Abdur Rehman Khan

Incipient Modernities

Dr Sambudha Sen

Mid Term Paper

The crowd and modernity in Baudelaire's poetry

Baudelaire stands on the threshold of so many discussions of modernity. It was Walter Benjamin

who most persuasively argued that Baudelaire was the first ‘writer of modern life1’, adapting the

title of Baudelaire’s encomium on the artist Constantin Guys, ‘The Painter of Modern Life2’. In

this essay, I will bring forward some of the vital characteristics introduced by Baudelaire without

which one cannot reach his definition of Modernity. In doing so we will see that many of the

qualities which Baudelaire writes for Constantin Guys can be very well noticed in Baudelaire’s

own work. From there, I will venture into the question of crowd and modernity while focusing

on Baudelaire’s capturing and representing the seemingly fleeting and changing crowd in Paris.

I will try to touch on the topic of multiculturalism in respect with incipient modernity, as well the

question of fragments and the whole. Some key aspects such as reconstruction of Paris and its

effects, and a rise of new commodity culture, will be discussed. I will try to conclude with the

idea that though it was Baudelaire who introduced the term modernity but in many places does

not seem to have a very welcoming notion towards it.

Baudelaire starts his essay The painter of Modern Life by saying "the world- and even the world

of artists- is full of people who can go to the Louvre, walk rapidly, without so much as a glance,
1 Benjamin, Walter, and Michael William. Jennings. The Writer of Modern Life: Essays on Charles
Baudelaire. Harvard University Press, 2006.
2 Baudelaire, Charles, and Jonathan Mayne. The Painter of Modern Life: And Other Essays. London:
Phaidon, 1964
past rows of very interesting , though secondary, pictures, to come to a rapturous halt in front of

a Titian or a Raphael- then they will go home happy, not a few saying to themselves, ‘I know my

museum” (p 1). Here Baudlaire pokes fun of people and artists alike, his complaint is a simple

one of not observing enough the given surroundings. In the very next lines he extends this

observation to the practice of reading, then he highlights “minor poets too have something good,

solid and delightful to offer” by emphasizing that general beauty which is captured by classical

artists and poets is good and all but it is the ‘particular’ beauty which is of utmost importance,

the beauty of “the beauty of circumstance and the sketch of manners”. I argue that here lies

Baudlaire's first characteristic of Modernity, because one cannot reach the concept of “fragments

in a whole” let alone “the ephemeral, the fugitive and the contingent” if one is not able to

appreciate the minute and odd particulars of one’s observations. In his poem “Un Cabaret

folâtre” translated as Gay Chophouse by David Paul3 the incipient modernity can be observed as

Baudlaire captures the said minute and odd particulars in a magnificent manner:

Gay Chophouse
(On the road from Brussels to Uccle)

You who adore the skeleton

And all such horrible devices
As so many relishes and spices
To tickle the delicate palate on (line 1-4)

Notice the line in brackets, the poem is obviously a product of Baudelaire's treading on that road,

and even in the state of movement he manages to capture particulars like ‘horrible devices’

which could be the meat cutting choppers, scimitars; skeletons of animals. Baudlaire writes,“We

might liken the spectator to the mirror as vast as the crowd itself; or to a kaleidoscope gifted with

consciousness, responding to each of its movements and reproducing the multiplicity of life and

3 David Paul, Flowers of Evil, New Directions, New York, 1955

flickering grace of all elements of life” (p 9). What Baudlaire has written for an ideal spectator

stands true in many of his own poems just as seen in “Un Cabaret”.

We must not forget that the title of this essay is The painter of the Modern Life which Baudelaire

wrote for the dutch painter Costintin Guys, such a title and it’s content holds true in Baudelaire’s

own work, as Walter Benjamin has rightly adapted the very title for Baudelaire in The Writer of

the Modern LIfe. The characteristics Baudelaire uses for Costintin Guys cannot go unnoticed in

many of his poems, particularly the one about global elements as he writes, “his interest is the

whole world; he wants to know, understand and appreciate everything that happens on the globe”

(p 7). Baudlaire’s poems are filled with global imageries such as “the absent coco-palms of

splendid Africa behind the immense wall of mist” in the Poem Le Cygne (The Swan),

albatrosses, a bird of the Antarctic Ocean, in his poem L’Albatros (The Albatross) “often to

amuse themselves, the men of a crew catch albatrosses, those vast sea birds that indolently

follow a ship as it glides over the deep, briny sea”, global mythological figures such as

Ganymede the greek embodiment of beauty in The Eyes of the Poor, “Ganymedes presenting,

with outstretched arms a little amphora of Bavarian cream” and Beatrice, Dante’s true love,

which Baudelaire used as a title in his poem La Beatrice. This is important because

multiculturalism, and ‘fragments in the romance of the whole’ which are an essential part of

incipient modernity can only come into existence by such fragmented global imageries.

