake at your words, and tears, in flame cascades,
Flow from their eyes. When you tell them the fell,
Foul carnage wrought, up will rise one and all!
But when you say it was their sons, pell-mell,
Who twisted taut the springs, down will they fall!
Que
y
r
ouz
e“
AMa
g
da
”Ma
y20,1891
Tr. Norman Shapiro (Creole Echoes 145).
Sha
pi
r
onot
e
st
ha
t“
t
hea
c
c
us
e
dha
dbe
e
na
c
qui
t
t
e
d,buti
twa
swi
de
l
yknownt
ha
t
Ma
f
i
amone
yha
d‘
boug
ht
’t
hejury . . . . None of the vigilantes was ever arrested or
c
ha
r
g
e
d”(
147)
.
There were other problems in the city as well. In 1889, the New Orleans school
e
nr
ol
l
me
ntwa
sonl
y“
25,
649outofapot
e
nt
i
a
l69,
131ofs
c
hoola
g
e
.Thea
ve
r
a
g
eda
i
l
y
attendance was 15,
761a
ndt
hes
c
h
o
oly
e
a
rl
a
s
t
e
donl
ys
i
xmont
hs
”(
J
a
c
ks
on200)
.The
cracks in the education system were mirrored in the fissures in New Orleans
infrastructure. In 1890, the Mississippi River overflowed and flooded many areas,
resulting in cracks in the levees. The Great Depression of the 1890s affected sugar and
cotton process, and cotton hit an all time low in 1894—just ten years after the Exposition.
These important events in national, state, and local history will serve as an
infrastructure for the Queyrouze biography, and to demonstrably situate Queyrouze into
this landscape, I will incorporate some of her commentaries. In reviewing them, I have
arrived at a conflicted portrait of Queyrouze, which is a confusing medley of alliances and
sentiments. There are several areas where her affiliations and personal views are at odds.
138
For instance, as the director of the French school, she would have had ties with the
Fourteenth of July Society that selected her for the position, but this society was known
for its white supremacist ideology. While this connection does not necessarily prove that
Queyrouze endorsed a supremacist attitude, it is logical to assume that many, if not all,
individuals of privilege in this time period harbored racist and elitist attitudes to varying
degrees. The fact that this school for was created solely for the purpose of educating
white French Creole boys, speaks to an assumption gender privilege, ethnic classism and
elitism.
In another case, she was sufficiently acquainted with Governor Nicholls to receive
a letter of presentation from him on March 17, 1895 recommending her to General M.
Ransom of Mexico City. If political associations translate into personal ideology—which
is certainly not always the case-- t
h
e
nQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
onne
c
t
i
on to Nicholls might indicate
a position of moderation. This is corroborated by the fact the her essays and articles do
nots
uppor
tt
heBour
bons
,nordot
he
yuphol
dt
he“
t
r
ue
”s
out
he
r
ni
de
a
l
sofwhi
t
e
supremacy or cast blame on the blacks for Reconstruction. Instead, her articles support
education for blacks.
Her connection with Henry Clay Warmoth, however, is complicated. He has been
characterized as a defender of egalitarian reform yet has also been accused of repressing
radical reform. While Warmoth had been endorsed by the black radicals in 1865, he
pr
ove
dt
obeobs
t
r
uc
t
i
vet
ot
he
i
ra
i
ms(
Ba
g
g
e
t
t142)
.I
n“
UneChi
mé
r
e
”Ca
r
y
nCos
s
éBe
l
l
lists some of these:
139
[Warmoth] stymied civil-rights legislation, resisted desegregation of the public
schools, opposed e
nf
or
c
e
me
ntoft
hec
ons
t
i
t
ut
i
on’
se
qua
la
c
c
ommoda
t
i
ons
provision, appointed white Democrats to political office, and accumulated a
personal fortune by exacting tribute from railroad companies (155).
In spite of this, Warmoth is also credited with putting black politicians in office
during his term as governor. Perhaps, then, like many individuals during this turbulent
era, his ideologies were as complicated as the issues he faced. Years later, when Warmoth
introduced Queyrouze to Powell Clayton, a foreign minister, this suggests a close
association or connection, but this is only conjecture.
This confusion of associations and loyalties is further evidenced by her stand on
the Lottery. Be
a
ur
e
g
a
r
da
ndEa
r
l
yove
r
s
a
wt
he
s
edr
a
wi
ng
s
,a
ndQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
onne
c
t
ion
to Beauregard might suggest her support, especially as she consistently demonstrated
unflinching loyalty to those in her salon. Moreover, the profits from the gaming supported
her beloved French Opera House. However, in 1890, she was working for George C.
Preot, an attorney in New Orleans, translating pamphlets into French for the Anti-Lottery
League. Perhaps her work for Preot was less political and more pragmatic; despite
political affiliations, providing for her own financial support proved to be a more pressing
need, or perhaps her loyalty to Beauregard was actualized by her tactful silence. In this
case, we are left with as many questions as we have answers.
Her positions on political and social issues are more clearly indicated in her 1890
letters t
oJ
a
me
sRe
dpa
t
hwhos
epo
l
i
t
i
c
a
lpos
i
t
i
onswe
r
ea
sc
ompl
e
xa
sQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
s
.Bor
n
in England in 1833, his family immigrated to the U.S. in 1849 and at age nineteen he
became a correspondent for the New York Tribune. During his tenure at the Tribune, he
journeyed through the South to witness first-hand the conditions of slavery, and he
140
became a fervent abolitionist. Later, he befriended John Brown and wrote his biography,
portraying him as a martyr in the cause for freedom. When Queyrouze corresponded with
him he was the editor of the North American Review. Ironically, he was working on a
memoir for Jefferson Davis whom he had come to know very well. This contradictory
mixture of political allegiances is not unlike those sometimes expressed by Queyrouze as
well.
Muc
hc
a
nbeg
l
e
a
ne
df
r
om Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sl
e
t
t
e
r
st
oRe
dpa
t
h.Appa
r
e
nt
l
yt
he
ywe
r
e
having a debate about the character of Beauregard, Jefferson Davis, and General
Johnston, and they were connecting current events to the fall of the Roman Empire. On
July 18,
1890s
hea
t
t
a
c
ke
dRe
dpa
t
h’
sc
onc
l
us
i
ont
ha
tDa
vi
sha
dt
he“
ut
mos
tc
ont
e
mptf
or
t
ha
tf
r
i
vol
ousl
i
t
t
l
eFr
e
nc
hma
nBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d.
”Shec
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
sDa
vi
s
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tape
r
s
on
who“
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
shi
sopi
ni
ons
,wor
ds&ma
nus
c
r
i
pt
st
ot
hef
ourwi
nds
,r
e
a
l
l
ys
pe
a
ks
confide
nt
l
yt
onoone
”a
ndde
f
e
nd
sBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d,c
i
t
i
nghi
si
nt
e
g
r
i
t
y
.Compa
r
i
ngt
he
i
r
di
s
c
us
s
i
ont
ot
hes
e
na
t
or
si
na
nc
i
e
n
tRome
,s
her
e
mi
ndsRe
dpa
t
ht
ha
t“
Tode
s
t
r
oyi
saf
a
r
easier task than to create. Hence, in social matters, the number of demolishers and the
s
c
a
r
c
i
t
yofa
r
c
hi
t
e
c
t
s
.
”He
rc
omme
nt
ss
ug
g
e
s
tr
a
nc
ora
g
a
i
ns
tt
hos
ewhowoul
dde
mol
i
s
ha
Latin cultural architecture—an allusion to Rome as well as her own transplanted culture.
Mor
es
i
g
ni
f
i
c
a
nt
l
y
,s
het
a
ke
si
s
s
uewi
t
hRe
dpa
t
h’
sde
f
e
ns
eof“
t
hebi
r
t
hr
i
g
ht of
f
r
e
es
pe
e
c
h”bya
r
g
ui
ngt
ha
t“
a
l
lr
i
g
ht
sa
r
el
i
mi
t
e
d,&i
fnott
he
yde
g
e
ne
r
a
t
ei
nt
ol
i
c
e
ns
e&
a
bus
e
”[
UU-68 2:17]. For a writer who defends the rights of freedom in her published
essays, Queyrouze private observations about the limitations of free speech is revealing,
thus raising these questions: if free speech is to be limited, who has the authority to do
so? Are her comments inspired by the bust of Plato gracing her parlor mantle? Perhaps
141
s
hei
sa
l
l
udi
ngt
ot
hePl
a
t
oni
ci
de
at
ha
t“
t
he
r
ewi
l
lbenoend to the troubles of states, or
ofhuma
ni
t
yi
t
s
e
l
f
,t
i
l
lphi
l
os
ophe
r
sbe
c
omeki
ng
si
nt
hi
swor
l
d”(
St
e
ve
ns
on473)
.Ordo
e
s
she reveal her elitism and classism? Perhaps, the answer is both.
In a letter to Redpath ten days later on July 28, 1890, she continues her debate,
comparing the rulers of the Roman Empire to the current situation in France and
Ge
r
ma
ny
.Shes
a
y
st
ha
ts
heha
st
he“
ut
mos
tc
ont
e
mpt&hor
r
orf
oruseless violence. It is a
l
uxur
ywhi
c
ha
l
wa
y
sha
st
obepa
i
da
tus
ur
yr
a
t
e
s
,
”a
nds
hec
a
nnot“
f
i
nda
nye
xc
us
e...
[
f
or
]a
i
ml
e
s
sf
ur
y
.
”Shes
t
a
t
e
st
ha
ts
he“
a
bhor
[
s
]e
xt
r
e
me
s
,unl
e
s
st
he
ybe
c
omene
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
,
& they can only be so for a short while. On the one hand, she deplores the cost of
violence, yet she does not define all violence in the same way. Her quarrel addresses only
“
us
e
l
e
s
s
”ora
i
ml
e
s
s
”vi
ol
e
nc
e
,wh
i
c
hg
i
ve
st
a
c
i
ta
ppr
ova
lt
ovi
ol
e
nc
ewi
t
haus
e
f
ul
purpose.
Mor
et
r
oubl
i
ngs
t
i
l
li
she
rr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
et
o“
t
hepe
opl
e
,orr
a
t
he
rt
heplebs [who] are a
force which should be controlled, & not foras
e
c
onds
houl
di
tbel
e
tl
oos
e
.
”Pr
i
vi
l
e
g
i
ng
he
rc
l
a
s
sa
nde
duc
a
t
i
on,s
hema
ke
st
hej
udg
me
ntt
ha
tt
he“
i
g
nor
a
nt
,unt
ut
or
e
dpl
e
bi
a
ni
sa
dangerous element. He must be taught to discern first [however. . . ] the vulgar . . . . are
irresponsible & worthy ofpi
t
y
.
”Onc
ea
g
a
i
n,s
hea
s
s
ume
st
her
ol
eoft
hephi
l
os
ophe
rki
ng
whoma
ke
sj
udg
me
nt
sf
ort
hos
ewhoa
r
e“
be
ne
a
t
h”he
r
.He
rha
r
s
he
s
tc
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
mi
sr
e
s
e
r
ve
d
f
or“
t
ho
s
ewhot
a
kea
dva
nt
a
g
eoft
hepe
opl
e
’
si
g
nor
a
nc
e
,s
i
mpl
i
c
i
t
y
,&pa
s
s
i
ons&l
e
a
d
them astray tos
e
r
vet
he
i
rowns
e
l
f
i
s
ha
i
ms
.The
ya
r
e“
t
hos
ewhos
houl
dbehung
,s
hotor
be
he
a
de
d;i
nf
a
c
ts
uppr
e
s
s
e
d”[
UU-68 2:17]. These comments correspond to many issues
of her era—ones in which she sees that uneducated people are incited to fervor without
reason, that others makes uninformed and misguided assumptions about her own culture,
142
and that unethical politicians use others to achieve their own self-serving goals. In every
c
a
s
e
,s
hepos
i
t
i
onshe
r
s
e
l
f“
a
bove
”ot
he
r
st
oma
kea
s
s
e
s
s
me
nt
sa
ndj
udg
me
nt
s
.
In her comments to Redpath, she makes direct references to class issues, and she
doubt
st
ha
t“
Ra
di
c
a
l
i
s
m”r
e
f
or
mwi
l
lha
vea
nye
f
f
e
c
t
,f
or“
i
ts
ha
l
la
l
wa
y
ss
t
a
ndbe
y
ondi
t
s
power to abolish classes & castes. On one hand there will ever be manual labor, on the
other the mental intellectual work; the eternal balance of humanity. Physical strength in
ones
c
a
l
e&s
pi
r
i
t
ua
lpowe
ri
nt
heot
he
r
,s
c
i
e
nc
ea
bove&i
g
nor
a
nc
ebe
l
ow”a
nds
he
implies that her role and her class position (involved in intellectual, spiritual, and
scientific work) grants her the right to judge. These comments undermine the substance
of her newspapers articles calling for egalitarian reform achieved through education.
While Queyrouze does assume an elitist and classist stance, in her defense, I must
add that many philosophers, scholars, theorists, scholars, essayists, novelists, and poets
have presumed to speak from positions of leisure and wealth, and in response to their
impulses of noblesse oblige, used their talents to address political and social conflict. The
ke
yt
ounde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
spol
i
t
i
c
a
lpos
i
t
i
oni
st
oc
ons
i
de
rt
ha
ts
hei
sa
t
t
e
mpt
i
ng
to view politics less particularly and more abstractly. While she does address, at times,
particular events, she places these events into the scheme of world history—trying to
place the pieces into the whole pattern to see what the mosaïque will ultimately reveal.
Shewa
r
nsRe
dpa
t
ht
ha
t“
wes
houl
dnotr
a
s
hl
yj
udg
et
hepa
s
twi
t
hourmode
r
ni
de
a
s
,t
he
n
unknown.
”
In her closing remarks she describes her r
ol
ea
s“
t
hec
hi
e
f
t
a
i
nofal
os
tc
a
us
e
,l
os
t
be
y
ondh
ope
”ar
e
f
e
r
e
nc
et
ohe
rt
a
s
kofc
ul
t
ur
epr
e
s
e
r
va
t
i
on,a
nds
het
e
l
l
sRe
dpa
t
ht
ha
t
s
hewi
l
lc
onduc
the
r
s
e
l
f“
l
i
ket
heRoma
ns
e
na
t
or
s
.
”Whe
ns
her
e
f
e
r
st
ot
he“
l
os
tc
a
us
e
”i
n
143
her letter, she makes a probable reference not only the fall of Rome, but to the demise of
he
re
qua
l
l
y“
pr
oudLa
t
i
n”r
a
c
e
—and possibly to the Confederacy. In the face of this, she
declares, she will conduct herself in the tradition of Roman senators--stoic to the last.
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
ss
t
oi
c
i
s
mi
sg
i
ve
nf
or
mi
nhe
rpoe
m,“
At
l
a
s
”wr
i
t
t
e
ni
n1901:
. . . a Giant bending at the knees.
His heavy face looked out into beautiful space.
And I expected his athletic shoulders to crack
Under the awesome burden while the tempest
Blasted him, roaring over his flashing crown
And his lightning scepter.
“
Ohy
ouoft
heuni
ve
r
s
e
Dark Caryatid! Atlas, convict of a prison
Immense! . . .
...................................
Cursed for eternity. I am the last one; I remain.
Listen and you will know. Jupiter in a gesture
Left upon my back this horrible burden.
No more do I wish to see through this curtain
Of my dazzling tears, so inscrutable into my very core.
I contemplate my soul or scream blasphemy . . .
[UU-71 7:54]
(Appendix 240)
Many writers during this time period attempted to affect social and political
c
ha
ng
et
hr
oug
hpubl
i
cc
omme
nt
a
r
y
,a
sdi
dQue
y
r
ouz
ei
nhe
rs
pe
e
c
h,“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
nd
Wa
g
ne
r
.
”Thr
oug
hout
,s
hedoe
snota
ddr
e
s
spol
i
t
i
c
si
npa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
ra
smuch as she is
addresses the abstract nature of patriotism. Although her comments were prompted by a
mob’
sde
f
a
c
e
me
ntofWa
g
ne
r
’
ss
t
a
t
uei
nFr
a
nc
e
,he
rs
e
nt
i
me
nt
sa
boutpa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
r
e
transnational, and there appears to be many coded references to the Civil War and its
aftermath:
144
the real substance of patriotism, that lofty ideal in the name of which so many
noble deeds are performed, and an equal number of follies committed. We are not
sufficiently exacting in regard to truth, and we rest content with an orchestra of
well sounding words, echoed from age to age by tradition, which has consecrated
them, and implying an indefinite sense of sublimity. We forget that the word is
merely a shell that must be broken to disclose its kernel which is the idea.
Patriotism originates in the instinct of possession or property, of which it is an
expansion, and which is inborn in all beings for the satisfaction of the
requirements of existence, and the preservation of what is theirs. It has been
ennobled by our imaginations, converted into a virtue, and inculcated as a duty . . .
. It is a variety of self-interest, and is derived from egoism . . . Patriotism in its
most extensive sense, is no less conventional than the sentiments of parental and
filial affection, both born of the natural principle of mutuality, which is an
indispensable agent of preservation and in virtue of which protection is requested
and granted. From that principle proceed the necessary union and solidarity which
constitute first, the family and next, the country. Compliance with this necessity
is confirmed by custom, and develops into a virtue . . . . Patriotism is relative . . . .
. We who are a recent nation, the result of a fusion of heterogeneous elements,
and are therefore subject to the divergent effects of hereditariness, according to
races, we can appreciate more distinctly the relativity of patriotism [UU-70 3:47].
Whe
ns
hema
ke
sr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
e
st
ot
he“
he
t
e
r
og
e
ne
ouse
l
e
me
nt
s
”ofa“
r
e
c
e
ntna
t
i
on,
”
she describes America, and when she appl
i
e
s“
r
a
c
e
”t
opa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
m,s
hede
f
e
ndshe
r
subjective notion of patriotism. Based upon the concepts of family, property, and selfinterest, she argues that patriotism is not a virtue; therefore, she can rationalize not only
the French Creole resistance to Ame
r
i
c
a
ni
z
a
t
i
on,butt
heSout
h’
sr
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
et
oUni
on
allegiance.
The notion of Freedom is suspect as well. Freedom, she says, is in many cases an
i
l
l
us
i
on
:“
Re
publ
i
c
a
ni
s
m,De
moc
r
a
c
y
,a
nds
i
mi
l
a
rwor
dsc
onve
y
i
ngawi
des
e
ns
eof
freedom, flatter our instinc
tofi
nde
pe
nde
nc
e
;
”Howe
ve
r
,“
t
hei
de
a
lofl
i
be
r
t
ya
si
na
l
l
i
de
a
l
s
,oneha
l
fi
sdr
e
a
ma
ndde
l
us
i
on,di
s
s
i
pa
t
e
dbyt
hes
l
i
g
ht
e
s
tbr
e
a
t
hofr
e
a
l
i
t
y
.
”I
n
f
a
c
t
,f
r
e
e
domwi
t
houtdi
s
c
i
pl
i
nei
sda
ng
e
r
ous
,f
ori
f“
l
i
be
r
t
y[
i
s
]e
nt
r
us
t
e
dt
oi
r
r
a
t
i
ona
la
nd
undisc
i
pl
i
ne
dj
udg
me
nt
s
,[
i
t
]i
st
r
a
ns
f
or
me
dt
ot
y
r
a
nny
.
”I
fwedonota
c
knowl
e
dg
et
hi
s
,
145
t
he
nwef
or
g
et
hewe
a
ponofourownde
mi
s
ef
or“
I
g
nor
a
nc
ei
sofa
l
lf
oe
st
hemos
t
murderous; of all weapons the most destructive, and in the hands of our countrymen, its
woundsbe
c
omes
ui
c
i
da
l
.
”
Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,s
hewa
r
nst
ha
t“
t
hemos
tnoxi
ousc
ons
e
que
nc
e
sa
r
eof
t
e
ng
e
ne
r
a
t
e
d
byt
henobl
e
s
ts
e
nt
i
me
nt
s...i
nt
hena
meofpa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
m.
”Sus
pi
c
i
ousoft
heunt
hi
nki
ng
mob mentality that follows idealistic rhetoric without understanding its source and
me
a
ni
ng
,s
heobs
e
r
ve
st
ha
t“
t
hema
j
or
i
t
yf
ol
l
owi
nahe
r
da
ndhowlwi
t
houtknowi
ng
e
xa
c
t
l
ywhy
.
”Thei
de
ol
og
i
c
a
lunde
r
pi
nni
ngofpa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ms
houl
dnotbeba
s
e
don
e
mot
i
on,nors
houl
dour“
not
i
onsofr
i
g
hta
ndwr
ong[
be
]ma
i
nl
yde
pe
nde
nt on feeling . . .
We should distrust personal impressions and experiences, and not convert them into
dog
ma
s
.
”Be
f
or
ewede
c
l
a
r
et
ha
to
u
ra
c
t
i
onsa
r
eba
s
e
dont
hepur
ei
de
a
lofpa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
m,we
must consider that even the most laudable and meritorious deeds do not satisfactorily
de
mons
t
r
a
t
et
hepur
i
t
yoft
he
i
ror
i
g
i
n.
”Bl
i
ndpa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
mi
snotanobl
es
t
a
t
e
,f
or“
Me
n
fight with the most fervent enthusiasm for what he understands the least. There have
been apostles and martyrs for all opinions and creeds. Error and truth alike have altars
a
ndvi
c
t
i
ms
.
”
Shea
l
s
oa
ddr
e
s
s
e
st
hei
s
s
ueofPowe
r
,l
i
ke
ni
ngi
tt
oas
hi
pa
ts
e
a
:“
Powe
ri
sa
da
ng
e
r
ousve
s
s
e
lt
os
t
e
e
r
,e
ve
ni
nt
hec
ompa
r
a
t
i
ve
l
yt
r
a
nqui
lwa
t
e
r
sofknowl
e
dg
e
,
”a
nd
s
hebe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
ti
ti
s“
i
ne
xc
us
a
bl
e
”t
ha
t“
e
nl
i
g
ht
e
ne
dme
ns
houl
dknowi
ng
l
ye
xc
i
t
ea
nd
l
e
a
da
s
t
r
a
yt
hedupe
sofi
g
nor
a
nc
e
.
”Whom wec
a
l
lapa
t
r
i
otorat
r
a
i
t
orl
i
e
sof
t
e
ni
n
interpretation. This further rationalizes her resistance to ideologies that are not in synch
with her loyalties to French Creole culture and southern traditions. She develops this
further by saying that all is relative, even that which we deem evil:
146
Evil is often nothing else but the exaggeration of good; injustice of right; and the
wrong may also lie in the interpretation, things being mostly what interpretation
makes them . . . . Words and their interpretations have armed man against his
Kind and Kin, and furnished a large tribute to the executioner . . . . Souls are not
conquered by bloodshed or money like lands; and no torrents of blood, however
mighty, can ever drown patriotism. . . . Our enemies make us great; by their
attacks, they reveal to us mines of energy until then hidden in our soul, and
unsuspected even by ourselves [UU-70 3:47].
In offering this argument, she legitimizes the resistance to the flood of changes
br
oug
hta
boutbyt
heCi
vi
lWa
ra
ndRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
on.Whe
ns
hes
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
s
oul
sa
r
enot
c
onque
r
e
d,
”s
hec
oul
dbea
l
l
udi
ngt
ohe
rownc
ul
t
ur
eort
ot
heSout
h,a
nds
hef
i
nds
comfort by declaring that “
oure
ne
mi
e
sma
keusg
r
e
a
t
.
”
Even though she retreats to an antagonistic position, her attempt to achieve a
semblance of abstract disinterest is laudable because it is a prerequisite to understanding
the panorama and scope of history. Striving to find a place for each piece into the larger
scheme of the mosaïque, she makes a concerted effort to describe her vision of power and
patriotism, and while she was understandably trapped within the social orthodoxy of her
time, her attempts to transcend it deserve recognition.
One cannot speak of Louisiana and politics without a specific focus on the social
conflict in the South, and because this central issue informed much of the political debate
and motivated most of the partisan machinery, a discussion of this is essential to any
research project covering this era. I approach this subject with some caution, however,
a
ndwi
l
la
t
t
e
mptt
hi
si
nt
hes
a
mema
nne
rofTe
dTunne
lwhos
a
y
s
:“
Ha
r
bor
i
ngno
delusions of definitiveness, I have addressed all of these questions and suggested
147
a
ns
we
r
s
”(
7)
.Iwi
l
lus
et
het
e
r
mrace as it was understood at the end of the nineteenth
century, for at that time, individuals often identified themselves by their genealogy, and
used such terms as Latin, Gallic, Anglo-Saxon, Negro, French, American, black, white,
gen de couleur, mulatto, quadroon, etc. Thus, when I use the term race it is to describe
the differences that individuals perceived in one another at that time, often dependant on
pe
r
c
e
pt
i
onsof“
bl
ood”or“
c
ol
or
.
”
In many ways, New Orleans was unique in its race relations until the advent of the
Civil War because its social divisions were based on property and prestige as well as
color. Where there had once been a three-part social structure, there was now a racial
division between black and white. This distinction had far-reaching effects on the white
Creoles, the gens de couleur, and former slaves. The white French Creoles found
themselves defining their position within this new social order.
In Black New Orleans John Blassingame de
s
c
r
i
be
st
he“
t
r
ul
yuni
quef
e
a
t
ur
e
si
n
t
heNe
g
r
oc
ommuni
t
y
”i
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsa
ndbe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
tt
her
e
a
s
ont
he
i
rs
i
t
ua
t
i
onwa
s
di
f
f
e
r
e
n
tf
r
om ot
he
rs
out
he
r
nc
i
t
i
e
swa
sduet
o“
l
oc
a
t
i
oni
nt
hemos
t‘
non-Ame
r
i
c
a
n’of
Ame
r
i
c
a
nc
i
t
i
e
s
”(
xvi
)
.Asa
ne
xa
mpl
e
,i
twa
sc
us
t
oma
r
yf
or“
uppe
rc
l
a
s
swhi
t
e
s
”[...
t
o
hire] free Negro men to teach their daughters music; [. . . They] dined with blacks, and
a
l
s
oa
t
t
e
nde
dpubl
i
cf
unc
t
i
onswi
t
hNe
g
r
oe
s
.I
nt
e
r
r
a
c
i
a
ls
oc
i
a
lf
unc
t
i
ons
”we
r
e
c
ommonpl
a
c
e(
17)
.Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,“
t
hes
tyle of life of the Negro upper-middle and upper
c
l
a
s
swa
sc
ompa
r
a
bl
et
ot
ha
toft
hes
a
mec
l
a
s
s
e
sa
mongwhi
t
e
s
”(
159)
.Eve
na
f
t
e
rt
he
Civil War, vestiges of this social system persisted; it was one that based on culture rather
t
ha
nc
o
l
or
:“
Thef
r
e
emul
a
t
t
o was French in thought, language, and culture while the
black freedman was English-speaking and Afro-Ame
r
i
c
a
ni
nc
ul
t
ur
e
”(
155)
.Log
s
dona
n
d
148
Hirsch describe how this situation changed after the war when a different structure
e
me
r
g
e
d:a“
t
wo-tiered structure that drew a single unyielding line between the white and
nonwhi
t
e
”(
189)
.Thedi
vi
s
i
onbe
c
a
meoneofbi
ol
og
yr
a
t
he
rt
ha
nc
ul
t
ur
e(
190)
.Be
f
or
e
t
hi
s
,t
he
r
eha
dbe
e
na“
c
ur
i
ousc
o-existence of a three-tiered Caribbean racial structure
along side its two-t
i
e
r
e
dAme
r
i
c
a
nc
ount
e
r
pa
r
ti
na
ne
t
hni
c
a
l
l
ydi
vi
de
dc
i
t
y
”(
189)
.The
“
c
ont
a
c
tbe
t
we
e
ni
mmi
g
r
a
nt
sa
ndbl
a
c
ks
,
”Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
donc
ont
i
nue
,“
wa
sf
r
e
que
nt
a
ndc
l
o
s
ei
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
’c
ong
e
s
t
e
dne
i
g
hbor
hoods
,a
ndaonedi
me
ns
i
ona
lpor
t
r
a
i
tof
unrelieved tensi
ondoe
snotdoj
us
t
i
c
et
ot
hec
ompl
e
xi
t
yoft
hes
i
t
ua
t
i
on”(
190)
.Log
s
don
a
ndCa
r
y
nCos
s
éBe
l
ls
t
a
t
et
ha
tt
h
e“
c
ons
umma
t
el
i
nka
g
eofne
g
r
i
t
udea
nds
e
r
vi
l
i
t
y
,t
he
domi
na
ntf
e
a
t
ur
eofr
a
c
i
a
lr
e
l
a
t
i
onsi
nt
heAme
r
i
c
a
’
sOl
dSout
h,ne
ve
rf
ul
l
ye
me
r
g
e
di
n
coloni
a
lLoui
s
i
a
na
”(
214)
,a
ndt
ha
tt
he“
r
a
c
i
a
lor
de
rr
e
ma
i
ne
df
l
ui
ddur
i
ngmos
toft
he
a
nt
e
be
l
l
u
m”pe
r
i
od(
218)
.Att
ha
tt
i
me
,t
hedi
f
f
e
r
e
nc
e
sa
mongt
her
a
c
e
swe
r
e
“
e
t
hnoc
ul
t
ur
a
l...nots
i
mpl
yc
ol
ororl
e
g
a
ls
t
a
t
us
”(
193)
,a
ndpe
opl
ei
nt
hec
i
t
yl
i
ve
d
according to their means more than their ethnic background. This is not to say that the
gens de couleur did not suffer from discrimination, but they enjoyed liberties not known
in other areas of the South. Tunnell explains:
[They] owned real and personal property (including slaves), contracted legal
marriages, testified against whites in courts of law, learned trades and professions,
and participated in music and the arts. Their achievements rested on a solid
economic base (67).
However, this ended when the people began to separate themselves along racial
lines. The“
di
s
a
ppe
a
r
a
nc
eofi
t
st
i
g
ht
l
ykni
t
,c
l
us
t
e
r
e
d,mul
t
i
c
ul
t
ur
a
lne
i
g
hbor
hoods
,a
l
s
o
meant the disintegration of the residential base that had created, nurtured and sustained
149
Ne
wOr
l
e
a
ns
’uni
quec
ul
t
ur
e
”(
Log
s
dona
ndBe
l
l200)
.Be
f
or
et
hes
e
pa
r
a
t
i
on,t
hepe
opl
e
in New Orleans engaged in intimate bonds and relationships between members of
different racial groups. They shared work and living quarters and often attended the
Sunday services together; however, C. Vann Woodward qualifies this by conceding that
“
c
ont
a
c
t
”di
dnotne
c
e
s
s
a
r
i
l
yme
a
n“
ha
r
mony
”(
13)
.Myg
oa
li
st
ode
mons
t
r
a
t
et
ha
tt
he
issue is more convoluted than public and political oppositions would indicate. Between
the conservatives (who advocated a return to the pre-war social, economic and racial
order) and the radicals (who called for social and political equality) was the middle
ground characterized by the Atheneé Louisianais, supported by Queyrouze. For her,
holding onto cultural values and taking pride in her nationality, social customs, religion
and heritage did not necessarily translate into intentional racism. She represents what
Cha
r
l
e
sE.Wy
ne
sde
s
c
r
i
be
sa
st
he“
f
or
g
ot
t
e
nvoi
c
e
s
”(
5)
,at
e
r
mc
oi
ne
dbyGe
or
g
e
Washington Cable. While Queyrouze defies a label, for the sake of discussion, I will
situate her in the category of the mosaïque. Like any mosaic, if we look too closely, we
will come to the wrong conclusion—but if we stand far enough away, we can see it in its
entirety, including its patterns and flaws.
Some scholars argue that any idea of a benevolent Creole was a myth--that their
lifestyle was based on the complacent, unspoken assumption of racial superiority, one that
r
e
qui
r
e
dnoe
xpl
a
na
t
i
onorde
f
e
ns
e
.I
n“
Cr
e
ol
e
sa
ndAme
r
i
c
a
ns
”Tr
e
g
l
ema
i
nt
a
i
nst
ha
tt
he
Uni
onpr
e
s
e
nc
ei
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsa
f
t
e
rt
heCi
vi
lWa
r“
pus
he
dt
hewhi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
si
nt
of
ul
l
a
c
c
e
pt
a
nc
eoft
her
a
c
i
a
lout
l
ookoft
he
i
rf
e
l
l
owwhi
t
es
out
he
r
ne
r
s
”(
Log
s
dona
ndHi
r
s
c
h
97). He argues that it was not until blacks were given equal status under the law that
Creoles rushed to define their separate and superior identity, even going so far as to deny
150
that racial mixing had ever occurred in New Orleans. Some argue that this turn to
negrophobia was caused by outside pressures. Unde
rt
he“
whi
t
e
”g
a
z
eofAme
r
i
c
a
,t
he
Creole felt threatened culturally and economically, and thus took a position along racial
c
ol
orl
i
ne
s
.Log
s
dona
ndHi
r
s
c
ha
r
g
uet
ha
tt
hewhi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
s
’r
us
ht
ode
c
l
a
r
er
a
c
i
a
l
“
’
pur
i
t
y
’a
nduni
t
y...r
e
pr
e
s
e
nt
e
daf
l
i
g
htf
r
omt
hea
by
s
s
”(
191)
.
From a folklore
pe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
vet
hi
si
sl
og
i
c
a
l
,c
ons
i
de
r
i
ngRe
g
i
naBe
ndi
x’
sc
l
a
i
mt
ha
tt
heg
a
z
ef
r
om
outsiders changes the object of scrutiny. There is strong evidence that this is the case and
that the disintegrating situation between whites and blacks and the move towards more
strident racial repression was enhanced by the overlay of American culture upon the
Cr
e
ol
eo
ne
.I
na
nye
ve
nt
,“
Some
t
hi
ngha
ppe
ne
d...t
heSout
hc
a
pi
t
ul
a
t
e
dt
or
a
c
i
s
m”
(Wynes 4). Wynes questions whether is wa
st
he“
a
ba
ndonme
ntoft
heNe
g
r
obyt
he
Republican party [or. . ] social Darwinian naturalism, in which the Negro and all men
we
r
el
e
f
tt
or
i
s
eorf
a
l
la
sar
e
s
ul
toft
he
i
rowne
f
f
or
t
sa
ndg
e
ne
r
a
lf
i
t
ne
s
s
”(
4)
.He
c
ons
i
de
r
st
heJ
i
m Cr
owl
a
wst
obe“
a
na
c
c
urate index of the decline of the reactionary
r
e
g
i
me
soft
heRe
de
e
me
r
sa
ndt
r
i
umphofwhi
t
ede
moc
r
a
t
i
cmove
me
nt
s
”a
ndpoi
nt
st
ot
he
“
f
a
i
l
ur
eoft
hede
moc
r
a
t
i
ca
g
r
a
r
i
a
nr
e
vol
tknowna
sPopul
i
s
m[
t
ha
t...]ha
dt
hr
e
a
t
e
ne
d
the one-party hegemony of the Democrats, and in doing so further threatened to place the
Ne
g
r
oi
napos
i
t
i
onofhol
di
ngt
heba
l
a
nc
eofpowe
r
”(
4)
.Hee
xpl
a
i
ns
:
...t
he
r
ewa
sPr
og
r
e
s
s
i
vi
s
mi
t
s
e
l
f
.Notonl
ywe
r
evi
r
t
ua
l
l
ya
l
lt
heSout
h’
s
progressive political leaders white supremacists, they also sincerely believed that
the only way to remove the bribery, vote buying, ballot box stuffing, etc, which
had plagued the South since the Civil War was to remove the Negro from the
pol
i
t
i
c
a
ls
c
e
nea
l
t
og
e
t
he
r
”(
5)
.
151
These problems not only existed in the South, they were prevalent in the North.
Many believed that the North and South were clearly divided on the issue of slavery, but
C. Vann Woodward argues that this is a misconception. The North and South were not
polarized into two opposing camps of pro-slavery and anti-slavery, he argues; the
situation was much more complicated and does not take into account the human frailties
and complexities of the individuals on both sides of the Mason-Dixon line. Woodward
a
r
g
ue
st
ha
te
a
c
hs
i
dewa
nt
e
dt
obe“
r
i
g
ht
”ba
s
e
dupon“
al
a
uda
bl
ei
mpul
s
et
obei
de
nt
i
f
i
e
d
wi
t
hnobl
ede
e
ds
”(
268)
.I
nde
e
d,hes
a
y
st
ha
t“
whi
t
es
upr
e
ma
c
ywa
sana
t
i
ona
l
,nota
r
e
g
i
ona
lc
r
e
do”(
269)
,a
ndbl
a
c
kss
uf
f
e
r
e
ddi
s
c
r
i
mi
na
t
i
oni
nt
henor
t
h,a
swe
l
l
.Tha
tmi
g
ht
e
xpl
a
i
nwhyt
ha
t“
by1860,only 6 percent of the Northern Negro population lived in the
f
i
ves
t
a
t
e
st
ha
tpr
ovi
de
dl
e
g
a
l
l
yf
o
rt
he
i
rs
uf
f
r
a
g
e
”(
270)
.
However, this does not mitigate the responsibility Creoles have for their own
actions involving treatment of black people. While Tregle maintains that the Union
pr
e
s
e
nc
ei
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsa
f
t
e
rt
heCi
vi
lWa
r“
pus
he
dt
hewhi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
si
nt
of
ul
l
a
c
c
e
pt
a
nc
eoft
her
a
c
i
a
lout
l
ookoft
he
i
rf
e
l
l
owwhi
t
es
out
he
r
ne
r
s
”(
Log
s
dona
ndHi
r
s
c
h
97), there is evidence that racist views were already entrenched. As early as 1831 Alexis
deToc
que
vi
l
l
e“
f
ounds
l
a
ve
r
y[
t
obe
]a
sr
ut
hl
e
s
si
nt
her
e
mna
nt
sofFr
e
nc
hLoui
s
i
a
naa
s
in the Anglo-Ame
r
i
c
a
nSout
h”(
Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don9)
.La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
nt
houg
htt
ha
tt
h
e
Creoles who treated their slaves badly were just a product of their heritage—that they had
a“
na
t
ur
a
lLa
t
i
nc
r
ue
l
t
y
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e150)
.J
e
a
n-Charles Houzeau of the New Orleans
Tribune was especially scathing in his observations about the Creoles. He considered the
“
whi
t
eCr
e
ol
e
spr
e
t
e
nt
i
ous
,di
s
hon
e
s
t
,di
s
s
ol
ut
e
,r
a
c
i
s
t
,a
ndr
e
a
c
t
i
ona
r
y
.
”I
nal
e
t
t
e
rda
t
e
d
July 22, 1866, he writes:
152
[The] European quarter of New Orleans is a disgrace for a civilized city . . .
where they speak French and Spanish . . . . The American city has an immense
contempt for these old . . . Latin customs . . . with all the libertinage that these
customs require when practiced in a distant foreign country. What a contrast with
the severity of the Anglo-Saxons, who are without a doubt cold, but who control
themselves . . . this Latin Society is not . . . honorable . . . . How can such a race .
. . have the pretension to colonize and dominate? [ . . . They are] the most cruel
and rabid slaveholders—people who are never truthful nor practical. Great luxury,
sumptuous clothing, debt up the their ears, all sorts of parties at night,
drunkenness, swindling without shame (33).
The Creoles attempted to counteract this with the construction of their own myth
regarding slavery. In fact, the New Orleans Daily Crescent in 1866 went so far as to state
t
ha
t“
dome
s
t
i
cs
e
r
vi
t
ude[
wa
s
]ve
r
ywr
ong
f
ul
l
yde
nomi
na
t
e
d‘
Af
r
i
c
a
nSl
a
ve
r
y
’[
a
nd...
]
t
husde
pr
i
ve
dt
he‘
s
a
bl
er
a
c
e
,s
omu
c
hf
a
l
s
e
l
ypi
t
i
e
d...[
of
]t
he
i
rl
os
tha
ppyc
ondi
t
i
on,
unde
rt
hepr
ot
e
c
t
i
onoft
he
i
ri
ndul
g
e
ntma
s
t
e
r
sa
ndmi
s
t
r
e
s
s
e
s
’
”(
Tr
egle 169). Rhetoric
such as this indicates the degree to which the Creoles were invested in abnegating any
responsibility for the inhumane institution that had supported the southern economy.
Not only did they fail to acknowledge culpability, they often used blacks as pawns
in political struggles for power. In The Future of the Past, Woodward points out that
mos
thi
s
t
or
i
c
a
la
c
c
ount
sa
r
e“
t
her
e
c
or
dofwha
tt
hewhi
t
ema
nbe
l
i
e
ve
d,t
houg
ht
,
legislated, did and did not do about the Negro. The Negroes is a passive element . . . he is
the object rather than the subject . . . . he had no past (35, 37). This suggests an
underlying assumption of racial superiority that affected even those who were advocates
of racial equality.
