Luxembourg palace the democratic architecture

Luxembourg Palace: The Democratic Architecture Matthew Burleigh - 20950992

"In architecture, the notions of freedom, equality and individuality that are essential to democracy are, arguably, made intelligible through the use of a complex of symbols and images. However, democracy is not only an ideal; it is also a form of administration, a way of organising and ordering society. What role does architecture play in the practice of democracy? A parliament building is one choice for a case study but an alternative might be other forms of institutional or public architecture/spaces."

Abstract In contemporary times, most people living in an industrialised country would consider freedom, equality and individuality as essential rights that should form the basis of the political system within their country. While this may be the case now, it was not always like this. Throughout the history of France, there have been a number of different political systems in effect; namely monarchy and democracy. Under the monarchic regime, up until the French revolution of 1789 to 1799, it could be argued that the citizens of France were repressed by the nobility and kingship and treated unequally. However, under the new regime of democracy in France, the people were given the chance to experience the freedom, equality and individuality that had been previously repressed.

Within the practice of architecture, the notions of freedom, equality and individuality, or the opposites of these are often present within the architect’s designs. Throughout the monarchical era of France, with specific reference to the Palace of Versailles and the Luxembourg palace, a series of symbols and images can be viewed through the design that promote the ideals of monarchy; the importance of nobility above all else; and the way in which the monarch was perceived. However, when democracy was introduced to France, one can see how those very same symbols were then utilised to represent the ideals of freedom and equality. This is demonstrated by the renovation of Luxembourg Palace, and the building of the Arc de Triomphe. These symbols can be studied further to demonstrate the way in which architecture can have a profound effect on the practice of democracy, by portraying the way in which the ideals of the nation shift through the symbolism of such constructions.

Essay Many people living in industrialised countries consider freedom, equality and individuality to be part of their basic human rights. These values are considered essential in any community that wants to enable its people to develop their full potential and lead fulfilling, and meaningful lives. These values also underpin the political system known as democracy. The word democracy was derived from the Greek word dēmokratía, which means "rule of the people" and in its most basic form, the word has retained that same meaning to this day. While democracy primarily applies to politics, it also has an ever expanding effect on other disciplines, including the world of architecture. Buildings which house the processes of democracy may have their design influenced by the democratic system while, conversely, the design of the building can have a profound effect on how the democratic system operates within. This essay discusses how the values of freedom, equality, individuality, and in some cases a lack of these values, are represented through a complex of symbols and images present within French architecture. The Luxembourg Palace is the main focus of the discussion, as it has been both a symbol of monarchical rule as well as a legislative building representing democratic rule. The role the architecture of the Luxembourg Palace plays in the practice of democracy in Paris is explored, particularly in relation to the symbols of monarchy and democracy that represent freedom, equality, individuality and their opposites. In addition, the symbolic representations of the Palace of Versailles and the Arche de Triomphe will be examined.

Within French society, symbols and images have been a very prominent part of revolutionary history. Some examples are Le Marianne, the tricoloured cockade, and the Phrygian-style cap.1 These forms of symbolism have often been used to represent the ideas of freedom, equality and individuality. In the case of the revolution, these three symbols were used as a rallying cry to achieve the goals of the revolutionaries – to build a republic and democracy2. These three relics serve as a prime example of how symbols and images can become a language within a democratic society, and serve as a way of communicating the notions and ideals of certain parties of people. When a series of symbols and images similar to Le Marianne, the tricolor cockade and the Phrygian-style hat are applied to architecture, they can serve to make great ideas visible. 3 Cope expressed the idea that “By their very nature parliamentary buildings are meant to attract notice; the grander the structure, the stronger the public and national interest and reaction to them.”4 In the case of the Luxembourg palace, a large number of symbolic designing methods have been applied in order to represent the same notions of freedom and equality that have been perceived through the symbols of the revolution. In manipulating the design principles and symbols that previously represented the monarchic regime within the Luxembourg palace, the architects responsible have created a grand structure capable of attracting a strong public and national interest which works to make the ideals of democracy within even stronger.5 By effectively changing the language of the symbols and images involved, the architects have created a monument that promotes the ideals of freedom, equality and individuality from a structure that previously promoted privilege, nobility and inequality.

The architecture of a city has always been considered to be a representation of that city’s values and beliefs.

Within the country of France, there is a rich architectural history that demonstrates how the architecture of a location can change and alter as the political ideals and emotions within that nation also change. It is necessary to study the way in which symbols and images portrayed the ideals of absolute monarchy in order to provide an understanding of how democracy could play off these same symbols to represent a different message. One such example is the Palace of Versailles which to this day still represents the power and privilege of monarchy under the ancient regime.