Benjamin’s invocation of fetishism of commodities, the obsession of experiencing fragmented

global architecture in one place, for example the 21st century Dubai’s World Island or Las Vegas

have an intricate relation with such imagries. This fetish, which constitutes the modern

capitalism, has deep roots in Baudelaire’s poetry, The Swan being a prime example of this as in
the poem fragmented global images can be seen at one place, which gives his work the accolade

of incipient modernity.

The question of crowd and modernity, is a recurrent one in Baudleaire’s city poems, where he

captures the architectural changes of central Paris under the reconstruction by Georges-Eugene

Haussman. Here again Baudelaire seems to retain his observations for Monsieur C.G. in his city

poems, such observations being "The external world is reborn upon his paper, natural and more

than natural, beautiful and more than beautiful, strange and endowed with an impulsive life like

the soul of its creator. The phantasmagoria has been distilled from nature. All the raw materials

with which the memory has loaded itself are put in order, ranged and harmonized. (p 12) This

distilling of phantasmagoria can be best observed in the following stanza of his poem Les Yeux

des pauvre (Eyes of the Poor):

That evening, a bit tired, you wanted to sit outside in front of the new cafe on the corner of the new
boulevard, still covered in rubble but already showing gloriously its unfinished splendors. The cafe
sparkled with light. The gas lamps themselves radiated all the warmth of a new day, and with all their
strength brightened the building white walls, the dazzling faces of mirrors, the gilded mouldings and
cornices.4

The very setting of this cafe represents the newly re-constructed Paris, notice the word ‘new’

before cafe and boulevard, though this cafe has some rough patches but it shines in its

“unfinished splendors”. And a vital reason for this ‘glory’ is the newly introduced ‘sparkling

light’. The ‘gas lamps’ suggest the brilliant illumination, which will make Belzac call this

particular kind of architecture “ a great poem of display”. The elements of the description of

this cafe are put in order, ranged and harmonized. The role of glass and its effect can be seen in

the following stanza of the same poem:

4 Translated by Michael Hoke

 Just in front of us, on the roadway, was planted a brave man of some forty years, with a weary face, a
grizzled beard, holding the hand of a little boy and carrying in his other arm a small child too weak to
walk. He was playing the nanny and taking his children out for some evening air. All in rags. These three
faces were extraordinarily serious, and these six eyes fixedly contemplated the new café with equal
admiration, though varying in expression according to age.

The ending stanza as a whole shows the desire of wanting to buy and the new commodity

culture. The glass plays the most important role as “these six eyes fixedly contemplated the new

café” shows the meticulous design for the visual consumption for the passersby, which would not have

been possible without the advent of glass. This architecture provides a dream-like sequence which Walter

benjamin calls phantasmagoria. If one looks at it from the conventional enlightenment idea of

progress what is being experienced here is a linear movement towards the modern. Where the

modern is an improvement on the past, Haussman’s intervention is that progressive movement

towards a more technologically, commercially active, advanced Paris. But what is interesting to

notice here is Baudelair’s not welcoming of this very change as it is clear in the last stanza:

Not only was I touched by that family of eyes, but I felt a little ashamed of our glasses and our carafes,
much larger than our thirst. I turned my gaze toward yours, dear love, to read my thoughts there; I was
plunging into your eyes, so beautiful and so oddly gentle, into your green eyes, inhabited by Caprice and
inspired by the Moon, when you said to me: “Those people there are insufferable with their eyes open like
carriage gates! Could you not ask the maître d’ to send them away from here?”

Here Baudelaire is with his dream partner he says “as you are, I believe, the most perfect

example of feminine impermeability that one could encounter” and still he ends up hating her

“Ah! you would like to know why I hate you today.” because this partner of Baudlaire does not

want the poor people looking at the cafe through the glass. Baudelaire “felt a little ashamed of

our glasses and our carafes, much larger than our thirst”, he does not only like this ‘progessive’
architecture but also shows a disdain towards the commodity culture as the cafes (the supply of

comodities) is much larger than their thirst (their actual need) .

One of the key terms which Baudelaire uses in his definition of modernity is ‘fugitive’ which is

deeply tied to the crowd, as the crowd is in the constant state of fleeting. Baudelaire writes for

the modern artist, “The crowd is his element, as the air is that of birds and water of fishes. His

passion and his profession are to become one flesh with the crowd. For the perfect flâneur, for

the passionate spectator, it is an immense joy to set up house in the heart of multitude, amid the

ebb and flow of movement, in the midst of the fugitive and the infinite (p 9)" .This setting up of

a house amidst the crowd can be seen in the following poem titled A une passante (To a

Passerby) :

The street about me roared with a deafening sound.