Plantation owners in the South had a reputation for ill treatment of slaves, and the
French Creoles were no exception. One of the threats often used on recalcitrant slaves
153
was that they would be sent down river to plantations where slaves were treated more
harshly. John Rodrigue explains tha
ts
ug
a
rpl
a
nt
a
t
i
onsha
da“
he
l
l
i
s
hr
e
put
a
t
i
ona
mong
s
l
a
ve
soft
hea
nt
e
be
l
l
um Sout
h”(
1
9
5)
,butt
hi
swa
sduemor
et
ot
her
i
g
or
ousme
c
ha
ni
c
sof
s
ug
a
rp
r
oduc
t
i
ont
ha
nt
opr
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
.
J
oeGr
a
yTa
y
l
ors
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
whi
l
et
heFr
e
nc
hpl
a
nt
e
r
s
in Louisiana did not work their slaves so hard as did the Anglo-Saxons, they did not care
f
ort
he
ms
owe
l
l
”(
Ta
y
l
or226)
,whi
l
eot
he
rs
c
hol
a
r
sa
r
g
uet
ha
tt
heFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
s
reputation for cruelty was exaggerated.
Their reputation did not consist solely upon plantation life, for there were
documented incidences in New Orleans, as well. Taylor cites one of the most notorious
cases, the one regarding Madame Lalaurie of New Orleans who starved and tortured her
slaves. When her crimes were discovered, an angry mob attacked her home and chased
her out of town. The crowds were mostly French, and they were angry, most of all,
be
c
a
us
e“
s
heha
ddi
s
c
r
e
di
t
e
dhe
rFr
e
nc
hbl
oodi
nt
hee
y
e
soft
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
”(
226)
,a
nd
as such, they felt that she had disgraced their culture. William Ivy Hair cites the cause of
t
he
s
e
sc
a
s
e
sofa
bus
eupon“
t
hec
ommi
ng
l
i
ngofEng
l
i
s
h-speaking and Creole-Cajun
cultures [that] had resulted in a milieu of political instability and unusual insensitivity to
huma
nr
i
g
ht
s
”(
186)
.Ta
y
l
or
,ont
heot
he
rha
nd,be
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
t individual cases of cruelty
do not represent the entire picture and argues that the problem resided in the institution
i
t
s
e
l
ft
ha
t“
ma
debr
ut
a
l
i
t
yne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
”e
ve
na
mongt
hos
e“
whor
e
pr
e
s
e
nt
e
dhi
g
he
s
t
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
s
”(
227)
.
During Reconstruction and afterwards, freedmen often faced greater challenges
i
nLoui
s
i
a
nat
ha
ti
not
he
ra
r
e
a
soft
heSout
h.Ta
y
l
ornot
e
st
ha
t“
t
hewhi
t
e
si
nLoui
s
i
a
na
s
oug
ht
,
a
ta
l
lc
os
t
s
,t
opr
e
ve
nta
nyt
e
nde
nc
yt
obr
i
ngt
het
wor
a
c
e
st
ot
hes
a
mel
e
ve
l
”
154
(
227)
.Ha
i
rs
e
pa
r
a
t
e
st
he“
uppe
r class conservatives in the post-Re
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
onSout
h”
f
r
omt
hos
eoft
he“
r
ul
i
ngc
l
a
s
si
nLoui
s
i
a
na
”(
Ha
i
r186)a
nds
a
y
st
ha
tunl
i
ket
her
e
s
tof
t
heSout
hwhove
r
ypa
t
e
r
na
l
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
l
yt
r
i
e
dt
ot
a
ket
he“
i
nf
e
r
i
or
”f
r
e
e
dme
nunde
rt
he
i
r
protective wing, the Louisiana elite were merely rabidly white supremacists who were
f
e
a
r
f
ulo
ft
hef
r
e
e
dme
n’
sa
s
s
e
r
t
i
onofr
i
g
ht
sa
ndpol
i
t
i
c
a
lc
ont
r
ol
.Ha
i
rc
i
t
e
st
hey
e
a
r1881
a
st
he“
t
ur
ni
ngpoi
ntt
owa
r
dse
xt
r
e
mec
r
ue
l
t
y
”(
187)
;t
hi
swa
st
het
i
mewhe
nt
he
r
ewe
r
e
more tortures, lynchings, and instances of inhuman cruelty--some were burned alive. The
Chicago Tribune e
s
t
i
ma
t
e
dt
ha
t“
b
e
t
we
e
n1882a
nd1903...
l
y
nc
hi
ng
sa
c
c
ount
e
df
or28
5
de
a
t
hs
”(
Ha
i
r187-188), but these figures do not necessarily include all local reports. A
contemporary reader would find the newspaper accounts of lynching in the 1890s
extremely unsettling. These papers described lynchings as neck tie parties, and one
Shreveport newspaper, the Evening Judge, a
c
t
ua
l
l
yus
e
dt
het
e
r
m“
be
a
ut
i
f
ul
”in its
description ofal
y
nc
hi
ng
.Equa
l
l
yof
f
e
ns
i
vewa
st
he“
Shr
e
ve
por
tPl
a
n”t
ha
tpr
opos
e
d
bl
a
c
ksbeg
i
ve
nonl
yme
ni
a
la
ndha
r
dl
a
borj
obsbe
c
a
us
et
he
ywe
r
ea“
s
ub-human
s
pe
c
i
e
s
”(
Ha
i
r191)
.Hos
t
i
l
i
t
yt
owa
r
dsbl
a
c
ksr
e
a
c
he
dhor
r
i
f
i
cl
e
ve
l
s
,a
ndt
hos
ewhowe
r
e
often the most violent were wealthy white planters who forced black landowners either to
sell their land at a low price or be tortured or killed. Louisiana became notorious for this
violence, and those guilty of these acts felt that they were above the law because they
were united in groups with similar sentiments--many of these individual held positions of
power.
In spite of these accounts, there were those who raised their voices against these
atrocities. One of these was Cable, a leading proponent of racial reform. Because he was
central in mounting the counter-narrative to the Creole myth, he cannot be separated from
155
the discussion of the Creoles and social conflict. Cable became involved in a social
movement that Woodward describes as having its origin in the upper c
l
a
s
s
.“
I
nt
hee
a
r
l
y
years of the nineteenth century, up to the time repression set in, antislavery sentiment was
f
oundi
nt
heuppe
rc
l
a
s
s
,
”t
he
n,t
he
yr
e
c
r
ui
t
e
dt
hemi
ddl
ec
l
a
s
s(
285)
.Woodwa
r
dpoi
nt
st
o
al
i
t
t
l
eknownf
a
c
tt
ha
t“
i
twa
sSout
he
r
ne
r
swhol
a
unched the antislavery press in
Ame
r
i
c
a
”(
286)
.Hec
a
l
l
sCa
bl
e
’
sSilent South publ
i
s
he
di
n1885,“
oneoft
hemos
tr
a
di
c
a
l
i
ndi
c
t
me
nt
sofs
out
he
r
nr
a
c
i
a
lpol
i
c
ywr
i
t
t
e
nbyaSout
he
r
ne
ri
nt
hee
i
g
ht
i
e
s
”(
289)
.
La
ur
e
nc
eJ
.Fr
i
e
dma
na
ddst
ha
tCa
bl
e
’
sde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
on of the maiming and torture of BrasCoupe in the Grandissimes serves as a counter-narrative to the widely circulated myth of
the content slave. In doing so, Cable departed from the Cavalier literary school of writers
who“
e
xa
l
t
e
dt
hei
mpr
ovi
de
ntbutg
e
ne
rous-hearted and cultivated Cavalier gentleman
pl
a
nt
e
r
”(
103)
.
Cable brought into question the perceptions of race. In a letter to Charles Waddell
Che
s
t
nut
tonJ
une12,1889,Ca
bl
ea
s
ke
dt
heque
s
t
i
on,“
’
wha
ti
sawhi
t
ema
n,wha
ti
sa
whi
t
ewoma
n?
’
”Thi
sinquiry implies that Cable was arguing the notion of race itself and
wr
e
s
t
l
i
ngwi
t
ht
hei
de
at
ha
ta
l
l“
r
a
c
ei
st
r
a
ns
i
t
or
y
”(
107)
.I
na
ddi
t
i
on,Ca
bl
ei
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
t
hemy
r
i
a
dofha
r
mf
ule
f
f
e
c
t
sofs
l
a
ve
r
y
.I
nhi
se
s
s
a
y
,“
TheFr
e
e
dma
n’
sCa
s
ei
nEqui
t
y
”
published in Century Magazine, h
ede
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
tt
he
r
ewa
sa“
mor
a
lr
e
s
pons
i
bi
l
i
t
yont
he
whole nation never to lose sight of the results of African-American slavery until they
cease to work mischief and injustice . . . . The nation was to blame; and so long as evils
s
pr
i
ngf
r
om i
t
,t
he
i
rc
or
r
e
c
t
i
onmus
tbeana
t
i
on’
sdut
y
”(
Wy
ne
s13)
.Whe
ns
l
a
ve
r
ywa
s
“
pe
t
r
i
f
i
e
d[
i
t
]be
c
a
met
hec
or
ne
r
s
t
oneoft
hewhol
es
oc
i
a
ls
t
r
uc
t
ur
e
,a
ndwhe
nme
ns
oug
ht
i
t
sove
r
t
hr
owa
sana
t
i
ona
le
vi
l
,i
tf
i
r
s
tbr
oug
htwa
rupont
hel
a
nd”(
14)
. Just as
156
Queyrouze expressed in her article in The Crusader, Cable felt that a future debt was
be
i
ngi
nc
ur
r
e
da
ndt
ha
ts
i
l
e
nc
ewoul
dnotmi
t
i
g
a
t
et
hi
sl
i
a
bi
l
i
t
y
.Hewa
r
ne
dt
ha
t“
t
o
c
ommi
ti
tt
ot
hes
i
l
e
nc
ea
ndc
onc
e
a
l
me
ntofac
ove
r
e
df
ur
r
ow”woul
dme
a
nt
hat it would
“
s
pr
i
ngupa
nde
xpa
ndonc
ea
g
a
i
ni
nt
oque
s
t
i
onsofpubl
i
ce
qui
t
y...que
s
t
i
onsof
na
t
i
ona
li
nt
e
r
e
s
t
”(
14)
.Hebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
tt
hos
ewi
t
ha
n“
uny
i
e
l
di
nga
t
t
i
t
ude
,whos
e
s
t
r
e
ng
t
hi
si
nt
hea
bs
e
nc
eofi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
la
ndmor
a
lde
ba
t
e
”(
16)we
r
enot evil people; in
f
a
c
t
,t
h
e
ywe
r
eof
t
e
n“
God-f
e
a
r
i
ngpe
opl
e
,
”butj
us
ta
sonec
a
ns
e
et
hef
a
ul
t
sofpr
e
vi
ous
g
e
ne
r
a
t
i
ons
,“
pos
t
e
r
i
t
ywi
l
ldi
s
c
ove
rour
s
”(
17)
.“
Thous
a
ndsofpi
ousma
s
t
e
r
sa
nd
mistresses flatly broke the shameful laws that stood between theirs
l
a
ve
sa
ndt
heBi
bl
e
”
(
18)
.Ma
nywhoc
l
a
i
me
d“
t
i
t
l
et
oa
nAme
r
i
c
a
nf
r
e
e
domsa
nda
s
pi
r
a
t
i
ons
”woul
d“
t
he
ni
n
da
i
l
ypr
a
c
t
i
c
ehe
a
pupon[
bl
a
c
ks
]i
ne
ve
r
ypubl
i
cpl
a
c
et
hemos
todi
ousdi
s
t
i
nc
t
i
ons
,
”t
he
r
e
s
ul
tofwhi
c
hde
s
t
r
oy
e
dhi
s“
a
mbi
t
i
on,t
r
a
mpl
e
[
d]upon . . . self-r
e
s
pe
c
t
”(
23)
.Hea
r
g
u
e
s
t
ha
ts
uc
hi
ndi
g
ni
t
i
e
sa
dve
r
s
e
l
ya
f
f
e
c
ta
l
l
,f
or“
t
hef
i
r
s
tpr
e
mi
s
eofAme
r
i
c
a
npr
i
nc
i
pl
e
si
s
that whatever elevates the lower stratum of the people lifts all the rest and whatever holds
i
tdownhol
dsa
l
ldown”(
25)
.The“
whol
ec
ommuni
t
yi
ss
i
nne
da
g
a
i
ns
ti
ne
ve
r
ya
c
tor
a
t
t
i
t
udeofoppr
e
s
s
i
on,howe
ve
rg
r
os
sorr
e
f
i
ne
d”(
33)
.Hewa
r
nst
ha
t“
s
l
a
ve
r
ywa
sa
mor
a
lmi
s
t
a
ke
”(
36)a
ndt
ha
tt
hewor
l
dwa
s“
wa
i
t
i
ngt
os
e
ewha
twewi
l
lwr
i
t
eupont
he
whi
t
epa
g
eoft
oda
y
’
sa
ndt
omor
r
ows
’hi
s
t
or
y
”(
31)
.
In spite of this rhetoric, Cable was not completely separate from the racial
or
t
hodoxyofhi
st
i
me
,a
ndFr
i
e
dma
ni
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
sCa
bl
e
’
sunde
r
l
y
i
ngpr
e
j
udi
c
e
.Fr
i
e
dma
n
believes that Cable was an exception to the orthodoxy of white supremacy, but argues
that even those who were sympathetic to the plight of blacks would not tolerate black
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
ve
ne
s
sa
nde
xpr
e
s
s
i
onof“
s
oc
i
a
ldignity”(
99)
.Fr
i
e
dma
na
s
s
e
r
t
st
ha
ti
twa
sne
a
r
l
y
157
i
mpos
s
i
bl
e“
f
orawhi
t
eSout
he
r
ne
rt
oope
nl
ya
ndme
a
ni
ng
f
ul
l
ydepart from racial
or
t
hodoxy
”(
100)
.Whi
l
eCa
bl
edi
dnotbe
l
i
e
vei
nwhi
t
es
upr
e
ma
c
ype
rs
e
,hene
ve
r
t
he
l
e
s
s
f
e
l
tt
ha
t“
mos
t
”whi
t
e
swe
r
es
upe
r
i
ort
o“
mos
t
”bl
a
c
ks
,a
ndt
ha
tbl
a
c
ksc
oul
dnot
c
ompl
e
t
e
l
yove
r
c
omet
he
i
rs
a
va
g
ena
t
ur
e
.Ca
bl
e
’
spur
pos
ei
ns
uppor
ting the cause for
e
qua
l
i
t
ywa
sa
l
s
ot
os
a
vewhi
t
e
sb
e
c
a
us
ehebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
ta“
r
e
pr
e
s
s
i
oni
s
tpol
i
c
yha
da
‘
wa
r
pi
ngmor
a
le
f
f
e
c
t
’upont
heoppr
e
s
s
or
”a
ndt
ha
ti
tc
ompr
omi
s
e
done
’
sChr
i
s
t
i
a
n
principles (110).
Ca
bl
e
’
spr
i
va
t
ej
our
na
l
sa
l
s
or
e
ve
a
ls
omeofhis hidden biases. James Robert
Pa
y
nei
nve
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
dCa
bl
e
’
spe
r
s
ona
lda
i
r
i
e
sa
tt
heHowa
r
d-Tilton Library at Tulane and
f
oundt
ha
ti
nCa
bl
e
’
sr
e
vi
s
e
dpa
s
s
a
g
e
sa
ndde
l
e
t
e
dl
i
ne
sonec
a
ndi
s
c
ove
rawr
i
t
e
ri
n
conflict. For instance, when Cable met George Washington Williams, a mulatto who
wrote The History of the Negro Race in America (1883), Cable wrote in his diary that he
wa
nt
e
dWi
l
l
i
a
mst
oj
oi
nhi
sl
i
t
e
r
a
r
yc
i
r
c
l
ebutnot
e
d“
‘
Is
e
ea
tl
a
s
tama
nwhos
eonl
y
Af
r
i
c
a
ni
s
mi
shi
st
a
wnys
ki
n’
”(
Di
a
r
yI
,3-4) (105). Likewise, Friedman describes how
Cable was patronizing to Carter G. Woodson, Booker T. Washington, and Charles
Chestnutt. In one instance, Cable expressed his admiration for Chestnutt, but
simultaneously revealed his patronizing and superior attitude when he considered asking
Chestnutt-- a brilliant writer in his own right-- t
o“
s
e
r
vea
s[
Ca
bl
e
’
s
]pe
r
s
ona
ls
e
c
r
e
t
a
r
y
”
(114). On the other hand, many southern whites—the Creoles among them-- accused
Ca
bl
eofbe
i
nga“
Ne
g
r
ol
ove
r
”a
sd
i
d“
Cha
r
l
e
sGa
y
a
r
r
éi
nt
he New Orleans Times
Democrat on January 22, 1885 (115). This was followed by "an assault by nine Southern
ne
ws
pa
pe
re
di
t
or
suponCa
bl
e
’
s‘
mi
s
c
e
g
e
na
t
i
oni
s
tt
e
nde
nc
i
e
s
’
”(
115)
.The
s
ea
ndma
ny
other attacks forced Cable, at last, to leave for Northampton, Massachusetts.
158
In any other context, Queyrouze and Cable would have not considered themselves
to be kindred spirits, but in varying degrees, each experienced censure for their support of
racial equality. When Queyrouze (under the nom de plume Salamandra or Adamas) wrote
articles for the New Orleans Crusader, a publication directed towards a predominantly
black audience, she suffered some backlash. On February 16, 1889, in an article entitled
“
TheRa
c
ePr
obl
e
m Log
i
c
a
l
l
yDi
s
c
us
s
e
d”Que
y
r
ouz
ebe
g
a
nhe
rdi
s
c
us
s
i
on by saying,
“
ne
ve
rh
a
sa
nys
oc
i
a
lorpol
i
t
i
c
a
lp
r
obl
e
mg
i
ve
nr
i
s
et
omor
evi
ol
e
ntpol
e
mi
c
sa
ndc
r
e
a
t
e
d
more causes for dissension and bitter animosity than the race question . . . .[The] hostility
[
i
s
]onet
ha
tf
e
e
dsone
ve
r
ypr
e
t
e
xt
,
”a
nds
hewa
r
ne
dt
ha
tt
he“
i
ne
qui
t
yoft
hef
a
t
he
r
swi
l
l
bevi
s
i
t
e
dupont
hec
hi
l
dr
e
n.
”Thes
a
mel
a
wofhe
r
e
di
t
yt
ha
ta
ppl
i
e
dt
oNa
t
ur
ea
ppl
i
e
dt
o
na
t
i
ons
,f
orana
t
i
oni
s“
butama
g
ni
f
i
e
di
ma
g
eoft
hef
a
mi
l
y
.
”Shec
ha
r
g
e
dt
ha
tt
he
“
pr
e
s
e
ntt
r
oubl
e
sbe
t
we
e
nt
hewhi
t
ea
ndbl
a
c
kr
a
c
e
s
”we
r
ear
e
s
ul
toft
he“
g
r
i
e
vouss
i
n
c
ommi
t
t
e
dbyourAme
r
i
c
a
npr
e
de
c
e
s
s
or
s
:t
hei
mpor
t
a
t
i
onoft
heNe
g
r
of
orbonda
g
e
.
”
She compares the situation to a ledger:
[America is] unconsciously contracting an overwhelming debt toward mankind
and posterity. The interests on the debt have accrued rapidly and constantly; and
the time has almost come for the present to settle the accounts of the past. What is
life, what is history, but an account current in which debit and credit must
balance? And woe to him whose accounts do not balance!
But the white man of this period still deceives himself and his colored
fellow-citizen, as his forefathers have done . . . .The sum of hypocrisy spent by
him in contriving subterfuges, and coloring his genuine motives of enmity is
incalculable. Any opportunity whatever is available as long as it may contribute
the slightest chance of supporting his assumed claims to autocracy . . . .[They]
wish less to become initiated to the truth than to maintain their once
authoritatively expressed opinions, for vanity and exaggerated pride have a far
stronger hold on man than the yearning towards justice . . . . A few think and lead
and the many follow. There are numerous empty-headed beings who adopt . . .
manufacture, and borrow . . . The very ones who stoutly deny the colored man the
159
rights that should be unreservedly his as a citizen . . . are those who have used him
to their own best advantage . . . . But after extracting all the profit . . . have they
not cast him off like a blunted tool? [UU-71 7:52].
In the same article she directs her argument to the black race, saying that "the colored
man must no longer be a tool. He must become the hand that wields the tool and the brain
that guides the hand." Not long after this article was published, Queyrouze wrote to a
f
r
i
e
nd,
s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
ts
heha
dbe
e
na
c
c
us
e
dofha
vi
ng“
mi
xe
dbl
ood,
”ac
ha
r
g
et
ha
twa
s
commonly used to silence proponents of racial equality; ironically, this was the same
tactic that the Creoles had used against Cable.
While noonec
a
nde
nyi
nt
hef
or
e
g
oi
ngQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
spa
s
s
i
ona
ndf
e
r
vorf
ore
qu
a
l
rights, she does exhibit some of the inevitable sensibilities of her era. Categorizing all
bl
a
c
ki
ndi
vi
dua
l
si
nt
oonei
nde
x,s
hes
a
y
si
nt
hes
a
mea
r
t
i
c
l
et
ha
t“
t
hebl
a
c
kr
a
c
ei
s
naturally kind, large hearted, devoted, and not at all distrustful; therefore, it [emphasis
a
dde
d]i
sa
ptt
obedupe
dt
hemor
ee
a
s
i
l
y
.
”Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,s
hequi
c
kl
ya
s
s
e
r
t
she
rown
r
a
c
i
a
lpur
i
t
ybys
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
hewr
i
t
e
roft
he
s
el
i
ne
s
,whos
ea
nc
e
s
t
or
swe
r
ebor
nin
Louisiana for many generations, belongs to the purest type of the noble Latin and Gallic
r
a
c
e
sc
ombi
ne
d,a
ndha
sc
ons
e
que
nt
l
ynoi
nt
e
r
e
s
ti
nbe
i
ngpa
r
t
i
a
lt
ot
hebl
a
c
kr
a
c
e
.
”
More troubling still is her description of some of the different people that
g
a
t
he
r
e
di
nCong
oSqua
r
eonSunda
ya
f
t
e
r
noons
.Shec
a
t
e
g
or
i
z
e
st
hedi
f
f
e
r
e
nt“
t
r
i
be
s
”
t
ha
ts
hes
e
e
sa
c
c
or
di
ngt
ot
he
i
rva
l
uea
sac
ommodi
t
yi
n“
Silhouette Créoles”
:
There one could see the athletic Mozambique who has large shoulders and who
was distinguished from the others by the curious tattoos on his flat face and the
160
constellation of black cuts in his very flesh. There was the statuesque Cafres who
was very tall and whose features were accentuated by his bronze complexion;
Mandinque slaves were nervous . . .[and] had fine and regular black faces, and an
independent spirit that made them adept at commerce, a characteristic that made
them often the opposite of a good slave . . . . [They were often called] the Yankees
of Negroes. The Congo, bulky, with a small build, was in demand by the
purchasers of slaves because of his docility and vigor, and his wide and frank
laugh in his square face . . . marked by a joy . . . The masters preferred this slave,
c
a
l
l
i
nghi
mt
he“
na
t
ur
a
l
”one...[
heha
d]t
hei
nstinctive devotion of the dog
[UU-70 6:47].
As further evidence of these conflicting sentiments, Queyrouze had a penchant for
wearing a bracelet that symbolized the oppression she addressed in her article. In
Laf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n’
sAme
r
i
c
anDay
s
,Edward Larocque Tinker describes this bracelet, one
i
mmor
t
a
l
i
z
e
di
napoe
mbya
na
nony
mouswr
i
t
e
r
.I
twa
sa“
g
ol
dba
ng
l
eofc
ur
i
ousde
s
i
g
n.
. . . A miniature slave whip which her grandfather had given to her grandmother with the
wor
ds
,‘
t
hi
ss
ha
l
lbey
ourba
dg
eofa
ut
hor
i
t
y
’
”(
Ti
nke
r264)
.He
rpr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
ef
ort
hi
s
symbolic bracelet counterbalances the sentiments she expressed in her Crusader articles,
which indicates her conflicted ideologies. This is further complicated by patronizing tone
when she expresses her affectionate reverence for blacks:
[The] loyal, unflinching,and tender abnegation of those of that race whose arms
were the first cradle . . . and body of whom they shielded from every bruise in life
as long a they could. Perhaps it is not given to all to duly appreciate the simple
grandeur of certain deeds [UU-71 7:52].
This bifurcation of sentiments is indicative of the political duality of many
people in the South, wherein supporters of social equality, inevitably, were products of
their own times. It would have been impossible for them to separate themselves from the
superstructure of political forces and partisan acrimony that often muffled the voices that
161
spoke for social change. Some historians indicate that this moderate and sometimes
conflicting sensibility arose from lingering racial intimacy combined with the underlying
assumption of white elitism.
Our understanding of race relations in the South has been largely informed by the
work of C. Vann Woodward, particularly his books, Origin of the New South, The
Strange Career of Jim Crow, and Future of the Past. Fr
i
e
dma
ns
umma
r
i
z
e
sWoodwa
r
d’
s
a
r
g
ume
nt
,e
xpl
a
i
ni
ngt
ha
t“
s
e
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
onha
dnota
l
wa
y
sbe
e
nt
hewa
yoft
hepos
t
be
l
l
um
South. Between the demise of Reconstruction and the collapse of Southern Populism in
t
hemi
ddl
e1890s
,r
a
c
er
e
l
a
t
i
onsha
dr
e
ma
i
ne
df
l
ui
da
ndr
e
l
a
t
i
ve
l
yuns
t
r
uc
t
ur
e
d”(
vi
)
.
Fr
i
e
dma
ns
a
y
st
ha
ts
c
hol
a
r
ss
i
nc
et
hepubl
i
c
a
t
i
onof[
Woodwa
r
d’
s
]booksha
vewi
de
l
y
a
c
c
e
pt
e
dt
he“
c
hr
onol
og
i
c
a
lde
ve
l
opme
ntofs
e
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
on”(
vi
)
;howe
ve
r
,Friedman points
t
og
r
owi
ngs
ke
pt
i
c
i
s
mt
owa
r
dsWoodwa
r
d’
st
he
s
i
swhi
c
h“
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
e
dt
hehopea
nd
optimism of the mid-1950’
sf
ora‘
ne
ws
a
y
’i
nSout
he
r
nr
a
c
er
e
l
a
t
i
ons
”(
vi
i
)
.Fr
i
e
dma
n
f
oc
us
e
s
,i
ns
t
e
a
d,wi
t
h“
c
y
ni
c
i
s
m”ont
hee
r
abe
t
we
e
nt
heCi
vi
lWa
ra
ndWWI
.Friedman
na
r
r
owshi
sa
r
g
ume
nt
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
ts
i
nc
eWoodwa
r
d’
sOrigin of the New South covered
“
’
Bl
a
c
kRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
on,
’t
he‘
bi
r
a
c
i
a
lPopul
i
s
tc
r
us
a
de
,t
heAt
l
a
nt
aCompr
omi
s
e
,a
ndt
h
e
‘
l
i
l
ywhi
t
e
’pr
og
r
e
s
s
i
vi
s
m,
”hewi
l
lnota
ddr
e
s
st
he
s
e
;i
ns
t
e
a
d,hewi
l
lf
ocus on why white
southerners clamored for the psychological presence of docile black servitude. In the
Future of the Past Woodward defends the Strange Career of Jim Crow saying that
r
e
g
a
r
di
n
gt
hei
s
s
ueof“
r
a
c
i
a
ls
e
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
ona
ndi
t
sor
i
g
i
ns...[
heg
a
ve
] priority over
circumstance and plac[ed] the chronology before sociology and demography of the
s
ubj
e
c
t
”(
296). Richard C. Wade and Ira Berlin argue that segregation not only divided
white from black, but divided freedmen from slaves. Howard N. Rabinowitz adds that
162
segregation, unfortunately, was very successful in oppression (306). Segregation was
most necessary in densely populated areas; thus, most instances of Jim Crow law
enforcement were found within cities. There were some exceptions, and Woodward
ma
i
nt
a
i
nst
ha
tt
he
r
ewa
sa“
de
l
a
y
e
ds
e
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
on,t
e
mpor
a
r
yf
l
ui
di
t
y
,a
nddi
ve
r
s
i
t
yi
nr
a
c
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
ons
,
”s
uc
ha
st
heonef
oundi
nNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns(
298)
.Hec
ont
e
ndst
ha
ti
nur
ba
n
developments, there were many people who wanted things they once were, but there were
ma
nywh
o“
wi
s
he
dt
oc
ha
ng
et
hi
n
g
sbutde
s
pa
i
r
e
dofe
ve
rbe
i
nga
bl
et
odos
o”(
299)
.One
c
a
nnoti
g
nor
et
hec
hr
onol
og
y
,hema
i
nt
a
i
ns
,be
c
a
us
e“
r
a
c
er
e
l
a
t
i
onshad history . . . [it]
ha
dnot‘
a
l
wa
y
sbe
e
nt
ha
twa
y
’
”(
300)
,a
ndhea
r
g
ue
st
ha
tt
hee
vi
de
nc
eofchange
logically supposes a chronology. He agrees with Rabinowits, that segregation was in
evidence earlier in 1800s than he previously supposed, but he maintains vehemently that
it increased as the century came to an end and that the changes in the South were based on
political and not economic foundations.
Black political leaders in New Orleans also took a role in affecting change.
Log
s
dona
ndHi
r
s
c
hpoi
ntoutt
ha
tBl
a
c
k“
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
ve
ne
s
sa
ndr
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
y...s
e
t
st
heNe
w
Orleans experience apart from thoseot
he
rAme
r
i
c
a
nt
owns
”(
191)
.The
yc
r
e
di
tt
hebl
a
c
k
Cr
e
ol
er
a
di
c
a
l
i
s
m,whi
c
hwa
s“
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
vea
ndi
nde
pe
nde
nt
,wi
t
hbr
oa
de
rhor
i
z
onsa
nds
e
l
f
c
onf
i
de
nc
e
”a
sha
vi
nga
ni
nf
l
ue
nc
eonr
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
et
oJ
i
mCr
owl
a
ws
,pe
r
ha
psmor
es
ot
h
a
n
elsewhere in the South (195). Even before Reconstruction, there were key black leaders
who played a role in social reform. For example, Tunnell describes local ministers who
“
e
me
r
g
e
da
si
mpor
t
a
ntpol
i
t
i
c
a
lf
i
g
ur
e
s
”(
s
uc
ha
sWi
l
l
i
a
m A.Dovea
ndRobe
r
tMc
Ca
r
y
)
,
and Tunnell demonstrates the importance of the Louisiana National Equal Rights League
a
ndt
heNa
t
i
ona
lConve
nt
i
onofCo
l
or
e
dCi
t
i
z
e
nsoft
heUni
t
e
dSt
a
t
e
s
,whi
c
h“
r
e
ve
a
l
e
d
163
the full extent to which the war politicized the social and religious institutions of free
Ne
g
r
os
oc
i
e
t
y
”(74-75). Tunnell also lists important figures who were central in shaping
Loui
s
i
a
napol
i
t
i
c
a
lt
houg
ht
.Hede
f
i
ne
st
he
s
ei
ndi
vi
dua
l
sa
s“
t
hebl
a
c
ke
l
i
t
eofNe
w
Or
l
e
a
ns
”who“
e
xe
r
t
e
dama
j
ori
nf
l
ue
nc
ei
nt
hec
ommuni
t
y
”(
75)
.Ones
uc
hpe
r
s
onwa
s
Paul Trévigne, who was the editor of The Union from 1862 through 1864, and editor for
the New Orleans Tribune from 1864-1869 (75). Dr. Louis Roudanez and his brother Jean
Baptiste Roudanez established the Tribune, a
ndf
r
om 1864“
unt
i
lt
hene
ws
pa
pe
r
’
s
demise in 1869, t
he
yt
ookpa
r
ti
ne
ve
r
yma
j
orr
a
c
i
a
lc
ont
r
ove
r
s
yi
nt
hes
t
a
t
e
”(
75)
.Ot
he
r
important leaders were Oscar J. Dunn, James H. Ingraham and P. B. S. Pinchback. Dunn
assisted freemen in finding employment after the war; Ingraham served the Union cause
with gallantry, and Pinchback was instrumental in organizing a company of Native
Guards. Each in turn would rise to political power. Trévigne, the Roudanez brothers,
Dunn,I
ng
r
a
ha
ma
ndPi
nc
hba
c
kwe
r
e“
a
mbi
t
i
ousa
nda
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
eme
nofc
ol
or[
who]
rejected white tutela
g
ea
ndde
ma
nd
e
da
ne
qua
lr
ol
ei
nt
he[
Loui
s
i
a
naRe
publ
i
c
a
n]pa
r
t
y
”
(
111)
.The
ybe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
uni
ve
r
s
a
ls
uf
f
r
a
g
ewa
sac
a
r
di
na
lpr
i
nc
i
pl
eoft
heRe
publ
i
c
a
n
pa
r
t
y
”(
131)
.Dunns
e
r
ve
da
sl
i
e
ut
e
na
ntg
ove
r
nor
,butwhe
nhedi
e
d,Wa
r
mot
ht
ook
measures to assure t
ha
tPi
nc
hba
c
kt
ookDunn’
spl
a
c
e
.Be
c
a
us
ePi
nc
hba
c
kwa
s“
t
hemos
t
powe
r
f
ulbl
a
c
kl
e
a
de
ri
nt
hes
t
a
t
e
”(
167)
,a
ndbe
c
a
us
ehehe
l
dt
he“
c
ont
r
ol
l
i
ngba
l
a
nc
eof
powe
ri
nt
hes
e
na
t
ebe
t
we
e
nr
i
va
lf
a
c
t
i
ons
”(
168)
,i
ti
sl
i
ke
l
yt
ha
tPi
nc
hba
c
kwa
s
Wa
r
mot
h’
sonl
ylogical choice. When Warmoth was impeached, Pinchback served as
g
ove
r
n
o
rf
ors
e
ve
r
a
lwe
e
ks
,dur
i
ngwhi
c
ht
i
meWa
r
mot
ha
t
t
e
mpt
e
dt
os
e
c
ur
ePi
nc
hba
c
k
’
s
he
l
p,butPi
nc
hba
c
kde
c
l
i
ne
d,s
a
y
i
n
ghewoul
ddohi
s“
dut
yt
o[
hi
s
]s
t
a
t
e
,pa
r
t
y
,a
ndr
a
c
e
”
(171). Pinchback believed that because whites outnumbered blacks, both in population
164
and power, the best course of action would be to work for reform within the system rather
than attempt a revolution outside of it, a position which was criticized by Afro-Creole
leaders.
Quincy Ewing is another example of those who worked towards social reform.
Born near Thibodaux La in 1877, he became a reverend of the Episcopal Church and used
hi
svoi
c
et
os
pe
a
kf
orhi
soppr
e
s
s
e
dbr
e
t
hr
e
n.Hede
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
ts
l
a
ve
r
ywa
sa“
f
or
e
i
g
n
irritantt
ot
hebodys
oc
i
a
l
”(
Log
s
d
ona
ndHi
r
s
c
h122)
.Hebe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
a
l
lt
hema
c
hi
ne
r
y
ofj
us
t
i
c
ei
si
nt
heha
ndsoft
hewhi
t
ema
n”(
124)a
ndt
ha
t“
Ne
g
r
oe
ss
uppl
ye
ve
r
y
whe
r
ei
n
this country the lowest social and industrial plane . . . the jails, the penitentiary, the
g
a
l
l
ows
”(
124)
.Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,hepo
i
nt
e
doutt
ha
tt
he“
Sout
h’
sf
r
i
c
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nt
her
a
c
e
s
i
se
nt
i
r
e
l
ya
bs
e
nts
ol
onga
st
heNe
g
r
oj
us
t
i
f
i
e
st
hewhi
t
ema
ns
’opi
ni
onofhi
ma
sa
n
inferior; and is grateful for privileges and lays no claims to r
i
ght
s
”(129).
In spite of these attempts at radical reform, the close of the nineteenth century
witnessed a rising tide against blacks in the forms of hostility, injustice, oppression, and
disenfranchisement. Many historians maintain that blacks were used as scapegoats in
order to heal the strife between the North and the South. Thus, the black population
became the recipient of lingering hostilities and was blamed for the economic problems
in the South. As a result, their hard-won social and political capital was compromised.
For example, the Farmers Union, many of whom were Louisiana Democratic legislators,
“
vot
e
df
orabi
l
lwhi
c
hma
der
a
c
i
a
ls
e
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
onc
ompul
s
or
yona
l
lr
a
i
l
r
oa
dc
oa
c
he
s
”(
Ha
i
r
196). In 1887, no student had yet graduated from the recently established Southern
Uni
ve
r
s
i
t
ya
nd“
onl
y10s
t
ude
nt
s[
we
r
e
]t
a
ki
ngc
ol
l
e
g
el
e
ve
lc
our
s
e
si
n1898(
Ha
i
r126)
.
In the Trinity Herald onJ
une21,1889,onec
omme
nt
a
t
orde
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
t“
‘
Godne
ve
r
165
intended the Negro to be educated. Like the horse, he was destined to work for what he
e
a
t
s
’
”(
Ha
i
r124-126). Very soon thereafter, the Separate but Equal statute of 1890 called
for the division of races in public transportation and accommodations. By 1898, blacks
could no longer vote because of the language and requirements stipulated in the
grandfather clause of the 1898 constitution. The Louisiana Legislature in 1908 defeated
the anti-miscegenation bill, which was designed to prohibit cohabitation between whites
a
ndbl
a
c
ks
.Thi
sl
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
onl
e
f
twome
nunpr
ot
e
c
t
e
d,“
whose existence men have
de
ma
nd
e
df
ort
heg
r
a
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
onofunl
a
wf
ulpa
s
s
i
ons
.
”Att
hes
a
met
i
mei
twa
s“
unwi
l
l
i
ng
t
or
e
s
t
r
i
c
twhi
t
ema
n’
sl
i
be
r
t
y
”(
Ewi
ng133)
.Ate
ve
r
yt
ur
n,bl
a
c
kswe
r
ede
mor
a
l
i
z
e
da
s
they saw their dreams become nightmares and their hopes turn into despair.
One eloquent voice stands out, among many, as an articulation of the black
e
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
,a
ndt
ha
ti
sW.E.B.DuBoi
s
.Ra
y
f
or
dW.Log
a
nde
s
c
r
i
be
shi
ma
sa
n“
a
r
de
n
t
agitator for political rights [who . . .] denounced segregation and called for integration
i
nt
oAme
r
i
c
a
ns
oc
i
e
t
yi
na
c
c
or
da
nc
ewi
t
h...t
hei
de
a
l
sofde
moc
r
a
c
y
”(
85)
.DuBoi
s
“
e
xpr
e
s
s
e
dmor
ee
f
f
e
c
t
i
ve
l
yt
ha
na
n
yofhi
sc
ont
e
mpor
a
r
i
e
st
hepr
ot
e
s
tt
e
nde
nc
yi
nNe
g
r
o
thought, and the desire for citizenship rights and integration i
nt
oAme
r
i
c
a
ns
oc
i
e
t
y
”
(
Log
a
n85)
,a
ndhebe
l
i
e
ve
di
nt
hepowe
rofe
duc
a
t
i
ona
nds
t
r
e
s
s
e
d“
t
hebui
l
di
ngofa
n
e
c
onomi
cf
ounda
t
i
on,t
hef
r
e
e
dme
n’
spr
i
ma
r
yc
onc
e
r
n”(
71)
.Que
y
r
ouz
es
pe
a
kst
ot
hi
s
s
a
mei
s
s
ue
,whe
ns
hea
ddr
e
s
s
e
sa“
c
ol
or
e
dma
n”i
nhe
rCrusader a
r
t
i
c
l
e
,s
a
y
i
ng
,“
[
He
]
must no longer be a tool. He must become the hand that wields the tool and the brain that
guides the hand . . . . The almighty mind . . . is also the sole guardian of supremacy and
e
qui
t
y
”[
UU-71 7:52].
166
Du Bois confronts not only the issue of education, but criticizes how blacks are
de
pi
c
t
e
dwhe
nt
hehi
s
t
or
yofAme
r
i
c
ai
swr
i
t
t
e
n.Hebe
l
i
e
ve
st
ha
tt
he“
ne
g
l
e
c
tof
,or
pr
e
j
udi
c
ea
g
a
i
ns
t
”bl
a
c
ksi
n“
Ame
r
i
c
a
nhi
s
t
or
i
og
r
a
phy
”i
sa
n“
a
s
pe
c
tofapr
e
va
i
l
i
ng
elitism in dominant history-writi
n
gi
ng
e
ne
r
a
l
”(
Long254)
.Hi
st
he
s
i
sha
se
ve
nbr
oa
de
r
implications when we study the oppressed, marginalized, and forgotten voices of the
myriad of ethnic cultures that comprise this nation.