The role architecture played in the construction of the Palace of Versailles as a symbol of absolute monarchy is profound, as the arrangement of the whole structure was based on elevating the king above everyone else.

Additionally, the constant additions to the palace made by each successive king served as a mark of their increasingly prosperous reign, leading to what would later be described by Payne as “the most sumptuous dwelling of the monarchy”.6 The palace was both the location of the royal court as well as the home of the French nobility, and this essentially made it the centre of the French government.7 As can be seen in Figure. 1, the centre of the extensive and symmetrical building was the Royal court with the king’s bed chamber placed above it. Symbolically, this represents the importance, centrality and power of the king of France. 8 Even the principle axis of the main gardens was set to radiate outwards from this central point which can be seen in Figure. 2. Together with the absolute enormity, grandeur and beauty of the palace, the architecture of the structure worked to show the importance that was placed on the king of France. This not only showcased the

1 “French Nation Symbols: The Phrygian Cap or Liberty Cap,” Living in the Languedoc, accessed April 29, 2015, http://www.languedoc-france.info/06141204_libertycap.htm 2 Living in the Languedoc, “French Nation Symbols.”

3 “Architecture of Democracy,” Allan Greenberg, accessed April 30, 2015, http://www.architectmagazine.com/design/architecture-of-democracy_o 4 R.L. Cope, “Housing a Legislature: When Architecture and Politics Meet,” Papers on Parliament No. 37 (Australia: Canberra, 2001), accessed April 30, 2015, http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Research_and_Education/pops/pop37/cope 5 Ibid.

6 Francis Loring Payne, The Story of Versailles (New York: Moffat, Yard & Company), 20.

1919.

7 Ibid., 28-29.

8 Louis Marin and Anna Lehman, “Classical, Baroque: Versailles, or the architecture of the Prince,” Yale French Studies 80 (1991): 168, accessed April 26, 2015, doi: 10.2307/2930266.

importance that was placed on the king, but elevated him above all the other nobility and made the king, both literally and figuratively, the centre of all of French politics.9 The Luxembourg Palace, though not on such grand scale, also symbolised the rule of absolute monarchy within France prior to the French revolution.

Figure. 1: A simplified floor plan for the Palace of Versailles demonstrates how the Royal court has been centralized, with the King’s suite elevated directly above the court.

History Lines. http://www.historylines.net/history/17th_cent/versailles.html (accessed May 3, 2015)

Figure. 2: Site plan depicting the garden of the palace with the King’s bed chamber circled in red. The image demonstrates how the gardens of the Palace of Versailles extends outwards from the bed chamber.

Science, Civilization and Society. http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/science+society/lectures/illustrations/index.html (accessed May 3, 2015)

The Luxembourg Palace was built in central Paris between 1615 and 1645 by the French architect, Salomon de Brosse.10 It was built to be the residence of the regent Marie de Medicis, who was the mother of Louis XIII - the king of France at that time. Marie de Medicis commissioned the palace specifically for herself and therefore the palace served as a symbol of inequality and privilege. After Marie de Medicis’ passing in 1642, the palace was passed on to her favourite son, Gaston, Duke of Orleans.11 The Luxembourg Palace had by then become a symbol of two generations of monarchy within France and would be used as a Palace for the monarch for many more years to come. The very creation of the Luxembourg Palace served as a symbol of absolute monarchy, although not to the same extent as the Palace of Versailles.

9 Ibid.

10 Peter Collins, Concrete: The Vision of a New Architecture (Colorado: Westview Press), 166-168, 1978.

11 Charles Dickens, Dickens’s Dictionary of Paris, 1882: An unconventional handbook (London: Macmillan and Co), 143, 1882.

The Luxembourg Palace, although to a lesser extent than the Palace of Versailles, had its spaces arranged to promote the idea of absolute monarchy. During Marie de Medicis’ era, the palace was arranged so that she could reside in the western wing, while her son when visiting would be accommodated in the symmetrical eastern wing as demonstrated in Figure. 3. This created a feeling of equality between the Queen and her son in terms of importance and nobility. As Figure. 4 demonstrates, the palace was located centrally within Paris, in the 6 th arrondissement, which included a concentration of some of France’s most important monuments such as the St. Suplice Church and Saint-Germain Abbey. In placing the palace within the centre of Paris next to a number of prominent churches and other landmarks,12 the Luxembourg Palace symbolised Marie de Medicis’and the monarchy’s importance within Paris. However, while the Palace of Versailles and the Luxembourg Palace may have been symbols of absolute monarchy within France, there are also a number of structures that represent the Republic’s triumph over the monarchy, such as the Arc de Triomphe and the redesigned Luxembourg Palace.

