#fantine relevant

[pilferingapples]

Prefect Henri Gisquet, from his own memoirs, on the legal system's harassment of sex workers , via Jill Harsin's Policing Prostitution in 19th Century Paris

[pilferingapples]

I think most people know that Hugo based the scene with Fantine and Bamatabois on an incident he saw himself?  Here’s some of his full account of it, taken as a snippet from a story titled in translation A Woman of The Streets. Since the account of the attack itself is pretty much just what he wrote in LM, I’m just copying over his account of post-arrest conversations with the police.  Some notes:  this is from a one-volume collection of various Hugo works put out by Black’s Readers Service , initially in 1927.  The translator is uncredited. 

I’m not entirely sure when this was written, but it takes place a couple days after Hugo was elected to the Academy in 1841--specifically two days after, and follows a dinner with Delphine Gay-Girardin, who I’ve mentioned before.  For some reason, Our Humble Author refers to himself in 3rd person as “V.H.” throughout. Under a cut for Long Post!

(following the attack and the arrest of the woman) 

V.H., interested in spite of  himself in the unhappy woman, followed them, amid the crowd of people which is never wanting on such an occasion.

Arriving near the station, V.H. conceived the idea of going in and taking up the cause of the woman.  But he said to himself that he was well known, that just then the newspapers had been full of his name for two days past(because he had just been elected to the Academie) , and that to mix himself up in such an affair was to lay himself open to all kinds of disagreeable banter. In short , he did not go in.

The office into which the girl had been taken was on the ground-floor , overlooking the street. He looked through the window at what was going on.  He saw the poor woman lie down upon the floor in despair and tear her hair; he was moved to pity, he began to reflect, and the result of his reflections what that he decided to go in.

When he set foot in the office a man who was seated before a table , lighted by a candle, writing, turned around and said to him in a sharp, peremptory tone of voice, "What do you want, sir?"  "Sir, I was a witness of what took place just now; I come to make a deposition as to what I saw, and to speak to you in  this woman's favor. " 

At these words the woman looked at V.H. in mute astonishment, and as though dazed.  

"Your deposition, more or less interested, will be unavailing. This woman has been guilty of an assault in a public thoroughfare.  She struck a gentleman.  She will get six months' imprisonment.”  

The woman once more began to cry, scream, and roll over and over.  Other women, who had come and joined her, said to her , "We will come and see you.  Never mind.  We will bring you some linen things.  Take that for the present." And at the same time they gave her money and sweetmeats.  

"When you know who I am," said V.H., "you will, perhaps, change your manner and tone, and will listen to me."

"Who are you, then?"

V.H.  saw no reason for not giving his name. 

He gave his name.  The Commissary of Police, for he was a Commissary of Police,  was prolific of excuses, and became as polite and deferential as he had before been arrogant; offered him a chair, and begged him to be good enough to be seated. 

(Hugo describes the events anyone will recognize from Fantine's encounter with Bamatabois) 

During this defence(sic), the woman, more and more surprised, beamed with joy and emotion. "How good the gentleman is! " she said , "how good he is!  I never knew so good a gentleman.  But then I never saw him.  I do not know him at all."

The Commissary of Police said to V.H. : "I believe all that you allege, but the policemen have reported the case, and there is a charge made out.  Your deposition will be entered in the charge-sheet, you may be sure.  But justice must take its course, and I cannot set the woman at liberty. "

"What! After what I have just told you, and what is the truth--truth which you cannot and do not doubt-- you are going to detain this woman?  Then this justice is a horrible injustice!"

"There is only one condition on which I could end the matter, and that is that you would sign your deposition.  Will you do so?" 

"If the liberty of this woman depends on my signature, here it is."   And V.H.  signed.  

The woman continuously repeated, " How good the gentleman is! How good he is!" 

These unhappy women are astonished and grateful not only when they are treated with sympathy, they are none the less so when they are treated with justice. 

[pilferingapples]

OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED ON PUBLIC WOMEN

These are just some of the rules governing Paris-area prostitutes in 1850,  via William Acton.  Though he’s writing about 1850, these are generalized laws and not specific details , and are pretty well applicable to canon era for LM.  It gives some idea of just how constrained they were: 

Public women, en carte, are called upon to present themselves at the dispensary for examination, once at least every fifteen days.