In the 1890s, Queyrouze began to assert herself more assiduously regarding the
issue of racism, and under the pseudonym, Salamandra, she addressed politicians and the
clergy in The Crusader [UU-717:
53]
.Shea
dvoc
a
t
e
dbl
a
c
ks
uf
f
r
a
g
es
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
he
r
e
had been of late no inconsiderable expense in the way of pens, paper, ink, rhetoric,
oratorical display, nonsense and hypocrisy in the most exalted ranks of Southern society,
from the clergyman to the legist, from the would-be philanthropist and humanitarian to
t
hedi
c
t
a
t
or
i
a
lj
our
na
l
i
s
t
”whoa
r
ea
r
g
ui
nga
boutt
he“
Ne
g
r
opr
obl
e
m,
”a
nds
hea
c
c
us
e
da
l
l
oft
he
m oft
r
y
i
ngt
o“
de
r
i
vee
ve
r
ypos
s
i
bl
ea
dva
nt
a
g
ef
r
om t
hedi
s
c
us
s
i
on.
”Shec
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
d
Catholic leaders who believed that only Chr
i
s
t
i
a
ni
t
ywoul
dma
kebl
a
c
ks“
hone
s
t
,mor
a
l
God-f
e
a
r
i
ngme
n.
”Shec
i
t
e
dt
hevi
ol
e
nc
ei
nSouth Carolina in 18901 as evidence that
whi
t
eChr
i
s
t
i
a
nsha
dnoba
s
i
sf
ora
s
s
umi
ngt
ot
e
a
c
ha
ny
onea
bouthowt
obe“
c
i
vi
l
i
z
e
d,
r
e
f
i
ne
da
ndc
ul
t
ur
e
d,
”a
nds
a
i
dt
ha
ti
ti
sf
or
t
una
t
et
ha
t“
Cha
r
i
t
y
”“
a
nt
e
da
t
e
sChr
i
s
t
i
a
ni
t
y
.
”
She charged that if white Christians r
e
c
og
ni
z
e
dt
he“
e
qua
l
i
t
yofr
a
c
e
sbe
f
or
et
hec
r
e
a
t
or
,
”
whys
houl
dt
he
y“
de
e
mi
tunwor
t
h
y...
t
og
r
a
ntt
heNe
g
r
ot
hes
a
mepr
i
vi
l
e
g
eone
a
r
t
h?
”
Sher
e
mi
nde
dt
he
mt
ha
t“
Hi
sI
nf
e
r
na
lHi
g
hne
s
s
”i
sa“
ve
r
yda
r
k-vi
s
a
g
e
dg
e
nt
l
e
me
n.
”
1
Possibly a reference to the S.C. governor Pitchfork Ben Tillman who called for violence against blacks
167
Although she advocated for blacks, she nevertheless revealed nativistic superiority
whe
ns
hede
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
tbl
a
c
kss
ho
u
l
dha
vemor
er
i
g
htt
ovot
et
ha
n“
t
hos
ef
or
e
i
g
ne
r
swho
c
omet
ousi
nhos
t
sf
r
omc
ount
r
i
e
st
ha
tha
venoi
nt
e
r
e
s
ti
nc
ommonwi
t
hour
s
.
”I
na
classicist and elitist vein, s
hec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
dt
he
s
ei
mmi
g
r
a
nt
sa
s“
me
ddl
e
s
omea
dve
nt
ur
e
r
s
and ambitious intriguers with an unknown past that mix turbulently into our politics,
wa
t
c
hi
n
gf
ort
he
i
rpr
e
yl
i
ker
a
ve
nouswol
ve
s[...The
ywe
r
e
]t
hes
c
umoft
hepl
e
bs
.
”Sh
e
argued that thes
e“
i
mpor
t
e
de
vi
l
s
”a
r
es
a
nc
t
i
one
d,whi
l
et
hebl
a
c
kpe
opl
ewho“
f
or
s
e
ve
r
a
lg
e
ne
r
a
t
i
onsbor
nhe
r
e
”a
nd“
boundt
ot
hi
sc
ount
r
ywi
t
he
ve
r
yf
i
br
e[
s
i
c
]ofhi
s
mor
a
ls
e
l
f
”we
r
ebe
i
ngdi
s
f
r
a
nc
hi
s
e
d.Shea
c
c
us
e
dpol
i
t
i
c
i
a
nsofus
i
ngt
hebl
a
c
kvot
ef
or
their own a
i
ms
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
uns
c
r
upul
ous
,a
ndi
ns
a
t
i
a
bl
ewhi
t
epol
i
t
i
c
i
a
nswho,t
he
na
s
ever, used the confident negro, still new in the wily ways of deceit, as a tool and a
s
c
r
e
e
n.
”Sher
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
oa
na
r
t
i
c
l
ei
nt
heBelford and attacked the writers who were quoted
a
ss
a
y
i
n
gt
ha
ts
l
a
ve
r
ywa
sa
n“
unqua
l
i
f
i
e
dbl
e
s
s
i
ng
”f
orbl
a
c
ks
,a
nds
hee
xc
l
a
i
me
dt
ha
t
t
he
i
rwor
dswe
r
ea“
s
a
c
r
i
l
e
g
i
ousut
t
e
r
a
nc
e
!
”Shea
r
g
ue
dt
ha
tt
heg
r
e
a
t
e
s
tc
r
i
mewa
st
hi
s
:
To have christianized and civilized him, to have freed him, and made him a
citizen; that is to say, to have taught him the equality of men of all hues before the
Christian God . . . to have opened infinite vistas to his spirit and thrown him into
the rapid current of progress to drift and be finally broken on the rock of Prejudice
. . . is the veritable crime.
She then referenced the classical principles that were characteristic of much of her
writing—those of philosophy--saying that this kind of prejudicial governance was not
“
wor
t
h
yofSoc
r
a
t
e
sa
ndPl
a
t
o.
”Thi
ss
ubt
e
xtofa
s
s
umed superiority was further
e
vi
de
nc
e
di
nhe
rs
t
a
t
e
me
ntt
ha
tt
he“
whi
t
ema
nt
hec
hi
l
dofc
i
vi
l
i
z
a
t
i
on,whoha
si
nhe
r
i
t
e
d
168
the capital and interests of centuries of culture, and the adept of progress, should adhere
with such tenacity to his less enlightened for
e
f
a
t
he
r
’
spr
e
j
udi
c
e
sa
nde
r
r
or
s
.
”I
ns
pi
t
eof
her elitism, she embraced equality by saying it would devastate even the strongest
individual to acknowledge this:
neither culture, nobleness of heart, elevation of mind, purity of aspirations, will be
able even to make him or his posterity the social equal o the vilest white criminal
and moral leper that he is not so much allowed to ride in the same car with this
fraudulent white bankrupt and ill-smelling ruffian who not even his countryman
Clearly differentiating between her European origins and America, she continued
bys
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tt
he“
l
e
a
s
tt
ol
e
r
a
nta
mongt
hewhi
t
er
a
c
eont
hi
ss
i
deoft
heOc
e
a
na
c
c
e
pt
and even favor the presence of the Negro as they would that of a docile domestic animal,
provided he bebor
na
ndbr
e
di
nt
hedog
maofs
ubmi
s
s
i
on.
”Al
l
udi
ngt
or
e
c
e
ntvi
ol
e
nc
e
a
ndbr
u
t
a
l
i
t
ya
g
a
i
ns
tbl
a
c
ks
,s
hea
r
g
ue
dt
ha
tabl
a
c
kma
ndi
dnote
ve
nha
ve“
t
her
i
g
htof
defending his life and his family against the whites who attack him in superior numbers,
and without any reason . . . . If he dares to obey his instinct of self-preservation, there are
a
l
wa
y
sat
r
e
ea
ndar
opea
tha
nd.
”Thi
ss
t
r
ongs
t
a
t
e
me
ntc
ha
l
l
e
ng
e
dwhi
t
es
upr
e
ma
c
i
s
t
s
who imagined that their actions were based upon righteous morality.
The onlya
ns
we
rt
ot
he“
Ne
g
r
opr
obl
e
m,
”s
hea
r
g
ue
d,i
s“
a
ma
l
g
a
ma
t
i
on”be
c
a
us
e
“
na
t
ur
ea
ndt
i
mea
r
ewi
s
e
ra
nds
t
r
ong
e
rt
ha
nma
n’
spr
e
j
udi
c
e
s
,r
e
pug
na
nc
e
s
,a
ndna
r
r
ow
egotistical plans. Her closing statement alluded to her growth as a proponent of social
reform, but as a Creole, she was aware of the price that Cable paid for speaking out
a
g
a
i
ns
ts
oc
i
a
li
nj
us
t
i
c
e
,a
nds
hea
c
knowl
e
dg
e
dt
ha
ts
heha
d“
not
hi
ngt
og
a
i
n,ma
yy
e
t
ha
ves
o
me
t
hi
ngt
ol
os
e
.
”I
ns
pi
t
eo
ft
hi
s
,s
heg
r
a
nt
e
dt
hebe
ne
f
i
tofha
vi
ng“
g
r
ownt
obea
169
cons
c
i
e
nt
i
ousdi
s
c
i
pl
eofBi
a
s
.
”Howe
ve
r
,s
t
i
l
lba
s
ki
ngi
nt
hepr
i
vi
l
e
g
eofa
ut
hor
i
t
y
,s
he
closed by declaring that through [her] contempt for human motives . . . and indifference
mi
xe
dwi
t
hpi
t
yf
orhuma
ni
t
y
,whi
c
h[
s
he
]nowwa
t
c
he
[
d]wi
t
ht
hena
t
ur
a
l
i
s
t
s
’c
old,
di
s
i
nt
e
r
e
s
t
e
dc
ur
i
os
i
t
y
”s
heha
dbe
e
na
bl
et
opa
s
sj
udg
me
nt[
UU-71 7:53]. Her reference
to naturalism—onet
ha
tt
he“
pl
e
bs
”woul
dnotunde
r
s
t
a
nd—was an elitist gesture to
Émile Zola who was credited with codifying the roman expérimental. Searching for
empirical evidence, naturalist writers observed human activity and the environment as a
laboratory in order to determine the scientific principles at work in its operation. Her
allusion to these principles anticipated the naturalist movement in America that began at
the turn of the century. The essential value in the study of her work, however, is not
necessarily to prove her racist, elitist, and classist tendencies, but to reveal the ways in
whi
c
hs
het
r
i
e
dt
oc
ha
l
l
e
ng
et
he“
dog
maofs
ubmi
s
s
i
on”a
nd“
Bi
a
s
”of late nineteenth
century America and to speak for the oppressed and disfranchised.
The deep racial conflict at the close of the nineteenth century underscores our
need to reassess how we perceive ourselves as a nation and how we cast and re-cast our
own history. To situate any individual or ethnic group along clearly delineated political
lines is an oversimplification that does not allow for the complete picture of the
mosaïque. Every person and every group is a mosaïque; each is a paradox, as is the case
of Cable and Queyrouze who were two writers who tried to challenge the norms of a
historical period characterized by racism. While Cable was more successful in escaping
the confines of racial orthodoxy, perhaps because if his enculturation as a New England
Protestant, Queyrouze—who was a French Creole daughter of a Confederate officer
living in the South during Reconstruction—made noteworthy attempts to transcend those
170
social boundaries. That is not to say that Queyrouze did not have racist tendencies, for her
a
s
s
umpt
i
onofe
t
hni
cs
upe
r
i
or
i
t
ya
n
dhe
rpr
e
s
umpt
i
ont
ol
e
c
t
ur
et
hee
nt
i
r
e“
bl
a
c
kr
a
c
e
”on
e
duc
a
t
i
onwa
se
l
i
t
i
s
ta
ndc
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
.Howe
ve
r
,s
hepe
r
c
e
i
ve
dt
hewr
i
t
e
r
’
st
a
s
kwa
st
oma
ke
commentary on social issues, and she attempted to fill that role. This may indicate that
she was either aspiring towards philosophical ideals or succumbing to elitism, but in
either case, the inherent value lies in her dissenting response to established norms. Her
dilemma may have arisen from the conflicting impulses to fulfill her self-assigned role as
a spokesperson for French cultural preservation at the same time she was calling for racial
equality—an insupportable and insoluble position that overtly advocated for the
eradication of class oppression and covertly for the continuance of class distinctions.
Even so, the significance rests in her attempt rather than her success. Moreover, her
rhetoric may have been a reaction against the prevailing Anglo-Saxon chauvinism at the
turn of the century. At that time, many Americans believed that because of the
“
i
nt
e
l
l
i
g
e
nc
e
,mor
a
l
i
t
y
,s
e
l
f
-restraint, and the genius for self-government that ran in
Eng
l
i
s
h‘
bl
ood’oft
heAme
r
i
c
a
npe
opl
e
,
”t
he
ya
l
onewe
r
e“
c
a
pa
bl
eofs
e
l
f
-g
ove
r
nme
nt
”
(Painter 151-2); thus, her challenges to freedom, power, and patriotism expressed in her
speeches and articles are more clearly understood in its historical context.
By looking closely at the political and social conflicts of this period, we can reach
a better understanding of the dynamics of nineteenth-century society and acknowledge
that broad assumptions about an individual, a group, or a race cross the boundary from
rational thought into irrational presuppositions. Only through examination and
evaluations can any society recognize the flaws and fissures that can crumble even the
strongest social construct. Greenblatt and Gallagher address this issue, calling for new
171
hi
s
t
or
i
c
i
s
t
st
o“
mi
newha
ta
r
es
ome
t
i
me
sc
a
l
l
e
dc
ount
e
r
-histories that make apparent the
slippages, cracks, fault lines, and surprising absenc
e
si
n[
our
]monume
nt
a
ls
t
r
uc
t
ur
e
s
”
(17). Armed with this new awareness, we can attempt to achieve a better understanding
of the complexity of our historical past and to challenge the orthodoxy of our own era.
172
CHAPTER SIX: QUEYROUZE IN LITERARY CONTEXT
AMERICAN AND FRENCH
Beauty pertains to all its multiform manifestations,
because it is an element which pervades the whole
universe and emanates from it. Man cannot exile it.
Its home is under all skies and it is the supreme and
most perfect expression of freedom, soaring high
beyond the reach of laws and tyranny . . . The artist
owes something to every object in creation. The
debt is mutual, and we all owe him thankfulness, for
he gives life, form and expression to our ideas. . . .
the scientist, the artist, and the philosopher
appropriate beauty and truth, which are
synonymous, wherever they find them, and giving
them back transformed to the universe, render them
glorified . . . --“
Pa
t
r
i
ot
i
s
ma
ndWa
g
ne
r
”Que
y
r
ou
z
e
While Leona Queyrouze offered commentary on the current political and social
issues of the late nineteenth century, she was departing from mainstream American
literary trends. Indeed, her life and work reveal an opposite impulse; instead of
incorporating American aesthetics, she was choosing to define herself in terms of cultural
isolation. Her work focused primarily on her local community, and her poetry with its
French Romantic style and classical references indicates literary divergence. She was
adhering to the aesthetics of the French romantic period while the American women
writers were moving towards realism. To demonstrate this, I will contrast the major
themes and trends of the work of some prominent American women writers in the late
ni
ne
t
e
e
nt
hc
e
nt
ur
yt
oQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
s work and then will compare Queyrouze to French
Romantic writers. Ultimately, I will show in this wide-frame transnational lens how her
oeuvre exhibits a growing sense of isolation that coincides with the disappearance of an
identifiably cohesive Creole culture.
173
American women writers were gaining a wide readership due in part to the growth
of newspapers and syndicated columns in the late nineteenth century and because of the
proliferation of elite publications such as Scribners, Century, Atlantic and Harpers.
During this time there was a trend in literature towards dealing with more concrete and
e
ve
r
y
da
ye
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
s
.Somewr
i
t
e
r
spl
a
c
e
dt
he
i
r“
s
ubj
e
c
t
si
ns
pe
c
i
f
i
cl
oc
a
l
e
s
,of
t
e
nwi
t
h
humor...whi
c
hbe
c
a
meknowna
st
he‘
l
oc
a
lc
ol
or
’
”move
me
nt(
Donova
nSarah Orne
Jewett 2). This in turn, served the direction towards realism, a literary path that
Queyrouze did not follow in spite of the advice Hearn had given her in 1887. Donovan
discusses how Romanticism and Realism functioned:
Realism is the term applied to a literary movement that developed in the latter half
of the nineteenth century in reaction against or as an outgrowth of Romanticism . .
. . Romantic literature tended to vaunt the value of the personal, subjective,
emotional reaction and the virtues of places and times remote from he nineteenth
century industrial city
(129).
Realism served the new focus of woman-centered writing, and women were
be
c
omi
ngac
ul
t
ur
a
lf
or
c
et
ha
tg
a
vel
i
et
oNa
t
ha
ni
e
lHa
wt
hor
ne
’
spe
t
ul
a
ntde
s
c
r
i
pt
i
onof
them as a “
da
mne
dmobofs
c
r
i
bbl
i
ngwome
n,
”a
ndbyt
hemi
d-1800s women dominated
the literary marketplace. Bauer and Gould state that the influence of their work was farr
e
a
c
hi
nga
ndt
ha
ti
t“
c
ha
ng
e
dbot
ht
hes
ha
peoft
heAme
r
i
c
a
nl
i
t
e
r
a
r
yc
a
nona
ndt
he
disciples ofAme
r
i
c
a
nl
i
t
e
r
a
r
yhi
s
t
or
y
”(
i
)
.The
i
rwor
kwa
s“
c
ul
t
ur
a
lwor
k,
”whi
c
h
f
unc
t
i
one
da
sa
n“
a
dvoc
a
c
yofs
oc
i
a
lc
ha
ng
e
”(
8)
.The
i
rf
oc
uswa
suponc
ha
l
l
e
ng
i
ng
social norms and questioning personal and cultural identities. June Howard identifies this
period inl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e“
f
r
omt
he1890swe
l
li
nt
ot
het
we
nt
i
e
t
hc
e
nt
ur
y
”a
sa“
vi
br
a
nt
di
a
l
og
u
eove
rc
ha
ng
e
si
nwome
n’
spos
i
t
i
ona
ndwome
n’
sa
s
pi
r
a
t
i
ons
”(
158)
.
174
Fur
t
he
r
mor
e
,s
hea
ddst
ha
t“
t
hede
f
i
ni
ngf
e
a
t
ur
eoft
heNe
wWoma
nwa
st
ha
ts
heha
d
choices”(
158)
.Donova
n explains that these women writers were instrumental in
c
ha
ng
i
n
gt
he“
di
me
ns
i
onsofac
oh
e
r
e
nt
,f
e
mi
ni
nel
i
t
e
r
a
r
yt
r
a
di
t
i
on”(
New England Local
Color Literature 3), and they accomplished this through a communal sense of shared
goals. They identified themse
l
ve
si
nt
hec
ont
e
xtofa
n“
a
l
l
i
a
nc
ewi
t
hot
he
rwome
n,a
nd
t
hr
oug
ha
na
s
s
e
s
s
me
ntofhe
r[
t
he
i
r
]ownr
e
a
l
i
t
i
e
s
,[
a
nd]pe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
ve
s
”(
3)
.Amongt
he
s
e
wr
i
t
e
r
st
he
r
ewa
sa“
mor
a
lvi
s
i
on”t
ha
twa
s“
ve
r
ymuc
hr
oot
e
di
nt
he
i
ra
wa
r
e
ne
s
sa
nd
c
onc
e
r
na
boutwoma
n’
ss
i
t
ua
t
i
oni
nt
heni
ne
t
e
e
nt
hc
e
nt
ur
y
”(
7)
.
The distinction between Queyrouze and mainstream writers can be found in their
choices of market, audience, and genre. While American women writers were sharing a
sense of a community and addressing the struggle of women towards self empowerment
in everyday life, Queyrouze, instead, was fighting to preserve the romantic idea of her
culture. My comparison will focus on four American women and the themes and issues in
their work: Sarah Orne Jewett (1849-1909) was describing regional identity through her
vivid characterizations in The Country of Pointed Firs; Mary E. Wilkins Freeman (18521930) was investigating the role of women in society; Charlotte Perkins Gilman (18611935) was surveying the landscape of a mind deni
e
di
t
sa
r
t
i
s
t
i
cf
r
e
e
domi
n“
TheYe
l
l
ow
Wa
l
l
pa
pe
r
”a
ndt
r
a
c
i
ngt
hec
onne
c
t
i
onsbe
t
we
e
ne
c
onomi
c
s
,g
e
nde
r
,a
nds
oc
i
a
lr
ol
e
si
n
Women and Economics: A Study of the Economic Relation between Men and Women as a
Factor in Social Evolution (1898) and in Herland. In The Awakening, Kate Chopin was
c
hr
oni
c
l
i
ngawoma
n’
ss
e
a
r
c
hf
ora
r
t
i
s
t
i
ca
nds
e
xua
le
xpr
e
s
s
i
ona
ndhe
rf
a
i
l
ur
et
oa
c
hi
e
v
e
this within her socially repressive society. Leah Blatt Glasser explains that their work
“
r
e
pr
e
s
e
nt
e
dt
hea
mbi
g
ui
t
i
e
sofwome
n’
sexperiences in the late nineteenth century [and]
175
e
xpl
or
e
dps
y
c
hol
og
i
c
a
lc
ompl
e
xi
t
y
”(
218)
.Ma
nyoft
he
i
rs
t
or
i
e
sde
pi
c
t
e
dwome
nwho
de
mons
t
r
a
t
e
dt
he“
c
onf
l
i
c
t
sbe
t
we
e
ns
oc
i
a
l
l
yuna
c
c
e
pt
a
bl
ef
ul
f
i
l
l
me
nta
nda
c
c
e
pt
a
bl
es
e
l
f
de
ni
a
l
”(
229)
,a
ndGl
a
s
s
e
ra
ddst
h
a
tt
hi
swa
sa“
c
onc
e
ptt
ha
tdomi
na
t
e
dwome
n’
sl
i
ve
sa
t
t
het
ur
noft
hec
e
nt
ur
y
,
”onet
ha
tc
ha
l
l
e
ng
e
dt
henot
i
ont
ha
tt
heonl
y“
me
a
ni
ng
f
ulwor
kf
or
wome
nwa
s“
de
vot
e
dmot
he
r
hood”(
219)
.
While this list of American women writers in somewhat limited, and the list does
not include contemporary male writers, such as Mark Twain, Paul Lawrence Dunbar, and
William Dean Howells, these writers sufficiently articulate the differences between
ma
i
ns
t
r
e
a
mAme
r
i
c
a
nl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
ea
ndQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ka
saFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
ewr
i
t
er. My
intention is not to situate Queyrouze among all writers of the time period, but to
demonstrate the ways in which she departed from prominent mainstream writers.
During the mid-to-late nineteenth century women often used writing as a means of
financial support, and marketability was a factor in their literary choices. For example, in
al
e
t
t
e
rt
oaf
r
i
e
nd,Fr
e
e
ma
na
dmi
t
t
e
dt
ha
tt
ha
ts
hewa
s“
‘
f
or
c
e
dt
oc
ons
i
de
rs
e
l
l
i
ng
qua
l
i
t
i
e
s
’
”(
Gl
a
s
s
e
r219)
.Ki
l
c
upa
ndEdwa
r
dsnot
et
ha
tJ
e
we
t
twa
sa“
wr
i
t
e
rde
e
pl
y
conscious of contemporary literary trends [which] underscores her manipulation of
ma
r
ke
ti
nf
l
ue
nc
e
s
”(
17)
.Tot
ha
te
n
d,ma
nyoft
he
s
ewome
nwr
ot
el
oc
a
lc
ol
ors
ke
t
c
he
s
be
c
a
us
et
he
ywe
r
ehi
g
hl
yma
r
ke
t
a
bl
e
.The
s
es
t
or
i
e
s“
de
pi
c
t
e
da
ut
he
nt
i
cr
e
g
i
ona
lde
t
a
i
l
,
including authentic dialect, authentic local characters, real geographical settings,
a
ut
he
nt
i
cl
oc
a
lc
us
t
omsa
nddr
e
s
s
”(
Donova
nNew England Local Color 7). During her
c
a
r
e
e
r
,J
e
we
t
twr
ot
e“
mor
et
ha
n170wor
ksoff
i
c
t
i
on”(
Donova
n2)c
ompr
i
s
e
dofs
hor
t
fi
c
t
i
on,nove
l
s
,c
hi
l
dr
e
n’
sbooksa
n
dpoe
t
r
y
.Ma
r
yR.Re
i
c
ha
r
dtnot
e
st
ha
t“
be
t
we
e
n1882
and 1928, Freeman published approximately 250 short stories in a wide variety of
176
ma
g
a
z
i
ne
sa
ndne
ws
pa
pe
r
s
”(
i
x)
.Thi
spr
ol
i
f
e
r
a
t
i
onwa
sc
a
us
e
dnotonl
ybyl
i
t
e
r
a
r
y
impulses, but by economic need. Freeman wrote to one of her professors that she had to
make a living writing and that poetry simply would not provide an adequate income.
For a time, Gilman supported herself by making greeting cards and teaching until
her pr
of
e
s
s
i
ona
ll
i
f
ef
l
our
i
s
he
d.Shebe
c
a
mea
nout
s
poke
npr
opone
ntofwome
n’
sr
i
g
ht
s
,
and her treatise, Women and Economics c
onc
e
nt
r
a
t
e
donwome
n’
spl
a
c
ei
ns
oc
i
e
t
ya
nd
s
oug
htr
e
c
og
ni
t
i
onf
ort
heva
l
ueofwome
n’
sl
a
bor
.Gi
l
ma
nbe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
tpe
opl
ec
oul
d
forge their own destiny and create their own social evolution. This is articulated in her
utopian novel Herland (1915). Well known for her political essays and social
c
omme
nt
a
r
y
,Gi
l
ma
na
s
s
e
r
t
e
dt
ha
t“
t
hi
ng
sc
oul
dbec
ha
ng
e
df
ort
hebe
t
t
e
ra
nd
surprisingly quickl
y
,bydi
ntofi
ndi
vi
dua
le
f
f
or
t
,
”abe
l
i
e
fs
y
s
t
e
mt
ha
tde
f
i
ne
dhe
ra
sa
n
opt
i
mi
s
t(
Rudda
ndGoug
hx)
.Shef
or
e
s
a
w“
g
r
e
a
tc
ha
ng
e
si
npe
opl
ei
ng
e
ne
r
a
l
,a
nd
wome
ni
npa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
r
,[
whi
c
h]a
l
t
e
r
e
dt
he
i
rwa
y
sofl
i
f
ea
ndt
houg
ht
”(
x)
.
During the height of her career, she was respected as a voice for the role of
women in society, and according to Lisa Ganobcsik-Wi
l
l
i
a
ms
,Gi
l
ma
nwa
s“
as
oc
i
a
l
t
he
or
i
s
t[...who]pl
a
c
e
dt
hei
s
s
ueofwome
n’
se
c
onomi
coppr
e
s
s
i
ona
tt
hec
e
nt
e
rofhe
r
a
r
g
ume
nt
sf
ors
oc
i
a
lr
e
f
or
m”(
16)
.Shewa
sf
or
t
una
t
et
oha
vea“
ne
t
wor
koff
r
i
e
ndst
ha
t
provided her with primary emotional connections or with what today we might call a
‘
s
uppor
tg
r
oup’
”(
Donova
n6)
.Sh
ewa
sde
e
pl
ya
wa
r
eof“
c
onne
c
t
i
on,c
ommi
t
me
nt[
a
nd]
c
ommuni
t
y
”(
Ki
l
c
up&Edwa
r
ds8). Her regular correspondence with other women
writers included Elizabeth Stuart Phelps, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Mary E. Wilkins
Freeman, Rose Terry Cooke, and Willa Cather, among many others (16), and she was
credited with having influenced Kate Chopin and Willa Cather. Her work often dealt with
177
t
he“
t
e
n
s
i
onbe
t
we
e
ni
ndi
vi
dua
l
i
s
ma
ndt
hepa
r
t
i
c
i
pa
t
i
onoft
hes
e
l
fi
nac
ommuni
t
y
i
de
nt
i
t
y
”(
Donova
nNew England 103), and she focused on female friendships and
community through her investigation of narrative structure.
Thec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
si
nAme
r
i
c
a
nwome
n’
ss
t
or
i
e
sof
t
e
nde
a
l
twi
t
ht
hes
a
mes
oc
i
a
l
issues that preoccupied the lives of the authors, and many of the characters were joined by
other women during the process of struggle and recognition—as were the writers
themselves. In addition, the plots often served as an infrastructure for the articulation and
exposition of key issues unique to the female experience. J
e
we
t
ta
ddr
e
s
s
e
d“
t
he
artificially limited possibilities of emotional and intellectual development afforded
wome
n”(
Donova
nNew England 99-100). For example, in the Country of the Pointed
Firs, t
hena
r
r
a
t
ors
a
y
st
ha
t“
wedi
ebe
f
or
eourowne
y
e
s
;s
owes
e
es
omec
ha
pt
e
r
sofour
l
i
ve
sc
omet
ot
he
i
rna
t
ur
a
le
nd”(
210)
,butt
henove
li
sa
l
s
ohope
f
ulbe
c
a
us
et
he women
a
c
c
ompa
nyonea
not
he
rt
hr
oug
ht
h
e
s
ec
ha
pt
e
r
si
nt
he
i
rl
i
ve
s
.“
Thewome
nhe
l
pone
a
not
he
r
”(
Donova
n117)
,a
na
s
pe
c
tt
ha
ti
sa
bs
e
nti
nQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
k.I
n“
The
For
e
i
g
ne
r
”J
e
we
t
ts
c
or
e
she
rna
r
r
a
t
i
vewi
t
ht
het
he
meoft
hes
t
r
ongf
e
ma
l
ef
r
i
e
nds
hi
ps
,
which serves as an alternative model to the patriarchal structure of her mainstream
Ame
r
i
c
a
.Fr
e
e
ma
n’
ss
t
or
i
e
sof
t
e
n“
de
a
lwi
t
ht
hemot
he
r
-daughter bond or with similarly
i
nt
e
ns
er
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
psbe
t
we
e
nwome
n”(
Donova
nNew England 121).
Among these writers there appears to be a shared sense of community in a
diachronic and synchronic dialogue, and within their work one can perceive an
i
nt
e
r
t
e
xt
ua
ldi
a
l
e
c
t
i
c
.Unl
i
keQue
y
r
ouz
e
,t
he
s
ewome
nwe
r
eapa
r
tofa“
wi
de
l
y
c
i
r
c
ul
a
t
i
ngc
ul
t
ur
a
ldi
s
c
our
s
e
”(
Ba
ue
ra
ndGoul
d5)t
ha
twa
sc
ont
r
i
but
i
ngt
o“
t
he
e
me
r
g
i
n
gna
t
i
ona
lc
ommuni
t
y
”(
1
2
)a
sde
f
i
ne
dbyHa
be
r
ma
sa
st
he“
l
a
r
g
ei
ma
g
i
ne
d
178
publ
i
cc
ommuni
t
y
”(
Ne
l
s
on39)
.J
e
we
t
twa
sl
e
e
r
yof“
e
xt
r
e
mei
ndi
vi
dua
l
i
s
m”a
nd
be
l
i
e
ve
di
nt
he“
vi
r
t
ue
sofa
s
s
oc
i
a
t
i
on”(Donovan 73). Beginning in 1886 and continuing
t
hr
oug
h1895,he
rs
t
or
i
e
sf
oc
us
e
d“
oni
ndi
vi
dua
l
smovi
ngoutoft
he
i
rs
he
l
l
sofi
s
ol
a
t
i
on
t
owa
r
d
spa
r
t
i
c
i
pa
t
i
oni
nal
a
r
g
e
rc
ommuni
t
y
”(
73)
.I
n1896,s
hepubl
i
s
he
dThe Country of
the Pointed Firs, whi
c
hr
e
vol
ve
da
r
ound“
t
hepresence of two women at a series of events
a
ndt
heg
r
owt
hoft
he
i
rr
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pwi
t
honea
not
he
r
”(
99)
;i
twa
sas
t
or
yofc
ommuni
t
y
a
ndt
hee
f
f
e
c
t
st
ha
tpe
opl
eha
veupononea
not
he
r
.Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
k,howe
ve
r
,doe
snot
follow this pattern. The experiences she relates are solitary and self-reflective. This is
further evidence of her isolation from the mainstream of literary tradition. Even though
she lived far from the hubs of literary activities in New York and Boston, she spent
extended periods of time in New York working for Har
pe
r
’
sBaz
ar
.This would have
afforded her ample exposure to the current literary trends and to the influences of
contemporary society. Therefore, her separation was not predicated on lack of
opportunity, which can lead to one possible conclusion-- her isolation was one of choice.
While the forgoing demonstrates the differences between Queyrouze and these
writers, there are several connections arising from the internal conflicts they experienced
while trying to simultaneously maintai
na
ndc
ha
l
l
e
ng
et
he
i
rs
oc
i
a
lc
ons
t
r
uc
t
s
.Fr
e
e
ma
n’
s
dua
l
i
t
yi
sf
oundi
nhe
r“
c
onf
l
i
c
t
sbe
t
we
e
nde
f
i
a
nc
ea
nds
ubmi
s
s
i
on,s
e
l
f
-fulfillment and
self-s
a
c
r
i
f
i
c
e
”(
Gl
a
s
s
e
rxvi
)
.“
I
ns
omeofhe
rwor
k,t
hevoi
c
ei
sde
f
i
a
nt
,unwi
l
l
i
ngt
o
submit. In other works, we hear passive acceptance and internalization of oppressive
s
t
a
nda
r
ds...e
ndi
ngwi
t
hi
ne
vi
t
a
bl
ea
mbi
g
ui
t
y
”(
xvi
i
i
)
,buthe
rf
oc
uswa
sonwome
n.I
n
her 1908 novel, The Shoulders of Atlas, she describes a woman who is paralyzed by her
vacillation between submission to cultural pressures and rebellion against them. An
179
i
nt
e
r
e
s
t
i
ngc
ompa
r
i
s
onpi
e
c
et
ot
hi
si
sQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
s“
At
l
a
s
”(
1901)t
ha
tde
s
c
r
i
be
st
he
burden of carrying the weight of her culture. The classical references of the stoic symbol
of Atlas is accompanied by references to his female counterpart, the stone Caryatid, who
holds over her head the heavy burden of the temple. Also included are references to Ixion
and Sisyphus who represent ceaseless toil and eternal burdens: For his crimes of murder
and adultery, Ixion was condemned by Zeus to be spend eternity bound to a fiery wheel,
and Sisyphus was punished by Zeus for his deception and trickery to eternally roll a stone
uphill only to have it fall as he neared the top. These symbols support the central theme of
s
t
oi
c
i
s
mi
n“
At
l
a
s
”
:
On my descending path, suddenly I saw an enormous shadow
And, against the clear sky was a deformed profile
Of a Giant bending at the knees.
His heavy face looked out into beautiful space.
And I expected his athletic shoulders to crack
Under the awesome burden while the tempest
Blasted him, roaring over his flashing crown
And his lightning scepter.
“
Ohy
ouoft
heuni
ve
r
s
e
Dark Caryatid! Atlas, convict of a prison
Immense! You live to roll these mountains
Into the waves of forgetfulness that Sisyphus carried
Unde
rI
xi
on’
swhe
e
l
,ha
g
g
a
r
da
ndde
s
pa
i
r
i
ng
,
At last you rest; then once again you rise shaking,
Your godless Olympus reviving
Yourde
a
de
ne
dmus
c
l
e
s
.
”
The monster cannot move
Yet seems to turn to his pupil and stops
In the misty eternity, and in a voice that echoes
like the thunder to say: I watch
In the night that fills your eyes, and I know all.
Yes, the Olympus is deserted, but Prometheus is standing;
Cursed for eternity. I am the last one; I remain.
Listen and you will know. Jupiter in a gesture
Left upon my back this horrible burden.
180
No more do I wish to see through this curtain
Of my dazzling tears, so inscrutable into my very core.
I contemplate my soul or scream blasphemy . . .
[UU-71 7:54]
(Appendix 240)
The Shoulders of Atlas a
nd“
At
l
a
s
”i
ndi
c
a
t
et
ha
tFr
e
e
ma
na
ndQue
y
r
ouz
ec
oul
d
not escape the inscribed boundaries of their culture. Amy Kaplan states that Freeman
“
‘
s
t
a
y
e
dwi
t
hi
ndome
s
t
i
cr
e
g
i
ona
lbounda
r
i
e
swhi
l
es
ubve
r
t
i
ngt
he
ma
sc
e
nt
e
r
sofs
oc
ial
pr
ot
e
s
t
’...buts
hene
ve
ra
s
kshe
rc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
st
os
t
e
pout
s
i
deoft
hes
y
s
t
e
m”(
215)
.Thi
s
was also true for Queyrouze because she centered her battle on the pages of periodicals
t
ha
tr
e
a
c
he
donl
yas
e
l
e
c
ta
udi
e
nc
e
.Whi
l
eFr
e
e
ma
n’
sc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
sr
e
ma
i
ne
dinside her
domestic space, Queyrouze remained within the self-constructed Creole system of
cultural isolation. Because Queyrouze was writing in French to a diminishing audience,
her literary obscurity was a self-fulfilled destiny; however, many mainstream women
writers who enjoyed widespread fame during their lifetimes fell into anonymity in the
twentieth century until they were resurrected during the feminist movement of the
seventies, as was the case for Gilman.
An intersection of ideologies between Gilman and Queyrouze involves their
patronizing attitudes towards other classes and cultures. However, from a new historicist
pe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
ve
,t
hi
s“
c
a
nbes
e
e
na
spa
r
toft
hes
oc
i
a
lc
l
i
ma
t
eoft
het
i
me
sa
ndi
ti
spos
s
i
bl
et
o
describe her views as representing the best intentions expressed in terms which are only
now regarded as patronizing and white-c
e
nt
e
r
e
d”(
xi
i
i
)
.Ga
nobc
s
i
k-Williams articulates
the value in investigating these conflicting impulses within the writing of social
181
reformists. To view history in bina
r
ys
i
mpl
i
c
i
t
yort
ol
e
a
vet
hi
sa
r
e
aof“
r
a
c
e
,c
l
a
s
s
,a
nd
e
t
hni
c
i
t
y
”une
xa
mi
ne
d”
bl
oc
ksaf
u
l
l
e
runde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngof[
t
he
i
r
]pl
a
c
ewi
t
hi
ni
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
l
history in general—and within late nineteenth—and early twentieth century social reform
discourse in particul
a
r
”(
16)
.Howe
ve
r
,t
hi
sdoe
snot“
e
xc
us
e[
t
he
i
r
]na
i
ve
t
éa
nd
ignorance concerning the hardships encountered by people of color in the United States
a
ndt
her
e
pe
r
c
us
s
i
onsofc
onde
s
c
e
n
di
nga
t
t
i
t
ude
s
”(
17)
.Fori
ns
t
a
nc
e
,i
n“
ASug
g
e
s
t
i
on
on the Negro Probl
e
m”(
1908)Gi
l
ma
ns
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
Ame
r
i
c
a
nswe
r
ee
xpe
r
i
e
nc
i
ngdi
f
f
e
r
e
nt
s
t
a
g
e
sofe
vol
ut
i
on,wi
t
hwhi
t
e
sha
vi
ngr
e
a
c
he
dahi
g
he
rs
t
a
g
et
ha
nbl
a
c
ks
”(
19)
,a
c
omme
ntt
ha
ti
s“
e
xt
r
e
me
l
yc
a
l
l
ousa
ndna
ï
ve
”a
ndonet
ha
tr
e
ve
a
l
she
r“
i
g
nor
a
nc
ei
n
dealing with racia
li
s
s
ue
s
”(
20)
.As
s
umi
nghe
rownr
a
c
i
a
ls
upe
r
i
or
i
t
y
,s
henot
e
si
n
Herland t
ha
t“
i
twa
si
mpor
t
a
ntt
ok
nowone
’
s‘
e
xa
c
tl
i
neofde
s
c
e
nt
,
’a
ndt
ha
the
rown
bl
oodl
i
ne
swe
r
er
e
a
s
s
ur
i
ng
l
yt
r
a
c
e
a
bl
et
oAme
r
i
c
a
’
swhi
t
ePur
i
t
a
nf
ounde
r
s
”(
23)
.Thi
si
s
remarkably s
i
mi
l
a
rt
oQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sdi
s
c
us
s
i
onoft
het
r
e
a
t
me
ntofbl
a
c
ksi
nhe
rCrusader
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
,
wr
i
t
t
e
nunde
rt
heps
e
udony
m,Sa
l
a
ma
ndr
a
.I
nhe
r1889,i
sa
na
r
t
i
c
l
ee
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Th
e
Ra
c
ePr
obl
e
m Log
i
c
a
l
l
yDi
s
c
us
s
e
d,
”Que
y
r
ouz
e
,wa
r
nst
ha
tt
he“
i
ne
qui
t
yoft
hef
a
t
he
r
s
wil
lbevi
s
i
t
e
dupont
hec
hi
l
dr
e
n.