Tall, slender, in heavy mourning, majestic grief,
A woman passed, with a glittering hand
5
Raising, swinging the hem and flounces of her skirt (line 1-4)

The enjambment between line two and three makes the poem sound as if it is not just the passing

woman who is in majestic grief but the very street of Paris as well. The reason for this grief due

to which “the street roared with a deafening sound” could be none other than the loss of old

Paris, which is a main theme in many of Baudelaire’s poems, especially La Cygne (The Swan).

“The glittering hand” or “queenly ringers” as translated by Cyril Scott6 again hints towards the

newly introduced fetishim of commodities. But for this point the most important aspect is

Baudelaire’s capturing of the ‘fugitive’, which is elaborated even more ornately in the next

stanza:

5 Translated by William Aggeler, The Flowers of Evil, Academy Library Guild, Fresno, 1954
6 Cyril Scott, Baudelaire: The Flowers of Evil, London 1909
 A lightning flash... then night! Fleeting beauty
By whose glance I was suddenly reborn,
Will I see you no more before eternity?
Elsewhere, far, far from here! too late! never perhaps!
For I know not where you fled, you know not where I go,
O you whom I would have loved, O you who knew it!

Baudelaire does not shy from using a direct word such as Fleeting, phrases like “will I see you

no more before eternity” , “far, far from here” “too late!” depicts “the ebb and flow of

movement” and the “infinite”.

As discussed above the one type of modern is the architecturally , technologically, commercially

advanced Paris, but this very incipient modernity was not welcomed by Baudelaire as well as by

his contemporaries. Jules Ferry criticises Houseman, about the destruction of the old Paris, he

writes, "We weep with our eyes full of tears, for the old Paris", what he resents the most is the

"the grand intolerance of the new buildings" and he also speaks of the "triumphant vulgarity" of

new arcades and cafes. Similar remorse can be seen in the iconic line of La Cygne “the form of a

city changes more quickly than a human heart” and even more so in L’ Irreparable:

Can we stifle the old, the lingering Remorse,

That lives, quivers and writhes,
And feeds on us like the worm on the dead,
Like the grub on the oak?
Can we stifle implacable Remorse? (1-7)
The tone of the poem is of melancholy and not of optimism of the incoming modern, the very

title suggests that the reconstruction by Hausman is irreparable. The imagery of the ‘worm’ can

be interpreted as the crowd of central Paris, of the districts such as St. Antoine, now wandering

as if a worm crawls on a dead, a grub on an oak tree. Notice the word “implacable” which is also

used by Baudelaire in the original French version “Pouvons-nous étouffer l’implacable

Remords?” The local exile of the crowd and Baudelaire himself is irreparable because it is

impeccable as the Old Paris is no more. The triumphant vulgarity of new cafes and arcades,

which Jules Ferry points out, can be seen in the final stanza of Un Cabaret folatre (A Gay

Chophouse) :

You old Pharaoh, Monselet,

Here's a sign I saw that will surely whet
Your appetite for an omelette;
It read: Cemetery View. Estaminet.7

Baudelaire calls Charles Monselet, a french journalist nicknamed ‘the king of the Gastronomes’,

an “old Pharoah”. The analogy drawn here is between the new neverending fetish of

commodities and the infamous insatiable ‘economic appetite’ of the Pharaohs (such as Ramses

II), this obscure analogy will become more apparent if one sees the cartoons of Monselet where

he is depicted with a fork and knife as big as himself hinting towards insatiable hunger. Here

Baudelaire hints towards the uprooting by the modern, as modern capitalism makes mobile what

is static because otherwise immobility will not allow the incessant cycle of trade. In doing so,

Baudelaire very cleverly suggests that this uprooting, the circulation of commodities and capital

taking place in the Estaminet, a type of cafe, will lead to a “Cemetery View” in other words for

Baudleire this new hunger for commodities is leading towards doom.

Bibliography:

Baudelaire, Charles, Flowers of Evil, New Directions, New York, 1955

Baudelaire, Charles, and Jonathan Mayne. The Painter of Modern Life: And Other Essays.

London: Phaidon, 1964

7 David Paul, Flowers of Evil, New Directions, New York 1955

Benjamin, Walter, and Michael William. Jennings. The Writer of Modern Life: Essays on

Charles Baudelaire. Harvard University Press, 2006.

Scott,Cyril, Baudelaire: The Flowers of Evil, London 1909

Aggeler, William, The Flowers of Evil, Academy Library Guild, Fresno, 1954