They are called upon to exhibit this card on every request of police officers and agents.

They are forbidden to practise the calling during daylight, or to walk in the thoroughfares until at least half an hour after the public lamps are lighted, or at any season of the year before seven o'clock, or after eleven P.M.

They must be simply and decently clad, so as not to attract attention by the richness, striking colours, or extravagant fashion of their dress.

They must wear some sort of cap or bonnet, and not present themselves bareheaded.

They are strictly forbidden to address men accompanied by females or children, or to address loud or anxious solicitations to any person.

They may not, under any pretext whatever, exhibit themselves at their window, which must be kept constantly closed and provided with curtains.

They are strictly forbidden to take up a station on the foot-pavement, to form, or walk together, in groups, or to and fro in a narrow space or to allow themselves to be attended or followed by men.

The neighborhood of churches and chapels, within a radius of twenty-five yards, the arcades and approaches of the Palais Royal, the Tuileries, the Luxembourg, and the Jardin des Plantes, are interdicted.

The Champs Elysees, the Terrace of the Invalides, the exterior of the Boulevards, the quays, the bridges, and the more unfrequented and obscure localities are alike forbidden.

They are especially forbidden to frequent public establishments or private houses where clandestine prostitution might be facilitated, or to attend tables-d’hote, reside in boarding-houses, or exercise the calling beyond the quarter of the town they reside in.

They are likewise strictly prohibited from sharing lodgings with a kept woman, or other girl, or to reside in furnished lodgings at all without a permit.

Public women must abstain when at home from anything which can give ground for complaints by their neighbors, or the passers-by.

Those who may infringe the above regulations, resist the agents of authority, or give false names or addresses, will incur penalties proportioned to the gravity of the case.

[pilferingapples]

A la Recherches des Femmes Perdues (“In Search of Lost Women”), is a digital humanities project giving social context to the monumental On Prostitution in the City of Paris (De la prostitution dans la ville de Paris), by Alexandre Parent du Châtelet (1836).

this site has lots of info on multiple subjects related to prostitution in 19th century France (and how it relates to other eras and places!) .  There’s pages on grisettes, class , industry regulation-- just so much info concentrated and laid out in easily searchable blocks! 

(thanks @synteis for finding this!) 

[pilferingapples]

[The author of this report, William Acton, was a serious student of prostitution who campaigned for its regulation in London. In that connection he published a detailed survey of English prostitution in 1857, and compared it to systems elsewhere. Below appears his account of legalized prostitution in Paris in the 1850s.]

[pilferingapples]

Being as it’s Enjolras and Feuilly week, and canon era work with Feuilly tends to be interested in the costs and wages of the day, thought I’d bring this back-- @tenlittlebullets‘ translation of the very detailed budget of a grisette in canon era. 

[pilferingapples]

The official registration of common prostitutes.. is now either on the voluntary demand of the female or by requisition of the Bureau des Moeurs (Bureau of Public Morals).

An account of how legalized prostitution was regulated in France. This applies to the 1850s specifically, but has a lot in common with the system in the earlier part of the century (and would of course have been part of the social context of Hugo’s initial French audience in 1862.) 

[pilferingapples]

Oh oh but I was wondering. When you tag something like the sleeve puff thing "Musichetta relevant" - how relevant to women-who-don't-have-a-rich-father is this stuff actually? Because often we seem to only look at paintings of very fancy things that not even rich people wore everyday, or caricatures that make the extremes even more extreme, and I get very frustrated by how difficult it is to find out about Normal People Clothes.

Aaa I’m SO glad you asked! This is a super good question and also something that bothers me about History of Fashion stuff SO MUCH oh gosh! Thank you for the chance to talk about it! (Though, warning: much necessary simplification and generalization below!) 

Okay, so Les Mis stuff first:  High Fashion stuff is definitely applicable to Musichetta!  Joly specifies that she dresses WELL.*  In the 1830s, as now, there were various ways for poorer women to make themselves look damn good– home sewing, second-hand shopping, etc, could all fill out a working-class woman’s closet somewhat. She might never be a fashion plate, but a woman who put effort into it could still look impressive.   And if she’s working-class then it’s possible, even probable, that she has less-fancy “work clothes” and finer Party clothes.  Fantine and her grisette friends had nice outfits in 1817, too– it wasn’t impossible! 