”Thes
a
mel
a
wofhe
r
e
di
t
yt
ha
ta
ppl
i
e
st
oNa
t
ur
ea
ppl
i
e
s
t
ona
t
i
onsbe
c
a
us
eana
t
i
oni
s“
butama
g
ni
f
i
e
di
ma
g
eoft
hef
a
mi
l
y
.
”Sher
e
a
s
onst
ha
tt
he
“
pr
e
s
e
ntt
r
oubl
e
sbe
t
we
e
nt
hewhi
t
ea
ndbl
a
c
kr
a
c
e
s
”i
sar
e
s
ul
toft
he“
g
rievous sin
c
ommi
t
t
e
dbyourAme
r
i
c
a
npr
e
de
c
e
s
s
or
s
:t
hei
mpor
t
a
t
i
onoft
heNe
g
r
o,
”butt
he
ns
he
qui
c
kl
ya
ddst
ha
the
rowna
nc
e
s
t
r
yi
spur
e
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
hewr
i
t
e
roft
he
s
el
i
ne
s
,whos
e
ancestors were born in Louisiana for many generations, belongs to the purest type of the
noble Latin and Gallic races combined, and has consequently no interest in being partial
t
ot
hebl
a
c
kr
a
c
e
”[
UU-71 7:52].
182
While Gilman and Queyrouze used poetry as a means of artistic expression, the
difference rests in their choice of s
t
y
l
ea
ndt
opi
c
.Gi
l
ma
n“
s
oug
htt
ous
epoe
t
r
ya
sa
political force and to this end made use of styles which had an established popular
a
ppe
a
l
”(
Rudd,Goug
hxvi
i
i
)
.Ca
t
h
e
r
i
neJ
.Gol
de
nwr
i
t
e
st
ha
tGi
l
ma
n“
be
g
a
nhe
rpubl
i
c
career as a poet and wrote poetry t
hr
oug
houthe
rl
i
f
ea
same
a
nsofs
oc
i
a
lc
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
m”a
nd
t
ha
t“
he
rne
a
r
l
yf
i
vehundr
e
dpoe
mse
xpos
epr
obl
e
ma
t
i
ca
s
pe
c
t
soft
r
a
di
t
i
ona
l
dome
s
t
i
c
i
t
y
”s
omeg
a
t
he
r
e
di
nhe
rvol
umeofpoe
t
r
ye
nt
i
t
l
e
dIn This Our World (1896)
(
243)
.Gol
de
nc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
sGi
l
ma
n
’
spoetry as a body of work that does not follow any
prescribed literary school but says that it does echo the style of Whitman, and Gilman
r
e
f
e
r
st
ohe
rpubl
i
cpoe
t
r
ya
sa“
‘
t
oolbox.I
twa
swr
i
t
t
e
nt
odr
i
vena
i
l
swi
t
h’be
c
a
us
es
he
“
s
a
wn
opoi
nti
nwr
i
t
i
ngwi
t
houtas
oc
i
a
lpur
pos
e
”(
244-5)
.He
rpoe
ms“
s
ubve
r
t
patriarchal ideologies, challenge female subjugation, and argue for equal rights [ . . . and]
c
a
l
l
sf
o
rwome
n’
se
mpowe
r
me
nt
”(
245)
.I
napoe
me
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
Tot
heYoungWi
f
e
”Gi
l
ma
n
asks:
Are you content, you pretty three-y
e
a
r
s
’wi
f
e
Are you content and satisfied to live
On what your loving husband loves to give,
And give to him your life?
(246).
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sdi
s
c
us
s
i
ona
boutt
hi
si
s
s
uei
sl
i
mi
t
e
d.“
Lol
ot
t
e
”i
sa
ni
s
ol
a
t
e
de
xa
mpl
e
:
So why then, at the flower of her age
does she enter into marriage,
when she had all the time to choose?
But we all attend the party
and we all turn heads,
183
and take advantage of serious fools
and we all join in the treachery
to commit our suicide
so all that's left is farewell.
[UU-71 7:56]
(Appendix 259)
This poem indicates that Queyrouze imagines marriage to be an end to autonomy
and indeed, to be a form of death, but she does not cast the blame on the men whom she
de
e
msa
s“
s
e
r
i
ousf
ool
s
;
”r
a
t
he
r
,s
h
ec
ons
i
de
r
swome
n culpable—they have become their
own worst enemies. However, this type of social commentary about women is scant in
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
soe
uvr
ewhi
l
ei
tc
ompr
i
s
e
st
hebul
kofGi
l
ma
n’
spoe
t
r
y
.
Gi
l
ma
n’
spr
i
va
t
epoe
t
r
y
,h
owe
ve
r
,r
e
ve
a
l
sa
not
he
rs
i
deofhe
rna
t
ur
e
,and in this
a
s
pe
c
ts
hei
smos
ta
ki
nt
oQue
y
r
ouz
e
.Bot
hwome
ne
xhi
bi
t“
c
ompl
e
xdi
c
hot
omi
e
s
be
t
we
e
n[
t
he
i
r
]publ
i
ca
ndpr
i
va
t
el
i
ve
s
”(
Kni
g
ht283)
.Thes
ubj
e
c
tma
t
t
e
roft
he
i
rpoe
t
r
y
often deals with the love and with loss. Denise D. Knight focuses on Gilman’
s
unpubl
i
s
he
dpr
i
va
t
eve
r
s
et
ha
tr
e
ve
a
l
sGi
l
ma
n’
s“
de
e
pe
s
thur
t
s
,he
rhi
g
he
s
ta
mbi
t
i
ons
,h
e
r
da
r
ke
s
tf
e
a
r
s
”(
269)
.Whi
l
eGi
l
ma
ni
sopt
i
mi
s
t
i
ci
nt
hepubl
i
cr
e
a
l
m,he
rpr
i
va
t
eve
r
s
ei
sa
mixture of hope and loss. She writes in her diary in 1883:
Alone am I, chillhearted [sic] still, and dreary;
Alone art thou, sadhearted [sic] worn, and weary;
Alone indeed are we.
.................
Alone are thou, I know not of thy sorrow.
Al
onea
mI
;a
nda
l
ll
i
f
e
’
st
o
mor
r
ow
Looks desolate and grey.
(277).
184
Whi
l
eGi
l
ma
n’
ss
e
ns
eofs
o
r
r
owa
ndl
os
si
si
nt
e
r
mi
t
t
e
nta
ndof
t
e
npunc
t
ua
t
e
dby
hopea
n
dj
oy
,Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
kr
e
t
a
i
nst
hes
e
ns
eofs
a
dne
s
st
hr
oug
hout
,t
husa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
i
ng
the major difference between the writers, for while Gilman is essentially an optimist,
Queyrouze is a pessimist.
Mainstream American women writers exhibited a shared sense of community and
pur
pos
e
,
a
ddr
e
s
s
i
ngwome
n’
si
s
s
ue
si
ng
e
nr
e
st
ha
twe
r
ema
r
ke
t
a
bl
ea
ndwi
de
l
yr
e
a
d.
Their synchronic goal was to effect changes in the fabric of American society. From
within the cultural system, they were attempting to make changes that would afford
women more autonomy and power. As such, their mission could be described as one
wherein they were trying to make their society function more successfully and fairly. The
essential difference between these writers and Queyrouze is that she was writing outside
the system. Her aspirations were driven by different impulses—she was trying to cast
blame on the American cultural system rather than trying to change it. Granted, American
women writers were challenging the system, but their work could not necessarily be
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
da
shos
t
i
l
e
,whi
l
eQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sr
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pt
ot
hedomi
na
ntc
ul
t
ur
ewa
s
antagonistic. She perceived her role to be warrior, attempting to rescue her culture from
oblivion. Symbolized by the busts of Diana and Venus gracing her parlor, she injects her
poetry with the themes of warlike protectionism and elegiac love. While she admits that
“
i
twa
sne
ve
rmyor
i
g
i
na
li
nt
e
nt
i
ont
of
i
g
ht
”a
ndt
ha
ts
hene
ve
rwa
nt
e
d“
t
hi
sda
r
k
s
t
r
ug
g
l
e
,
”ne
ve
r
t
he
l
e
s
s
,s
hede
c
l
a
r
e
she
ri
nt
e
nt
i
onst
ous
ehe
rwor
dsa
sas
wor
d:
185
“
Ad Pennam”
Gold and fine pearls are reflected in the sky
Like fine jewels, but I want to make it into a sword
As we both struggle for the same dream,
Without faltering in the clash of a strange duel.
It was never my original intent to fight over the honey
Of the swarm of Hymette. Or burning leaves.
My large heart is still open for you even as you drink from it without pity
Never realizing that the venom you drank was bile.
But when I lost faith, I lost courage,
The hand I placed in yours was for our alliance
And I did not reproach you, but alas, was it not to reconcile?
Oh, I never wanted this dark struggle
Or wished for the power to defeat you! Oh no. Rather, for us to sway
In the shrouding river, where we could fall into silence [UU-71 7:56].
(Appendix 264)
Increasing the intensity of her rhetoric, Queyrouze admonishes those she believes
were traitors to her cause and in angry tones she takes issue with those who gave into
pr
e
s
s
ur
ea
nds
uc
c
umbe
dt
ot
hee
ne
myi
n“
Parce Nocere:
”
You are a passing traitor bathed in infamy
And bowed with shame, and you extend a hand?
Have you washed your feet that were hurt along the way?
Have you cleansed the outrage from your dirty face?
To save yourself from the foul enemy,
Affronted by their hisses, strong and superhuman,
Did you acknowledge your brother and share the light
And spread your coat over him while he slept?
Misfortune on you! . . . [UU-71 7:56]
(Appendix 265)
186
I
n“
Al
l
e
gor
i
e
:Pe
us
é
ed’
unCr
é
ol
e
”(
1891)
,s
heus
e
sa
na
na
l
og
yt
ode
s
c
r
i
behe
r
sentiments about her culture being overrun by America, which she depicts as a parasite.
Her anger surfaces when she refers to t
hi
spa
r
a
s
i
t
ea
sa“
l
i
vi
ngi
ns
ul
t
:
”
In the old trunk is a withered branch that is destroyed.
There are no more flowers, foliage, or fruits.
Around its barren surface a voracious vine
Surrounds it, climbing and overrunning it. Empty
Is the source of life. Even worse, the face of
This ghostly tree can feel a living insult:
Thereupon it hatches and gleams a strange flower
With the breath of a parasite that feeds itself on meager light [UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 238)
While the previous poem makes oblique references to her enemy, she is less
c
i
r
c
ums
p
e
c
ti
nhe
rpoe
m“
Imprecatio”(
1891)
.He
re
ne
myi
sc
l
e
a
r
l
yna
me
d,a
nds
heus
e
s
t
hei
ma
g
e
soft
he“
r
i
ve
r
”t
ode
mons
t
r
a
t
ehowhe
rc
ul
t
ur
ewa
sove
r
whe
l
me
d,a
ndt
he
“
t
omb”a
ndt
he“
a
by
s
s
”t
oi
ndi
c
a
t
ehows
hede
f
i
ne
st
he fate of her culture. She
characterizes their experiences as one of exile, and she mourns the loss of her language
that was the mode and method she used to preserve her culture and speaks to her
insistence on writing mostly in French:
. . . the fading flower of our Creole race
Once a proud race. The other nation
Those mere infants with their blonde looks and words
Crush under their heels the generations
Of the French and the Latin, the grand Spanish,
And all those who knew the same passion.
187
To love, to seek vengeance, to hate, to forgive . . .
...Oura
nc
e
s
t
or
s
’l
a
ng
ua
g
e
Is now denigrated and only found on headstones.
Cut off and exiled, we are ushered to the
The large rolling river where its heavy waves take us under
Taking all, carrying all, into the tomb of the abyss [UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 255)
The
s
ee
xc
e
r
pt
sg
i
vevoi
c
et
oQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
a
us
e
,whi
c
hwa
snott
os
e
c
ur
e
wome
n’
sr
i
g
ht
s
,butt
os
e
c
ur
et
hef
u
t
ur
ef
orhe
rc
ul
t
ur
e
.I
n“
Caryatis,
”s
hede
s
c
r
i
be
she
r
self-assigned role, which is to stoically carry the burden of cultural preservation, and she
appears to achieve some comfort from her poetry in order to sustain her efforts.
Over your head, you hold the massive granite architecture.
Through the breadth of time,
You have never bent,
And your far reaching look grows and
Sees the delirious passage of humanity,
And several times that lighting has engraved your eyes
And scolded the temple, trembling,
But your remained standing while I am ready to fall
Under the weight . . . .
Seeing you, I stand up braver . . . [UU-71 7:56].
(Appendix 244)
In a brief poem, simply entitled, “Sonne
t
,
”she articulates her pain and likens her
attempt to save her culture and her ultimate failure to the Stations of the Cross:
188
If ever you learned to despair
All that you had cherished, and rose up with your face smeared
And your knees bleeding, at the last station
Of the cross on Golgotha, and then drink without ever emptying
The deep chalice that makes you tremble close to breaking
And to doubt that you and the gods are the same;
And like Julien, without any comprehension
Cast your blood to the heavens without being able to appease;
If ever your dreams became grindstones and all seemed
Formidable, and Life was for you an empty soul
And Like Samson, you wandered in the desert
Without dawn and without stars in delirious darkness
Well then, gladiator, I am forced to smile
Ah! Do not blaspheme. You have not suffered!
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1896
[UU-71 8:59]
(Appendix 273)
This poem indicates that she knew that she was fighting a losing battle, and while
t
he
r
ea
r
es
omepa
r
a
l
l
e
l
sbe
t
we
e
nQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ka
ndhe
rc
ont
e
mpor
a
r
i
e
s
,t
he
i
rl
i
t
e
r
a
r
y
paths diverge. Separated be culture, religion and regions, Queyrouze was following a
distinctly different literary path. Jewett, Freeman and Gilman were publishing in the
prominent periodicals whereas Queyrouze was submitting her work to journals that were
r
e
a
c
hi
nga
ni
nc
r
e
a
s
i
ng
l
ys
ma
l
l
e
ra
u
di
e
nc
e
.Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
st
he
me
sdi
dnotc
a
l
lf
ort
he
autonomy of women; rather, she was fighting for her culture. There is, however, one
significant connection to American writers, one that can be found in the work of Kate
Chopin (1851-1904), and she represents an interesting mixture of American and Creole
sensibilities and serves as a bridge between the two worlds.
189
Chopin was born in into a comfortable middle-class Irish family in St. Louis, but
she was exposed to the French culture through her relationship with her grandmother.
Schuyler notes that she enjoyed an active social life in St. Louis before meeting Oscar
Chopi
n,a“
we
a
l
t
hyc
ot
t
onf
a
c
t
orofNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
”whoha
dadi
s
t
a
ntc
onne
c
t
i
onswi
t
ht
he
Cha
r
l
e
v
i
l
l
e
s
”a
ndha
d“
hos
t
sof‘
c
ous
i
ns
’i
nt
hePe
l
i
c
a
ns
t
a
t
e
”(
Pe
t
r
y62)
.Af
t
e
ral
e
ng
t
hy
sojourn in Europe, Kate and her husband moved to New Orleans. Over the next ten years,
she bore six children. Joy Jackson notes that Chopin lived in New Orleans for ten years
where her husband worked as a cotton merchant. When his business went under, they
moved to Cloutierville, and he opened a general store in 1880, but he died in 1882. Kate
remained for two more years before returning to St. Louis where she began to write short
stories, character sketches and novels about Louisiana characters. Her turn towards
writing was brought about by ne
c
e
s
s
i
t
y
.Ke
nne
t
hEbl
ee
xpl
a
i
nst
ha
ta
f
t
e
rChopi
n’
smot
he
r
di
e
di
n1885Chopi
nbe
g
a
nwr
i
t
i
ngi
nor
de
rt
os
uppor
the
rf
a
mi
l
y
.Ka
t
e
’
swor
kwa
swe
l
l
received and she reached some financial success, but that changed when her novel, The
Awakening, was published. Eble relates how much controversy her novel created upon its
publication in 1899. It was removed from library shelves, and she was refused acceptance
into the Fine Arts Club in St. Louis. Up until that time, her work had been widely
accepted and had gained momentum alongside other local color writers such as Grace
King and George Washington Cable.
The 1899 reviews of The Awakening were passionate and centered on the
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rofEdnaPont
e
l
l
i
e
r
.Onea
ut
horde
c
l
a
r
e
dt
ha
tEdna
’
sde
a
t
hs
houl
ds
e
r
vea
sa
cautionary example of what happens to women when they follow their whims. Another
denounced Edna and expressed satisfaction that she took her life. Others disagreed and
190
expressed compassion for Edna, while still others tried to delve into the reasons that Edna
failed to find artistic and personal actualization. Some believed that she acted without
courage because she did not understand, as Mademoiselle Reisz did, that true art demands
great courage.
Thede
ba
t
ea
l
s
of
oc
us
e
donChopi
n’
sa
bi
l
i
t
yt
ounde
r
s
t
a
ndthe Creole culture.
Wi
l
l
i
a
mSc
huy
l
e
rr
e
l
a
t
e
dt
ha
the
rf
a
t
he
r
,Thoma
sO’
Fl
a
he
r
t
y
,wa
sa“
na
t
i
veofGa
l
l
owa
y
,
Ireland, and for many years was a prominent merchant in St. Louis. Her mother was the
da
ug
ht
e
rofaHug
ue
notf
a
mi
l
y
”(
Pe
t
r
y61)
.Sc
huy
l
e
ra
t
t
e
mpt
st
ot
r
a
c
eChopi
n’
sa
f
f
i
l
i
a
t
i
on
wi
t
ht
heCr
e
ol
eFr
e
nc
ht
ot
he“
Fr
e
nc
hbl
oodi
nMr
s
.Chopi
n’
sa
nc
e
s
t
r
y
”(
61)
.As
evidence, he notes that Chopin grew up attended by black servants and that she was
exposed to their dialect as well as the French patois spoken by grandmother. When she
be
g
a
nwr
i
t
i
ng
,Sc
huy
l
e
ra
r
g
ue
s
,he
rt
a
s
t
e
si
nr
e
a
di
ngl
e
a
ne
d“
t
ot
heFr
e
nc
hs
c
hool
.
”She
r
e
a
dwi
t
hpl
e
a
s
ur
eMol
i
é
r
e
,Al
phons
eDa
ude
t
,a
nde
s
pe
c
i
a
l
l
yDeMa
upa
s
s
a
nta
ndZol
a
”
(
63)
.Eb
l
enot
e
st
ha
tChopi
nr
e
a
d“
Fl
a
ube
r
t
,Tol
s
t
oy
,Tur
g
e
ne
v,D’
Annunz
i
o,Bour
g
e
t
,
Goncourt, and Zola”(Petry 81). Joseph J. Reilly believes that Chopin was emulating
Ma
upa
s
s
a
ntwhoe
s
pous
e
dt
hevi
e
wt
ha
t“
c
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rr
a
t
he
rt
ha
ns
i
t
ua
t
i
on”i
st
heke
yt
o
understanding passion (Petry 71), and Chopin followed this model in her novel The
Awakening. Moreover, her direct style, descriptions, and conclusions—sans the cynicism- could be ascribed to Maupassant. Eble praises The Awakening, saying that it is
“
a
dva
nc
e
di
nt
he
mea
ndt
e
c
hni
queove
rt
henove
l
sofi
t
sda
ya
ndt
ha
t it anticipates in
ma
nyr
e
s
pe
c
t
st
hemode
r
nnove
l
”a
nda
r
g
ue
st
ha
ti
ti
s“
notc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
cofAme
r
i
c
a
n
writing”(
Pe
t
r
y76)
.Hec
ompa
r
e
sChopi
n’
snove
lt
oMadame Bovary claiming that
“
Chopi
nhe
r
s
e
l
fwa
spr
oba
bl
ymor
et
ha
na
nyot
he
rAme
r
i
c
a
nwr
i
t
e
rofhe
rtime under
191
Fr
e
nc
hi
nf
l
ue
nc
e
”(
77)
.Ebl
ede
f
e
ndst
hi
sc
l
a
i
mbys
t
a
t
i
ngt
ha
the
r“
ba
c
kg
r
oundwa
s
French-Irish; she married a Creole; she read and spoke French and knew contemporary
Fr
e
nc
hl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
”(
77)
.He
re
xpos
u
r
et
oFr
e
nc
hpr
os
ei
nf
l
ue
nc
e
dhe
rwr
i
t
i
ng style, but I
believe that her enculturation in Midwest American values was an overriding guide to the
moral underpinning of her work.
Chopin was an American writer, in spite of her associations, and thus could never
be entirely free of the Anglo-American influence. Her exposure to the French Creole
culture did not equate to being one with that culture because close associations could not
replace social indoctrination. Any ethnographer will attest to the fact that an individual
who investigates a culture –e
ve
no
n
e
’
sown---is at once removed. This disjunction can be
f
oundi
nt
hec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rofEdnaPont
e
l
l
i
e
rwhoLa
r
z
a
rZi
f
fbe
l
i
e
ve
s“
wa
sa
nAme
r
i
c
a
n
woman, raised in the Protestant mistrust of the senses . . . . [but] her nature awakened in
the open surrounding
sofCr
e
ol
eLoui
s
i
a
na
”(
304)
.Thus
,Chopi
n’
ss
e
ns
i
bi
l
i
t
i
e
swe
r
enot
unl
i
ket
hec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rs
hei
ma
g
i
ne
d.Ednawa
sa
nout
s
i
de
r
,“
t
houg
hs
heha
dma
r
r
i
e
da
Cr
e
ol
e
,
[
s
he
]wa
snott
hor
oug
hl
ya
thomei
nt
hes
oc
i
e
t
yofCr
e
ol
e
s
”(
Chopi
n18)
.Li
ket
he
character she imagined, Chopin could not have possibly foreseen upon her arrival in New
Or
l
e
a
nsa
sOs
c
a
rChopi
n’
swi
f
et
ha
t“
r
e
s
pe
c
t
a
bl
ewome
nt
ookwi
newi
t
ht
he
i
rdi
nne
ra
nd
br
a
ndya
f
t
e
ri
t
,s
moke
dc
i
g
a
r
e
t
t
e
s
,
p
l
a
y
e
dChopi
n’
ss
ona
t
a
s
,a
ndl
i
s
t
e
ne
dt
ome
nt
e
l
l
risqué st
or
i
e
s
.I
twa
s
,i
ns
hor
t
,f
a
rmor
eFr
e
nc
ht
ha
nAme
r
i
c
a
n”(
Zi
f
f297)
.Chopi
nwa
s
an outsider to this culture and clearly was aware of the difference. Emily Toth describes
Chopi
n’
se
xpe
r
i
e
nc
e
:
Although she had French roots, and was even related to several Cloutierville
f
a
mi
l
i
e
sonhe
rmot
he
r
’
ss
i
de
,t
hene
wMa
da
meChopi
nwa
sat
hor
oug
hout
s
i
de
r
192
i
nt
hee
y
e
sofOs
c
a
r
’
sf
a
mi
l
y
.Ne
wOr
l
e
a
nswa
ss
t
i
l
loc
c
upi
e
dbyuni
f
or
me
dUn
i
on
soldiers, and Kate Chopin had come from a state that had not seceded . . . to
Os
c
a
r
’
sr
e
l
a
t
i
ve
s
,Ka
t
e
’
sMi
dwe
s
t
e
r
nor
i
g
i
ns
,he
rf
r
a
nka
ndf
or
t
hr
i
g
htwa
y
s
,a
nd
her insistence on doing strange things –such as taking long walks by herself—
made her seem more Yankee than Southern. They regarded her with great
suspicion and disapproval (66-67).
Addi
ngt
ot
hi
ss
us
pi
c
i
onwa
st
heChopi
ns
’c
hoi
c
et
ol
i
veont
he“
ot
he
r
”s
i
deof
Ca
na
lSt
r
e
e
t
;t
he“
ne
wl
y
we
dsde
l
i
be
r
a
t
e
l
yc
hos
eahous
eout
s
i
det
heQua
r
t
e
r
,a
c
r
os
st
he
Ca
na
lSt
r
e
e
tdi
vi
di
ngl
i
ne
,‘
t
heAme
r
i
c
a
ns
i
de
’
”(
65)
.Eve
nwhe
nt
he
ywe
r
eout
s
i
deof
t
hec
i
t
ya
tt
heCr
e
ol
er
e
s
or
ta
tGr
a
n
dI
s
l
e
,Ka
t
ewa
st
r
e
a
t
e
da
s“
af
or
e
i
g
ne
r
,aNor
t
he
r
ne
r
,
a
nda
nout
s
i
de
r
”(
78)
.
Chopin inscribes Edna Pontellier with her own sensibilities: Edna failed to
negotiate her place in the Creole social structure, and was unable to resolve the disparate
aspects of herself as she searched for role models to follow. Sandra Gilbert and Susan
Gubar describe this tortuous path of self-definition and the difficulty of finding suitable
role models. In the introduction to The Awakening and Selected Stories, Gilbert states that
t
henove
lr
e
ve
a
l
st
he“
wor
dl
e
s
swa
i
lofe
ve
r
ywoma
nwhos
epa
s
s
i
onf
ors
e
l
ff
ul
f
i
l
l
me
nt
ha
sbe
e
nf
or
bi
dde
norf
or
g
ot
t
e
n”(
8)
.OneofEdna
’
sr
ol
emode
l
s(
onewhi
c
hs
omec
r
i
t
i
c
s
ha
vedu
bbe
dt
he“
ma
dwoma
ni
nt
hea
t
t
i
c
”
)i
sMa
de
moi
s
e
l
l
eRe
i
s
zwhos
e“
c
l
a
r
i
t
yofmi
nd
of
f
e
r
sas
t
r
i
ki
ngc
ont
r
a
s
tt
ot
hee
s
s
e
nt
i
a
l
l
ya
bs
t
r
a
c
tna
t
ur
eofEdna
’
sque
s
t
”(
Thor
nt
on88)
.
Even though Edna has the sensitivity of the artist, she does not have the required sense of
self and inner dis
c
i
pl
i
net
os
uc
c
e
e
d,a
ndRe
i
s
za
dmoni
s
he
she
rbys
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
t
os
uc
c
e
e
d,
t
hea
r
t
i
s
tmus
tpos
s
e
st
hec
our
a
g
e
ouss
oul...t
ha
tda
r
e
sa
ndde
f
i
e
s
”(
Chopi
n106)
.
La
wr
e
n
c
es
t
a
t
e
st
ha
tRe
i
s
zi
nt
he“
o
nl
ye
xa
mpl
eofaf
r
e
e
,i
nde
pe
nde
ntwoma
n”i
nt
he
novel (89) even if her character is flawed by her willingness to be aggressive and
193
insensitive, often quarrelsome and brusque. In spite of this, she embodies certain qualities
that are similar to Leona Queyrouze. An accomplished pianist living in the French
Quarter, she is independent, artistic, outspoken, and unmarried. However, Queyrouze also
has many of the qualities that Chopin reserves for Edna who is passionate and is plagued
by feelings of longing and loss. While Queyrouze was subject to sentimentality and
mela
nc
hol
y
,s
hewa
sa
s
s
e
r
t
i
ve
,i
nde
pe
nde
nta
ndout
s
poke
n.I
nma
nywa
y
s
,Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
s
life is an amalgam of the characters portrayed in The Awakening, thus indicating that a
true picture of what it meant to be a Creole in New Orleans at the close of the nineteenth
century can be found more clearly in life than it can in fiction.
The mixture of these American sensibilities and Creole influence imbue The
Awakening with a tension that resembles the uneasy relations between the Creoles and
Americans towards the close of the century. Edna is a paradox, for she is American in
muc
hofhe
rs
e
ns
i
bi
l
i
t
i
e
sy
e
t“
dr
e
s
s
e
d”a
saCr
e
ol
e
.He
ri
nne
rs
e
ns
i
bi
l
i
t
i
e
sa
r
eAme
r
i
c
a
n:
she feels puritanical restraint on her sensuality, both as an artist and as a woman, and she
lives in the American section of New Orleans on the other side of Canal Street. Yet, she
adheres to the customs and manners of the Creoles. Perhaps her blueprint was Chopin
herself, who was understandably American given her upbringing, but who had learned the
manner of the Creoles. Like her character, Chopin was trying to fit into a model that was
foreign to her. The difference is that Chopin, who had an affair with a married plantation
owner, did not suffer the same fate she ascribes to her character.
Edna ends her life in the sea where she had began her awakening, and this raises
the question why the location off the mainland is where Edna finds both birth and death.
Does it mean that on the mainland, a place that was quickly becoming Americanized, she
194
could not survive? Clearly, it was not solely Robert Lebrun who had awakened Edna, for
he
rl
ove
r
sbe
c
a
mei
nt
e
r
c
ha
ng
e
a
bl
e
.
I
nt
hec
l
os
i
ngc
ha
pt
e
roft
hebook,s
hes
a
y
s“
Toda
yi
t
is Arobin; to-mor
r
owi
twi
l
lbes
omeonee
l
s
e
.I
tma
ke
snodi
f
f
e
r
e
nc
et
ome
”(
188)
.Thi
s
might indicate that it was her entry into a place-- not her association with lovers-- that
c
a
us
e
dhe
ra
wa
ke
ni
ng
.Pe
r
ha
ps
,i
twa
st
he“
voi
c
eoft
hes
e
a[
t
ha
t
]s
pe
a
kst
ot
hes
oul
”
(Chopin 25), and that Edna—like Queyrouze-- was reaching for something that was just
out of reach. In the end, Edna swam towards that ephemeral dream even though she knew
she was swimming towards her demise.
Many scholars believe that Edna serves as the voice of a woman who is being
drowned by her oppressive culture, but I would add that she also serves as a symbol for
the Creole society. Edna is the voice of women; Queyrouze is the voice of Creoles.
Queyrouze is aware of her own demise—as an individual and as a culture— and she
documents this descending arch in her poetry and her essays. Try as she might to hold on
to her dream, it was vanishing, and she reached for it even as she knew that it was
sinking. Edna said that when she awoke from a nap and looked out over the island that it
s
e
e
me
da
si
f“
ane
wr
a
c
eofbe
i
ng
smus
tha
ves
pr
ung up, leaving only you and me as past
r
e
l
i
c
s
”(
Chopi
n63)
.Li
ke
wi
s
e
,Qu
e
y
r
ouz
es
a
y
si
n“
Si
l
houe
t
t
e
sCr
é
ol
e
s
”there has been a
c
ha
ng
eb
e
c
a
us
eoft
he“
t
hea
bs
or
p
t
i
onoft
heCr
e
ol
er
a
c
ei
nt
ot
heAng
l
oSa
xone
l
e
me
nt
.
”
Shec
ont
i
nue
s
,s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
tt
he“
i
r
r
e
s
i
s
t
i
ble flood of assimilation takes over rapidly without
r
e
s
i
s
t
a
nc
e
;t
het
i
der
i
s
e
st
os
ubme
r
g
eus
,t
hec
ur
r
e
ntdr
ownsus
”[
UU-70 6:47]. Thus, one
must ask: Who is it that drowns at Grand Isle? Is it Edna or is the Creole culture? If Edna
is an American, her death symbolizes her failure to thrive within a patriarchal social
195
s
t
r
uc
t
ur
et
ha
ts
uppr
e
s
s
e
dwome
n’
sa
r
t
i
s
t
i
cf
r
e
e
dom.I
fs
hei
saCr
e
ol
e
,he
rde
a
t
hi
s
emblematic of the drowning of a culture.
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
soe
uvr
ei
ndi
c
a
t
e
st
ha
ts
hewa
ss
i
mul
t
a
ne
ous
l
yf
i
g
ht
i
ngto preserve her
culture at the same time she was mourning its demise. The sense of elegy also migrates to
her expressions of love, and the result is a body of work that is, all at once, rebellious,
mournful, plaintive, and stoic. The causes for the demise of the French Creole culture are
numerous, but the central cause is that they were out of rhythm with the rest of the
country. For her part, Queyrouze was a woman out of place and out of time. Her poetry
shows her preoccupation with love, nature and death, which were hallmarks of French
Romanticism, yet her structured style and classical references reveal that she was
borrowing from of the Enlightenment period as well. Thus, her poetry did not belong to
the period in which it was written, but rather to the literary period that had ended long
before she was born.
The French Romantic period was an outgrowth and reaction against of the
Enlightenment, and Robert T. Denommé outlines the events leading to this period and
t
hos
ef
ol
l
owi
ngi
t
.TheEnl
i
g
ht
e
nme
nt“
i
ndirectly paved the way for French
Roma
nt
i
c
i
s
m”be
c
a
us
eofi
t
sf
oc
uson“
s
i
mpl
i
c
i
t
ya
ndna
t
ur
a
ll
a
ws
”(
5)
.Thephilosophes
e
nc
our
a
g
e
donet
ovi
e
ws
oc
i
e
t
ywi
t
houti
t
s“
e
xi
s
t
i
ngc
us
t
omsa
ndc
onve
nt
i
ons
”(
5)
.
De
nomméc
i
t
e
sRous
s
e
a
u’
sLe Contrat Social (The Social Contract) t
ha
t“
a
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
e
sa
vision of such a society [and. . .] the lush exoticism permeating the novels of JeanJacques Roussau and Bernardin de Saint-Pierre [as] explicit criticism of the conditions
contaminating organized society in the eighteenth c
e
nt
ur
y
”(
5-6). These and other writers
be
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
wi
s
dom a
ndha
ppi
ne
s
sa
r
eg
oa
l
sbe
s
tr
e
a
l
i
z
e
di
npr
i
mi
t
i
ves
ur
r
oundi
ng
s
”
196
(
6)
.Th
ee
xot
i
c
i
s
me
nc
ount
e
r
e
di
nt
he
i
rnove
l
s“
s
ur
r
oundsa
nde
ns
hr
i
ne
st
hei
ndi
vi
dua
la
s
he turns his back upon a deficient society which he regards as intolerable and unworthy of
r
e
f
or
m”(
6)
.Thi
s“
a
c
t
sa
sal
i
be
r
a
t
i
ngf
or
c
e
”(
7)
.TheEnl
i
g
ht
e
nme
ntt
hi
nke
r
sbe
l
i
e
ve
d
t
ha
ta
n“
a
de
qua
t
ede
f
i
ni
t
i
onofma
nc
oul
dbea
c
hi
e
ve
dt
hr
oug
hc
ont
r
ol
l
e
dr
e
a
s
ona
nd
l
og
i
c
;
”howe
ve
r
,t
heRoma
nt
i
c
sbe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
r
e
a
s
ona
l
onewa
si
nc
a
pa
bl
eofa
r
r
i
vi
nga
ta
c
ompr
e
he
ns
i
veunde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngofma
ni
nt
heuni
ve
r
s
e
”(
7)
.
Romanticism had been firmly established in England and Germany for many
years before it took root in France. Denommé cites the reasons for its late arrival:
The spirit of Classicism and of the pseudo neo-Classicism that dominated French
literature for more than two centuries was destined to logically win the ready
approval of the imperial regime of Napoleon and the restored Bourbon dynasty
which lasted until 1830 (11).
The politics and the literature of any nation are inextricably connected, and this
wa
st
r
u
ef
orFr
a
nc
ei
nt
hee
a
r
l
y1800s
.Be
c
a
us
et
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
a
ls
t
y
l
es
e
r
ve
dNa
pol
e
on’
s
pol
i
t
i
c
a
la
i
ms
,“
s
t
r
i
c
tc
e
ns
or
s
hi
pwa
si
ns
t
i
t
ut
e
ddur
i
ng [his] administration that favored
t
hepubl
i
c
a
t
i
onofode
s
,t
r
a
g
e
di
e
s
,a
ndnove
l
swr
i
t
t
e
na
c
c
or
di
ngt
oc
l
a
s
s
i
c
a
lpr
e
s
c
r
i
pt
i
ons
”
(11). Romanticism did not flourish until these political strictures were loosened.
With the collapse of the empire, the political landscape changed, and so did its
literature. Perceiving their role to be the voices of reform, poets such as Lamartine and
Hug
owi
t
h“
e
xa
l
t
e
df
e
r
vora
ndme
s
s
i
a
ni
cz
e
a
l
,
”pur
s
ue
dt
he
i
r“
huma
ni
t
a
r
i
a
nc
onc
e
r
ns...
a
ndt
he
i
rdr
e
a
msofs
oc
i
a
lut
opi
a
s
”
(
32)
.La
ma
r
t
i
nea
r
g
ue
dt
ha
t“
poe
t
r
yha
das
e
r
vi
c
et
o
r
e
nde
rs
oc
i
e
t
y
,
”a
ndHug
obe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
tapoe
ts
houl
df
unc
t
i
ona
st
hevoi
c
eofs
oc
i
a
l
r
e
s
pons
i
bi
l
i
t
y
.The
yr
e
g
a
r
de
dt
he
i
r“
pos
i
t
i
onoft
hepoe
ta
sl
e
a
de
ra
ndg
ui
de
,
”a
ndt
hi
s
197
ideology held through the 1840s during the regime of Louis-Phi
l
i
ppewhe
nt
he“
s
oc
i
a
l
,
pol
i
t
i
c
a
l
,r
e
l
i
g
i
ous
,a
ndpoe
t
i
c
a
le
l
e
me
nt
sme
r
g
e
dt
og
e
t
he
r
”(
32)
.Whe
nFr
e
nc
h
Roma
nt
i
c
i
s
mf
i
na
l
l
yt
ookhol
d,i
twa
save
r
y“
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
vec
ombi
na
t
i
onoft
heus
eofr
e
a
s
on
a
nde
mo
t
i
on”(
12)
,a
ndLa
ma
r
t
i
ne
,Hug
oa
ndVi
g
nyt
r
i
e
dt
o“
r
e
wor
kt
het
e
ne
t
sa
nd
traditions of Christianity into a new framework to make it correspond to the need of the
ni
ne
t
e
e
nt
hc
e
nt
ur
y
”(
140)
.The
ys
oug
htt
o“
a
ppe
ndt
hemor
epe
r
s
ona
lmy
s
t
i
que
sof
emotion, sentiment and intuition to reason in order to arrive at a more comprehensive
vi
e
woft
heuni
ve
r
s
e
”(
41)
,a
ndt
he
ywe
r
ei
ns
pi
r
e
dbyGe
r
ma
i
neNe
c
ke
rdeSt
a
e
l
,whowa
s
“
t
hef
i
r
s
ts
i
g
ni
f
i
c
a
ntt
he
or
i
s
tofFr
e
nc
hRoma
nt
i
c
i
s
m”wi
t
ht
hepubl
i
c
a
t
i
onofhe
rbookOn
Germany in 1810 (12). Hugo s
a
wdeSt
a
e
l
’
swor
ka
sama
ni
f
e
s
t
oa
ndbe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t
“
a
nc
i
e
ntl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
ei
sf
orusamode
r
nt
r
a
ns
pl
a
nt
e
dl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
e
;howe
ve
r
,r
oma
nt
i
cor
chivalrous literature is indigenous to us, since it is our own religion and institutions that
ha
vei
n
s
pi
r
e
di
t
”(
15-16)
.Thus
,i
ti
si
mbue
dwi
t
h“
s
pi
r
i
t
ua
l
i
t
ya
ndChr
i
s
t
i
a
ni
t
y
”(
16)
.
Ma
da
medeSt
a
e
lbe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
tt
he“
obj
e
c
t
i
ve[
ofl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
ei
s
]t
omovet
hes
oula
nd
e
nnobl
ei
t
”(
17)
.
Le
onaQue
y
r
ouz
ewa
sof
t
e
nc
a
l
l
e
dt
he“
l
i
t
t
l
eMa
da
medeSt
a
e
l
”byt
hos
ei
nhe
r
salon, a
ndt
hi
si
sa
ni
mpor
t
a
ntdi
s
t
i
nc
t
i
onbe
c
a
us
eQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ke
mbodi
e
sma
nyo
f
deSt
a
e
lpr
i
nc
i
pl
e
s
,whi
c
hc
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d“
a
l
lofwe
s
t
e
r
nl
i
t
e
r
a
t
ur
ea
se
i
t
he
rnor
t
he
r
nof
s
out
he
r
n”(
13)
.“
Nor
t
he
r
n”wa
sBr
i
t
a
i
na
ndGe
r
ma
ny
—foggy and imaginative—which
was permeat
e
dwi
t
hr
e
l
i
g
i
os
i
t
y
.“
Sout
he
r
n”wa
sGr
e
e
c
e
,Rome
,I
t
a
l
ya
ndFr
a
nc
ea
nd
Spain, which were influenced by pagans; southern was simultaneously sensual and
logical. This may account for the sensuous imagery and references to pagan gods found in
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
k.
198
However, long before Queyrouze was born, the Romantic period in France ended.
The“
c
a
mpa
i
g
nbyt
hel
e
a
di
ngFr
e
n
c
hRoma
nt
i
c
i
s
t
sf
oras
oc
i
a
lut
opi
ae
nde
dc
r
ue
l
l
ya
nd
a
br
upt
l
yi
n1851wi
t
ht
hea
s
s
umpt
i
onofNa
pol
e
onI
I
Ia
se
mpe
r
or
”(
40)
.Thus
,whe
n
Queyrouze began to write her poetry in the 1880s, she was adhering to the style and
sentiments that she had long been out favor, both in America and abroad.
