Principles of diversity and novelty in gallant aesthetics

Zaótseva Nataliya Vladimirovna PhD in Art History Director General, "Voyager" LLC 194100, Russia, g. Saint Petersburg, ul. Kharchenko, 1, kv. 34 nvzaytseva@mail.ru Other publications by this author

The process of updating aesthetics in the period of modernity and postmodernity, which V.V. Bychkov called the period of "post-culture" ^{[1, p. 164]}, primarily affects the tools, categorical apparatus that has been used in aesthetics for the last century, making adjustments to classical concepts, categories and principles.

Against the background of disputes about the content of aesthetics in the modern world, the principle of historicity, the historical development of aesthetic categories and concepts helps to perceive the process of art development in its entirety. It is difficult not to agree with the opinion that "the history of aesthetics is not a venerable past in which no connections remain, but a process within which aesthetic thought develops" ^{[2, p. 3]}.

The modern concept of art as a constant renewal begins to take shape long before the XX century. In gallant aesthetics, not only aesthetic demands of novelty and diversity are put forward for the first time, but these demands receive their ontological justification, turning into aesthetic principles of Modern art. In the light of discussions about the renewal of the theory of aesthetics, it seems important to consider the historical movement and the transition of the requirement of diversity and novelty into the principle of modern art, which allows us to get away from the absolutization of modern art as radically new. 

It is not by chance that the attention of modern European specialists is drawn to the XVII century and over the past decades there has been a discussion around gallant aesthetics, since we associate the beginning of philosophy, art, mental and behavioral models of Modern times with this period.  This radical turn was associated with historical and socio-cultural processes: the transformation of the knightly estate into a court, the formation of a monarchy of the classical model, the emergence of a new socio-cultural space of salons. There was an embedding of the old feudal aristocracy into a new model of the monarchy of the classical model, which led to a change in the ideal, model of behavior and cognitive method, in a word, the transformation of the authoritarian medieval mind into a new European one ^{[3, p. 138]}. 

Therefore, numerous works of modern researchers, such as A. Adam p^{[4, pp. 277-284]}, J.-M. Peloux ^{[5, p. 512]}, Anne Madeleine Goulet p^{[6, pp. 89-104]}, numerous works by A. Viala ^{[7, pp.115-134]}, D. Denis ^{[8, p. 389]}. Considering various aspects of gallant aesthetics, they formulate its main features, such as secular character, the principle of the elusive, the art of liking, the features of aesthetic categories.

However, the principle of diversity and novelty turned out to be beyond the attention of researchers. At the same time, it is a fundamental principle of the aesthetics of Modern times, since it meant a complete break with the traditionalism characteristic of medieval-Renaissance consciousness.

In this paper, the aim is to investigate the reasons for the demand for diversity and novelty in a gallant society,  as from the sphere of secular and gender relations, these requirements come to literature and art, becoming one of the main aesthetic principles of gallant aesthetics. It seems important to consider the phenomenon of art of the XVII century, when novelty and diversity become a sign not of avant-garde art, not the lot of a narrow group of artists breaking with the old tradition and breaking through the layer of inertia and rejection of their innovation, but a well-formulated and conscious fundamental requirement of new art.

There are several aspects of the problem - philosophical, philosophical, social, gender and artistic.

If we talk about the philosophical and scientific aspect of the problem, then the principles of diversity and novelty find their ideological justification in Cartesianism. The new philosophical and ideological foundation of Cartesianism and the gallant ideal are changing the view of the meaning of creativity, trying to overcome the Renaissance crisis of consciousness and striving to harmonize the world and personality. Cartesianism saw the possibility of such harmonization in turning a person inside himself. Cartesian philosophy forced us to look differently at the processes of movement, change and diversity of the universe.  With regard to movement, Descartes separates God from the universe. He hypothesizes about the initial introduction of movement into the world. God gives an impetus to movement, but he is unchangeable. The world created by God, consisting of elements of particles, is in circular or vortex motion ^{[9, p. 183]}.   Descartes tries to "explain the reason for all the changes taking place in the world and all the diversity existing on Earth" ^{[9, p. 184]}. To do this, he reduces sensual forms to three elements - fire, earth and air, that is, he is looking for a system in diversity. Novelty is perceived by Descartes as an eternal change and movement.  