But yes, most poorer women mostly wore work clothes!  You’re very right to think that sleeve pads, hip pads, etc wouldn’t have been common for working clothes. Working women still had underclothes, of course!  Any woman who could possibly afford it would have had several chemises and a set of stays, at the least, and probably underskirts– chemises and underskirts kept sweat and other bodily fluids from staining and stinking up outerwear as fast, and put a layer between a body and the stays. And stays–or bends, creaks, or corsets– were (and are!) supportive garments, when not made for fashion. Think back supports and bracers rather than waist-whittlers– if you’re gonna be on your feet all day doing manual labor, you definitely want some support! 

Hugo gives us a solid description of working-class women’s Practical Clothing when he describes Fantine’s  post-Tholomyes outfit: 

She was dressed like a working-woman who is inclined to turn into a peasant again. …Her hair, a golden lock of which had escaped, seemed very thick, but was severely concealed beneath an ugly, tight, close, nun-like cap, tied under the chin….A large blue handkerchief, such as the Invalides use, was folded into a fichu, and concealed her figure clumsily. … she wore a cloak of coarse brown woollen stuff, a linen gown, and coarse shoes. It was Fantine. (Hapgood translation) 

(we also know Fantine had a corset, because later it’s mentioned that the stays are starting to poke through the fabric and cut her, and she can’t afford strong cloth to fix them. ;_; )

Hugo’s obviously got some bias in the description, but the basic outline of the outfit is about right.  A working woman would wear a hair-covering scarf or close hat (practical, keeps dirt and dust off and keeps hair from getting messy)  a fairly simple dress, with less volume in the sleeves and skirt than a fashionable dress (saves money on material) and shawls and aprons to protect the basic dress and add variety to the outfit.

Here’s how an outfit like this might look, for a woman who could afford printed fabrics!

(please go check out the blog of the awesome seamstress who made and is wearing this!) 

Personally, I think working-class outfits of the era are super cute, and having worn them a fair amount, I can vouch that they’re quite comfortable and practical when made well of climate-appropriate fabrics! 

There were differences from place to place and over time, of course–it might be the style to tuck in the blouse one place, or wear multiple aprons, hats varied, available materials varied (Fantine’s shoes at this point are very likely wood, but might be rough leather; her Dating Life shoes were probably silk and linen  and polished leather, etc).  But one of the big differences between working clothes and Fashion was that working clothes didn’t change too much too fast– that meant a woman could keep wearing the same dress for years, with only mending to do, changing things like scarves and aprons to spruce it up. 

There’s much less about working fashion largely because of, well, classism in history–ugh, POOR PEOPLE, who cares what they did– but also because working people’s clothes had to WORK, they got worn until they fell apart, while a fashionable dress or coat might be set aside after very little time so the wearer could move with the fashions, so we have those artifacts, as well as fashion plates, which of course weren’t made for women who were going to be sewing most of their own clothes and/or buying a dress every five-ten years.. But there is actually a lot of focus on this class of clothing , especially among reenactors– Old West and Civil War-era reenactors in the US have a LOT of of material on this, and while it’s not exactly France, a lot of the patterns, fabrics, etc made available would have been very similar. 

It’s probably also worth mentioning that social mores varied widely in France at the time.  A lot of middle-class-tourist  ink was spilled over the shocking fact that in some places peasant women would strip to the waist and roll their skirts up over the knee–or even go naked!– to do some kinds of work. This was, of course, entirely practical-why wear skirts to go fishing or work in sodden fields? But about as much ink was spilled again by later tourists lamenting that for some mysterious reason, the peasant girls they’d come to ogle had given up the custom and started wearing basic skirts and blouses all the time, at least in tourist season. :/  (Working -class men, of course, went shirtless for convenience in the country and city both, and no one cared.) 

ANYWAY that is probably more than you wanted to know, but I hope it does answer the question somewhat!

*(Actually, given what Joly tells of us Musichetta, I don’t think there’s any reason to assume she has to be a grisette at all– while Musichetta’s obviously a nickname, a well-dressed, literary woman might also be a performer, or a woman from a wealthier family living La Vie Boheme, etc. She could also totally be a grisette! Working class women could learn to read, and , as said above, had access to some fashion options.  I’m just saying there were options besides “middle class Respectable” and “grisette”.)