Not only did Queyrouze follow romantic traditions, she incorporated classical
references in her poetry. In fact, she dedicated some of her work to Jean Baptiste Racine
(1639-1699) who wrote several dramatic masterpieces (considered the great tragedies of
the French theater) as well as poetry, all of which relied on themes from Roman and
Greek classics. Racine
’
ss
t
y
l
ewa
sne
oc
l
a
s
s
i
ca
ndhi
sc
l
a
s
s
i
c
a
lpoe
t
r
ye
mpl
oy
e
dr
hy
me
d
a
l
e
xa
ndr
i
neve
r
s
e
.Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
l
a
s
s
i
c
a
lr
e
f
e
r
e
nc
e
swe
r
ef
ol
l
owi
ngt
hi
st
r
a
di
t
i
on.
Primarily, however, her work reflects the romantic style. Some of her poetry is
dedicated to Alfred de Musse
t
,oneofFr
a
nc
e
’
sl
e
a
di
ngr
oma
nt
i
cpoe
t
sa
nddr
a
ma
t
i
s
t
s
.I
n
he
rpoe
m“
al
’
Ope
r
a,
”Queyrouze begins with an epigraph by Alfred de Musset, and then
proceeds to emulate his style, using the music of opera as her muse. Frits Noske explains
that many of Musset
’
spoe
mswe
r
ec
ompos
e
dunde
rt
he“
i
nf
l
ue
nc
eofmus
i
c
”(
74)
,a
nd
Que
y
r
ouz
et
a
ke
sVi
ol
e
t
t
a
’
svoi
c
et
oi
ns
pi
r
ehe
rve
r
s
ea
ndt
oe
xpr
e
s
she
rhe
a
r
t
-felt pain:
Vi
ol
e
t
t
a
’
ss
ongdi
s
t
ur
be
dt
h
es
pa
c
ebe
t
we
e
nus
,
her hymn learned too late burned into our hearts,
Embracing us both with powerful sweetness
entering our sleep, awakening the pain . . .
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1886 [UU-71 7:56].
(Appendix 262)
199
I
nhe
rpoe
m,“
Re
s
ur
ge
,
”she addresses the power of music directly and says that it
has the power to release her from the confines of ignorance and to raise her to higher
levels of thought:
I crouched against a wall. Then, in the shadows, the sounds
From a crimson apparition came, suspended in air
Nebulous and trembling, spreading its
Wings of New Thought. And my reveries were channeled
Into the mystery, harkening to the delirious verse,
Until I left my misty prison, following the music
Of the low voice, leaning towards my release . . .
L’Abe
i
l
l
e1908
[UU-70 6:45].
(Appendix 271)
Mus
s
e
tbe
l
i
e
ve
dt
ha
t“
Roma
nt
i
c
i
s
mi
sr
oot
e
di
nt
hebe
l
i
e
ft
ha
tl
ove
,wi
t
hi
t
s
a
t
t
e
nda
ntj
oy
sa
nds
uf
f
e
r
i
ng
s
,c
ons
t
i
t
ut
e
st
heg
r
e
a
t
e
s
ts
i
ng
l
es
our
c
eofma
n’
si
ns
pi
r
a
t
i
on
since it reveals to him the significance of human existence“(
131)
,buthef
e
l
tt
ha
tt
hi
s
ki
ndofi
nt
e
ns
i
t
yc
oul
dnotl
a
s
t
.The
r
ei
sape
r
va
s
i
ves
e
ns
ei
nhi
spoe
t
r
yt
ha
t“
hi
se
ne
r
g
y
and time is limited an that he wished to convey the intensity of his love experience in
poe
t
r
yb
e
f
or
ehi
st
i
mer
a
nout
”(
13
2
)
,a
ndthere is this same sense of urgency in
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ka
swe
l
l
;f
ore
xa
mpl
e
,i
n“Vi
s
i
on,
”she says:
So much life still—and love
And the fullness of kisses sweet,
Like prayers upon the altar of death,
Life lies triumphant
Trembling like a devouring flame.
But I feel the searing pain enter my soul
Like a funeral bird, and I fear the flame . . .
C.R.A.L. 40 [UU-70 6:45]. (Appendix 276)
200
Mus
s
e
tde
f
i
ne
dpoe
t
r
ya
s‘
s
pont
a
ne
ousc
onve
r
s
a
t
i
onwi
t
ht
hehe
a
r
t
”(
De
nommé
136), and Queyrouze often used her poetry to express her love, loss, and longings. Note
the similarities between Musset and Queyrouze in this excerpt. Musset writes:
Sachez-l
e
,c
’
e
s
tl
eCoe
urquipar
l
ee
tquis
oupi
e
r
,
Lorsque la main écrit, --c
’
e
s
tl
eCoe
urquis
ef
ond;
C’
e
s
tl
eCoe
urquis
’
é
t
e
nd, se découvre et respire,
Commeungaipé
l
e
r
i
ns
url
es
omme
td’
unmont
.
Know that it is the heart that speaks and sighs, when it is the hand that
writes, it is the heart that dissolves itself; it is the heart that stretches itself,
that exposes itself and breathes, like a happy pilgrim who has reached the
mountain top
(Denommé 138).
Queyrouze declares in “I
mpr
ompt
u”:
If I were Romeo I would dare to climb
These fragile vines to reach you in rapture
And I would climb to the heavens for my love
[UU-70 6:45]. (Appendix 258)
I
n“
Phy
r
ne
”she addresses her love:
If you had not so many urgings born of Doubt
Love, we could have been so much more, sweet and true
So that when the winds of strife would rend us,
We would have spread our wings of love
And sailed across the troubled skies [UU-70 6:45].
(Appendix 266).
In “Somni
av
i
,
”she uses the analogy of a vine reaching towards the sky to symbolize the
aspirations of the heart:
201
On a rugged rock, there were tangled fragile vines
Trying in vain to climb to the sky
...........................
Until finally they leap with abandon
..............................
With their pale flowers spiraling with pure desire
Until the rays of heaven descend in radiant splendor
Taking them to the sky, where they bloom into stars
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1908 [UU-70 6:45].
(Appendix 272)
Mus
s
e
twr
i
t
e
si
n“
la Lettre á M. Lamartine”:
Qu’
uni
ns
t
ant
,c
ommet
oi
,de
v
antc
ec
i
e
li
mme
ns
e
,
J
’
ais
e
r
r
édansme
sbr
asl
av
i
ee
tl
’
e
s
pé
r
anc
e
,
Etqu’
ai
ns
iquel
et
i
e
n,monr
ê
v
es
’
e
s
te
nf
ui
?
That for an instant, like you, under this immense sky,
I held life and hope in my arms and that like yours,
my dream escaped from me? (Denommé 140).
Note thes
i
mi
l
a
r
i
t
i
e
si
ns
t
y
l
ea
ndt
he
mei
nLe
ona
’
s1911poe
m“
Agonie”whe
ns
hes
a
y
s
:
Once my soul held a cherished vision
and like a tree , it grew in strength and love
and its very summit held the skies aloft
. . . was it a dream—a dream all? [UU-71 7:55]
(Appendix 237)
These similarities in tone, style, and theme indicate that Queyrouze drew upon
Mussset and the French Romantic tradition for her poetry. She also relied on Victor Hugo
for inspiration. Indeed, the similarities were so apparent that when her poetry was read
before the Academy of Sciences in Bordeaux, the president wrote her grandmother
202
praising Queyrouze, saying that she was a poet in the tradition of Hugo and Lamartine.
The
r
ea
r
es
e
ve
r
a
le
xa
mpl
e
st
ha
tde
mons
t
r
a
t
eHug
o’
si
nfluence on her work.
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
spoe
m “ámaMè
r
e
”embodies the hallmarks of French Romantic
literary tradition, inspired by Musset and Hugo. She sees the stars in the heavens as
hopeful signs, but the stars, like the French Romantic period, are extinguished:
Why flee, o radius of love,
Without return?
Stay and shine to the heavens where springs
All our hope.
.....................
A capricious sprite
In the heavens
Suddenly saw the star and plucked it
..............
Leaving the tender lovers
In torment . . . . .
[UU-71 8:59]
Queyrouze acknowledged Hugo in this poem by incorporating his words in an
e
pi
g
r
a
ph:“
Vois,--c
’
e
s
tunmé
t
é
or
e
!I
lé
c
l
at
ee
ts
’
é
t
e
i
nt
”(
Se
e
--it is a meteor! It explodes
a
nddi
e
sa
wa
y
)
.Not
et
hes
i
mi
l
a
ri
ma
g
e
r
yi
nhe
rs
onne
tf
or“
MagdaTur
pi
n”:
. . . You eyes are closed like those fading stars
Under a brilliant sun, but the meteor
Makes your face resplendent and raises you above the pain
[UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 274)
The
r
ea
r
edi
s
t
i
nc
ts
i
mi
l
a
r
i
t
i
e
sbe
t
we
e
nHug
o’
spoe
m“
Ce que dit la Bouche
d’
ombr
e
”(
Wha
tt
heMout
hofDa
r
kne
s
sSa
y
s
)a
ndQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
spoe
m“
Cequ’
ontdi
tl
e
s
203
Mont
agne
s
”(
Wha
tt
heMount
a
i
nSa
i
d)
.Bot
hoft
he
s
ede
mons
t
r
a
t
ea“
my
s
t
i
c
a
lbe
l
i
ef in a
wor
l
dt
ha
tpa
r
t
i
c
i
pa
t
e
si
nt
hebe
i
ngofGodi
nuni
ve
r
s
a
lha
r
mony
”(
De
nommé38)
.
Thi
sphi
l
os
ophyi
sa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
e
di
nHu
g
o’
sve
r
s
e
s
:
Imaginais-t
udoncl
’
uni
v
e
r
saur
t
e
me
nt
?
Non, tout est une voix et tout est un parfum;
Toutdi
tdansl
’
i
nf
i
nique
l
quec
hos
eáqui
l
qu’
un;
Une pensée emplit le tumulte superbe.
Did you imagine the universe any differently? No. There is but one voice and one
perfume. In God everything says something to someone. There is but a single
idea, and it permeates the superb hubbub of creation (Denommé 40).
Thi
ss
a
mephi
l
os
ophyf
un
c
t
i
onsi
nQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
k,a
ndi
smos
tc
l
e
a
r
l
y
expressed in her poem, “c
equ’
ontdi
tl
e
sMont
agne
s
.
”One can see that there is a single
idea and one voice that exists in all creation. She combines all religions—that of the
pa
g
a
ng
odsa
ndt
heGodofI
s
r
a
e
la
nda
l
lc
r
e
a
t
i
oni
sc
ombi
ne
di
none“
vi
br
a
ntha
r
moni
ous
c
r
y
:
”
Night weighed heavy upon the sacred summits
Where the distant centuries in returning mists,
Like giant specters veiled in shrouds of mystery,
Listened to the echoes of the earth
Through a door that sometimes opened fleetingly.
All at once in the dreadful calm
There was heard the formidable vibrant harmonious cry
Of the first song of the world and the mortal cries of agony
Of Creation falling once again into the void.
In many voices towards a gaping space,
They all cried out: Bend your face, o zenith, to me.
I am the Himalaya. Once I knew
An unknown hand that carved us from chaos,
And this hand carried the purest of jewels,
204
The star of day, the flaming spirit of Being,
And when I saw this immense fearsome master
Tears etched my face at its incredible beauty
That was modeled after eternity,
Rising above the immortal souls,
This, his work and his love, so plaintive, so beautiful,
So forgiving. I have seen these things
While upon my flanks I have felt
Rising humanity flooding the immense plains
Where, they tire of the invisible chain
And turn to build great granite towers of Babel,
Where science robbed them of the dream of knowledge
Because their God is veiled in the infinite limits
Of the unlimited.
Oh sun of Israel,
Sinai, shakes his mane of lighting,
His voice resounding through the air
Like vibrant echoes of sacred trumpets,
Its brightness striking the wayward tribes.
“
Sur
e
l
y
,t
he
r
ei
snot
hi
ng more than this, Sinai,
for on my forehead rests the foot of Adonis
as I keep repeating the eternal words,
the pregnant knowledge of what is to come,
while my shoulders carry the sapphire sky
Wi
t
hwe
i
g
hts
ohe
a
vyt
ha
twe
a
r
i
ne
s
sr
e
t
ur
ns
.
”
There is a flame embracing the heights of Parnassus
Where triumphant Helios reigns
With his dominance over the world, where the sudden wind
That comes from the infinite resounds the lyre,
Awakening into a divine ecstasy
The mountains of the gods. Hail fiery Apollo!
Towards you the whirlwind swarms,
Towards the ideals, the ecstasies and the dreams.
The diadem rocks beneath the sword,
Too tired to strike, it breaks, for every god, in turn,
Will sleep in exile but for you, who with fiery breath
Replenishes the universe, returning the souls to their specters.
You are immortal, almighty Helios!
Ma
s
t
e
rofmys
ummi
t
s
,f
a
t
h
e
rofAs
c
l
e
pi
us
.
”
Uponmymount
a
i
n’
ss
l
e
e
p
i
ngf
l
a
nks
Come your fleeting flames of dawn.
205
Then imperial Palatine speaks:
And in his rough accents, he speaks of the bright
Clash of the shields and the battle cries.
“
Is
l
e
ptuna
wa
r
e
,a
ndwhe
nIa
woke
I was crushed under the sacred plow of Romulus
And the elected gods called for the blood of Remus
Which fertilized my breast-- and the harvest was Rome!
Where therefore is my god, the mountain, or the man,
Whe
r
et
hewor
dsofg
l
or
y
?
”
Now comes another voice: I speak
with humility and dreadful remembrance
Of nameless tortures and dark mortal agonies.
I am Golgotha, Brother of twins.
On that day I felt, captive and trembling,
A living God against my flesh inclining
Thrust with a flaming sword,
And in profound mute witness I saw a flaming cross
Erected among the roaring people.
O mountains! The gods demanded your blood,
All for the sublime dream
Of tears for forgiveness, the abyss
Reached for the stars, the suns
Surrounded His head with a radiant halo;
His soft forehead was torn under an infamous crown,
And I, black Golgotha, the field of this sinister crime,
Who knew the footfalls of a God
Remain still under the blue heavens of an eternal sun
[UU-71 7:55] (Appendix 245)
Within these lines, she combines sacred mythological and religious symbols in her
references to the hills of Golgotha where Christ was crucified, as well as the mountains of
Parnassus, Mount Sinai, and the Himalayas. She alludes to the Old Testament when she
includes references to the tower of Babel, and she mixes these Christian images with
pagan ones, such as the sun god Helios, Apollo, Asceplius, Palatine, Romulus and
Remus. She references an unforgivable crime that incurs a debt that can never be repaid,
and in doing so alludes to her own mission to rail against the perceived crime to her
culture. Likening her role to the dumb and helpless hill, Golgotha, she situates herself as
206
the dumb witness to events and employs romantic imagery where nature is in sympathy
with her cause speaks for the narrator.
Her poetry also exhibits a divergence from American writers, not only in theme
and tone, but in aesthetics as well. She mourns the loss of her dear friend in her elegiac
poe
m,“
In Graecium”(
1893)wr
i
t
t
e
ni
nhonorofPl
a
c
i
deCa
nong
e
.He
rl
i
ne
sa
r
er
e
pl
e
t
e
with loss and longing and punctuated with classical imagery and allusions. Note how this
poem seems to belong to the Neo-Classical and Romantic periods rather than late
nineteenth century America. She uses romantic metaphors and once again personifies
nature in harmony with her spirits (in ancient Greek mythology, the cicada represented
immortality and/or rebirth). She includes classical references to Helen, Hymette
(Hymettus), Socrates, Pericles, Apsasia, and Alcibides (Alcibiades) in a mixture of pagan
and Christian symbols:
The hand let go and dropped the fragile vessel
Once so full of mead, and the echoing vase
Is broken, spilling its fragrant liqueur.
Li
keHe
l
e
n’
svi
ol
e
t
s
,t
ha
tf
i
l
l
sourhe
a
r
t
s
covering the mountains of Hymette,
Like the honey the bee carries
with its golden lance, full and restless
With its perfume, I will write my sacred poem to you,
And from my memories I will pluck
My verse, soft and sad, in this diaphanous hour . . .
When the flanks of the mountains come to the plains
In their coat of shadows, so far away,
Sheltered, shuddered in a harmonious unity,
Where Socrates laughed at the red elixir,
Where Pericles listened to Aspasia
With general Alcibides at his side. Come, now,
To the boundless banquet, and on your ivory chariot
Come to the place of spirits. This is the time of your glory,
Of desire and love. Your compatriots will come,
207
And these silent guests will circle your pale forehead
with branches of ivory and violets
And will crown your head with white bandlettes.
---In the distant hills the day climbs to its end, fleeting
Light floating on mountain lakes
Casting an amber reflection on your violet sepulcher,
Preparing your spirit. In the shadows, the cicadas begin the golden monochord
Of their vague rhythm while you sleep,
And when their chant is silenced, the moment
Becomes but smoke and the shiver of fevers,
Yet the day lingers against the constellations
While the flights of birds etch the sky
in the rising north winds.
Suddenly a strange cold comes over me
Blowing against the flame and against the phalanx
Where the flare of tombs ignites the granite
Which towards you inclines, and I resist and curse
For I saw the thunderbolt strike the trees
Illuminating how cold, how heavy, is this white coat of marble.
Three times the Angelus repeated the word, and my song begins its ending with a
sob [UU-71 7:54].
(Appendix 252)
After much suffering on earth, Canonge is welcomed home like a returning hero
to join the gods, and by placing him in this context, Queyrouze raises the level of French
culture and ideals embodied in the quintessential aristocratic and noble Canonge to
Parnassian heights. Thus, the French Creoles who waged and lost the battle of securing
hegemony in America would find, upon their deaths, their rewards in both pagan and
Christian terms. Canonge would join the great democratic leader of Athens, Pericles who
lives in eternity with his consort Aspasia and his war general Alcibiades. Queyrouze
likens her verse to the honey produced in the mountains of Hymettus near Athens, and
whe
ns
henot
e
st
ha
tPe
r
i
c
l
e
s“
l
i
s
t
e
n
e
dt
oAs
pa
s
i
a
”s
hema
ybei
nf
e
r
r
i
ngt
ha
ts
hei
sl
i
ke
Aspasia who had been well educated by tutors employed by her father and who had
208
earned both admiration (notably by Socrates) and castigation in her adopted Athens. Her
poem, therefore, adheres to the principles set forth by de Stael who characterized southern
European literature as having pagan influences, but this poem also crosses those
boundaries by including the religiosity of the north, for Canonge would also earn his
Catholic everlasting reward as the tolling of the Angelus bells indicates, a prayer that asks
t
ha
t“
i
tbedonea
c
c
or
di
ngt
ot
hywo
r
d,
”a
nd“
t
ha
twema
ybema
dewor
t
hyoft
he
pr
omi
s
e
sofChr
i
s
t
.
”
In spite of the hopeful message of this poem, Queyrouze often succumbs to
me
l
a
nc
hol
y
.“
Amor”i
sag
oode
xa
mpl
eofQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
si
s
ol
a
t
i
on,s
a
dne
s
s
,a
ndl
os
s
,
when she almost audibly sighs, “Ve
r
s
e
raut
antdepl
e
ur
s
,v
e
r
s
e
raut
antdes
ang...Pu
i
s
mour
i
rs
oust
e
spase
nr
é
v
antquet
um’
ai
me
s(“
t
obl
e
e
ds
oma
nyt
e
a
r
s
,t
ot
e
a
rs
omuc
h
bl
ood...t
he
nt
odi
eunde
rt
hes
t
e
psofmyf
r
i
e
nds
.
”Onma
nyoc
c
a
s
i
ons
,s
he
superimposes the lossofhe
rc
ul
t
u
r
eont
ot
hepa
s
s
i
ngoff
r
i
e
nds
.Ones
uc
he
xa
mpl
ei
s“
A
mon amie, Magda Turpin”(
1891)
.
Cont
i
nui
nghe
rba
t
t
l
ei
ma
g
e
r
y
,s
hea
l
s
oma
ke
s
r
e
f
e
r
e
nc
e
st
ot
he“
e
ne
my
”c
ul
t
ur
ea
ndi
nt
her
oma
nt
i
ct
r
a
di
t
i
on,l
i
ke
nshe
rde
pa
r
t
e
d
f
r
i
e
nd’
se
y
e
st
os
t
a
r
sa
nd her life to a meteor. This is one of the few indications of
Que
y
r
ouz
e
’
sc
l
os
ef
r
i
e
nds
hi
pst
owome
n:
Yesterday I cried for you, today I sing for you.
Have you felt my tears upon your sleeping face?
Have you heard my voice? Your heart must have shuddered
When your mother spoke to you softly and imploringly.
Do you breathe again? Your friends
Speak of your valiant soul. The teeth of the enemy can do no more
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
209
You eyes are closed like those fading stars
Under a brilliant sun, but the meteor
Makes your face resplendent and raises you above the pain [UU-71 7:55].
(Appendix 274)
I
n“
AHy
ac
i
nt
heLoi
s
e
au,
”she mourns the loss of a dear friend and quotes the
French Romantic poet, Alfred de Musset who speaks of suffering over the tomb. She
again personifies nature and describes how the flowers and birds who witness her pain
speak to her. True to romantic traditions, she finds truth and wisdom in Nature:
. . . And the flowers in the path who saw my distress,
Said: Where are you going with such grief pressing upon you,
Is it he who you go to see this morning?-- The sparrow,
bantering as he perched on his branch, shouted at me:
What pain do you have? Is it for some man?
We do not sulk here for we have eaten the apples
Of our garden . . .
...............................
Who do you look for? asked the pale Chrysanthemum,
--the flower of the death. I look for a tomb. And the flower
Answered me: His pain is now quiet
But now it begins for you . . .
..........................
Alas! You cry at the death of others
But they sleep without hatred or remorse
Do you not know that it is necessary to suffer so that a dark joy
Can rise in your heart? . . . .
Your friend is made well again by his leaving
When he answered the call of the dark archangel
. . . . our flesh deceives us,
For only death is true . . .
[UU-70 6:45]
I
n“
Impromptu”(
Ma
r
c
h20,1898)s
hes
pe
a
ksto the living, but her tone is still
elegiac as she responds to a passerby who had once been a close and dear friend. Her
reference to Mars is in keeping with her predilection to maintain classical images, and
210
this underscores her persistent war imagery. She also includes her pervasive death
i
ma
g
e
r
yi
nbyhe
ri
nc
l
us
i
onoft
het
e
r
m“
f
une
r
a
ldi
r
g
e
:
”
I see you coming, and I fear, there will be some embarrassment,
And an uncomfortable surprise. I see under your arm,
Pressed against your side,
the dreaded walking cane.
Perhaps I will tell you we shall remain friends.
But I know Mars has an old rival. And my heart will gasp
For one instant before it rights itself.
This will require Virtue in me,
For this is only my wounded pride; thus I will
Dispatch remembrances of the Past,
Of one brief embrace, one without reproach.
But the blessed Past, like a returning ghost,
Tries to speak to the present about love and faith.
But I will vow to respect the laws of Virtue
And to nourish my soul as well as its vessel.
So that the lasting heat of the Past shall expire.
Because I now know your path
I can rest without fear or dread
And in a forlorn funereal dirge
Forsake your lie for my law [UU-70 6:45] (Appendix 256)
Years later, the theme of sadness still marks her worka
sde
mons
t
r
a
t
e
di
n“
Agoni
e
”
written in 1911:
. . . So when were the dreams of souls broken?
What insidious worm began to gnaw at its core?
Which parasite drank up the sap of its heart
and silenced the music of the heavens? [UU-71 7:55]. (Appendix 237)
The“
wor
m”a
ndt
he“
pa
r
a
s
i
t
e
”t
ha
t“
dr
a
nkupt
hes
a
pofi
t
she
a
r
t
”i
sat
hi
nl
y
veiled reference to the Anglo-American culture that she perceived as the enemy. Unlike
mainstream American women writers who were trying to effect change within the
patriarchal social system, Queyrouze was situating herself in opposition to that culture.
211
Moreover, she ignored the marketable and widely circulated genres of the novel and short
story and continued to publish French poetry, which not widely accepted as a
commercially viable or influentially significant endeavor. By writing in a genre and
language that could no longer reach the public, she was withdrawing from the flow of
American life and assuring her own obscurity. As Lafcadio Hearn had advised her, the
new direction of literature was towards realism, which was a literary doctrine calling for
reality and truth in ordinary life, but she ignored him. George Washington Cable, Brett
Harte, Kate Chopin, Mark Twain, Mary E. Wilkins Freeman, Charlotte Perkins Gilman
and Sarah Orne Jewett were advancing past the local color movement towards this new
frontier, one that traveled into the interior psychological landscape of their characters.
Instead, Queyrouze turned backwards and dedicated her poetry to Hugo, Lamartine, de
Musset, and those French Romantics whose rise and decline and already been chronicled
long before she was born.
This comparison between American and French literary tradition raises a question
as to the inclusion of Queyrouze in the category of an American writer. This query
assumes that there are established criteria for the elements comprising a national
literature, and this dissertation does not presume to attempt to define an American writer.
I
ns
t
e
a
d,a
sTunne
l
ls
a
y
s
,Iwi
l
lha
r
borno“
de
l
us
i
onsofde
f
i
ni
t
i
ve
ne
s
s
;
”r
a
t
he
r
,Iwi
l
lpos
e
questions and merely suggest answers (7). If one believes that an American writer lives in
America, then Queyrouze fills the requirement, but that criterion would eliminate many
ex-patriots whom we claim in our canon. If one includes a language requirement, that
would exclude all non-Anglophone writers, but our national literature claims many
languages. Moreover, the definition does not rest upon style or subject matter. With such
212
nebulous criteria, the answer is elusive. There have been many works that have addressed
the composite of the American writer, and rather than provide an exhaustive analysis,
i
ns
t
e
a
d,Iwi
l
lbor
r
owf
r
omSa
r
a
hOr
neJ
e
we
t
t
,whos
a
y
si
n“
AtHomef
r
om Chur
c
h:
”“
I
somehow feel as if shut out/ From somemy
s
t
e
r
i
oust
e
mpl
e
”(
678)
.Is
ug
g
e
s
tonl
yt
ha
ti
n
order to enter the great cathedral of American literature, writers must first be permitted
through the gates and then allowed to join the congregation and join the discourse.
Without that opportunity, their voices will never be heard nor will they have influence.
Within this great hall, writers share a sense of common purpose and engage in a
dialectical discourse—their work has a synchronic and diachronic quality wherein the
writers speak to each other and give nod to those who have influenced them. Thus, they
are members of a congregation, and when they rise to the pulpit to speak, often the choir
will take up their refrain. This is not the case for Queyrouze, for while she expressed her
opinions publicly, hers was another church altogether, one that was romantic, French, and
Catholic, instead of realistic, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant. She was not consciously
attempting to seek membership in the great hall of American literature; her pilgrimage
was towards a disparate self definition. If one were to ask Gilman, Freeman, Jewett,
Chopin, and Cable if they were American writers, no doubt the answer would be yes.
Thus, the act of becoming an American writer is often determined as much by personal
choice as it is selection, but Queyrouze chose an alternative. Her efforts were devoted to
trying to write her culture into history by the force of her pen. Her love and her passion
l
a
ye
l
s
e
whe
r
e
,a
nds
hee
xpr
e
s
s
e
dt
hi
swi
t
hpoi
g
na
nc
yi
nhe
rpoe
m,“
A La France”
:
Oh France, I wish, like a jealous lover
To find new words in an unknown language
In accents as profound and soft as clouds
213
To speak of love. . . .
I would like the time to come to welcome night
in my sleep I could feel upon my flesh
The embrace and kisses of a spouse.
Before my soul climbs to the light
With ears trembling, and tearful eyes
That wake to the frail light of morning, blue
as violets, and feel the blood in my veins
Like sparkling grapes pressed into wine
To fill to overflowing our loving cup [UU-71 7:54].
(Appendix 251)
This poem clearly expresses her love for her imagined motherland, but while
Queyrouze may not lay claim to the title of American writer, we must permit her to enter
the gates of the cathedral we call American literature and allow her to rise to the pulpit to
speak, at last, of the experiences of those who lost the battle for autonomy in the great
flood of American expansion. Queyrouze provides for us, in the words of Gottfried von
He
r
de
r
,
as
a
mpl
eof“
poe
t
r
y
’
sg
a
l
l
e
r
yofdi
ve
r
s
eway of thinking, diverse aspirations, and
di
ve
r
s
ede
s
i
r
e
s
”(
143)
.Thr
oug
hhe
r
,wec
a
n“
c
omet
oknowpe
r
i
odsa
ndna
t
i
onsmor
e
i
nt
i
ma
t
e
l
yt
ha
twec
a
nt
hr
oug
h...s
t
udy
i
ngpol
i
t
i
c
a
la
ndmi
l
i
t
a
r
yhi
s
t
or
y
”(
143)
.
Furthermore, Herder argues that we can learn muc
ha
boutac
ul
t
ur
ef
r
om i
t
spoe
t
r
y
:“
We
can learn about its way of thinking, its desires and wants, the ways it rejoiced, and the
wa
y
si
twa
sg
ui
de
dbyi
t
spr
i
nc
i
pl
e
sori
t
si
nc
l
i
na
t
i
ons
”(
143)
.Gr
e
e
nbl
a
t
ta
ndGa
l
l
a
g
he
r
reinforce this by describing the value applying a new historicist template to literary study.
Thebe
ne
f
i
ti
st
ha
ts
c
hol
a
r
sa
r
ea
l
l
owe
dt
of
ol
l
ow“
t
hes
oc
i
a
le
ne
r
g
i
e
st
ha
tc
i
r
c
ul
a
t
eve
r
y
br
oa
dl
yt
hr
oug
hc
ul
t
ur
e
”a
ndt
os
e
e“
t
hee
nt
i
r
er
a
ng
eofdi
ve
r
s
ee
xpr
e
s
s
i
onbywhi
c
ha
culture manifests i
t
s
e
l
f
”(
13)
.Bymovi
ng“
be
y
ondt
hec
onf
i
ne
soft
hec
a
noni
c
a
lg
a
r
de
n”
(
14)
,wea
r
ebea
bl
et
os
e
et
he“
va
s
t
ne
s
soft
het
e
xt
ua
la
r
c
hi
ve
,a
ndwi
t
ht
ha
tva
s
t
ne
s
sa
n
a
e
s
t
he
t
i
ca
ppr
e
c
i
a
t
i
onoft
hei
ndi
vi
dua
li
ns
t
a
nc
e
”(
16)
,a
ndt
he
r
e
bywea
r
ea
bl
et
o
214
acknowledget
ha
tt
he“
hous
eofi
ma
g
i
na
t
i
onha
sma
nyma
ns
i
ons
”(
12)a
ndt
ha
tt
he
r
ea
r
e
many missing pieces in the mosaïque of American literature. American writers often have
spoken to the ideal of potential and relied on the possibilities expressed by Emerson,
Dickinson, Whitman and Thoreau, or have believed that like Ishmael, they would survive
adventure and adversity to tell their tales, or like Huck, they could escape the confines of
s
oc
i
e
t
yt
o“
l
i
g
htoutf
ort
het
e
r
r
i
t
or
i
e
s
.
”I
nt
heni
ne
t
e
e
nt
h-century, many Americans
believed in possibility and promise, and theirs was a dream of expansion and tomorrow,
but for others, like Queyrouze, theirs was a tale of loss and a dream of the past.
215
CONCLUSION
Le
onaQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
ka
r
t
i
c
ul
a
t
e
st
hes
t
a
g
e
sofg
r
i
e
f
-- those of denial,
acceptance, and sorrow--which indicates her awareness that she was a part of a dying
culture. Even as she held onto it, she also knew that its days were numbered, just as the
days of her life were numbered. In her poetry she eulogized her dead friends who had
once been a part of her salon. Images of death permeate her poetry, suggesting that she
kne
ws
hewa
ss
e
e
i
ngt
hel
a
s
toft
h
eFr
e
nc
hCr
e
ol
e
s
’c
a
r
e
f
ul
l
yc
ons
t
r
uc
t
e
da
ndnur
t
ur
e
d
world. With the passing of each one of her friends and family, her mother and father,
General Beauregard, Paul Morphy, Placide Canonge, Charles Gayarré; her husband,
Pierre Barel, she was left increasingly alone until by the end of her life, she was holding
onto to futile romantic dream. Evidence of this can be found in her unpublished and
hi
g
hl
ys
e
nt
i
me
nt
a
ls
hor
ts
t
or
ywr
i
t
t
e
ni
n1933e
nt
i
t
l
e
d“
TheFl
owe
r
sofNi
r
va
na
:The
LoveofTwoSoul
s
.
”
In this brief story written in large script on small pieces of paper (that probably
once were pinned to the walls in her room as she described in one of her interviews)
Queyrouze tells the story of a young man who is compelled, for reasons he does not
understand, to go to New Orleans. There at a boarding house, he meets an elderly but still
radiant woman. Through their long talks over the next several weeks, they learn that their
souls are connected and that their spiritual love transcends time and place. This was the
answer he sought, and when he leaves her he does so with a mixture of sadness and
contentment. Queyrouze wrote this piece while nearly blind, and this gradual loss of her
sight coincided with dimming of a time and a place that was now only a cherished
memory, her dream of the past.
216
George Washington Cable describes the death of the Creole culture in The
Creoles of Louisiana, s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
ts
oc
i
a
l“
c
ha
ng
ec
a
r
r
i
e
d[
t
heCr
e
ol
e
]ne
a
r
e
ra
ndne
a
r
e
r
towards the current of American ideas and absorption into their flood, which bore too
much the semblance of annihilation. Hold back as he might, the transformation was
appallinglys
wi
f
t
”(
254)
.I
napr
ophe
t
i
cf
a
r
e
we
l
lnove
lt
oNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
,La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
n
likewise addresses the death of the French Creole culture. This novel, Chita, describes the
disappearance in 1856 of an island called L’
I
s
l
eDe
ni
é
r
eoff the coast of Louisiana. Much
like Grand Isle, it had been a favorite destination for many French Creoles in the midnineteenth century, and they often congregated there to bathe in the sea and to attend
social gatherings. Such was the case one August night when partygoers, unaware that a
storm was approaching, attended a ball at l
’
I
s
l
eDe
r
ni
é
r
e
. A ship captain, who had been
unable to warn them, docked just in time to witness the storm as it completely submerged
the island, drowning all but a few and sweeping all of their belongings away to be
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
e
dbyt
hec
ur
r
e
nt
s
.St
r
a
ng
e
l
ye
noug
h,He
a
r
n’
sa
c
c
ountpr
ove
dt
obepr
ophe
t
i
c
,f
or
what he describes is analogous to the disappearance of the French Creole culture in New
Orleans that began its decline towards the middle of the nineteenth century.
J
oyJ
a
c
ks
onnot
e
st
ha
t“
f
r
omt
he1880son,t
heCr
e
ol
e
swe
r
eade
c
l
i
ni
nge
t
hni
c
g
r
oupa
n
dnol
ong
e
ravi
t
a
lf
a
c
t
ori
npol
i
t
i
c
s...i
ni
t
st
wi
l
i
g
hty
e
a
r
s
”(
14)
.Byt
het
i
me
that Cable described the Creoles culture and the Vieux Carré, Jackson says,t
he
i
r“
wa
yof
life was only a museum piece which would pass out of general existence within thirty
y
e
a
r
s
”(
14)
.Que
y
r
ouz
ewa
sawoma
nwhowa
soutofpl
a
c
ea
ndt
i
me
---she no longer
lived in a world where her culture could thrive and her literary endeavors were no longer
relevant to the direction that America was taking—a vibrant county that was moving
217
towards industrialization and commerce, leaving the agricultural riches of cotton and
plantations behind and the evil of slavery with them.
The economic reasons for the French Creole decline began long before the Civil
wa
ra
ndRe
c
ons
t
r
uc
t
i
on.J
a
c
ks
ons
t
a
t
e
st
ha
t“
a
c
t
ua
l
l
yt
het
r
oubl
e
sa
g
a
i
ns
twhi
c
hNe
w
Orleans commerce struggled in the 1880s and 1890s had their roots in antebellum times.
Her supremacy as the trade mart of the Mississippi Valley had been challenged early in
t
hec
e
nt
ur
ybyt
hebui
l
di
ngofc
a
na
l
sa
ndi
nt
he1850sbyr
a
i
l
r
oa
ds
”(
208)
.Shec
ont
i
nue
s
,
s
a
y
i
ngt
ha
t“
noot
he
rma
j
orpor
ts
howe
ds
uc
har
a
di
c
a
lc
ha
ng
ei
nt
r
a
depa
t
t
e
r
ns
”a
sdi
d
New Orleans from 1894-1898 (212- 213).
Cable of
f
e
r
sot
he
rr
e
a
s
onsa
ndmus
e
st
ha
t“
i
ti
sha
r
dt
ounde
r
s
t
a
nd,l
ooki
ngba
c
k
f
r
omt
hepr
e
s
e
nt
,hows
oe
xt
r
a
va
g
a
ntami
s
t
a
kec
oul
dha
vebe
e
nma
debywi
s
emi
nds
”
(241). He estimates that they were blinded by their current wealth and did not realize that
with the opening of the Erie Canal, the westward expansion, the railroads, and the
advancing steam technology that their livelihood was threatened. Not only that, the basis
of their wealth, slavery, was more than a social evil,i
tc
r
e
a
t
e
df
ort
heCr
e
ol
e“
e
a
s
y
fortune-g
e
t
t
i
ng
”a
nds
pr
e
a
d”
i
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
li
ndol
e
nc
e
”(
242)
.The
i
rmi
nds
e
tha
daki
ndof
“
i
nvi
nc
i
bl
epr
ovi
nc
i
a
l
i
s
m”(
245)t
h
a
tpr
e
ve
nt
e
dt
he
mf
r
omr
e
a
l
i
z
i
ngt
ha
tt
he“
i
mpr
ove
d
transportation, denser settlements, [and] labor-s
a
vi
ngma
c
hi
ne
r
y
”oft
her
e
s
toft
hena
t
i
on
wa
sl
e
a
vi
ngt
he
mbe
hi
nd(
249)
.Ca
bl
ea
c
c
us
e
st
heCr
e
ol
eof“
t
oomuc
hf
a
l
s
epr
i
dea
g
a
i
ns
t
me
r
c
a
nt
i
l
epur
s
ui
t
s[...a
ndofa
]s
oc
i
a
le
xc
l
us
i
ve
ne
s
s
”t
ha
tul
t
i
ma
t
e
l
yl
e
dt
oadownf
a
l
l
(251). He summarizes their situation:
In [many] American cities, American thought prevailed, and the incoming
foreigner accepted it. In New Orleans American thought was foreign, unwelcome,
disparaged by the unaspiring satirical Creole, and often apologized for by the
218
American, who found himself a minority in a combination of social forces oftener
in sympathy with European ideas that with the moral energies and the enthusiastic
and venturesome enterprise of the New World (252).
The Creoles consistently and self-consciously separated themselves from the
American culture. Cable indicates that t
he“
r
i
c
hCr
e
ol
e
,bot
hofpl
a
nt
a
t
i
ona
ndt
own,s
t
i
l
l
drew his inspiration from the French tradition,--not from books,--and sought both culture
a
ndpa
s
t
i
mei
nPa
r
i
s
”(
260)
.I
na
ddi
t
i
on,t
heCr
e
ol
e
s depended too much on land and
s
l
a
ve
sf
o
rr
i
c
he
s
.I
nt
her
e
s
toft
hena
t
i
ont
he
r
es
t
ooda“
t
r
i
umphofma
c
hi
ne
r
yove
r
slavery that could not be retrieved, save possibly through a social revolution so great and
apparently so ruinous that the mention of it ki
ndl
e
dawhi
t
ehe
a
tofpubl
i
ce
xa
s
pe
r
a
t
i
on”
(254). Even so, among their members were those who brought them fame and infamy,
a
ndCa
bl
er
e
c
i
t
e
sal
i
s
tofi
l
l
us
t
r
i
ousCr
e
ol
e
s
:onewa
st
he“
Mi
ni
s
t
e
rofWa
ri
nFr
a
nc
e..
.
another sat in the Spanish Courts; another became a Spanish Lieutenant-General . . . Jean
J
a
que
sAudubon...Loui
sGot
t
s
c
ha
l
k..
..Ge
ne
r
a
lBe
a
ur
e
g
a
r
d”(
315)
.Nots
ur
pr
i
s
i
ng
l
y
,
this is a mosaïque of people who, when viewed from afar, develops into a panorama of
intriguing complexity, but one thing they shared was an understanding that they were
members of a dying culture.