At the same time, the question arises how the complex philosophical system, which is Cartesianism, could affect the emerging gallant ethos? Very often, researchers overlook that the penetration of Cartesianism into the court and secular environment was very deep.  One of the first Descartes researchers Fouche de Carey in his work "Descartes and the Princess Palatine or the influence of Cartesianism on women of the XVII century" called Descartes an intellectual ruler of the XVII century and emphasized the timeliness of the appearance of his philosophy and how easily it is assimilated by secular society: "Cartesianism was liked primarily by the elite of society for its noble courage and its free gait…It was the philosophy of a noble man. Goethe, who is difficult to suspect of being addicted to Descartes or his century, remarked that in order to understand this philosopher, one must always remember that he was a nobleman and a French nobleman who wore a sword and saw the light. Rejected by the school, his philosophy was met by salons. The women who made up the sovereign empire were its first adherents"^{[10, p. 5]}.

The Cartesian model is personocentric and revolutionary, it departs from the traditionalist model and completely breaks with the past. According to philosophers, moralists and scientists of the XVII century, the essence of the world order created by God is the diversity and flow of forms and matter. Continuing Descartes' ideas, they saw in life and art not just a movement, but an upward movement, perceiving the historical movement as an evolution and improvement of the situation. Life and art are beginning to be perceived not as contemplation, but as movement. 

In the famous dispute between the "old" and the "new", the principle of the progress of civilization is formulated. Gallant aesthetics, relying on Cartesian philosophy, with its inherent rationalism, perceives all the changes taking place positively as progress and forward movement. The diversity of the world feels like a given to her. The nature created by the creator offers a wide variety of species and varieties, so "there is nothing more natural than diversity," says the writer and moralist of the XVII century Kontiere ^{[11, p. 73]}. At the same time, he clarifies that diversity should not be confused with impermanence, which comes from a whim of the imagination, whereas diversity comes from fertility and abundance.

The demand for diversity and novelty from the sphere of nature and the universe extends to social and gender relations. If we talk about the gender revolution of the XVII century, many researchers note a radical change of the ideal, when suffering love is replaced by the ideal of gaiety and impermanence. According to Jean-Michel Peloux, who devoted his research to gender relations, gallantry voluntarily renounces suffering love, but retains all its reverence for the power of love, giving it a quasi-official status ^{[12, p. 5]}. 

 Scientists of the XVII century are trying to explain and justify the new ideal of impermanence and variability, referring to the world order. So the famous doctor and scientist Nicolas Venette writes: "We will not be mistaken if we attribute our impermanence to the world order in which God created nature. It is preserved only through changes, the successive replacement of one by another. The stars are constantly in motion, the seasons are changing opposite to each other, natural elements come into connection and mix, creating an endless struggle without destruction. All generations in this world live and survive only thanks to changes. The man himself in the womb of his mother is formed by different matters and survives only thanks to the variety of his movements. [...] The blood through which we live consists of parts so diverse that we would not be able to live if its composition were homogeneous and the qualities were the same. Everything that exists in the world is preserved only through diversity and impermanence. Therefore, the instability of our temperament creates the impermanence of our inclinations, contributing to the expedient beauty of the world and bringing us variety and lightness"^{[13, p. 269]}.  

Reinterpretation of the old theory of human temperaments leads Nicolas Venette to the conclusion that because of this, man is the most fickle being: "Our actions depend on our temperament and since our temperament is not very constant due to mood swings, we can conclude that man is the most fickle and the most changeable of all animals. That his mind is far from destroying his weaknesses often serves to increase his impermanence" ^{[13, p. 270]}. Having defined impermanence as a law of human nature, Nicolas Venette concludes that because of this diversity attracts noble people in communication and gender relations. 

  In the XVII century, diversity and novelty in relationships are viewed from the point of view of one of the unconditionally positive qualities that are liked in both men and women. The resulting impermanence is not condemned, but on the contrary acquires a positive connotation. Kontier in the book "The Art of liking" writes about this:

 Beauties are always changeable.

To please them, you need variety

Very strong monotony tires sooner or later.

            It is the inconstancy of beauties that fascinates ^{[11, p. 75]}

However, the constant novelty in the relationship, according to moralists, was dangerous due to its proximity to libertinage and it was possible to avoid this only by deep inner qualities: "You need to know the human heart when you want to please. Men are most touched by novelty as the highest degree of perfection, but the color of novelty is short. What you like as new is tiring, becoming a habit. To keep the taste for novelty, you need to have the means and various advantages in yourself," writes the famous hostess of the salon Marquise de Lambert ^{[14, p.63]}.

Diversity and novelty become extremely important in secular communication. The reason for this, according to the Marquise de Lambert, lies in the fact that diversity is the main sign of a deep mind: "To convince and to touch, you need to like and you can like only thanks to grace. Your mind has been shaped by this. He is subtle and elegant, his ideas are clear, lively and pure. He invests diversity in everything he does - in all turns of speech, description, his expressions, attachment to every idea"^{[14, p. 503]}. 