Figure. 3: Luxembourg Palace plan prior to the series of renovations. Marie De Medicis resided in the apartments on the right, while the left apartments were reserved for her son, the king, Louis XIII when he visited.

Wikimedia. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palais_du_Luxembourg_-_Plan_du_second_%C3%A9tage_-_Architecture_fran %C3%A7oise_Tome2_Livre3_Ch8_Pl4.jpg (accessed May 5, 2015)

12 “Arrondissements of Paris,” A View on Cities, accessed April 28, 2015, http://www.aviewoncities.com/paris/arrondissements.htm

Figure. 4: A simplistic map of Paris with the 6th arrondissement highlighted. It is of note that the 6th arrondissement is rather centralised within Paris.

Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_arrondissement_of_Paris (accessed May 5, 2015)

The Arc de Triomphe, is considered one of Paris’s most famous monuments and is located in the centre of the Place Charles de Gaulle.13 It stands as an honorary monument to those who fought for France in the French Revolutionary wars, among other wars. The monument also has the names of all of the victories of France, along with their generals inscribed upon its interior and exterior walls.14 It stands as a literal monument of triumph. The structure was designed in 1806 by Jean Chalgrin, who was also the architect responsible for the remodelling of the Luxembourg Palace into a legislative building from 1799 to 1805. The program of the Arc de Triomphe pictures a number of different sculpted images on its sides, all of various depictions of the battle between the Monarch and the revolutionaries during the French revolution, one of which is depicted in Figure.

5. Symbolically, the Arc de Triomphe represents the triumph of the revolutionaries over the monarch and various other nations through a series of battles during the late years of the 1700s and early years of the 1800s 15.

The arch was created on a very large scale and was placed in a highly visible location as shown in Figure. 6, so that all of France and its visitors can see the symbolic defeat of the monarch by the patriotic revolutionaries. In showing the triumph of republicanism and democracy over the monarch, the Arc de Triomphe’s iconography and imagery symbolises the yearning for freedom and equality that the revolutionaries fought for, and stands as a monument of triumph for these very ideals. While the Arc de Triomphe represents the absolute triumph over the monarchy, the renovation of the Luxembourg Palace has also become a representation of this same notion.

Figure. 5: La prise d'Alexandrie, an example of one of the sculptings on the arc de triomphe depicting the French revolution.

History Europe: http://www.histoireeurope.fr/RechercheLocution.php?Locutions=Jean-Baptiste+Kl%E9ber (accessed May 5, 2015)

13 “Arc de Triomphe Paris,” Arc de Triomphe Paris accessed April 29, 2015, http://www.arcdetriompheparis.com/ 14 Ibid.

15 “History of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris,” Places in France, accessed April 29, 2015, http://www.placesinfrance.com/history_arc_de_triomphe.html

Figure. 6: An image of the Arc de Triomphe demonstrating its scale and visibility within France.

Rue Savoir. http://ruesavoir.com/fr-civ/monuments/article2/ (accessed May 5, 2015)

By renovating the building that served as the home of many monarchs before the French revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte and the revolutionaries aimed to show their triumph over the monarch. While they could have easily commissioned the construction of a completely new building for the legislature, they chose to effectively take over and repurpose one that was previously symbolic of the absolute monarchy. In doing so, they were able to achieve a central position within the city of France to house the new government; display the centrality of the new government in respect to the rest of the city; and demonstrate their dominance and ability to take whatever they needed from the previous monarchy. This position and yearning for symbolism is what led to the refurbishment of the palace and ultimately the practicing of democracy within the Luxembourg Palace.

From 1799 to 1805, the Luxembourg palace was transformed. It no longer needed to serve the purposes of an absolute monarchy, as there was now no monarchy for it to serve. The architect, Jean Chalgrin, was enlisted to transform the palace into something more suitable of the new era - a legislative building. 16 For the old palace to work as a legislative building, a large number of changes had to be made. The grand central staircase was completely removed to make way for a senate chamber on the first floor. The Marie de Medicis chapel also had to be completely destroyed. The long gallery, that had previously been the home to a number of cycle paintings by the famous artist Peter Paul Rubens, was completely demolished to make room for a stairway of honour designed in a neo-classical style. This stairway of honour was located in the west wing, along with a coffered barrel vault which covered the single monumental flight of stairs. It was additionally enclosed by an ionic colonnade.17 While the majority of essential changes to the palace were made during Jean Chalgrin’s time, it wasn’t until the 1850s that the final changes were made to the structure, completing the transformation into the legislative building that Paris knows today.