Tr
e
g
l
e
’
s“
Ea
r
l
yNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsSoc
i
e
t
y
:ARe
a
ppr
a
i
s
a
l
”s
howst
ha
tt
heCr
e
ol
e
sha
dno
de
f
e
ns
ea
g
a
i
ns
tt
hei
nc
omi
ngAme
r
i
c
a
nswi
t
h“
t
he
i
ri
mpr
e
s
s
i
vee
duc
a
t
i
on,c
a
pi
t
a
l
,
resources, and business acumen [which] enabled these newcomers to take control rather
qui
c
kl
y....TheCr
e
ol
ebus
i
ne
s
s
me
nwe
r
enoma
t
c
hf
ort
heYa
nke
ee
nt
r
e
pr
e
ne
ur
s
”
(Logsdon and Hirsch 91-92)
,a
ndt
he
ywe
r
e“
a
bs
or
be
da
ndma
det
os
ubmi
tt
ot
hef
a
t
eofa
conquered race . . . with a rapidity and thoroughness . . . much greater than that with
219
whi
c
ht
heRoma
nst
r
a
ns
f
or
me
dt
h
epe
opl
ewhos
ubmi
t
t
e
dt
ot
he
i
ra
r
ms
”(
Tr
e
g
l
e161)
.“
I
t
[
wa
s
]ar
a
c
epa
s
s
i
ngi
nt
ot
heva
l
l
e
yofs
ha
dea
ndobl
i
vi
on”(
162)
,s
ome
t
i
me
sbybus
i
ness,
of
t
e
nbyma
r
r
i
a
g
e
.TheCr
e
ol
e
sc
ul
t
ur
ef
a
i
l
e
dt
ot
hr
i
vebe
c
a
us
ei
twa
s“
s
e
ti
ni
t
st
r
a
di
t
i
on,
enveloped in its memories, [living] almost entirely in the past, a stranger to the progress
a
nds
pi
r
i
toft
het
i
me
s
”(
168)
.Al
lt
ha
ti
sl
e
f
ta
r
et
hea
r
c
hi
t
e
c
tural relics, residual public
festivals, and marketable iconic trinkets.
When one visits New Orleans today, one can still see the remnants of that lost culture
i
nt
heFr
e
nc
hQua
r
t
e
rwhi
c
hhol
dsapa
r
t
i
c
ul
a
r“
f
or
e
i
g
n”a
t
mos
phe
r
e
.Thei
de
nt
i
f
i
a
bl
e
French Creoles have disappeared, but their legacy is found in the narrow, crowded streets
lined with wrought iron balconied structures hiding interior courtyards, and one can still
walk past the home where the Queyrouzes once lived. There is an air about the Quarter
that still remains defiantly un-American, and one cannot help but pause to reflect on the
people and the place that once belonged to a foreign territory.
These were the streets that Leona Queyrouze walked, and the Vieux Carré was the
Frenchtown she cherished. In spite of the social and political upheaval, her ultimate goal
was to safeguard her way of life, regardless whether she was progressive or traditional.
With the support and contribution of her salon, she quixotically dedicated her efforts to
the preservation of her culture and attempted to use the force of her pen to keep her
customs, traditions, and love of French literature alive. Even as she failed, her attempt
was valiant and worth recognition. Those who criticize the Creoles for their social
injustice must also acknowledge that each culture is more than the sum of its parts, for as
Fr
e
dr
i
cJ
a
me
s
ona
r
g
ue
s
,ac
ul
t
ur
a
lpe
r
i
oddoe
snote
xpr
e
s
sa“
uni
f
i
e
di
nne
rt
r
ut
h”(
27)
.
Queyrouze is an illustrious shard in the mosaïque of her culture, and within her, as in any
220
enlightened individual, there is a mosaic of sensibilities, aspirations, hopes and dreams.
Tos
t
udyQue
y
r
ouz
e
,wea
r
ee
ng
a
g
e
di
na“
pr
oj
e
c
tofs
a
l
va
t
i
on”(
20)a
se
xpr
e
s
s
e
dby
Jameson, and thus we are able to access history in ways that areuna
va
i
l
a
bl
et
ous“
e
xc
e
pt
i
nt
e
xt
ua
lf
or
m”(
35)
.
The goal of this project was to make Queyrouze available to a modern audience so
that she may be studied from various critical perspectives and to assist in providing a
more complete understanding of the Creole culture. Through an ever-widening critical
lens, I have attempted to place Queyrouze in the context of Creole identity, her
environment, salon culture, politics, ethnicity, and literary movements, in order to provide
a portrait of the Creole society
’
spa
r
oc
hi
a
lr
e
t
r
e
a
tt
ha
tpr
e
c
l
ude
di
t
svi
a
bi
l
i
t
y
.The
r
ei
sa
r
e
c
og
ni
t
i
onoft
hi
sc
ul
t
ur
a
ll
os
si
nQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
spoe
m,“
le Tisserand”
:
Sur le vaste horizon la treme était tendue;
Pourlant je ne vis point la main du tisserand
Etj
’
e
nt
nudi
sgr
onde
runecho de torrent
Au fond du noir allence; es je vis, éperdue
On the vast horizon, the hand of the weaver extends
I do not see the hand of the weaver,
But I hear the groans and the echoes of the torrent
And I fear the black wing, where I see that all is lost [UU-71 7:56].
Shee
xpr
e
s
s
e
ss
i
mi
l
a
rs
e
nt
i
me
nt
si
n“
Vision”wr
i
t
t
e
ni
n1885a
ndr
e
a
dbe
f
or
et
he
Academy of Sciences in Bordeaux, France:
I will not hear the cries of nations
like an expanding torrent, invading the lands
ravaging the harvest, with hope dying in pain,
brutally crushed back into stony furrows.
So swiftly time hurries, its winds destroying
the ripened fields of enterprise, ideals and hopes,
221
running in its course all joy and suffering
of bewildered people, crushed like chaff in the whirlwind
of eternity
1885 C.R.A.L. 40 [UU-71 6:45]. (Appendix 276)
This expresses her ineffable grief over the inevitable death of her constructed
c
ul
t
ur
e
,
“
c
r
us
he
dl
i
kec
ha
f
fi
nt
hewhi
r
l
wi
nd.
”Fr
a
nc
i
sPa
r
kma
nwr
i
t
e
st
ha
t“
t
heFrench
dominion is a memory of the past; and when we evoke its departed shades; they rise
uponu
sf
r
omt
he
i
rg
r
a
ve
si
ns
t
r
a
ng
e
,r
oma
nt
i
cg
ui
s
e
”(
Woodwa
r
dThe Future of the Past
340).
Leona Queyrouze serves as an individual example of the collective demise of the
Creole who failed to see the signs of change and to adjust to the New World. Her fate as
well as the fate of the French Creoles raises the question that many ethnic groups face
today of how to retain cultural markers while becoming part of the dominant society. In
many ways, this leaves us with a paradox, for it appears impossible to attain both
disparate identity and acculturation simultaneously. One dynamic calls for ethnic
discretion and the other assimilation, two opposing forces on the same magnet with the
power to attract on one hand, and repel on the other. Perhaps the only answer I can offer
to this dilemma is to respond with responsible scholarship in the spirit of new historicism
by my commitment to add a silent and forgotten voice to the ongoing human
conversation. To retrieve a lost cultural moment will enhance our understanding of the
process of Americanization on a doomed social construct, a small island of French Creole
culture, swept away by the sea of America, and that it can heighten our awareness of the
responsibilities that come from acknowledging our own history.
222
WORKS CITED
Original manuscripts:
The Lafcadio Hearn Collection Special Collections Division, Howard
Tilton Memorial Library, Tulane University.
New Orleans, Louisiana.
Queyrouze Papers. Special Collections. MSS UU 68-71 #1201, 1278, 1314, 1323, 1335 and X 97-98.
Louisiana and Lower Mississippi Valley Collections. Hill Memorial Library.
Louisiana State University. Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Interviews:
Cressy, Adele Queyrouze. Personal Interview. 1996. 1244 Carrolton Ave. Metarie
LA 70005.
(Interview conducted at the home of her mother, Mrs. Harold Queyrouze).
Queyrouze, Mrs. Harold. Personal Interview. 1996. 6535 Louis XIV New Orleans LA
70124. (
Shewa
sma
r
r
i
e
dt
oMa
xi
mQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
ss
ona
ndkne
wLe
ona
)
.
Print Sources:
L'Abeille de la Nouvelle Orleans. New Orleans, Louisiana.
Ayers, Edward L. The Promise of the New South after Reconstruction. New York:
Oxford UP, 1992.
Baggett, James Alex. The Scalawags. Baton Rouge, LA: LSU Press, 2003.
Ba
r
t
he
l
e
my
,Ant
honyG.“
Li
g
ht
,Br
i
g
hta
ndDa
mnne
a
rWhi
t
e
:Ra
c
e
,t
hePol
i
t
i
c
sof
Ge
ne
a
l
og
y
,a
ndt
heSt
r
a
ng
eCa
s
eofSus
i
eGui
l
l
or
y
”Ke
i
n.2000.
Bauer, Dale M. and Philip Gould, Eds. Nineteenth Ce
nt
ur
yWome
n’
sWr
i
t
i
ng,
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2001.
Bell, Caryn Cossé. Revolution, Romanticism and the Afro-Creole Protest Tradition
in Louisiana 1718-1868. Baton Rouge, LA: LSU Press, 1997.
---.“
Un
eChi
mé
r
e
”
:TheFr
e
e
dme
n’
s
’Bur
e
a
ui
nCr
e
ol
eNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
.
”Ci
mba
l
a
and Miller. 140-160.
223
Berger, Harris M. and Giovanna P. Del Negro. Identity and Everyday Life: Essays in the
Study of Folklore, Music, and Popular Culture. Middleton, Conn.: Wesleyan
UP, 2004.
Be
ndi
x,Re
g
i
na
.“
Tour
i
s
ma
ndcultural Displays: Inventing Traditions for Whom?”
Journal of American Folklore. (1989): 102:404. 131-146.
Bisland, Elizabeth. The Life and Letters of Lafcadio Hearn Vol 1. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin. 1906.
Blassingame, John W. Black New Orleans: 1860-1880. Chicago: U Chicago P, 1973.
Cable, George Washington. Creoles and Cajuns: Stories of Old Louisiana. Ed. Arlin
Turner. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1965.
---. The Creoles of Louisiana. Gretna, La.: Pelican, 2000.
---.“
TheFr
e
e
dma
n’
sCa
s
ei
nEqu
i
t
y
.
”Century Magazine XXIX. Jan 1885. 409-18.
---. The Grandissimes. Gretna, LA: Pelican, 2001.
---. Old Creole Days. New York: C. Scribner, 1921.
---.”
Si
e
urGe
or
g
e
.
”Creoles and Cajuns: Stories of Old Louisiana. Ed. Arlin Turner.
Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith, 1965. Originally published 1873.
---. The Silent South. New York: Charles Scribner, 1885.
---.“Weoft
heSout
h.
”Century Magazine XXIX November 1884. 152.
---.“Whoar
et
heCr
e
ol
e
s
?”Ce
nt
ur
yMagaz
i
neXXVJanuary 1883. 395.
Castellanos, Henry. New Orleans As It Was: Episodes of Louisiana Life.
Forward by Charles L. Dufour. Gretna: Pelican, 1990.
Chopin, Kate. The Awakening. New York: Avon, 1972.
---. Selected Stories. New York: Penguin, 1986.
Cimbala, Paul A. and Randall M. Miller eds. TheFr
e
e
dme
n’
sBur
e
au
and Reconstruction. New York: Fordham UP, 1999.
Clément, Catherine. Opera: or the Undoing of Women. Translated by Betsy Wing,
Forward by Susan McClary. Minneapolis, U Minnesota P, 1988.
Coleman, Will H. “
TheFr
e
nc
hMa
r
ke
t
.
”Sketchbook and Guide to New Orleans
and Environs. 1885. De Caro. 1998.
Comptes-Rendus Athénée Louisianais (C.R.A.L.). Athénée Louisianais. New Orleans,
Louisiana.
Cott, Jonathon. Wandering Ghost: The Odyssey of Lafcadio Hearn. New York:
Knopf, 1991.
224
Cressy, Adele Queyrouze. Letter to the author. August 8, 1996.
Da
ws
o
n
,Sa
r
a
h,Mor
g
a
n.“
Exc
e
r
ptf
r
om aConf
e
de
r
at
eGi
r
l
’
sDai
r
y
.
”
De Caro. 1998. 261-266.
De Caro, Frank. Ed. Loui
s
i
anaSo
j
o
ur
ns
:Tr
av
e
l
e
r
s
’Tal
e
sandLi
t
erary Journeys.
Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1998.
---.“
Un
r
i
va
l
e
dCha
r
ms
:Fol
kl
or
e
,Non-Fi
c
t
i
on,a
ndLa
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
n’
s‘
Cr
e
ol
e
’
Ye
a
r
s
.
”J
os
e
phSc
hi
c
kLe
c
t
ur
e
sa
tI
ndi
a
naSt
a
t
eUni
ve
r
s
i
t
y
.De
c
e
mbe
r2002.
Denommé, Robert T. Nineteenth-Century French Romantic Poets. Harry T. Moore,
ed. London: Feffer & Simons, 1969.
Dickinson, Emily. Hollander. 583.
Disheroon-Green, Suzanne and Lisa Abney. Songs of the Reconstructing South:
Building Literary Louisiana 1865-1945. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 2002.
Domínguez, Virginia. White by Definition: Social Classifications in Creole Louisiana.
New Brunswick, Rutgers UP, 1986.
Donovan, Josephine. Ne
wEngl
andCol
orLi
t
e
r
at
ur
e
:AWoman’
sTr
adi
t
i
on.
New York: Frederick Ungar P, 1983.
---. Sarah Orne Jewett. New York: Frederick Ungar P, 1980.
Dor
ma
n
,J
a
me
sH.“
Loui
s
i
a
na
’
s‘
Cr
e
ol
e
sofCol
or
’
:Et
hni
c
i
t
y
,Ma
r
g
i
na
l
i
t
y
,a
ndI
de
nt
i
t
y
.
”
Social Science Quarterly 73 (1992:) 616.
Dorson, Richard. American Folklore & the Historian. Chicago: U Chicago P, 1971.
---. ed. Folklore and Folklife. Chicago: U Chicago P, 1972.
Ebl
e
,Ke
nne
t
h.“
AFor
g
ot
t
e
nNove
l
:Ka
t
eChopi
n’
sTheAwak
e
ni
ng.
”
Western Humanities Review 10: 3 (Summer 1956): 261-69.
Elfenbein, Anna Shannon. Women on the Color Line: Evolving Stereotypes and the
Writings of George Washington Cable, Grace King, Kate Chopin.
Charlottesville: UP Virginia, 1980.
Ewi
ng
,Qui
nc
y
.“
TheHe
a
r
toft
heRa
c
ePr
obl
e
m.
”Atlantic Monthly CIII. March 1909.
389-97.
Foner, Eric. Nothing But Freedom: Emancipation And Its Legacy. Baton Rouge: LSU
Press, 1983.
For
t
i
e
r
,Al
c
é
e
.“
TheAme
r
i
c
a
nDomi
na
t
i
onPa
r
tI
I1861-1903.
” History of Louisiana
Vol 4. New York: Manzi, Joyant, Succesors of Goupil & Co., Paris 1904.
225
Fouc
a
ul
t
,Mi
c
ha
e
l
.“
TheAr
tofTe
l
l
i
ngt
heTr
ut
h.
”Critique and Power: Recasting the
Foucault /Habermas Debate. Ed. Michael Kelly. Cambridge, Mass.:
MIT Press, 1994. 139-148.
---.“
Cr
i
t
i
c
a
lThe
or
y
/
I
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
lThe
or
y
.
”Critique and Power. Kelly, 1994. 110-139.
---. Language, Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and
Interviews. Ed. Donald F. Bouchard. Tr. Donald F. Bouchard and Sherry Simon.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1977.
Freeman, Mary Eleanor Wilkins. Selected Stories of Mary E. Wilkins Freeman.
Ed. Marjorie Pyrse. New York: Norton, 1983.
---. The Shoulders of Atlas. New York: Arno Press, 1908.
Friedman, Lawrence J., The White Savage: Racial Fantasies in the Postbellum South.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1970.
Ganobcsik-Wi
l
l
i
a
ms
,Li
s
a
.“
TheI
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ua
l
i
sm of Charlotte Perkins Gilman:
Evol
ut
i
ona
r
yPe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
ve
sonRa
c
e
,Et
hni
c
i
t
y
,a
ndCl
a
s
s
.
”Rudd,Goug
h.16-41
Ga
y
a
r
r
é
,Cha
r
l
e
s
.“
TheCr
e
ol
e
sofHi
s
t
or
ya
ndt
heCr
e
ol
e
sofRoma
nc
e
.
”
Public address at Tulane April 25, 1885.
---.“
Lar
a
c
eLa
t
i
nee
nLoui
s
i
a
ne
”Spe
e
c
hbe
f
or
et
heAthénée.
---.“
Le
sGr
a
ndi
s
s
i
me
s
”
Gilbert, Sandra and Susan Gubar describe in The Madwoman in the Attic:
The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth Century Literary Imagination.
New Haven: Yale UP, 1984.
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. Herland. New York: Pantheon Book, 1979.
---. The Later Poetry of Charlotte Perkins Gilman. Ed. Denise D. Knight.
Newark: U Delaware P, 1996.
Glasser, Leah Blatt. In a Closet Hidden: The Life and Work of Mary E. Wilkins
Freeman. Amherst: U Massachusetts P, 1996.
Gol
de
n,Ca
t
he
r
i
neJ
.“
‘
Wr
i
t
t
e
nt
oDr
i
veNa
i
l
sWi
t
h:
’Re
c
a
l
l
i
ngt
heEa
r
l
y
Poe
t
r
yofCha
r
l
ot
t
ePe
r
ki
nsGi
l
ma
n.
” Rudd,Goug
h.243-266.
Golden, Catherine J. and Joanna Schneider Zangrando, Eds. The Mixed Legacy of
Charlotte Perkins Gilman. Newark, New Jersey: U Delaware P, 2000.
Grant, Michael and John Hazel. Wh
o’
sWhoi
nCl
as
s
i
c
alMy
t
hol
ogy
.Ne
wYor
k
:
Oxford UP, 1993.
226
Ha
g
i
wa
r
a
,J
unko.“
La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
na
ndLe
onaQue
y
r
ouz
e
.
”Lafcadio Hearn Journal.
Vol 1:2. (The Lafcadio Hearn Collection Special Collections Division, Howard
Tilton Memorial Library, Tulane University).
Hair, William Ivy. Bourbonism and Agrarian Protest, Louisiana Politics 1877-1900.
Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1969.
Hall, Alice Petry, ed. Critical Essays on Kate Chopin. New York: G.K. Hall & Co.,
1996.
Hall, Gwendolyn Midlo. Africans in Colonial Louisiana: the Development of Afro-Creole
Culture in the Eighteenth Century. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1995. 157.
Ha
ndl
e
r
,Ri
c
ha
r
da
ndJ
oc
e
l
y
nLi
nne
ki
n.“
Tr
a
di
t
i
on,Ge
nui
nea
ndSpur
i
ous
.
”Journal
Of American Folklore. (1984): 97:385. 273-290.
Haws, Robert, ed. The Age of Segregation: Race Relations in the South, 1890-1945.
Jackson: UP of Mississippi, 1978.
Hearn, Lafcadio. Chita: A Memory of Last Island (copyright 1889). New York: Harper,
1898. Republished by Scholarly Press in St. Clair Shores Michigan in 1970.
---. Fantastics and Other Fancies. Ed. Charles Woodward Hutson.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1014.
---.“
Gr
a
ndi
s
s
i
me
s
.
”Tur
ne
r
.198
0
.8-9
---.“
Lo
sCr
i
ol
l
os
”J
e
we
l
l
’
sCr
e
s
c
e
ntCi
t
yI
l
l
us
t
r
at
e
d.1874. 198-200.
---- Laf
c
adi
oHe
ar
n’
sCr
e
ol
eCoo
kBook
.Gretna, La.: Pelican, 1990.
---.“
t
heSc
e
ne
sofCa
bl
e
s
’Roma
nc
e
s
.
”Tur
ne
r
.1980.53-62.
(Gift from the Queyrouze family).
Herder, Gottfried von. Against Pure Reason: Writings on Religion, Language,
and History. Trans.,ed. Marcia Bunge. Minneapolis: Fortress P, 1993.
Hirsch, Arnold R and Joseph Logsdon, eds. Creole New Orleans:
Race and Americanization. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1992.
Hi
r
s
c
h,
Ar
nol
dA.“
Si
mpl
yaMa
t
t
e
rofBl
a
c
ka
ndWhi
t
e
:TheTr
a
ns
f
or
ma
t
i
onof
Race and Politics in Twentieth-Ce
nt
ur
yNe
w Or
l
e
a
ns
.
” Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don.
262-321.
Hollander, John. American Poetry: the Nineteenth Century. New York:
Library of America College, 1996.
Howard, June. Publishing the Family. Durham, Duke UP, 2001.
Humm, Maggie. Feminist Criticism. Ne
wYor
k:St
.Ma
r
t
i
n’
s
,1986.
227
Hutson, Charles Woodward, ed. Fantastics and Other Fancies by Lafcadio Hearn.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1914.
Jackson, Joy J. New Orleans in the Gilded Age: Politics and Urban Progress 1880-1896.
Baton Rouge, LSU Press, 1969.
Jameson, Fredric. The Cultures of Globalization. Eds. Masao Miyoshi.
and Fredric Jameson. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 1998.
---.“
OnI
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on:Li
t
e
r
a
t
ur
ea
saSoc
i
a
l
l
ySy
mbol
i
cAc
t
.
”
Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially symbolic Act.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1981.
Jewett, Sarah Orne. The Country of the Pointed Firs and Other Stories.
New York: Anchor Books, 1989.
---. Hollander (1996): 678.
J
or
da
n,Ros
a
nAug
us
t
aa
ndFr
a
nkdeCa
r
o.“
I
nThi
sFol
k-Lor
eLa
nd:
”Race, Class,
Identity, and Folklore Studies in Louisiana. Journal of American Folklore 109
(431): 1996. 31-59.
Kein, Sybil, Ed. Creole: The History andLe
gac
yofLoui
s
i
ana’
sFr
e
ePe
opl
eofCol
or
.
Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 2000.
Keyes, Frances Parkinson. The Chess Players. New York: Farrar,
Straus and Cudahy, 1960.
Kilcup, Karen L. and Thomas S. Edwards, Eds. Jewett and Her Contemporaries:
Reshaping the Canon. Gainesville, FL: UP Florida, 1999.
Ki
ng
,Edwa
r
d.“
I
nt
e
r
vi
e
wwi
t
hCha
r
l
e
sGa
y
a
r
r
é
.
”Sc
r
i
bne
r
’
sMont
hl
y
,VI.
November 1873. 13.
King, Grace. Creole Families of New Orleans. Baton Rouge: Claitors, 1971.
A reprint of the 1921 edition.
---. Memories of a Southern Woman of Letters. Freeport, NY: Books for Library P,
1971.
Kirshenblatt-Gi
mbl
e
t
t
,Ba
r
ba
r
a
.“
Mi
s
t
a
ke
nDi
c
hot
omi
e
s
.
”Journal of American Folklore.
(1988): 101:404 140-155.
Kni
g
ht
,
De
ni
s
eD.“
‘
ButOMyHe
a
r
t
:
’ThePrivate Poetry of Charlotte Perkins
Gi
l
ma
n.
” Rudd,Goug
h.2
67-288.
228
Kui
l
a
n,Sus
i
eSc
i
f
r
e
s
.“
The‘
Al
l
-Se
e
i
ngEy
e
’i
nGr
a
c
eKi
ng
’
sBalcony Stories.”
Disheroon and Abney. 99-108.
LaCha
nc
e
,Pa
ulF.“
TheFor
e
i
g
nFr
e
nc
h.
” Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don.1992.101-131.
Lafcadio Hearn Society USA Department of English and Comparative Literature.
University of Cincinnati OH.
La
wr
e
n
c
e
,J
ohnH.“
Exhi
bi
t
i
onOpe
ns
:AGa
t
he
r
i
ngofWor
ksbyMa
r
i
eAdr
i
e
nPe
r
s
a
c
.
”
The Historic New Orleans Collections Quarterly.”XI
X:
1(Winter): 2001. 2.
Logan, Rayford., ed. W.E.B. Du Bois: A Profile. New York: Hill and Wang, 1971.
Log
s
don,J
os
e
pha
ndCa
r
y
nCos
s
éBe
l
l
.“
TheAme
r
i
c
a
ni
z
a
t
i
onofBl
a
c
kNe
wOr
l
e
a
ns
,
1850-1900.
” Hirsch and Logsdon. 1992. 210-262.
Long
,Li
s
aA.“
ThePostbellum Reform Writings of Rebecca Harding Davis
a
ndEl
i
z
a
be
t
hSt
ua
r
tPhe
l
ps
.
”Ba
ue
ra
ndGoul
d.262-307.
Loomis, Ormond H., Coordinator. Cultural Conservations: The Protection of Cultural
Heritage in the United States. Library of Congress. Washington DC:
American Folklife Center, 1983.
Lowenthal, David. The Past is a Foreign Country. New York: Cambridge UP, 1985.
Macrae, David. The American at Home. New York: Dutton, 1952.
Ma
g
i
l
l
,J
ohn.“
Pe
r
s
a
c
’
sCa
na
lSt
r
e
e
t
.
” The Historic New Orleans Collections Quarterly
XIX:1 (Winter): 2001. 2.
Ma
r
t
i
n,J
oa
nM.“
Pl
a
ç
a
g
ea
ndt
heLoui
s
i
a
naGens de Couleur Libre: How Race and Sex
De
f
i
ne
dt
heLi
f
e
s
t
y
l
e
sofFr
e
eWome
nofCol
or
.
”Ke
i
n.2000.
McWilliams, Vera. Lafcadio Hearn. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1946.
Me
nke
,
Pa
me
l
a
,Gl
e
nn.“
Be
hi
ndt
he“
Whi
t
eVe
i
l
:
”Al
i
c
eDunba
r
-Nelson, Creole Color,
and The Goodness of St. Rocque.
”Di
s
he
r
oona
ndAbne
y
.77-87.
Mercier, Alfred. “Pr
og
r
e
s
soft
heFr
e
nc
hLa
ng
ua
g
e
”(
“
Progrés de la langue Francaise”
)
Les Compte-Rendus. 1883.
Meyering, Sheryl L. Ed. Charlotte Perkins Gilman: the Woman and Her Work.
Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research P, 1989.
229
Mi
l
l
e
r
,Ra
nda
l
l
.M.“
’
TheEne
myWi
t
hi
n’
”SomeEf
f
e
c
t
sofFor
e
i
g
nI
mmi
g
r
a
t
i
onon
Ant
e
be
l
l
um Sout
he
r
nCi
t
i
e
s
”i
nSouthern Studies XXIV 1985. 30-53.
Mills, Sara. Michael Foucault. New York: Routledge, 2003
Ne
l
s
on,Da
na
,D.“
Wome
ni
nPubl
i
c
.
”Ba
ue
ra
ndGoul
d.38-68.
Ni
s
hi
z
a
k
i
,I
c
hi
r
o.“
Ne
wl
yDi
s
c
ove
r
e
dLe
t
t
e
r
sf
r
om La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
nt
oDr
.Rudol
ph
Ma
t
a
s
.
”Ochanomizu University Studies in Arts and Culture March 8, 1956.
90-91.
Noske, Frits. French Song from Berlioz to Duparc. Trans. Rita Benton.
New York: Dover, 1970.
Oring, Elliott., ed. Folk Groups and Folk Genres: An Introduction. Logan, Utah:
Utah State UP, 1986.
Painter, Nell Irvin. Standing at Armageddon: The United States 1877-1919. New York:
Norton, 1987.
Parkman, Francis. Count Frontenac and New France under Louis XIV:
France and England in North America, part 5th. Boston: Little, Brown, 1902.
Pa
y
ne
,
J
a
me
sRobe
r
t
,Ed.“
Ge
or
g
eWa
s
hi
ng
t
onCa
bl
e
’
s‘
MyPol
i
t
i
c
s
’
:Cont
e
xta
nd
Re
vi
s
i
onofaSout
he
r
nMe
moi
r
.
”Multicultural Autobiography: American Lives.
Knoxville: U Tennessee P, 1992. 94-113.
Pollard, Percival. Their Day in Court. New York: Neal Publishers, 1909.
Queyrouze, Leona. (Constant Beauvais). “AdPannam.
”1896.
---.“
Agoni
e
.
”September, 1911.
---.“
Amor
”n.d.
---.“
Al
l
e
gor
i
e
:Pe
ns
é
ed’
unCr
é
ol
e
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.June 21, 1891.
---. “Ar
r
i
g
oBo
i
t
o
.
”L’
Ab
e
i
l
l
e
.
December 23, 1894.
---. “
At
l
a
s
.
”L’
Ab
e
i
l
l
e
.
1901.
---.“
Ca
r
y
a
t
i
s
.
”L’
Ab
e
i
l
l
e
,
March 3, 1898.
---.“
Ceq
u
’
o
n
t
d
i
t
l
e
sMo
n
t
a
g
n
e
s
.
”1911.
---.“
Char
l
e
sGay
ar
r
é
.
”C.
R.
A.
L.November 1887. 443.
---.“
l
eDe
s
i
r
.
”Compt
e
s
-Rendus Athénée Louisianais (C.R.A.L.) March, 1885
40. (and in Le Diamant. March 19, 1887).
---.“Fa
n
t
omed’
Oc
c
i
de
nt
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.December 23, 1894.
---.“
Fi
r
s
ta
ndLa
s
tDa
y
sofPa
ulMor
phy
.
”
(Unpublished manuscript is housed at the Williams Research Center in the
Historic New Orleans Collection, 410 Chartres, New Orleans).
---.“
ALaFr
anc
e
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.1892.
230
---. “I
nGr
ae
c
i
um.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.January 22, 1893.
---. The Idyl: Reminiscences of Lafcadio Hearn. Tokyo, Japan: Hokuseido
Press, 1932.
---.“
I
mpr
e
c
at
i
o.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.May 3, 1891.
---.“
Impromptu.
”Manuscript. March 20, 1898.
---.“
Lol
ot
t
e
.
”C.
R.
A.
L.1886. 216.
---. “Noc
t
ur
ne
.
”December, 1901.
---.“
aMagdaTur
pi
n.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.
May 1891.
---.“
aMaMé
r
e
.
”C.
R.
A.
L.September, 1886. 214.
---. “al
’
Ope
r
a.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.1886.
---.“
AdPe
nnam”n.d.
---.“
Par
c
enoc
e
r
e
.
”Cr
us
ade
r
.December 14, 1894.
---.“
Phy
r
ne
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.n.d.
---.“
le Regret.”C.R.A.L. September 1885. 227.
---.“
Re
s
pons
e
.”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.May 27, 1887.
---.“
Re
s
ur
ge
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.December 25, 1908.
---.“
Sol
i
t
ude
.
” L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.1897.
---. “Somni
av
i
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.December 25, 1908.
---.“
Sonne
t
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.1896.
---.“
Sui
t
eDé
pe
c
he
s
.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.
n.d.
---.“
SurunePe
ns
é
edonné
e
.
”C.
R.
A.
L.322.
---.“
LeTi
s
s
e
r
and.
”L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
.n.d.
---.“
Vision.”C.R.A.L. January, 1885, 40. (republished on July 9, 1885
in the French newspaper, le Nouveliste de la Gironde).
Racevskis, Karlis. Michael Foucault and the Subversion of Intellect. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell UP, 1983.
Ra
nki
n,Da
vi
dC.e
d.“
I
nt
r
oduc
t
i
o
n
.
” My Passage at the New Orleans Tribune:
A Memoir of the Civil War Era by Jean-Charles Houzeau. Baton Rouge:
LSU Press, 1984.
Reichardt, Mary R. Mary Wilkins Freeman: A Study of the Short Fiction.
New York: Twayne Publishers, 1997.
Re
i
l
l
y
,J
os
e
phJ
.“
St
or
i
e
sbyKa
t
eChopi
n.
”The Commonweal 25 (26 March): 1937.
606-7.
Reinfeld, Fred and Andrew Soltis. Morphy Chess Masterpieces. New York:
McMillan, 1974.
Rodr
i
g
u
e
,J
ohnC.“
TheFr
e
e
dme
n’
sBur
e
a
ua
ndWa
g
el
a
bori
nt
heLoui
s
i
a
naSug
a
r
Re
g
i
on.
”Ci
mba
l
aa
ndMi
l
l
e
r
.193-218.
231
Roman, Alfred. The Military Operations of General Beauregard 1861 to 1865:
including a brief personal sketch and a narrative of his services in the war with
Mexico 1846-8. v1-v2. New York: Harper & Bros., 1884.
Rudd, Jill and Val Gough.. Eds. Charlotte Perkins Gilman: Optimist Reformer.
Iowa City: U Iowa P, 1999.
Sala, George Augustus. America Revisited. 1882.
Sc
huy
l
e
r
,Wi
l
l
i
a
m.“
Ka
t
eChopi
n
.
”The Writer 7 August 1894. 115-17.
Se
i
de
l
,Ka
t
hr
y
n,Le
e
.“
Pi
c
t
ur
ePe
r
f
e
c
t
:Pa
i
nt
i
ngi
nThe Awakening.
” 227-236.
-----Southern Belle in the American Novel. Gainesville, FL: UP Florida, 1985.
Se
nt
e
r
,Ca
r
ol
y
n.“
Cr
e
ol
ePoe
t
sont
heVe
r
g
eofaNa
t
i
on.
”Ke
i
n,2000.
Shapiro, Norman R. Creole Echoes: the Francophone Poetry of Nineteenth-Century
Louisiana Tr. Norman R. Shapiro with Intro by M. Lynn Weiss and Forward by
Werner Sollors. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.
Shell, Marc and Werner Sollors. The Multilingual Anthology of American Literature:
A Reader of Original Texts with English Translations. New York: New York
UP, 2000.
Soc
ol
a
,Edwa
r
dM.“
Cha
r
l
e
sGa
y
a
r
r
é
:ABi
og
r
a
phy
.
”Uni
ve
r
s
i
t
yofPe
nns
y
l
va
ni
a
.
1954.
Sol
l
or
s
,We
r
ne
r
.“
For
e
wor
d.
”Sha
pi
r
o.2004.
Spe
c
i
a
lExhi
bi
t
s
.“
Pe
opl
e
.
”Louisiana State University Library. (6/26/2004).
www.lib.lsu.edu/special/exhibits/croele/People/people.html).
Stevenson, Elizabeth. The Grass Lark: A Study of Lafcadio Hearn. New Brunswick:
Transaction, 1999. Originally published by Macmillan Co, 1961.
Stevenson, Leslie. Seven Theories of Human Nature. New York: Oxford Up, 1974.
Taylor, Joe Gray. Negro Slavery in Louisiana. New York: Negro UP, 1963.
Thernstrom, Stephan, ed. The Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups
Cambridge, Belknap Press, 1980. 237.
Thor
nt
on,La
wr
e
nc
e
.“
The Awakening: APol
i
t
i
c
a
lRoma
nc
e
.
”i
nAmerican Literature 52
(March 1980): 50-66
232
Tinker, Edward Larocque. Ecrits de Langue Francais en Louisiane. Paris, 1932.
---- Lafcadio He
ar
n’
sAme
r
i
c
anDay
sDetroit: Gale Research Co.
1970. Originally published in 1924 in New York by Dodd, Mead and Co.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. Journey to America. Trans, George Lawrence. Ed. J.P. Mayer.
Westport Conn: Greenwood P, 1981.
Toth, Emily. Unveiling Kate Chopin. Jackson: U Mississippi P, 1999.
Tr
e
g
l
e
,J
os
e
phG.J
r
.“
Cr
e
ol
e
sa
ndAme
r
i
c
a
ns
.
”Hi
r
s
c
ha
ndLog
s
don.1992.131-189.
---.“
Ea
r
l
yNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsSoc
i
e
t
y
:Ar
e
a
ppr
a
i
s
a
l
.J
ournal of Southern
History XVIII. February (1952): 20-36.
Tunnell, Ted. Crucible of Reconstruction: War, Radicalism, and Race in Louisiana
1862-1877 Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1984.
Turner, Arlin Ed. Critical Essays on George W. Cable. Boston: G.K. Hall, 1980.
---. George Washington Cable: A Biography. Durham, 1956:
Twain, Mark. Life on the Mississippi ( 1882) Reprinted New York: PF Collier & Son,
1917.
Wi
e
s
e
,J
a
s
on.“
Pa
ulMor
phy
:Ne
wOr
l
e
a
ns
’
sKi
ngofChe
s
s
.
”The New
Orleans Collection Quarterly XIX : 1. Winter (2001) 8.
Williamson, Joel. A Rage for Order: Black/White Relations in the American South Since
Emancipation. New York: Oxford UP, 1986.
Woodward. C. Vann. The Future of the Past: New York Oxford UP, 1989.
---. Origins of the New South 1877-1913. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1951.
---. The Strange Career of Jim Crow. New York: Oxford UP, 1974.
Wynes, Charles E. ed. Forgotten Voices: Dissenting Southerners in an Age of
Conformity. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1967.
Yu, Beongcheon. An Ape of Gods: The Art and Thought of Lafcadio Hearn.
Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1964.
Ziff, Lazar. The American 1890s: Life and Times of a Lost Generation.
New York: Viking Press, 1966.
233
APPENDIX: POETRY
Thi
ss
e
c
t
i
onc
ont
a
i
nsar
e
pr
e
s
e
nt
a
t
i
ves
a
mpl
i
ngofQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
swor
k,a
nddoe
s
not contain, by any means, her entire oeuvre, but among these poems, one can find a
voice of rebellion and elegy, one that speaks from a lost cultural moment. These
translations comprise my work of salvation, one that attempts to re-capture a voice that
belongs in our canonical garden.
As to translation work, I will rely on the advice of those who have gone before
me. Lafcadio Hearn makes his observations about this endeavor:
It is by no means sufficient to reproduce the general meaning of a sentence:--it is
equally necessary to obtain a just equivalent for each word, on regard to force,
colour, and form,--and to preserve, so far as possible, the original construction of
the phrase, the peculiarity of the rhetoric . . . . A most laborious, cautious . . . work
. . . A work requiring intense applications, wearisome research
(McWilliams 179).
Almost sixty years later, Norman Shapiro writes about his translations of poetry in
the anthology Creole Echoes, saying
though always working with a text created by another, every translator, by
choosing from a vast number of possibilities, leaves a personal mark on the work
undertaken . . . . As ever, I have been guided in my translations—my recreations—by the fundamental desire to carry across into English both the
message of these poems and their manner (xxi-xxiii).
My intentions have been the same, and to that end, I have offered the most exact
meaning of her lines of poetry as possible, but in doing so, had to eschew her rhyming
patterns. In any attempt to duplicate the musicality and meter of each line, I would have
had to sacrifice, in many places, the elegance of her sentiments—and that I could not do.
234
Contents in Alphabetical Order
Agonie
237
Allegorie
238
Arrigo Boito
239
Atlas
240
Caryatis
244
Ce qu’
ontdi
tl
e
sMont
agne
s
245
Le Désir
249
Fat
ômed’
Oc
c
i
de
nt
250
A La France
251
In Graeciam
252
Imprecatio
255
Impromptu I
256
Impromptu II
258
Lolotte
259
Nocturne
261
Al
’
Ope
r
a
262
Ad Pennam
264
Parce Nocere
265
Phyrne
266
L’
Re
gr
e
t
267
Response
270
235
Resurge
271
Somniavi
272
Sonnet
273
Sonnet a Magda Turpin
274
Suite Dépêche
275
Vision
276
236
“Agoni
e
”
Mon âme avait jadis une chère patrie
Oùl
ec
hê
nepui
s
s
a
ntdel
’
a
mi
t
i
éc
r
oi
s
s
a
i
t.
Pour soutenir le ciel sa cime se dressait
Ets
e
sr
a
me
a
uxc
ha
nt
e
l
e
ntàl
’é
t
oi
l
l
ef
l
e
ur
i
e
.
As
onombr
es
’
ouvr
a
i
t
,f
i
l
l
edel
’
I
oni
e
,
La tendre violette; et sans peur mûrissait
Lamoi
s
s
ondel
’
e
s
poi
rq’
unr
a
y
onc
a
r
e
s
s
a
i
t
Etait-ce donc un rêve en mon âme meurtrie?
Quel insecte a rongé le bel arbre vainqueur?
Quel parasite a bu la sève de son coeur?
Onn’
e
nt
e
ndpl
usl
e
sc
ha
nt
sda
nsl
aha
ut
er
a
mé
e
;
Unepe
s
a
nt
enui
tt
ombedel
’
a
ude
l
à
;
L’
é
t
oi
l
l
es
’
e
s
te
t
e
i
nt
ee
tl
af
l
e
urs
’
e
s
tf
e
r
mé
e
.
C’
e
t
a
i
tunr
ê
ve
,he
l
a
sun reve tout cela!