These theoretical principles find expression in the ideal of secular communication. Books on the art of conversation teach that a conversation should not turn into a scientific debate, a conversation on one topic is tiring, so you should change the plots ^{[15, pp.77-166]}. Madeleine de Scuderi, talking about the art of constructing a conversation, advises taking into account the place, time and personality of the people leading it, but any conversation should be diversified with plots ^{[16, p.33]}. The philosopher and moralist Moncri in "The Art of liking in Conversation" continues: "The greatest charm of conversation consists in a variety of plots that replace each other as if by chance, but imperceptible connections are present" ^{[17, p. 179]}. 

It should be noted that the salon space was a place where the goals of art were rethought, a new aesthetic taste was formed. In a word, it was the secular salons that were the socio-cultural space in which the tastes of the French elite were formed, educated and unified, a place for acquiring aesthetic experience. Numerous literary and philosophical disputes, which are full of secular correspondence, ranging from the Marquise Sevigne ^{[18, p. 543]} to Ninon de Lanclos ^{[19, pp. 80-134]}, demonstrate these processes.  In this case, it is "the aesthetic that acts as one of the most important abilities for seeing, evaluating and understanding novelty" and, by virtue of its nature, becomes one of the main criteria for novelty"^{[20, pp. 108-122]}. 

The socially diverse public filling the salons, along with the royal court, was a consumer and customer of works of art. How to explain this phenomenon, when the ideas of innovation not only did not cause hostility and rejection, but, on the contrary, were picked up and became the main requirement for works of art? This can be explained by the fact that the new gallant ethos and the new ideology, which is on the rise, clearly articulate the main principle of the new art, distancing themselves from the past. It was not a desire for diversity and novelty, which are inherent in the very nature of art and the aesthetic. The principle of diversity and novelty has become a point of non-contact, a breaking point of the old and the new. So the writer Andre Marechal writes that the difference between the modern theater and the ancient theater lies in the diversity: "The difference between modern and ancient theaters is that the ancient theater only narrates, whereas ours always wants action and variety" ^{[21, p. 3]}.

Writers, philosophers, moralists write about the same thing, talking about different types of art. As a result, the art of the XVII century creates a hitherto unprecedented variety of new forms - comedy-ballet, heroic and pastoral novels, gallant short stories, epistolary novels, travel essays, memoirs, and so on. 

Diversity and novelty in literary works are evaluated as the sophistication and professionalism of the author. The principle of diversity of plot and action becomes the main requirement, the main condition for the possibility of pleasing the viewer: "if fiction is not entirely new, then there must be a new twist. If there is no grace of novelty in the turn, then there must be something elusive that gives admiration and pleasure," writes philosopher and moralist Dominique Buur ^{[22, p. 101]}.

Diversity must be present in the very structure of the work of art. In dramaturgy, according to Paul Pelisson, this is expressed in the fact that "poems that mix with prose should form a single whole with it" ^{[23, p. 21]}. An example is "The Love of Psyche and Cupid", in which La Fontaine combines a prosaic plot - a walk in Versailles with a poetic plot.  According to La Fontaine, along with the diverse form, a new unexpected ending is extremely important, which keeps the audience in suspense until the end of the play: "one should never reveal the finale of events in advance, it needs to be prepared, but it should not be predicted" ^{[24, p. XI]}.   

Moralist and writer Ortig de Vomoriere believes that in light genres such as comedy, the principle of diversity is especially important, because "there need more diverse characters than in tragedy, more descriptions of morals, which I find more difficult, and it should introduce events interesting enough and new enough to entertain and enlighten the audience, and to make noble people laugh" ^{[25, p. 168]}. 

Historian Antoine Felibien, analyzing Moliere's play "Georges Dandin", considers its serious merit to be the variety of parts that make up the unity: "The play consists of parts so diverse and charming that it can be argued that hitherto no play has been staged at the theater that can more satisfy the tastes of the audience. The prose was written in simple words corresponding to the action that was presented. The verses were sung between the acts of comedy and perfectly corresponded to the plot, so subtly conveying the experiences with which the reciters were excited that there was nothing more touching. It seemed that two comedies were being played at the same time, one in prose, the second in verse. At the same time, they combined so well into one plot that it seemed that it was one play representing one action" ^{[26, p. 217]}. 