During 1835, the architect Alphonse de Gisors began a series of additional renovations on the building. 18 He began by adding a new garden wing parallel to the old corpis de logis. In doing so, he was able to replicate the old 17th century façade to such a perfect extent that the old is virtually indistinguishable from the new. This resulted in the senate chamber being relocated to what would have been the courtyard area in between. This new wing also included a library and featured a new cycle of paintings created by Eugene Delacroix. 19 During the 1850s, Emperor Napoleon III requested that Alphonse de Gisors create a highly decorated conference room. The room that would subsequently be created would later serve as the inspiration for other official interiors of the

16 Andrew Ayers, The Architecture of Paris (London: Edition Axel Menges, 2003), 131.

17 Ibid.

18 A and W Galignani and Co, Galignani’s Illustrated Paris Guide for 1889 (Ulan Press, 2012), 188.

19 Ayers, The Architecture of Paris, 131.

second empire, one notable example being the Palais Garnier.20 All the changes that have been made to the structure have all been done to better constitute democracy within the structure as can be seen through the comparing of the old and new floor plans in Figures 3 and 7. Consequently, after its renovation the Luxembourg Palace became a symbol of the republic’s triumph over the monarch, in a similar fashion to the Arc de Triomphe, as well as a monument to freedom and equality, providing a place in which democracy could now be practiced.

Figure. 7: The renovated floor plan of the Luxembourg palace featuring all the new additions.

Wikimedia. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palais_du_Luxembourg_plan_1904_-_Hustin_1904_p86__Google_Books_(cropped,_marked).jpg

When the Luxembourg Palace was remodeled, similar to other legislative buildings, it was designed with the noblest ideals of democracy in mind.21 Within the structure, with the addition of the new rooms, the old style of ornamentation was maintained so that it could “reinforce the power of the court without overlooking its democratic functions.”22 The speaker within parliament serves as the national representative of the French upper house and as such, presides over all of the discussions and debates within the Luxembourg Palace’s senate chamber.23 The speaker sits elevated above all the other senators in a fashion reminiscent of the previous monarchy, although instead of representing absolute power, the speaker simply helps to guide discussions and help the democratic process. Furthermore, the senators are then organised around the central podium, resulting in an arrangement in which everyone in the room is able to speak up and voice their opinion; a lynchpin of democracy. Furthermore, it is of note that each chamber for the two houses of Parliament have been housed “in equally magnificent historic buildings, the Bourbon Palace for the National Assembly and the Luxembourg Palace for the senate.”24 This serves to only further the notions of equality produced by the new democratic architecture of France, conversely, it could be argued that inequality between the two houses may result in a

20 Ibid., 131–132.

21 Allan Greenberg, “Architecture of Democracy.”

22 “Court Architecture and the Development of Democracy,” Colonial Court: A Building Block of American Democracy, accessed May 3, 2015, http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/score_lessons/colonial_court/html/court_architec.html 23 “The Speaker of the Senate,” Senat.fr, accessed May 5, 2015, http://www.senat.fr/lng/en/organisation/the_speaker.html 24 Charles T. Goodsell, “The Architecture of Parliaments: Legislative Houses and Political Culture,” British Journal of Political Science 18, no. 3, (1988): 293. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/stable/193839? seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

polarity between the two chambers.25 To further the idea that democracy truly is the rule of the people, “all parliaments provide special seating for members of the press and public.”26 This allows for everyone in the country to bear witness and feel involved in everything that happens within the senate.

When the palace was first remodeled in 1799, it was remodeled for the purpose of republicanism and democracy. The main focus of the building was no longer for the comfort of a single person; rather it was now to be the structure where the major decisions of the country would be made in the name of democracy. During its reconstruction, the factors that Jean Chalgrin and then Alphonse de Gisors had to take into account were how to change a building that was effectively a symbol of absolute monarchy into a symbol of democracy. In choosing such a symbolic building, it shows the changes that the country was going through at the time. It is a perfect example of how a building can portray a country’s changing ideals in physical form. The remodeled design of the palace was influenced entirely by what the architects knew was necessary for democracy to work.27 As previously mentioned, the structure had already been placed in the centre of the city of Paris, giving it the symbolic location of centrality (refer back to Figure. 4). Similarly, the gardens were refurbished and reopened so that the general public could get closer to the palace, and be provided with a sense of openness and equality that was not present during the monarchical era. The people of the city were now able to feel like the leadership of the country was more accessible, providing them with a sense of freedom and equality. Internally the ornamental staircase and chapel were replaced by a senate chamber, which was more befitting of a legislative building and similarly served as a more practical symbol of the forming of democracy. 28 Together, all these changes work together to represent the absolute triumph of democracy over the monarchy. It also shows how the role of architecture in the practice of democracy can be significant.