24 Aout 1911 Constant Beauvais
“
Ag
ony
”
Once my soul held a cherished vision
and like a tree, it grew in strength and love.
Its very summit held the skies aloft
with branches blooming among the stars.
The night sky opened for the daughter of Ionie;
the tender violets bloomed without fear,
the harvest of hope blessed by light.
So when were the dreams of souls broken?
What insidious worm began to gnaw at its core?
Which parasite drank up the sap of its heart
and silenced the music of the heavens?
Leaving my soul in the darkness of tombs
with its stars extinguished and blossoms closed.
It was a dream, alas! A dream all!
--September 24, 1911
237
“Al
l
e
gor
i
e
”
Pe
ns
é
ed’
unCr
é
ol
e
Du vieux tronc désséché les rameaux sont détruits.
I
l
sn’
a
va
i
e
ntpl
usnif
l
e
ur
s
,s
if
r
onda
i
s
on,nif
r
ui
t
s
.
Autour du flanc stérile une liane avide
Euroule ses anneaux, et par cent lèvres. vide
La source de sa vie. Et déjà sur son front,
L’
a
r
br
es
pe
c
t
r
eas
e
nt
i
,c
ommeunv
i
va
nta
f
f
r
ont
.
Eclore et resplendir une fleur étrangère
Qui se balance aux vents parasite et légère.
-Constant Beauvais
Nouvelle-Orleans mai 1891
Allegory: The Passing of the Creole
In the old trunk is a withered branch that is destroyed.
There are no more flowers, foliage, or fruits.
Around its barren surface a voracious vine
Surrounds it, climbing and overrunning it. Empty
Is the source of life. Even worse, the face of
This ghostly tree can feel a living insult:
There upon it hatches and gleams a strange flower
With the breath of a parasite that feeds itself on meager light.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eJune 21, 1891
238
“ParAr
r
i
goBoi
t
a”
“Sonne
t
”
Homma
g
ee
tr
e
me
r
c
i
e
me
ntàl
’
i
l
l
ui
r
eaut
e
urde
“Me
f
i
s
t
of
e
l
e
”
Arrigo Boito
Tousl
e
sa
nne
a
uxd’
orf
i
nqu’
àt
e
sbl
a
nc
adoi
g
t
sd’
é
c
ume
Les dogos ont passé, je voudrais les ravir,
O folie Adriatique, aux écrins de saphir
Det
ont
r
é
s
oré
t
r
a
ng
e
,é
tj
’
e
nf
e
r
a
l
smapl
ume
.
I
nvi
nc
i
b
l
ee
tma
g
i
que
.Al
’
e
nc
e
ns
oi
rqu’
a
l
l
ume
Da
nsl
’
o
r
a
ng
e
re
nf
l
e
ur
sl
es
y
l
phedudé
s
i
r
,
J
evi
e
nd
r
a
i
sl
at
r
e
mpe
r
;àl
’
a
l
l
edu plaisir
Je prendrais sa poussière, à la vapeur qui fume
Sur le flanc des côteaux, le soufflé fulgurant
Des fannes de Falerne; au volcan dévorant
La flamme dont rêvait sur son roc Prométhée.
Puis de tous ces rayons, Maitre je te ferais
Un sonnet plus fra
g
r
a
ntquel
emi
e
ld’
Ar
i
s
t
é
e
;
Et ma plume et mon coeur ensuite briserais
--Constant Beauvais 1894
“
ForAr
r
i
g
oBoi
t
o”
All the rings of fine gold circle your white fingers like dross
I will pass all others and would like to delight
In you in Adriatic madness and take the sapphire jewel case
Of your strange treasures and unfurl my pen.
Invincible and magical. The censer of light
In the color of orange blossoms, the sylph of desire,
I would come and be tempted to seek pleasure
I would like to take his magical dust and his misty vapor
On the flanks of the hills, the stabbing light breaks
OfFa
l
e
r
ne
’
sf
a
ns
,a
ndt
hevol
c
a
node
vour
s
Thef
l
a
mewhe
r
ePr
ome
t
he
us
’r
oc
kl
i
e
s
Then of all these rays, maestro, I would make
A sonnet more fragrant than the honey of Aristee
And my pen and my heart would break.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eDecember 23, 1894
239
“
At
l
a
s
”
Sur ma route tomba, soudain, une ombre énorme,
Et, dans le clair azur, se proflia, difforme,
Et courbant en vaincu les genoux, un géant.
Sonf
r
ontl
our
ds
epe
nc
ha
i
ts
url
’
e
s
pa
c
ebéaut,
Etj
’
e
nt
e
ndi
sc
r
a
que
rl
’
é
pa
ul
edel
’
a
t
hl
è
t
e
Sous son faix sidéral tandis que la tempête
Luij
e
t
a
i
te
ng
r
onda
nts
ac
our
onned’
é
c
l
a
i
r
s
Et son sceptre de foudre.
“
Ot
oidel
’
uni
v
e
r
s
Sombre cariatide! Atlas, forcat du bagne
Immensité! Tu vis rouler de sa montagne
J
us
qu’
a
u
xf
l
ot
sdel
’
oubl
iSi
s
y
phedé
l
i
vr
é
.
Sur sa roue Ixion, hagard, désespéré
Enf
i
ns
’
e
s
te
ndor
mi
;l
é
ve
-toi donc, secoue
Ton Olympe sans dieux désormais et dénoue
Te
smus
c
l
e
se
ng
our
di
s
.
”
Le monstre, san bouger,
Releva sa prunelle où semblait se figer
L’
é
t
e
r
n
i
t
ébr
ume
us
ee
t
,des
avoi
xp
a
r
e
i
l
l
e
Al
’
é
c
hodut
onne
r
r
e
,i
lr
é
pondi
t
:J
eve
i
l
l
e
Dans la nuit qui remplit ton oeil, et je sais tout.
Oui
,l
’
Ol
y
mpee
s
tdé
s
e
r
t
,Pr
omé
t
hé
ee
s
tde
bout
;
Des damnés éterneis, moi le dernier, je reste.
Ec
out
ee
tt
us
a
ur
a
s
.Qua
ndJ
upi
t
e
r
,d’
ung
e
s
t
e
,
Eutpl
oy
éme
sdur
sr
e
i
nsl
’
hor
r
i
bl
ef
a
r
de
a
u,
Je ne voulous rien voir à travers le rideau
De mes pleurs fulgurants; et, fermé dans moi-même,
Je contemplais mon âme oú hurlait le blasphème.
Mais un jour je sentis, sur ma paupière en feu,
Commeunf
r
ol
e
me
ntd’
a
i
l
ee
t
,s
url
’
unf
i
nibl
e
u,
J
’
e
nt
r
’
ouvr
i
sme
sy
e
uxl
a
se
tj
evi
s
.Ôme
r
ve
i
l
l
e
!
Pa
s
s
e
re
nbour
donna
nte
ts
e
mbl
a
bl
eàl
’
a
be
i
l
l
e
Quivac
he
r
c
he
rs
onmi
e
l
,unepl
a
nè
t
ed’
or
Et puis encore une autre, et, prenant leur essor
Autour de mon front noir, les innombrables mondes
Ont tendu les rayons de leurs harpes profondes.
Surmonc
oumoi
nsme
ur
t
r
il
’
Ol
y
mpes
’
a
l
l
é
g
e
a
;
Une étoile nouvelle avait chassé déjà,
De son fouet lumineux, les fleurs dieux de la Grèce,
Et je les entendis, surpris dans leur ivresse,
La
i
s
s
e
rt
ombe
rl
ac
oupee
ts
’
e
nf
ui
rduba
nque
t
Pourde
s
c
e
ndr
ea
uNé
a
ntl
ec
he
mi
nqu’
i
ndi
qua
i
t
Undoi
g
tmy
s
t
é
r
i
e
ux,f
a
i
tdi
’
ombr
ee
tdel
umi
è
r
e
.
240
Une voix quie me lit chanceler en arrière
Me dit: Va maintenant; ton temps est consommé.
Rejoins-les. Ne crains point que le monde abîmé
Dans le gouffre sans fond se fracasse en atomes;
Ca
rj
’
a
i
,
puré
t
a
y
e
rme
ss
upe
r
be
sr
oy
a
ume
s
,
Le bois impériesable et sanglant de ma Croix.
Et moi, je répondis à la divine Voix:
O Seigneur, laisse-moi, sous le poids de ta gloire,
Me courber à jamais, autant que le mémoire
De
ss
ol
e
i
l
sdur
e
r
a
.Ta
ndi
squ’
Aha
s
vé
r
us
Monte vers ton pardon à travers Arcturus,
Al
dé
ba
r
a
nf
a
r
ouc
hee
tt
apous
s
i
è
r
ed’
a
s
t
r
e
,
Moi, je veux être, ô Di
e
u,l
’
i
mmobi
l
epi
l
a
s
t
r
e
Qui soutient ta splendeur, et sentir sur mon flanc
S’
a
ppe
s
a
nt
i
r
,t
onpi
e
doùpe
r
l
ee
nc
ort
ons
a
ng
.
Constant Beauvais 25 Dec. 1901
“
At
l
a
s
”
On my descending path, suddenly I saw an enormous shadow
And, against the clear sky was a deformed profile
Of a Giant bending at the knees.
His heavy face looked out into beautiful space.
And I expected his athletic shoulders to crack
Under the awesome burden while the tempest
Blasted him, roaring over his flashing crown
And his lightning scepter.
“
Ohy
ouoft
heuni
ve
r
s
e
1
Dark Caryatid! Atlas, convict of a prison
Immense! You live to roll these mountains
Into the waves of forgetfulness that Sisyphus carried
2
Unde
rI
xi
on’
s
wheel, haggard and despairing,
At last you rest; then once again you rise shaking,
Your godless Olympus reviving
Yourde
a
de
ne
dmus
c
l
e
s
.
”
The monster cannot move
Yet seems to turn to his pupil and stops
1
priestess of Karyai in ancient Greece, or an architectural pillar in the shape of a draped
woman.
2
He was the Etruscan god who is often depicted on a crucified wheel. He was a
Thessalian king who killed his relative. Zeus gave him refuge, but when Ixion tried to
seduce Hera, he was condemned to turn on a wheel for eternity.
241
In the misty eternity, and in a voice that echoes
like the thunder to say: I watch
In the night that fills your eyes, and I know all.
Yes, the Olympus is deserted, but Prometheus is standing;
Cursed for eternity. I am the last one; I remain.
Listen and you will know. Jupiter in a gesture
Left upon my back this horrible burden.
No more do I wish to see through this curtain
Of my dazzling tears, so inscrutable into my very core.
I contemplate my soul or scream blasphemy.
Until one day I felt upon my eyelids on fire
A touch like a wing from the infinite blue.
I opened my eyes at last-- and I lived. Oh Wonder!
Passing by was a humming like a bee
That was looking for its honey, a planet of gold,
And then again another, and they leapt
about my black forehead, and countless worlds
cast rays like profound harps.
On my less bruised neck Olympus lighted
A new star that hunted again
With its luminous whip the proud gods of Greece,
As they heard, they was surprised in their rapture
And recoiled from the sting to flee the banquet
To descend into the Void that was indicated
By a mysterious finger
One way shadow and the other light.
A voice that knew how I wavered
said to me: Go now; your time is over.
Rejoin them. Do not fear this worldly abyss
In this gulf without end, all crashes into atoms
For I have only the pure and steadfast in my supreme kingdom,
Imperishable wood and the blood of my Cross
And so I responded to the divine voice:
O Lord, leave me under the weight of your glory
I will never bend, as long as the memory
of these suns endures. While Ahasvérus1
Knowna
st
he“
Wa
nde
r
i
ngJ
e
w.
”Muc
hl
e
g
e
nds
ur
r
oundst
hi
sf
i
g
ur
e
.Mos
tl
i
ke
l
y
,
Que
y
r
ouz
ewa
sr
e
f
e
r
r
i
ngt
oPi
l
a
t
e
’
ss
e
r
va
ntwhos
t
r
uc
kChr
i
s
ta
shewa
sc
a
r
r
y
i
nghi
s
cross—who would not allow Christ to rest. In return, Christ told him to await his Second
Coming—thus condemning Ahasverus to live for centuries. Even after Ahasverus
repented, his curse was not lifted.
1
242
climbs towards your pardon across Arcturus,1
wild Aldébaran,2 and your star dust.
And I, God, I want to become an unmoving pillar
that supports your splendor, and feel upon my flank
The weight of your foot or a drop of your blood.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eDecember 25, 1901 (Christmas Day)
Also know as Alpha Bootis. This is a very bright orange star—the 4th brightest in the
sky. It is one of the three stars that divides the sky in thirds. It is in the constellation of the
He
r
ds
ma
n(
Boot
e
s
)a
ndi
sc
a
l
l
e
dt
h
e“
Be
a
rWa
t
c
he
r
.
”(
Ar
kt
os
=be
a
rGr
.
)
.I
tf
ol
l
owsUr
s
a
Major(Greater Bear) around the north pole.
1
2
Also known as Alpha Tauri, the giant red star and the brightest star of Taurus—it is the
bul
l
’
se
y
e
.I
ti
st
he“
f
ol
l
owe
r
”be
c
a
us
ei
tf
ol
l
owst
heSe
ve
nSi
s
t
e
r
s(
Pl
e
i
a
de
s
)
.
(Aldebaran=Torch Gr.) According to the Persians, it is one of the four Royal Stars.
Note: According to Who’
sWhoi
nCl
as
s
i
c
alMy
t
hol
ogy
.Ed. Michael Grant and John
Hazel, New York Oxford UP, 1993:
Atlas (the one who endures or carries) was supposedly charged with guarding the gates to
heaven and golden apples, but is often described as holding up the sky.
243
“Car
y
at
i
s
”
Animam non cruciare, non
perducere ad contempticuem.
Sur ton front de granit las massive architrave
Pèse a travers les temps, sans jamais te courber.
Et ton large regard voit croitre et seccomber
Le
spe
upl
e
se
ndé
l
i
r
el
’
huma
ni
t
éh
â
ve
.
Et bien des fois la foudre effleura ton oeil grave
Et
,g
r
onda
nts
urt
oi
,f
i
tl
’
e
di
f
i
c
et
r
e
mbl
e
r
.
Mais tu restes debout—Et moi prêt à tomber
Sous le poids du dégoût, je me dresse plus brave,
Et ne veux point fléchir—Entassez la douleur
Sur la douleur encore, sculptes bien le malheur,
Ensuite posez-le sur mon âme en détresse;
Soit, mais pas un soupir ne vous révé era
L’
a
g
oni
eoùs
’
é
t
e
i
ntmas
upr
ê
met
e
ndr
e
s
s
e
,
Ma dernière pitié pour tout ce qui-sera.
3 mars 1898 Constant Beauvais
Over your head, you hold the massive granite architecture
Through the breadth of time
Never have you bent
And your far reaching look grows and
Sees the delirious passage of humanity
And several times that lighting has engraved your eyes
And scolded the temple, trembling
But your remained standing while I am ready to fall
Under the weight of such--Seeing you, I stand up braver
And not all desires that weigh upon me in pain
In my pain, sculptor of misfortune
Next to put my soul in distress
Be, but not a sign, not our dream of mortal agony or extinguished itself in supreme
kindness,
For my pitiable back and all that will be.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eMarch 3, 1898
244
“Cequ’
ontdi
tl
e
sMont
agne
s
”
La nuit des temps pesait sur les sommets sacrés
Où les siècles lointains, dans la brume rentrés,
Spectres géants voi
l
é
sd’
unl
i
nc
e
u
ldemy
s
t
è
r
e
,
Rêvent en écoutant les échos de la terre
Que leur porte parfois la tempête en fuyant.
Tout-à-coup éclata, dans le calme effrayant,
Unf
or
mi
da
bl
ea
ppe
loùvi
br
a
i
e
ntl
’
ha
r
moni
e
De
spr
e
mi
e
r
sc
ha
nt
sdumondee
tl
ec
r
id’
a
g
oni
e
D’
unec
r
é
a
t
i
onr
e
t
ombé
ea
uné
a
nt
.
Etl
amul
t
i
pl
evoi
x,ve
r
sl
’
e
s
pa
c
ebé
a
nt
,
Cl
a
ma
:Cour
bet
onf
r
ont
,ôz
é
ni
t
h,pourm’
e
nt
e
ndr
e
.
J
es
ui
sl
’
Hi
ma
l
a
y
a
.J
a
di
sj
’
a
ivus
’
é
nt
e
ndr
e
Lama
i
ndel
’
I
nnomméquis
c
ul
pt
al
ec
ha
os
.
Et cette main tenait le plus pur des joyaux:
As
t
r
es
e
r
t
id’
a
r
g
i
l
e
;e
s
pr
i
tf
l
a
mmed
el
’
ê
t
r
e
.
Puis aussitôt je vis le redoubtable Maître
D’
unel
a
r
mee
f
f
a
c
e
rl
’
é
ba
uc
hedeb
e
a
ut
é
Qu’
i
la
va
i
tmode
l
é
ee
ns
oné
t
e
r
ni
t
é
.
Mais au-de
s
s
usde
sf
l
ot
spl
a
na
i
tl
’
â
mei
mmor
t
e
l
l
e
Des
onoe
uvr
ed’
a
mour
,s
ipl
a
i
nt
i
v
e et si belle
Enc
or
,
qu’
i
lpa
r
donna
.
—J
’
a
ivuc
e
sc
hos
e
s
-lá.
Surmonf
l
a
ncj
’
a
is
e
nt
i
,ve
na
ntdel
’
a
u-delá,
J
a
i
l
l
i
rl
’
h
uma
ni
t
éj
us
qu’
àl
’
i
mme
ns
epl
a
i
ne
,
Où, lasse de traîner son invisible chaine,
Elle voulut bâtir ses Babels de granit,
De science et de rêve et bondir en bandit
J
us
qu’
às
onDi
e
uvoi
l
é
,g
i
g
a
nt
e
s
quel
i
mi
t
e
Del
’
i
l
l
i
mi
t
émê
me
.
Au sol israélite,
Si
na
ï
,s
e
c
oua
nts
ac
r
i
ni
è
r
ed’
é
c
l
a
i
r
s
,
Fit retentir sa voix qui sonna dans les airs
Comme un vibrant écho des trompettes sacrées
Dontl
’
é
c
l
a
tf
i
tt
r
e
mbler les tribus égarées.
“
Nulpl
usquemoin’
e
s
tg
r
a
nd,c
a
rj
es
ui
r
eSi
na
ï
.
Surmonf
r
ontr
e
pos
al
epi
e
dd’
Adona
ï
Ta
ndi
squ’
i
lr
é
pé
t
a
i
ts
apa
r
ol
eé
t
e
r
ne
l
l
e
Au prophète intrépide ;e
tj
’
a
lvul
’
é
t
i
nc
e
l
l
e
Du Verbe féconder les sillons a venir.
Mon épaule a porté les tables de saphir,
Etl
epoi
dsf
uts
il
our
dqu’
e
l
l
ee
ne
s
te
nc
orl
a
s
s
e
.
”
Une flamme embrasa les hauteurs du Parnasse,
Etl
’
onvi
tda
nss
apour
pr
eHé
l
i
ost
r
i
ompha
nt
245
Qui dominait le monde et tout-à-coup le vent
Quivi
e
ntdel
’
i
nf
i
nif
i
tr
é
s
onne
rs
alyre,
Pe
nda
ntques
’
é
ve
i
l
l
a
i
t
,e
nundi
vi
ndé
l
i
r
e
La montage du dieu.---Salut, fier Apollon!
C’
e
s
tve
r
st
oiqu’
àj
a
ma
i
ss
’
é
l
a
nc
ee
nt
our
bi
l
l
on
L’
e
s
s
a
i
mdel
’
i
dé
a
l
,del
’
e
xt
a
s
ee
tdur
ê
ve
.
Ledi
a
dè
mer
oul
eàl
’
a
bî
mel
eg
l
a
i
ve
,
Las de frapper, se brise; à son tour chaque dieu
Vador
mi
rda
nsl
’
e
xi
l
.Ma
i
st
ons
ouf
f
l
edef
e
u,
Re
pe
upl
a
ntl
’
uni
ve
r
s
,r
e
nda
uxs
pe
c
t
e
r
sl
e
urâ
me
Etr
e
do
n
nel
avi
eàt
ous
,mê
meál
’
i
nf
â
me
.
Toi seul es immortel, o superbe Hélios!
Ma
î
t
r
ed
eme
ss
omme
t
s
,pè
r
ed’
As
c
l
é
pi
os
.
”
La montagne se tut et sur son flanc sonore
Pa
l
pi
t
a
,f
ug
i
t
i
f
,unf
l
a
mboi
e
me
ntd
’
a
ur
or
e
.
Alors, impérieux, le Palatin parla;
Etda
nss
onr
udea
c
c
e
ntondi
s
t
i
ng
ua
i
tl
’
é
c
l
a
t
Du choc des boucliers et la voix des batailles.
“
J
edor
ma
i
si
nc
onnu,qua
nds
ouda
i
nme
se
nt
r
a
i
l
l
e
s
Frémirant sous le soc sacré que Romulus,
L’
é
l
ude
sdi
e
ux,g
ui
da
i
t
;e
tl
es
a
ngdeRé
mus
Vint féconder mon sein et ma moisson fut Rome!
Que
le
s
tdonca
pr
è
smoil
edi
e
u,l
emontoul
’
homme
Quipa
bl
e
r
adeg
l
or
i
e
?
”
Uns
ouf
f
l
edi
f
:c
’
e
s
tmoi
Qui parlerai; moi l
’
humbl
ee
tquic
onnusl
’
e
f
f
r
oi
Des supplices sans nom, des sombres agonies.
Je suis le Golgotha, frère des gémonies.
Ma
i
sunj
ourj
’
a
is
e
nt
i
,c
a
pt
i
fe
tt
r
é
buc
ha
nt
,
Un Dieu vêtu de chair qui montait mon penchant.
Pui
sa
l
or
ss
’
e
nf
onc
ac
ommeung
l
a
i
vedef
l
amme
Aupl
uspr
of
onddemoi
;c
’
é
t
a
i
tl
ac
r
oi
xi
nf
â
me
Qui se dressait parmi le peuple rugissant.
O montagnes! vos dieux ont demandé du sang;
Et Lui, donnait le sien pour son rêve sublime.
Pourr
e
c
e
voi
rs
e
spl
e
ur
se
ts
onpa
r
don,l
’
a
bî
me
A tendu son calice étoilé; les soleils
Sont venus entourer de leurs nimbes vermeils
Le doux front déchiré sous sa couronne infime.
Et le noir Golgotha, sinistre champ du crime,
Devint le marchepied de la Divinité
Etr
e
s
t
ea
us
e
ni
l
ed’
a
z
urdes
oné
t
e
r
ni
t
é
.
246
“
Wha
tt
heMount
a
i
nsSa
i
d”
Night weighed heavy upon the sacred summits
Where the distant centuries in returning mists,
Like giant specters veiled in shrouds of mystery,
Listened to the echoes of the earth
Through a door that sometimes opened fleetingly.
All at once in the dreadful calm
There was heard the formidable vibrant harmonious cry
Of the first song of the world and the mortal cries of agony
Of Creation falling once again into the void.
In many voices towards a gaping space,
They all cried out: Bend your face, o zenith, to me.
I am the Himalaya. Once I knew
An unknown hand that carved us from chaos,
And this hand carried the purest of jewels,
The star of day, the flaming spirit of Being,
And when I saw this immense fearsome master
Tears etched my face at its incredible beauty
That was modeled after eternity,
Rising above the immortal souls,
This, his work and his love, so plaintive, so beautiful,
So forgiving. I have seen these things
While upon my flanks I have felt
Rising humanity flooding the immense plains
Where, they tire of the invisible chain
And turn to build great granite towers of Babel,
Where science robbed them of the dream of knowledge
Because their God is veiled in the infinite limits
Of the unlimited.
Oh sun of Israel,
Sinai, shakes his mane of lighting,
His voice resounding through the air
Like vibrant echoes of sacred trumpets,
Its brightness striking the wayward tribes.
“
Sur
e
l
y
,
t
he
r
ei
snot
hi
ngmor
et
ha
nt
hi
s
,Si
ni
a
i
,
for on my forehead rests the foot of Adonis
as I keep repeating the eternal words,
the pregnant Verb of what is to come,
while my shoulders carry the sapphire sky
Wi
t
hwe
i
g
hts
ohe
a
vyt
ha
twe
a
r
i
ne
s
sr
e
t
ur
ns
.
”
There is a flame embracing the heights of Parnassus
Where triumphant Helios reigns
247
With his dominance over the world, where the sudden wind
That comes from the infinite resounds the lyre,
Awakening into a divine ecstasy
The mountains of the gods. Hail fiery Apollo!
Towards you the whirlwind swarms,
Towards the ideals, the ecstasies and the dreams.
The diadem rocks beneath the sword,
Too tired to strike, it breaks, for every god, in turn,
Will sleep in exile but for you, who with fiery breath
Replenishes the universe, returning the souls to their specters.
You are immortal, almighty Helios!
Ma
s
t
e
ro
fmys
ummi
t
s
,f
a
t
he
rofAs
c
l
e
pi
us
.
”
Uponmymount
a
i
n’
ss
l
e
e
pi
ngf
l
a
nks
Come your fleeting flames of dawn.
Then imperial Palatine speaks:
And in his rough accents, he speaks of the bright
Clash of the shields and the battle cries.
“
Is
l
e
ptuna
wa
r
e
,a
ndwhe
nIa
wok
e
I was crushed under the sacred plow of Romulus
And the elected gods called for the blood of Remus
Which fertilized my breast-- and the harvest was Rome!
Where therefore is my god, the mountain, or the man,
Whe
r
et
hewor
dsofg
l
or
y
?
”
Now comes another voice: I speak
with humility and dreadful remembrance
Of nameless tortures and dark mortal agonies.
I am Golgotha, Brother of twins.
On that day I felt, captive and trembling,
A living God against my flesh inclining
Thrust with a flaming sword,
And in profound mute witness I saw a flaming cross
Erected among the roaring people.
O mountains! The gods demanded your blood,
All for the sublime dream
Of tears for forgiveness, the abyss
Reached for the stars, the suns
Surrounded His head with a radiant halo;
His soft forehead was torn under an infamous crown,
And I, black Golgotha, the field of this sinister crime,
Who knew the footfalls of a God
Remain still under the blue heavens of an eternal sun.
1911
248
“LeDé
s
i
r
”
Gran duol me prese al cor. Dante.—Inferno
Perché cantando il duol si
disacerba. Petrarca.
Un baiser que jamais la lèvre saisit.
Une étoile attirant le papillon caprice,
J
us
qu’
àc
eques
onvols
el
a
s
s
ee
ts
’
a
l
our
di
s
s
e
;
Una
pp
e
li
ns
e
ns
él
’
é
c
honousr
e
di
t
;
Uneombr
equif
a
i
ts
i
g
nee
tda
nsl
’
o
mbr
es
’
e
nf
ui
t
,
Fa
nt
ômequel
’
on nomme Idéal, Béatrice;
Espérance enlacée au regret; précipice
Où flottent Paolo, Francesca dans leur nuit;
O Désir, monstre ailé, phaléne sidérale!
O démon quie nous tends une toile infernale
Oùl
’
i
ns
e
c
t
e
,l
af
l
e
ur
,l
’
hommevi
e
nte
xpi
r
e
r
:
Que de genoux meurtris, que de mains étendues!
Quel
’
h
o
mmee
s
tma
l
he
ur
e
ux,vi
va
ntpourt
’
a
dor
e
r
,
Et quels soleils naîtront de nos larmes perdues.
Constant Beauvais--J
our
naldel
’
At
hé
né
e
“
TheDe
s
i
r
e
”
The kiss that never reaches the lips.
The whimsy of a butterfly attracted to a star,
Even as it grows heavy and weary;
The senseless cry that echoes and then repeats.
The shadow marks but in a shadow flees,
A phantom with the name, Ideal, Beatrice;
Hope mixed with regret, a precipice
Where Paolo floats and Francesca remains in darkness.
Oh Desire, winged monster, a moth towards the stars,
Oh demon, that extends across the vast canopy
Where all insects, flowers and mankind expire.
Kneeling in pain with hands outstretched!
I
ti
sma
nki
nd’
smi
s
f
or
t
unet
ol
i
vea
ndt
ol
ove
where rising suns give birth to our lost tears.
249
“Fant
ômed’
Oc
c
i
de
ntaLaf
c
adi
oHe
ar
nauJ
apon”
Le chrysanthème d'or au ciel a'epanouit
La Nuit a sur son flanc, denoué sans contrainte
Saz
onedemy
s
t
è
r
e
;e
t
,d’
uneé
t
r
a
ng
eé
t
r
e
i
nt
e
,
Le croissant grêle tient, sous sa griffe qui luit,
Les
pe
c
t
r
edel
aLune
,e
ts
’
a
ppr
ê
t
es
a
nsbr
ui
t
A jouer à la paume avec sa face éteinte.
--Unf
a
n
t
ômel
oi
nt
a
i
n,va
g
uea
i
ns
iqu’
unepl
a
i
nt
e
,
Tout-à-c
oupapa
s
s
é
,voi
s
,i
ls
’
é
va
noui
t
.
Il vient de ce pays où la Nuit blonde et pure
Jamais entièrement ne défait sa ceinture;
Oùda
n
sl
’
a
z
urf
l
e
ur
i
t
,c
ommeunb’
a
ncma
g
nol
i
a
,
La lune éclose auprès des tremblantes étoiles
Auxpr
u
ne
l
l
e
se
npl
e
ur
s
;oùl
’
ombr
ed’
Ophé
l
i
a
Dans le fleuve profond semble trainer ses voiles.
Constant Beauvais
Louisiana 1894
“
Pha
nt
om oft
heOc
c
i
de
nt
:La
f
c
a
di
oHe
a
r
n”
The golden Chrysanthemum now blooms
Without restraint under the vast night skies
In a place of mystery, and in a strange embrace
The growing slender threads catch the light.
The ghost of the moon appears in the quiet
Pretending to hide its face with its palms.
--A distant phantom, with a vague complaint,
All at once it disappears, fainting away.
It comes from this country where the pure and blond Night
Can never entirely escape the bonds that tie,
Of azure blooms and white magnolias.
The moon gives birth to trembling stars,
Each one a tearful pupil, where like the shadow of Ophelia
In a deep river, they cast their veils.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eDecember 23, 1894
250
“OFr
anc
e
”
O France, je voudrais, comme un amant jaloux
Trouver des mots nouveaux, une langue inconue,
De
sa
c
c
e
nt
sdontj
a
ma
i
sn’
ar
e
t
e
nt
il
anue
,
Pour dire mon amour, si profonde et si deux.
Ainsi que mes äieux le front sur tes genoux,
Je voudrais, une fois le ongue nuit venue,
M’
e
ndormir, en sentant autour de ma chair
Toné
t
r
e
i
nt
epa
r
e
i
l
l
ea
uba
i
s
e
rdel
’
e
poux;
Tandis que monterait mon âme à le luminère
Ave
cl
’
e
pit
r
e
mbl
a
nts
ousl
’
humi
depa
upi
è
r
e
Du bluet matinal, dans le fréle encensoir
Des violettes, et, que du sang de mes veines,
Le raison rutilant rougirait le ressoir
Et ferait déborder las vastes coupes pleines.
“
OhFr
a
nc
e
”
Oh France, I wish, like a jealous lover
To find new words in an unknown language
In accents as profound and soft as clouds
To speak of love.
I pray upon my knees with my eyes closed
For the time to come to welcome night
So in my sleep I could feel upon my flesh
The embrace and kisses of a spouse.
Before my soul climbs to the light
With ears trembling, and tearful eyes
That wake to the frail light of morning, blue
as violets, and feel the blood in my veins
Like sparkling grapes pressed into wine
To fill to overflowing our loving cup.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1892
251
"In Graeciam"
Homma
g
edoul
our
e
auxr
e
nduáMons
i
e
urL.Pl
ac
i
deCanongel
’
amit
antr
e
gr
e
t
t
é
,mor
t
le 22 Janvier 1893.
Ta main a donc laissé glisser le frêle amphore,
Pl
e
i
nee
nc
ord’
hy
dr
ome
l
;e
tl
eva
s
es
onor
e
S’
e
s
tbr
i
s
é
,r
é
pa
nda
nts
af
r
a
g
r
a
nt
el
i
que
ur
.
La violette Hellène y croîtra. Dans son coeur
J
epui
s
e
r
i
al
emi
e
lqu’
e
mpot
a
i
tàl
’
Hy
me
t
t
e
L’
a
bi
l
l
eàl
a
nc
ed’
or
,s
epr
e
s
s
a
nt
,i
nqui
è
t
e
.
Pui
sj
’
e
npa
r
f
ume
r
a
imonpoè
mes
a
c
r
é
,
Et sur ton souvenir je les effeuillerai,
Mes vers triste et doux—Al
’
he
ur
edi
a
pha
ne
,
Lorsque le flanc des monts bleuit, viens au platane
Quides
onma
nt
e
a
ud’
ombr
e
,e
nunpa
s
s
él
oi
nt
a
in,
Abr
i
t
a
,f
r
é
mi
s
s
a
ntl
’
ha
r
moni
e
uxf
e
s
t
i
n
Où Socrate raillait la rouge symposie,
Tandis que Péricles écoutait Aspasie.
Aupr
è
sd’
Al
c
i
bi
a
deé
t
a
i
tt
apl
a
c
e
.Vi
e
ns
,
Fils du pays des Dieux, et, si tu te souviens,
Auba
n
q
ue
tg
a
r
debi
e
n,s
urt
ac
ouc
hed’
i
voi
r
e
,
Lapl
a
c
edemons
pe
c
t
r
e
.Ai
ns
iqu’
a
uxt
e
mpsdeg
l
oi
r
e
.
Dedé
l
i
r
ee
td’
a
mour
,e
nc
ohor
t
ei
l
svi
e
ndr
ont
,
Les convives sans voix ceindre ton pâle front
Des verts rameaux du lierre avec des violettes,
Et te couronneront de blanche bandelettes.
--Sur les dernier
ss
omme
t
s
,l
ej
ourmont
ee
ts
’
e
nf
ui
t
,
Laissant flotter un pan de Chlamyde de qui luit:
Orgiaque reflet et pourpe sépulcrale!
Le deipnon-fantôme est dressé. La Cigale
Da
nsl
’
o
mbr
ef
a
i
tvi
br
e
rs
onmonoc
or
ded’
or
Etr
hy
t
hmeva
g
ue
me
ntt
a
ndi
squ’
e
l
l
es
’
e
ndor
t
,
Les chants silencieux qui montent de vos lèvres,
Ai
ns
iqu’
unef
umé
e
.Etl
ef
r
i
s
s
onde
sf
i
è
vr
e
s
Fait palpiter là-bas les constellations
At
r
a
ve
r
sl
e
sr
a
me
a
ux,c
ommeunvold’
a
l
c
y
ons
,
Pa
rl
’
a
q
ui
l
ons
ur
pr
i
s
.
Soudain un froid étrange
A fait frémir mon flanc. Là, parmi la phalange
Des tombeaux affames, étreignannt le granit
Qui
eve
r
st
ois
’
i
nc
l
i
na
i
t
,j
er
ê
va
i
s
,
moi
,ma
udi
t
;
Moiquit
ouj
our
sa
ivul
af
oudr
ef
r
a
ppe
rl
’
a
r
br
e
.
--Comme il est froid et lourd, ton blanc manteau de marbe!
252
Pa
rt
r
i
osf
oi
sl
’
Ang
e
l
usàrépété le Mot
Etmonc
ha
ntc
omme
nc
és
’
a
c
hè
vee
nuns
a
ng
l
ot
.
“
I
nGr
a
e
c
i
a
m”
The hand let go and dropped the fragile vessel
Once so full of mead, and the echoing vase
Is broken, spilling its fragrant liqueur.
Li
keHe
l
e
n’
svi
ol
e
t
s
,t
ha
tf
i
l
l
sourhe
a
r
t
s
covering the mountains of Hymette,
Like the honey the bee carries
with its golden lance, full and restless
With its perfume, I will write my sacred poem to you,
And from my memories I will pluck
My verse, soft and sad, in this diaphanous hour
When the flanks of the mountains come to the plains
In their coat of shadows, so far away,
Sheltered, shuddered in a harmonious unity,
Where Socrates laughed at the red elixir,
Where Pedicles listened to Aspasia
With general Alcibides at his side. Come, now,
To the boundless banquet, and on your ivory chariot
Come to the place of spirits. This is the time of your glory,
Of desire and love. Your compatriots will come,
And these silent guests will circle your pale forehead with branches of ivory and violets
And will crown your head with white bandlettes.
---In the distant hills the day climbs to its end, fleeting
Light floating on mountain lakes
Casting an amber reflection on your violet sepulcher,
Preparing your spirit. In the shadows, the cicadas begin the golden monochord
Of their vague rhythm while you sleep,
And when their chant is silenced, the moment
Becomes but smoke and the shiver of fevers,
Yet the day lingers against the constellations
While the flights of birds etch the sky
in the rising north winds.
Suddenly a strange cold comes over me
Blowing against the flame and against the phalanx
Where the flare of tombs ignites the granite
Which towards you inclines, and I resist and curse
253
For I saw the thunderbolt strike the trees
Illuminating how cold, how heavy, is this white coat of marble.
Three times the Angelus repeated the word, and my song begins its ending with a sob.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eJanuary 22, 1893
254
“I
mpr
e
c
at
i
o”
Tunousat
ousma
udi
t
s
.Ma
r
i
qui
t
al
af
e
’
l
e
Par-delà le tombeau ta malêdiction
A flétri dans sa fleur notre race créole
J
a
di
sr
a
c
edepr
e
ux.D’
unea
ut
r
ena
t
i
on,
Les enfants aux, frents blonds ont, selon ta parole
Broyé sous leur talon la génération
Du Franc et du Latin, la grandesse espagnole,
Et tous ceux qui sava
i
e
nt
,d’
é
g
a
l
epa
s
s
i
on.
Aimer, venger, hair , et pardonner . . peut-être
Et que nous reste t-i
l
?Lal
a
ng
uedel
’
a
nc
e
t
r
e
Pa
rl
ef
l
’
sdé
da
i
g
né
e
,a
uxc
he
ve
t
sdeg
r
a
ni
t
.
De
sa
j
e
ouxs
’
e
xi
l
a
i
t...Compl
i
c
edet
uhui
ue
La grande fleuve aux lourds flots roulant hors de aon lit
Ser
e
pa
i
tdet
ombe
a
uxdual
’
a
bi
mei
le
nt
r
a
i
ne
--Constant Beauvais
“
I
mpr
e
c
a
t
i
o”
Your curses are mine. Mariquita is like a wisp
Far beyond the tomb of your curses
For the fading flower of our Creole race
Once a proud race. The other nation
Those mere infants with their blonde looks and words
Crush under their heels the generations
Of the French and the Latin, the grand Spanish,
And all those who knew the same passion.
To love, to seek vengeance, to hate, to forgive . . . perhaps
And ther
e
s
t
?Oura
nc
e
s
t
or
s
’l
a
ng
ua
g
e
Is now denigrated and only found on headstones.
Cut off and exiled, we are ushered to the
The large rolling river where its heavy waves take us under
Taking all, carrying all, into the tomb of the abyss.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eMay 3, 1891
255
“I
mpr
ompt
u”
March 20, 1898
J
et
’
a
ur
a
i
,j
el
ec
r
a
i
ns
,c
a
us
eque
l
quee
mba
r
r
a
s
Par una surprise émue, en voyant sous son bras
Et presseí à tou flane courre un corps de sulfane
Helas, non plus deja la malehaneuse canne
Lui pourlant eût voulu rester fulete, ami.
Mars sa rivale antique. Et mon coeur a gému
Un instant—Ma
i
sa
pr
ì
s
,ja
il
oue‘
t
ac
ons
t
a
nc
e
Et une surs demandé par quelle-- vertance
Cette intruse arrogante avait, una for; pensé
Exiler cet aime talisman du Passé
De tou austere étreinte—Il est seul, san reproche
Ce Passé brenheureup, sur sou spectre ricoshe
Chaque trait du Present, fleui Gardeur et de for
--Ordoncj
’
a
rr
é
s
ol
ur
e
s
pe
c
t
a
nta
l
t
el
oi
.
De nourrir eu tore âme, ainsi que la vestele
L’
é
t
e
r
u
e
l
l
ec
ha
l
e
urquiduPa
s
s
e
’
se
xha
l
e
.
Sur
l
ac
a
us
el
’a
ut
a
nquir
e
c
onna
i
tt
oupa
s
,
Repose toi sans crainte et ne redoule pas
Quel
’
a
ut
r
e
,dé
l
a
i
s
s
i
ee
us
ouc
oi
uobs
e
qurs
oug
e
A transformer pour loi sa ler ise en mensourge
256
“
I
mpr
ompt
u”1898
I see you coming, and I fear, there will be some embarrassment,
And an uncomfortable surprise. I see under your arm,
Pressed against your side,
the dreaded walking cane.