The principle of diversity, novelty and surprise is asserted by one of the first art historians Roger de Pilem as the fundamental principles of painting. Since a person viewing a work of art receives not only "pleasure for the mind", but also "pleasure for the eyes, which comes from what is unexpected", surprise, surprise in the first impression of the picture is very important ^{[27, p. 77]}. Roger de Peel, looking at the works of Rubens, sees in them the desire to follow the diversity of nature that does not need rules and restrictions: "Rubens was sure that the diversity of nature is one of the greatest beauties. It cannot be found, being attached only to statues and bas-reliefs" ^{[27, p. 256]}. The artist chooses from all this diversity, but "the choice is not to take thoughtlessly everything that occurs, but according to what the plot requires, depicting figures this way or that way, according to the principle of diversity, as a pleasure for the eyes and a better representation of nature, in which there are no two identical objects"^{[27, pp. 253-254]}. Thus, the artist does not turn the picture into chaos and a pile of objects, but follows a conscious choice.

In architecture, the desire for diversity is expressed in a variety of materials that complement each other and make up one whole. Felibien, describing the grottoes of Versailles, says that there is nothing extraordinary in these grottoes, there is no luxury and gold, only a mosaic connected with a large number of shells. But, most importantly, it is "the huge variety that we meet here, which makes up its beauty"^{[26, p. 358]}. 

Paradoxically, even in the dispute between "ancient" and "new", with regard to architecture, only the principle of diversity was recognized by both sides.  So Claude Perrault argued that "if you like the structure, it's not because of the proportions, which many have not heard of," in addition, there are no immutable rules. Diversity is what I like ^{[28, p. vj]}. Opponents of Perrault and supporters of architectural rules agreed with this: "The love of diversity is so necessary to be liked in all spheres of art," writes Charles-Etienne Brizo, a follower of Francois Blondel ^{[29, p. 56]}. Too strict simplicity in the absence of diversity generates cold beauty and monotony. How can diversity be achieved by following the rules? "Proportions in all types of buildings can be infinitely diverse"^{[29, p. 57]}. 

In books on architecture of the XVIII century, diversity is already becoming a fundamental principle: "Consider a completely extensive building that must be cut and interrupted by different heights. To do this, it is not enough to draw several protruding buildings. It is necessary that they represent to the eyes the contrast and diversity that occurs when looking from afar, when all the parts merge and only the masses are visible," writes Le Comu de Maiziere ^{[30, pp. 73-74]}. 

Diversity and novelty are beginning to be strongly associated with pleasure and not only aesthetic. The historiographer of King Louis XIV, Paul Pelisson, considers diversity and novelty as the main aesthetic principles of modern art, since art increases the diversity of the world and gives pleasure. In his opinion, in works of art we are attracted by the novelty of the drawing, "nothing makes you laugh like the unexpected, nothing entertains like what you don't expect. Diversity, which is useful and commendable in various kinds of work, is absolutely necessary in that which aims at pleasure"^{[23, p. 19]}.

Therefore, the principle of diversity is most clearly manifested in royal holidays. In form, they differed from all previous eras. The novelty consisted in a constant variety of activities - a walk, snacks, boating on the canals, a performance, dinner, fireworks. The scenography of the holiday was based on the constant movement of participants, changing angles and changing entertainment, the desire to surprise and surprise with surprise.  Receptions and the very space of the halls in the royal chambers were organized according to the principle of diversity. From the description of the newly opened halls of Versailles, it becomes clear that their organization was aimed at a constant change of impressions, since the principle of diversity lies at the heart of the aesthetic pleasure that the participants of secular communication receive: "The greatest true pleasure is to change entertainment, since the pleasure of a long time becomes less tangible and they are changed as often as they will wish it. First they play one game here, then another, then they listen to a symphony, watch dancing, have conversations, go to a room with paintings, where snacks are served and find there in abundance everything that can satisfy the taste. The imagination is only looking for what it might like, the eyes are looking, the hands are taking," writes an anonymous author in the magazine "Mercury Galan" ^{[31, p. 56]}. 

 Diversity is thus perceived as a luxury worthy of a king and the most important decoration of the royal chambers. Therefore, the diversity and beauty of Versailles, where the holidays were held, had to resemble Eden. Diversity becomes the fundamental principle of gardening art, which is formulated in gardening textbooks: "Diversity seriously contributes to the decoration of the garden. [...] When planning the garden space, one should place the parts that are opposite to each other side by side [...] In this amazing variety, the eye rejoices and the mind finds something with which it can be satisfied. Not only should there be diversity in the main idea of creating a garden, but also in each part of it separately" ^{[32, p. 116]}. 