Perhaps I will tell you we shall remain friends.
But I know Mars has an old rival. And my heart will gasp
For one instant before it rights itself.
This will require Virtue in me,
For this is only my wounded pride; thus I will
Dispatch remembrances of the Past,
Of one brief embrace, one without reproach.
But the blessed Past, like a returning ghost,
Tries to speak to the present about love and faith.
But I will vow to respect the laws of Virtue
And to nourish my soul as well as its vessel.
So that the lasting heat of the Past shall expire.
Because I now know your path
I can rest without fear or dread
And in a forlorn funereal dirge
Forsake your lie for my law.
--Manuscript March 20, 1898
257
“I
mpr
ompt
u”II
De mon balcon au vôtre, un long fil irisé
Est tendu ce matin; le vent n'a pas brisé
Ce pont aérien, cette soyeuse échelle.
Si j'etais Roméo, j'oserais bien gravir
Ces fragiles degrés pour aller vous ravir;
Et j'escaladerais les cieux pour vons ma belle.
L'amour est se léger qu'il grimpernit, ma foi,
Sans rompre ce fil fin, mon enfant, jusqu'à toi
A moins qu'il u'expirât en chemin, de vertige.
Il redescend parfois lorsqu'il devrait monter;
Notre siècle est prudent faut-il s'en irriter?
Tant pis pour qui s'eu fâche et pour qui trop exige.
Autrefois on mourait pour l'amour; à présent
On vit n'importe comme. Il serait malséant
De demander aux gens une pareille preuve.
Mais votre Roméo s'avane. Dien merci,
Ce n'est qu'une araignée encote et le souci
Des amons, je le erois n'a rien qui vous émeuve.
258
“Lol
ot
t
e
”
Heureuse petite Lolotte,
Aves sa tête linotte,
Avic son cour de papillon!
Devant son mirror elle danse,
Et regarde avec complaisance
L éclat doré de son chignon.
Da
ndl
er
uee
l
l
es
’
i
ma
g
i
ne
Qu’
àc
ha
quepa
se
l
l
ef
a
s
c
i
ne
Tousl
e
sbe
a
uxg
a
r
c
onsqu’
e
l
l
evoi
t
.
Au bal elle fait la coquette.
Etr
e
po
n
dd’
unevoi
xdi
s
t
r
a
i
t
e
Aux compliment
squ’
e
l
l
er
e
ç
oi
t
.
Heuresuse petitie Charlotts,
El
l
es
’
a
i
me
,e
l
l
es
edor
l
ot
e
;
Le sort la fit pur le plasir.
Pour
quoidonc
,àl
af
l
e
urdel
’
â
g
e
,
S’
e
nt
e
r
r
e
rda
nsl
ama
r
r
i
a
g
e
?
Elle a bien le temps de choisir.
Prenons part à toutes les fêtes;
Faisons tourner toutes les têtes.
Tant pis spur les fous serieux,
Qui nous traiterone de perfide,
Et commettront un suicide.
En laissant de triste adieux.
259
“
Lol
ot
t
e
”
Happy little Lolotte
with her head in the air
and the heart of a butterfly!
In the mirror she dances
and looks with satisfaction
at the gilded splendor of her hair.
In the street she imagines
that her every step captivates
all the handsome boys she sees.
At the dances she acts the ingenue
and responds without acknowledgment
to the compliments she receives.
Little happy Lolotte,
So loved, so pampered;
she charms purely for the pleasure of it all.
So why then, at the flower of her age
does she enter into marriage,
when she had all the time to choose?
But we all attend the party
and we all turn heads,
and take advantage of serious fools
and we all join in the treachery
to commit our suicide
so all that's left is farewell.
C.R.A.L. 1886
260
“Noc
t
ur
ne
” (some words were not legible in the manuscript)
Viens à la vielle table ou le vulgaire ennui
Mancais n a fait poser aur nous sa main de glace
Oui
,d’
-- unr
é
s
e
a
ud’
or
,l
al
a
mpe
ne
ni
use
nl
a
c
e
,
---la --- qio souvent sur nous, sereine, a lui
Vi
e
nr
e
uvr
i
ra
ve
cmoic
e
’
l
l
i
vr
e
;s
’
e
s
tc
e
l
ui
--- emble nous avons fermé. Voici la place
Nous v retreverous, ne croia to pas, la trace
D’
unel
a
r
mee
tl
’
é
c
hodenot
r
er
i
r
ee
nt
i
l
!
-------------- encor vibrer, harmonie
Tui
ne
,d’
e
nmê
mel
ut
h,l
e
sc
or
de
sr
a
di
e
us
e
s
Ne, ames se tendent sous le soufflé divin.
Et --- amins, en tourant les feullets du poème,
S—obercheroont encore et sejeindront enfin.
Ami, comme autrefeis, dans la donceur suprême.
“
Noc
t
u
r
ne
”
We come together at this old table in our ennui
Before the hands of ice pass over us.
Yes, a tangled golden glow of light envelops us
And serenity comes to us in this place.
Come, review this book with me. It is the one
That will ease our confusion. Here is the place.
We choose not to believe that our lives are passing, but the trace
Of our tears and the echo of our laughter tells us so.
No, our stirring should be in harmony
Attuned on a lute with radiant chords
As our spirits become an offering to the Divine Breath.
Just as my hand turns these sheets of poetry
So, to, shall we be joined in the end,
I, you, as it has always been, in infinite sweetness.
--manuscript December 1, 1901
261
“al
’
Ope
r
a”
Respecteusement dedie a M.L. Placide Canonge
Ce ne sont pas des chants, ce ne sont que des larmes.
-- de Musset
Nos fauteuils se touchaient; en doux acents vai queu
Violette chantait, troublée et pàlissante,
Cet hymne appris trop tard, et qui brûlant no coeurs.
Les étreignait tours deux dans sa douceur puissante
Dans notre âme endormie éveillant les douleurs,
L'harmonie appelait de sa voix caressante
Les larmes que l'exces des injustes malheurs
tarit, les refusant à la peine croissante.
Qui n's pleuré, souffert? Et, qui l'ose avouer,
Un jour vient ou l'on croit que rien ne peut vibrer
Au fond de l'être humain, et que tout fait silence.
mais l'art sous son archet, en nous fit tressaillir.
ette corde d'or fin d'où la plainte s'elance,
Et nous fait vivre encore en nous faisant souffrir.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1886
262
At the Opera
dedicated to Placide Canonge
---It is not some songs, it is only some tears.
Alfred de Musset
Our chairs were touching as the soft accents of
Vi
ol
e
t
t
a
’
ss
ongdi
s
t
ur
be
dt
hes
pa
c
ebe
t
we
e
nus
,
Her hymn learned too late burned into our hearts,
Embracing us both with powerful sweetness
Entering our sleep, awakening the pain.
The harmonious summons of the caressing voice
Called for tears at injustice and misfortune
Even as we tried to refuse the increasing pain.
For whom do we weep? And for what do we dare to claim?
At one time we believed that nothing could affect us
To the bottom of our being, that all was silence.
But the art of the archer is to make us quiver.
Pulling like a golden chain to places where silence moans
And we find the strength to live again only to suffer.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1886
263
“AdPe
nnam”
D’
ore
tdena
c
re fine aux reflete d-arc-en-ciel,
Tun’
é
t
a
i
squ’
unj
oy
a
u,j
’
e
nvoul
usf
a
i
r
eung
l
a
i
ve
;
Et nous avons tous deux combattu pour le rêve,
Sa
nc
ha
nc
e
l
e
ra
uc
hocdel
’
é
t
r
a
ng
edue
l
.
J
enet
’
oi
g
ni
sj
a
ma
i
s
,Ig
ue
r
r
i
è
r
ed
umi
e
l
De
se
s
s
a
i
mi
sdel
’
Hy
me
t
t
e
.Al
abr
ûl
ante sève
Demonc
oue
rl
a
r
g
eouve
r
tt
ut
’
a
b
r
e
uva
i
ss
a
nst
r
ê
ve
,
Etne
’
c
onnusj
a
ma
i
sl
eve
ni
nnil
ef
i
e
l
Ma
i
s
,e
npe
r
da
ntl
af
oi
,j
’
a
ipe
r
dul
ava
i
l
l
a
nc
e
.
Lama
i
nquit
’
a
va
i
tmi
s
e
,e
ng
a
g
ed
’
a
l
l
i
a
nc
e
,
Dans ma main sans reproche, hêlas, a donc farbli?
Oh! je ne voudrais pas, dans la sombre balance
Du vainqueur te jeter! Oh non. Plutôt un pli
Du fleuve pour suaire, où tomber en silence!
Constant Beauvais
Novelle-Orléans, 1896.
“
AdPe
n
na
m”
Gold and fine pearls are reflected in the sky
Like fine jewels, but I wanted to make it into a sword
As we both struggled for the same dream,
Without faltering in the clash of a strange duel.
I was never my original intent to fight over the honey
Of the swarm of Hymette. A burning leaves
My large heart still open for you even as you drank from it without pity
Never realizing that the venom you drank was bile.
But when I lost faith, I lost courage,
The hand I placed in yours was for our alliance
And I did not reproach you, but alas, was it not to reconcile?
Oh, I never wanted this dark struggle
Or wished for the power to defeat you! Oh no. Rather, for us to sway
In the shrouding river, where we could fall into silence.
264
“Par
c
eNoc
e
r
e
”
Aupa
r
i
aquipa
s
s
é
,a
br
e
uvéd’
i
nf
a
mi
e
,
Et ployé sous la honte, as-tu tendu la main?
As-tu baigné ses pieds meurtris par le chemin?
As-t
ul
a
vél
’
out
r
a
g
ee
us
af
a
c
ebl
ê
mi
e
?
Pour le sauver, as tu de la foule ennemie
Affronté la huée; et fort et surhumain,
L’
a
s
-tu nommé ton frère et partagé le liu
De ton mince manteau sur sa tête endormie?
Alors malheur à toi! Bientôt tu connaitras
La trahison qui broie et le coeur et le bras
-Pui
s
s
a
nt
,l
’
a
i
g
l
epl
a
na
i
t
,c
he
r
c
ha
n
tpa
r
mil
e
sf
l
a
mme
s
Tonpi
evi
e
r
g
e
,ôJ
us
t
i
c
ea
s
s
i
s
ea
ut
r
é
pi
e
dd’
or
,
Quand du ravin fangeux où gitent les infâmes
Jaillit le plomb brûlant qui brisa son essor.
“
Pa
r
c
eNoc
e
r
e
”
You are a passing traitor bathed in infamy
And bowed with shame, and you extend a hand?
Have you washed your feet that were hurt along the way?
Have you cleansed the outrage from your dirty face?
To save yourself from the foul enemy,
Affronted by their hisses, strong and superhuman,
Did you acknowledge your brother and share the light
And spread your coat over him while he slept?
Misfortune on you! Soon your cohorts
The treason that is in their hearts and the arms.
--Powerful, the eagle glides, searching among the ashes
Fort
hevi
r
g
i
n’
sf
e
e
t
;OJ
us
t
i
c
e
,s
i
t
t
i
nguponhi
sf
e
e
tofg
ol
d
When the muddy ravine where the lair of infamy
Gushes and shoots up to break its flight.
--1894 the Crusader and L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
265
“Phy
r
ne
”
Reminiscence de l'esprit grec.
Rapriamus, amici,
Occasion am de die.
Horace.
Si vous n'aviez pas tant demandé tant doute,
Ami, nous nous serions aimés, doux et fidèles;
Quand souffle l'ouragan, l'amour ouvre ses ailes
Et la voile s'enfui loin d'un ciel redouté.
Si les fleurs t'ont donné leur parfum, leur beauté,
Pourquoi leur commander avec des airs rebelles
De ne sourire pas a d'autres, pauvres belles,
De garder pour un seul tant de suavité.
Pourquoi vouloir tonjours que demain t'appartienne?
Cueille donc cette joie alors qu'elle est la t enne;
Hier est un cercueil et demain un berceau.
Mais aujourd'hui le fruit est mûr, il faut y mordre;
Peut être un scarabée en a pris un morceau,
Comme après toi le ver aussi viendra s'y tordre
.
“
Tur
ni
n
g
”
If you had not so many urgings born of Doubt,
Love, we could have become so much more, sweet and true,
So that when the winds of strife would rend us,
We would have spread our wings of love
And sailed across the troubled skies.
For flowers surrender their beauty and perfume
Without your commands, and at their own bidding,
Smiling into blossoms, with their own sweet breath
If you do not pluck them too soon.
Why then do you hasten to make tomorrow yours?
To pluck the joy before it is born?
For yesterday is a coffin and tomorrow a cradle.
So taste of the fruit only in its season,
For each bite can become a prison,
And like the scarab who eats into flesh
You will turn in the walls of your own making.
266
-L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
“LeRe
gr
e
t
”
Deux fronts se sont penchés ensemble sur un livre,
Jeunes, graves tous deux; la lampe de vieux cuivre
Ouvr
es
onl
a
r
g
eoe
i
ld’
orda
nsl
ap
r
of
ondenui
t
,
Comme sur sa victime étincelle et reluit
La prunelle du fauve à travers les ténèbres.
Ils lisent un recit aux doux accents funèbres
Oùpa
l
pi
t
el
’
a
moure
tc
ha
nt
el
adoul
e
ur
;
Ve
r
ss
i
mpl
e
se
tna
vr
a
nt
squ’
i
ns
pi
r
al
ema
l
he
ur
.
Da
nsl
e
s
que
l
sàj
a
ma
i
spl
e
ur
eunevoi
xdel
’
â
me
Et que cet homme ému relit à cette femme.
Ces deux êtres sont-ils des amis, des amants?
Le sang qui de leurs coeurs presse les battements,
Ce sang est-il le même, et la même patrie
Vit-e
l
l
edoncl
e
ur
sy
e
uxs
’
e
nt
r
óuvr
i
ràl
avi
e
?
Non, rien ne les unit que la main du hasard;
L’
a
ve
ni
re
s
te
nt
r
ee
ux,e
tbi
e
nt
ôtl
e
urr
e
g
a
r
d
Ne rencontrera pl
usqu’
uneombr
ei
ns
a
i
s
i
s
s
a
bl
e
Qui
es
’
e
nf
ui
r
aduc
oe
ur
,t
e
lqu’
unf
l
ots
url
es
a
bl
e
.
Lebonhe
urn’
e
s
t
-i
lpa
sc
ommel
’
a
l
g
uedeme
r
Que la vague inquiète et, sur son sein amer
Ent
r
a
î
nt
ee
tr
oul
ea
ul
oi
n,l
’
a
r
r
a
c
h
a
ntàs
apl
a
g
e
.
Ils étaient arrivés à la dernière page,
Ma
i
sl
avoi
xquil
i
s
a
i
tf
a
i
bl
i
te
ts
’
a
l
t
é
r
a
;
La regard, relevé tout-à-c
oup,s
’
é
c
l
a
i
r
a
,
Inondant de rayons des têtes pâlissantes.
Ainsi dans un ciel pur des clartés jaillissantes
Dé
c
hi
r
a
n
tl
’
hor
i
z
on,bl
a
nc
hi
s
s
e
ntl
e
sc
he
mi
ns
.
Ils songent que jamais ne se joindront leurs mains.
Que luers lèvres toujours doivent rester muettes,
Austères gardiens des révoltes secrètes.
Ils sentent dans leur sein le désespoir gronder;
L’
a
ve
umont
er
a
pi
dee
tpr
ê
tàdé
bor
de
r
.
Telle, en la coupe pleine, une liquier brûlante
Ava
ntdes
’
é
pa
nc
he
r
,r
e
s
t
euni
ns
t
a
ntt
r
e
mbl
a
nt
e
.
Ma
i
sl
’
a
ve
un’
e
s
tt
ombéde
sl
è
vr
e
snide
sy
e
ux;
Lapa
upi
è
r
ee
s
tba
i
s
s
é
e
,e
tl
’
oe
i
ls
i
l
e
nc
i
e
ux
Ne révèle plus rien; et les lèvres fermées
Ont laissé retomber les paroles aimées.
Da
nsl
’
o
mbr
edel
ac
ha
mber, un reflet envolé
S’
é
g
a
r
es
url
emur
,é
c
l
a
i
r
a
nt
,i
s
ol
é
.
267
Le buste menacant de Scévola farouche,
Auguel sourit de loin la chaste et fière bouche
De Diane, rêvant sous son masque bronzé
Que dans un angle obscur le sculpteur a posé.
“
TheRe
g
r
e
t
”
Together, they lean towards a book.
Young are these two. The old copper lamp
With it open eyes, pierces the profound darkness
Making them sparkle and shine,
Two pupils under its tawny breath.
They read together in two soft accents
Of thriving love and songs of sorrow,
Of simple things that inspire misfortune,
And the crying voice of the soul.
As he reads again to the woman beside him
One wonders, are they friends or lovers?
The blood of their hearts beat, pressing.
Their blood is the same, their homeland the same
Butdot
he
yl
i
vei
ne
a
c
hot
he
r
’
se
y
e
s
?
No, they are subject to the hand of Chance.
The future lies between them and their eyes
Will never meet, nor cross the impenetrable shadow.
Their hearts shall flee like waves on the sand,
Their happiness will bend like ocean seaweed
Unsettled by the waves; his bitter breast
Will Retreat, rolling far from the dunes.
They turn to another page,
But as he reads, his voice falters; there is a change
In him as the flood fades.
And with pure clarity the sky opens
tearing open the horizon, showing the way
Because they now know that their hands will never touch
And their lips will remain silent
For they will guard their inner secrets
And scold their hearts despairing
Even as the need to confess rises to overflowing.
Such is the searing wound, like a hot liqueur,
Before it rights itself, trembling for an instant
Before falling without a voice
Revealing nothing, and with silent eyes
They lower their eyes again to the familiar words.
268
In the shadow of the chamber, now there is one
Figure cast upon the wall, alone.
Nearby, the bust of the wild and menacing Scevola
Smiles at the chaste and fiery mouth
of Diana, reveling under his bronze mask
Anobs
c
ur
ea
ng
l
e
,putt
he
r
ebyt
hes
c
ul
pt
or
s
’ha
nd.
269
“Re
s
pons
eaL.H.
”
Medea superset---Sénèque
Medee, avez-vous dit; et vous aviez raison
Del
an
omme
ra
i
ns
i
,c
e
t
t
ef
e
mmeàl
’
oe
i
ls
ombe
r
,
AuCoe
urf
a
r
ouc
hee
tf
i
e
r
,pl
e
i
nder
e
vol
t
ee
td’
ombr
e
,
Etquida
nst
out
ema
i
nd’
a
mi
,l
i
e
t
:Tr
a
hi
s
on!
Poète, fais tone mile, Elle fait son poison
Des maledictions, des prièrs sans nombre
Quie retombent des cieux, de chaque espoir qui somber.
Et des ris ebranlant les murs de la prison.
Va boire la rosee au calice quie tremble;
Pr
e
ndspourt
oil
e
sr
a
y
onsquel
’
a
ur
or
er
a
s
semble;
Mais laisse lui la nuit et sa froide claret.
Al
’
e
nd
r
oi
toùt
ombal
ebi
e
nf
a
i
tc
r
oi
tl
aha
i
ne
.
C’
e
s
tl
àqu’
e
s
ts
amoi
s
s
onqua
nddor
tl
’
huma
ni
t
e
,
Et que vole sans bruit le nocturne phalène.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eMa
r
c
h27,1887
“
Re
s
pons
et
oL.H.
”
(note: L. H. is Lafcadio Hearn)
Medea, you have spoken the words of truth
and have taken your name, thus, woman of somber eyes
with a heart shy yet proud, filled with rebellion and shadow
And you hold the hand of a friend named: Treason!
Poets, make your honey, for she will make it poison
With curses and prayers without end
Calling from the heavens when hope grows dim,
And her screams will shake the walls of prison.
Shedr
i
nksde
e
pt
hede
woft
her
os
e
’
st
r
e
mbl
i
ngc
ha
l
i
ce;
Taking the rays of morning for her own
even as she sees in the night with cold clarity
the places of tombs that give rise to hate
where she will reap her harvest while humanity sleeps
and quietly claim her own like a moth in the night.
March 27, 1887
270
“
Re
s
ur
g
e
”
Dans sa prison de brume où nul reflet ne luit,
Mon Rêve léthargique, informe sous la cendre
Des souvenirs froidis, a cru soudain entendre
Palpiter, effarés, les essaims de la nuit
Eng
our
di
ss
urs
onf
l
a
nc
.Et
,da
nsl
’
ombr
equibr
ui
t
,
Un pa
nd
’
a
ur
or
epour
pr
ee
s
tve
nus
es
us
pe
ndr
e
Auxl
a
mbr
i
sné
bul
e
uxoùt
r
e
mbl
ee
tvas
’
é
nt
e
ndr
e
L’
a
i
l
ed’
ordel
’
I
dé
e
.EtmonRê
ve
,c
ondui
t
Par le mystique appel des strophes en délire,
A quitté sa prison de brume et, vers là lyre
Quenu
inevoi
td’
e
n-bas, son e
s
s
orl
’
àpor
t
é
,
Ta
ndi
squ’
a
ut
ourdel
uipha
l
a
ng
e
sa
s
t
r
a
l
s
Te
nde
n
ts
url
’
i
nf
i
ni
,vi
br
a
ntdevo
l
u
pt
é
L’
ha
r
moni
e
uxr
é
s
e
a
ude
sc
or
de
ss
i
dé
r
l
e
a
s
.
Resurge
In the misty prison, with only reflected light
In lethargic reverie, under the dying rembers
Of cold memories, I saw a sudden flare.
Trembling, frightened by the swarms of night.
I crouched against a wall, then, in the shadows, the sounds
From a crimson apparition came, suspended in air,
Nebulous, and trembling, spreading its
Wings of New Thought. And my reveries were channeled
Into the mystery, harkening to the delerious verse,
Until I left my misty prison, following the music
Of that low voice, leaning towards my release
While around me there were astral lights
Stretching towards the infinite, vibrating with exquisite delight
In harmonious rays that stretched towards the stars.
271
“
Somniavi”
Sur la roche rugueuse un liseron fragile
SeTr
a
i
n
ee
tc
he
r
c
hee
nva
i
nuna
p
puive
r
sl
’
a
z
ur;
Mais sur le sommet nu pas un tronc, pas un mur.
Seul, le vent vient tromper son étreint intuile.
Pl
usba
sc
’
e
s
tl
eva
l
l
on.Làc
r
oi
tl
ec
he
ne
,a
s
i
l
e
Du gui mystique ; là le lierre austere et dur
Soutient, du vieux donjon, le front qui penche, obscur ;
Et la vigne bondit, échevelée, agile,
Al
’
a
s
s
a
utde
sc
ot
e
a
ux;e
tc
’
e
s
tpa
r
t
outl
’
e
s
s
or!
Alors au ciel lointain, par un suprême effort,
Le liseron tendit sa tremblante spirale
Et son pâle bouton ; et vers son pur désir
Un rayon descendit de la splendeur astrale;
Etl
’
onvi
ta
uz
e
ni
t
huneé
t
oi
l
ef
l
e
ur
i
r! December 25 1908
“
Somniavi”
On a rugged rock, there was a tangled fragile vine,
Trying in vain to climb to the sky
On the bare summit, but there was neither trunk nor wall,
So the wind came to undo its useless embrace.
Below in the valley, the ivy knows that the oak
Is the mystical refuge, and there the hardy ivy endures.
It covers an old dungeon, but it always faces the sky,
Until one day it leaps with wild abandon
Taking the hills, everywhere it leaps!
And with a supreme effort, even towards the distant sky
The humble weed aspires.
Its pale flowers spiral with pure desire
Until finally the rays of heaven descend in radiant splendor
Taking them to the sky, where they bloom into stars.
272
“
Sonne
t
”
Decrescere pondus convenit.
Sij
a
ma
i
svousn’
a
ve
za
ppr
i
sámé
pr
i
s
er
Ce que vous chérissiez; et gravi, le front bleme
Et les genoux saignante, la station supreme
DuGol
g
ot
haSoupc
on;e
tbu,s
a
nsl
’
é
pui
s
e
r
,
Auc
a
l
i
c
epr
of
ondqu’
ont
r
e
mbl
ed
ebr
i
s
e
r
;
Et préiéré douter des dieux et de vous-meme;
Et comme Julien, jeté votre anathéme
Etvot
r
es
a
nga
uc
i
e
l
,s
a
nspouvoi
rl
’
a
pa
i
s
e
r
;
Sij
a
ma
i
svousn’
a
ve
zs
ong
équ’
ác
e
t
t
eme
ul
e
For
mi
da
bl
e
,l
eVi
e
,i
tf
a
utquel
’
a
mes
e
ul
e
Ets
e
mbl
a
bl
eáSa
ms
on,t
our
neda
n
sun’
dé
s
e
r
t
Sa
nsa
ubee
ts
a
nsé
t
oi
l
e
,e
t
,qu’
e
nc
enoi
rdé
l
i
r
e
,
Il fant, gladiateur, en succombant sourire;
Ah! ne blashphémes-pa
s
.Vousn’
a
ve
zpoi
nts
ouf
f
e
r
t
!
“
Sonne
t
”
If ever you learned to despair
All that you had cherished, and rose up with your face smeared
And your knees bleeding, at the last station
Of the cross on Golgotha, and then drink without ever emptying
The deep chalice that makes you tremble close to breaking
And to doubt that you and the gods are the same;
And like Julien, without any comprehension
Cast your blood to the heavens without being able to appease;
If ever your dreams became grindstones and all seemed
Formidable, and Life was for you an empty soul
And Like Samson, you wandered in the desert
Without dawn and without stars in delirious darkness
Well then, gladiator, I am forced to smile
Ah! Do not blaspheme. You have not suffered!
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e1896
273
“
Sonne
t
”
“Amonami
eMagdaTur
pi
n”
Hi
e
rj
et
epl
e
ur
a
i
s
,a
uj
our
d’
huij
et
ec
ha
nt
e
.
As tu senti mes pleurs sur ton front endormi?
Entendras tu ma voix? Ton coeur a-t-il frémi
Quand ta mére écoutait, eans soufflé et suppliante
S’
i
lpa
l
pi
t
a
i
te
nc
or
?
—De ton âme vaillante
Le
sa
c
c
e
nt
sde
sa
i
mé
sl
ade
ntdel
’
e
nne
mi
,
Nef
e
r
o
n
tpl
usj
a
i
l
l
i
rl
’
é
t
i
nc
e
l
l
e
.Pa
r
mi
Les obacuts au-delà ton ombre trébuchante.
Avus
el
e
ve
rl
’
a
ubeàl
a
que
l
l
es
af
o
nd
L’
huma
i
nepa
s
s
i
on;t
e
l
l
ee
nl
’
e
nurpr
of
ound,
L’
é
t
oi
l
es
edi
s
s
outa
uxr
a
y
onsdel
’
a
ur
or
e
.
Tes yeux se sont fermas comme se etoila fleux
Sous un roleil brûlant mais le bas meteore
Resplendit tou regard plus haut que la douleur.
“
Sonne
tf
ormyf
r
i
e
ndMa
g
daTur
pi
n”
Yesterday I cried for you, today I sing for you.
Have you felt my tears upon your sleeping face?
Have you heard my voice? Your heart must have shuddered
When your mother spoke to you softly and imploringly.
Do you breathe again? Your friends
Speak of your valiant soul. The teeth of the enemy can do no more
Than break the sky.
Those obstacles, like shadows, stumble
When the dawn rises
With human passion; even the most profound
Star disappears in the rays of dawn.
You eyes are closed like those fading stars
Under a brilliant sun, but the meteor
Makes your face resplendent and raises you above the pain.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
eMay 1891
274
“Sui
t
eDe
pe
c
he
s
”
Dus
a
ngdel
’
e
nne
mi
,j
evousr
e
c
onna
i
st
ous
:
Galois aux glaives tourdis guerriers France aux frotns roux
J
’
a
ivuder
é
f
l
e
t
ér, dans chaque lame nue
Le soleil des combats. O légion venue
Des champs de Walhalla, va diriger ses coups
Des preux soldats de France, et que sous ton courroux
Tr
e
mbl
ee
nc
or
eMe
nne
mi
e
,qu’
uné
t
r
e
i
nt
ei
nc
onue
Paralyse sa droite ! Oui, que le désespoir
Le poursaive, acharné, pressant son coursier noir
Quel
’
i
mmondedé
monde
sdé
r
out
e
sdé
c
ha
î
ne
Toutl
’
e
s
s
a
i
m de
st
e
r
r
e
ur
s
—San cesse il eroire voir
Le galive flamboyant de le virge Lorraine
Etinceler aux cieux dans les brumes de soir
Suite Dépeches
...
The blood of my enemy, I recognize you
Gauls with your heavy swords,
You Frank warriors with your red faces.
I see reflected in your naked blades
The sun of combat. O legion who comes
From the fields of Walhalla, who will rain blows
On the valiant French soldiers, how your fury
Will make Mennemi tremble again in an unknown embrace
Paralyzing his rights, yes, that is despair.
The persecutor, fierce, urges his black steed,
That filthy foul demon of chaos unleashed,
And the never ending swarm of terror crosses against
The blazing swords of the virgin of Lorraine
Glittering against the sky in the mists of evening.
L’
Abe
i
l
l
e
275
“Vision”
Pa
runma
t
i
nd’
Avr
i
l
,àl
’
he
ur
eoùt
outpa
l
pa
t
e
,
Quel
ana
t
ur
ee
muee
nunf
r
i
s
s
ons
’
a
g
i
t
e
,
Souriant au reveil sous son ma
nt
e
a
ud’
a
z
ur
,
Etquel
’
â
mede
sf
l
e
ur
ss
’
e
xha
l
eda
nsl
’
a
i
rpur
,
J
’
e
r
r
a
i
sl
ef
r
ontc
our
be
,l
’
â
mel
a
s
s
ee
tme
ur
t
r
i
e
,
Suivant vers le passé ma rêverie,
Et je sentais en moi le blasphème gronder
Et tout un ocean de mepris deborder;
Et je songeais toujours, qua
ndde
sf
l
e
ur
se
tdel
’
he
r
be
Surgit devant mes pas comme une blanche grebe
Faite un cimetière.
Etrange floraison!
Un rayon pâle et doux qui dorait un viel arbre
Me
t
t
a
i
tunea
ur
é
ol
ea
uf
r
ontd’
uns
a
i
ntdema
r
be
;
Le zéphyr, en passant, réveillait les rameaux,
Courbant sous son baiser la fleur des blancs tombeaux
Et dans ma somber nuit tout-à-coup vint à luire
Un peu de cet azur qui semblait me sourire.
Le blasphème impuissant se heurtait à la mort;
Se
r
e
i
nee
l
l
edi
s
t
a
i
t
:“
Si
l
e
nc
e
!I
c
it
outdor
t
.
”
Un charme amer et doux me tetint immobile;
Ha
l
e
t
a
nt
,j
’
e
c
out
a
i
sc
ommei
lf
a
i
s
a
i
tt
r
a
nqui
l
l
e
,
Mystérieuse étreinte où la Mort frissonnant,
Troublée en son repos par ce jour rayonnant
Se réchauflait, livide, aux amours printanières.
L’
a
i
rvi
br
a
nt
,t
outc
ha
r
g
édeba
i
s
ers, de prièrs;
Al
’
a
ut
e
ldel
aMor
t
,l
avi
ee
nt
r
i
umpha
nt
Secouait sur le monde un flambeau dévorant.
J
es
e
nt
i
smadoul
e
rs
’
e
nvol
e
rdemo
nâ
me
Comme un oiseau funèbre effraye de la flamme;
J
’
oubl
a
ic
e
song
sj
our
snoi
r
sdedo
u
t
ee
td’
hor
r
e
ur
,
Où, seul, désespéré, maudissant son erreur,
Pl
e
a
r
a
n
tl
’
i
l
l
us
i
ons
et
r
ompe
us
ee
ts
ebe
l
l
e
L’
hommedé
c
ut
ouj
our
s
,c
onf
i
a
nte
tf
i
dè
l
e
,
S’
a
f
f
a
i
s
s
eda
nsl
al
ut
t
e
,a
c
c
a
bl
é
,t
o
u
ts
a
ng
l
a
nt
,
Lec
oue
rpl
e
i
ndedé
br
i
s
,e
tl
’
â
medené
a
nt
.
J
en’
é
t
a
i
spl
usqu’
unma
r
bea
ur
e
g
a
r
di
mmuable
Fi
xés
ur
el
’
i
nvi
s
i
bl
e
,e
tduf
r
oi
di
ne
f
f
a
bl
e
Dec
e
sg
a
r
di
e
nsde
smor
t
smonê
t
r
es
’
e
ng
our
di
t
,
Pé
né
t
r
edouc
e
me
ntd’
uns
omme
i
ldeg
r
a
ni
t
!
J
evi
sa
ve
cl
’
e
s
pr
i
ts
epr
e
s
s
e
rda
nsl
’
e
s
pa
c
e
Le semis fécondant des âmes que Dieu chasse
276
Dans le nouveau sillon, ger
me
sdel
’
a
ve
ni
r
,
Fr
a
g
me
nt
sdel
’
i
nf
i
ni
.
Puis vint le Souvenir,
Vi
s
i
onduPa
s
s
é
,don’
tl
ema
s
quee
s
té
t
r
a
ng
e
;
Ext
a
s
ee
tc
a
uc
he
ma
r
,s
our
i
a
ntpr
of
i
ld’
a
ng
e
A la paupière humide, et soudain grimaçant,
Haineux, somber et tragique.
Un chaos manacant
Fait d’
é
c
l
a
i
r
se
tdenui
t
,dec
hos
e
si
nnommé
e
s
,
Enva
hi
tl
’
hor
i
z
on,l
a
r
ve
si
na
ni
mé
e
s
,
I
nf
or
me
se
tdor
ma
nta
us
e
i
ndel
’
a
ve
ni
r
J
us
qu’
àl
’
é
c
l
os
i
onquidoi
tl
e
sr
é
uni
r
.
Unepu
i
s
s
a
nt
ema
i
nda
nsl
’
e
s
pa
c
eé
t
e
ndue
Tenait un arc immense, et, de loin entendue,
Une voix cr
i
al
’
he
ur
e
,e
tf
l
è
c
hevol
a
:
Cé
t
a
i
tl
’
a
r
cduDe
s
t
i
n.
Mon esprit se troubla,
Ét
r
a
i
ntpa
rl
’
i
nvi
s
i
bl
e
,àc
e
t
t
evoi
xpr
of
onde
Tomba
ntda
nsl
’
i
nf
i
nic
ommeuné
c
hoquig
r
onde
.
J
’nevi
spa
spe
s
e
rnoss
ombr
e
spa
s
s
i
ons
,
Etj
en’
e
nt
e
ndi
spa
sl
ec
r
ide
sna
t
i
ons
.
Comme un torrent gonflé, debordant sur la plein,
Ra
va
g
el
amoi
s
s
on,l
’
e
s
poi
rdet
a
ntdepe
i
ne
,
Et, brutal, la matile aux calloux de son lit,
Ainsi le Temps rapide abat, brise et détruit
Le
spr
oj
e
t
smûr
i
s
s
a
nt
s
,l
’
i
dé
a
l
,l
’
e
s
pé
r
a
nc
e
,
Et roule dans son cours la joie et la souffrance,
Les peoples éperdus, broyés en tourbillon
J
us
qu’
àl
’
é
t
e
r
ni
t
é
.
L’
or
g
ue
i
l
,l
’
a
mbi
t
i
on,
Lef
r
a
c
a
sde
spl
a
i
s
i
r
s
,t
outs
’
é
t
e
i
nte
tt
outpa
s
s
é
,
I
ndi
s
t
i
nc
t
e
sva
pe
ur
ss
’
e
f
f
a
c
a
ntda
n
sl
’
e
s
pa
c
e
.
277
“
Vi
s
i
on”
On a morning of April, at the hour when all awakens
Andn natures is enthralled into new life,
Smiling, awakening under an azure coat,
With the scent of flowers breathing into pure air,
I wander, with heavy head, tired heart,
And gloomy reverie, towards a statue,
And I feel roar blasphemy within me;
When I see all the flowers and herbs
Emerging into a white sepulcher sheet
Made of starry white flowers
Covering the grounds of tombs.
Strange blossoming!
Radiant and pale, they adorn the trees
And glow against the foreheads of marble saints
While the gentle passing breeze awakens winter branches
Bending to kiss the flowers over the tombs.
And within my dark thoughts there suddenly gleams
A little of the azure smiling sky
While the impotent blasphemy harkens towards death.
Serenely, a voice says: "Silence, all sleep here!"
Ane a bittersweet calm keeps me still;
Catching my breath, I listen to the tranquility
Embraced by the mysery of quivering death
Troubled in its peace in the brightness of day
So much life still. And love
And the fullness of kisses sweet
Like prayers upon the altar of death, life is trimpahnt
Trembling like a devouring flame
I feel the searing pain enter my soul
Like a funeral bird, I fear the flame
I know thelong dark days of doubt and of horror,
Of despair, curses, and failures,
And I cry out against the lovely lying illusion
Of mankind, confident and faithful
Subsiding in the struggle, defeated and bloody
With hearts in fragments and spirits empty
I stand like a marble saint, with unwavering regard
Transfixed and invisible, and ineffably cold
Like these guardians of death, I am numb,
Nothing penetrates my granite sleep;
278
Yet, I live, and my spirit still fills the air
Like a fertile seed of the souls God sows
In new furrows, planting the kernels of the future,
Each a fragment of the infinite.
These monuments,
Are visions of the past, with their weary masks
Hiding the invisible cold
These guardians of death
Are both ecstasy and nightmare,
Smiling with their angelic profiles
Yet with glittering, grimacing eyes,
Full of hate, death, and tragedy.
Oh, manacing chaos!
Flashes of lightning in the night of things unkown
Invading the horizons, like lifeless cocoons.
Formless, you sleep within the future,
Until the bursting forth, you will be re-united;
By a powerful hand, you will be sent forth
From his immense bow, into limitless regions,
Wi
t
hh
i
svoi
c
ec
r
y
i
ng
,“
Yourhoura
sc
ome
!
”
And youru arrow will fly from the Archer of your destiny.
But my spirit is troubled,
Held by an invisible resonating voice
Falling into the infinite like an roaring echo.
And I know I will not live to plumb the depths of dark passions,
And I will not hear the cries of nations,
Like an expanding torrent, invading the lands
Ravaging the harvest. With hope dying in pain,
Brutally crushed back into stony furrows.
So swiftly time cuts us down, its winds destroying
The ripening fields, the enterprises, ideals, and dreams
And runs does in tis course all joy, and all suffering,
Of a bewildered people, ground down like chaff
In the whirlwind of eternity.
The pride, the ambition,
The throes of pleasure, all die, all pass,
Dissolving into vapor, diffusing into space.
279
VITA
Donna Meletio was born in Dallas, Texas, the daughter of a Greek father and an
Irish mother. After attending a Catholic elementary school, she later enrolled in Hillcrest
High school and left for the University of Texas at Austin in 1969. Before completing her
degree, she married and moved to San Antonio, Texas, where she worked at a bank. Her
first two daughters, Saran and Maegan, were born during this time. After a short tenure
living in Tampa, Florida, and Winston-Salem, North Carolina (where her third daughter,
Kate, was born), Donna returned to San Antonio and began restoring historical properties
and managing real estate. At the same time, she began attending classes at a local
community college. She became a licensed broker and expanded her real estate business
while earning her bachelor’
s degree from the University of Texas San Antonio (UTSA) in
1990. She sold her business in 1993. After receiving her master’
s degree at UTSA in
1994, she began teaching freshman English, first at San Antonio College, then at UTSA
and Trinity University. It was during this time that she began publishing her poetry and
s
hor
ts
t
or
i
e
si
ns
ma
l
lpr
e
s
s
,e
a
r
ni
ngt
heCor
onaPr
e
s
sa
wa
r
dsf
ort
hepoe
m“
Li
f
eSt
i
l
l
,
”
a
nds
hor
ts
t
or
y
,“
For
g
ot
t
e
nWor
ds
.
”Whe
ns
hevi
s
i
t
e
dNe
wOr
l
e
a
nsi
n1995s
heha
ppe
ne
d
upon the portrait of Leona Queyrouze who would became the subject of her dissertation.
She applied to the doctoral program at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge with
the goal of pursuing her research on Queyrouze. While completing her dissertation, she
returned to San Antonio and resumed teaching at UTSA where she received teaching
awards. She is currently a member of the Southern Conference of MLA, the Popular
Culture Association, and the Texas Folklore society, and has presented her work at their
280
conferences. She earned her doctorate in August, 2005, and is working on a collection of
Le
onaQue
y
r
ouz
e
’
spoe
t
r
ya
ndac
r
i
t
i
c
a
lbi
og
r
a
phywhi
l
epur
s
ui
nghe
ri
nt
e
r
e
s
ti
nva
r
i
ous
folklore projects.
281