Therefore, Colbert collects in Versailles all the diversity of flora and fauna of the world: "We would like to have everything that can be found most interesting on the islands of America, for example, flowers, fruits, as well as shells that could serve as decoration and decoding of the gardens of the royal palace and in order to present them to the king. [...] What would you be looking for with the same attention are there beautiful shells, rare plants, evergreen shrubs, unusual flowers, in a word, everything that can be curious and unique to send me on the way back with French ships ^{[33, p. 343]}. 

The aestheticization of everyday life, the build-up of the aesthetic experience of everyday life leads to the fact that the requirements for diversity and novelty invade the sphere of cooking and table setting.  The variety of serving dishes and their decoration becomes the fundamental principle of the new gastronomy. Pierre de Lune is writing a book for professional butlers in wealthy homes and dedicates it to Guillaume de Lamoigne's butler Monsignor Chantel.  This book examines in detail the principle of diversity both in the serving of dishes and in their preparation ^{[34, p.364]}. The cook echoes him  Nicolas de Bonephon, who writes that dishes should be served on the table according to the principle of symmetry, hierarchy and diversity ^{[35, p. 375]}.

There should not have been identical dishes on the table next to each other, they were served according to the principle of contrast. "The main decoration of the dinner is impeccable courtesy and abundance, which saturates you more with its appearance than with food, in order to increase the radiance of beauty with variety. Music, games, entertainment perfectly combine to present objects even more magnificently and worthy of universal admiration," writes the author of a popular book on cooking, Monsieur Le Sieur Robert ^{[36, p.314]}.  

Novelty in cooking, new flavors become a feature of French cuisine: "there is always a new sauce, an unfamiliar stew," Saint-Evremont or an unknown Sicilian slanders ^{[37, p. 286]}. Descriptions of new recipes at dinners flash in the writers' stories: "There were so many different stews cooked in a new manner that everyone liked it as a novelty for the taste" ^{[38, p. 471]}.

Ultimately, the principle of diversity and novelty finds its ontological justification in the treatise "On the Beautiful" by the Swiss scientist Jean-Pierre de Cruz, whose ideas echo those of his contemporary Montesquieu. Jean-Pierre de Cruz was a follower of Descartes, during his stay in Paris he closely converged with Malebranche and, of course, he was familiar with the ideas of John Locke. According to de Cruz, the human mind tends to novelty and diversity, "because it is born to comprehend them endlessly and without stopping" ^{[39, p. 12]}. Comprehending the world, a person gets rid of despondency and lethargy. Beauty is directly related to diversity and novelty: "greatness, diversity and novelty combine to create beauty and to increase it" ^{[39, p. 93]}. However, in order not to drown in the diversity of the world, uniformity is necessary, without which diversity is tiring and confusing. How to connect these two opposites? Unity must be sought in diversity: "The alternative to unity and diversity lies in regularity. In this connection lies partly the nature of the beautiful. Because our senses, as well as the mind, enjoy diversity, which is reduced by order and unity" ^{[39, p. 114]}. In this he consistently continues the ideas of Descartes, who was looking for a system in diversity.

With regard to the aesthetic category of beauty, de Cruz tries to combine Cartesianism and sensualism, explaining that there is an idea of beauty that does not depend at all on feeling. Moreover, the feelings that capture a person make it difficult to consider this idea. However, "a person is capable of an idea and a feeling, from which many things happen, including an experiment." God creates a perfect human mind and, if a person thinks correctly, relying on knowledge, he can get pleasure from the universe, "created in the proportions that reign there" ^{[39, p. 64]}.

 Thus, as we see, in philosophy, science, social and gender relations, art and everyday life in the XVII century, the principles of novelty and diversity come to the fore as the main criteria of beauty and a reflection of the diversity of the world and its harmony. Moralists, writers, philosophers, art historians of the XVII century are united in the opinion that diversity and novelty are the fundamental principles of the new aesthetics. 

The gallant aesthetics of the XVII century, relying on Cartesianism and rationalism, does not give up before the infinite diversity of the world, which is in constant motion. The art of Modern times considers the principle of diversity and novelty as a reflection of the richness and diversity of the surrounding world, the impermanent nature of man himself and, consequently, as the main condition for what to like. Diversity is perceived as a pleasure for the eyes and mind. It is opposed to monotony and tedious static: "So, for example, we like stories with a variety of plots, novels with a variety of wonderful events, theatrical plays with a variety of passions; people who are able to teach others try in every way to avoid monotony of presentation," Montesquieu summed up the last century ^{[40, pp. 138-139]}.