The role that architecture plays in the practice of democracy could be considered to be large. Without the construction of appropriate buildings, democracy simply wouldn’t happen. Without the complete remodeling, the structure of the Luxembourg Palace wouldn’t have worked as a legislative building, as there are certain requirements that a structure requires to work as a democratic building, such as certain meeting chambers, conference rooms and other features.29 In this instance, one of the most important roles of architecture in the practice of democracy could be considered to be symbolic, rather than simply practical. The redesigning of the Luxembourg Palace created a structure that was more open and accessible to the public. This allowed the citizens of the country the ability to get close to the leadership and feel as though they were more involved and on a more equal level. By choosing the Luxembourg specifically, the new government was able to promote the message of freedom and equality triumphing over the previous monarchic regime.

Symbols and images are very important for both the practice of democracy and construction of architecture. As with the Palace of Versailles and original Luxembourg Palace, the symbols present within the buildings strongly suggested an absolute monarchy. Within the monarchy of France, this symbolism was very important in elevating the nobility above everyone else and further elevating the royal family above even them. This symbolism placed within the structure of each palace is very important in influencing the way in which people viewed the royal family within the monarch, it provided the people of the country with a sense of repression and inequality. Conversely, this same symbolism was taken over by the revolutionaries in order to promote the changing ideals of France. They instigated the presence of democracy within the structures of France. In the case of the Arc de Triomphe and the repurposed Luxembourg Palace, these symbols and images became important in showing the triumph of the republic over the old monarchical regime. The symbols of centrality and power of the monarch became repurposed and now represented the centrality of the new government. The power was given to the people by creating an accessibility and openness that was not present previously. It could be stated that these symbols in architecture are a profoundly important part of what provides the people of a city or country with a feeling of freedom, equality and individuality that are essential for the practice of democracy.

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid., 297.

27 Colonial Court: A Building Block of American Democracy, “Court Architecture.”

28 Ibid.

29 Ibid.

References A View on Cities. “Arrondissements of Paris.” Accessed April 28, 2015. http://www.aviewoncities.com/paris/arrondissements.htm Arc De Triomphe Paris. “Arc de Triomphe Paris.” Accessed April 29, 2015. http://www.arcdetriompheparis.com/ Ayers, Andrew, The Architecture of Paris. London: Edition Axel Menges, 2003.

Collins, Peter, Concrete: The Vision of a New Architecture. Colorado: Westview Press, 1978.

Colonial Court: A Building Block of American Democracy. “Court Architecture and the Development of Democracy.”

Accessed May 3, 2015. http://score.rims.k12.ca.us/score_lessons/colonial_court/html/court_architec.html Cope, R.L. “Housing a Legislature: When Architecture and Politics Meet,” Papers on Parliament No. 37. Australia: Canberra, 2001. Accessed April 30, 2015. http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Research_and_Education/pops/pop37/cope Dickens, Charles, Dickens’s Dictionary of Paris, 1882: An unconventional handbook. London: Macmillan and Co, 1882.

Galignani, A and W, and Co, Galignani’s Illustrated Paris Guide for 1889. Ulan Press, 2012.

Goodsell, Charles T. “The Architecture of Parliaments: Legislative Houses and Political Culture.” British Journal of Political Science 18, no. 3, (1988): 287-302. http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/stable/193839? seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Greenberg, Allan. “Architecture of Democracy.” Accessed April 30, 2015. http://www.architectmagazine.com/design/architecture-of-democracy_o Link Paris.com. “Palace of Versailles History.” Accessed May 5, 2015. http://www.linkparis.com/versailles.htm Living in the Languedoc. “French Nation Symbols: The Phrygian Cap or Liberty Cap.” Accessed April 29, 2015. http://www.languedoc-france.info/06141204_libertycap.htm Marin, Louis, and Anna Lehman, “Classical, Baroque: Versailles, or the architecture of the Prince.” Yale French Studies 80 (1991): 167-182. Accessed April 26, 2015. doi: 10.2307/2930266.

Marrow, Deborah, “Maria de’ Medici and the Decoration of the Luxembourg Palace.” The Burlington Magazine 121 (1979): 783-791 Pardoe, Julia, The Life of Marie de Medicis, Vol 2. Fairford: Echo Library, 2004.

Payne, Francis L., The Story of Versailles. New York: Moffat, Yard & Company, 1919.

Places in France. “History of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris.” Accessed April 29, 2015. http://www.placesinfrance.com/history_arc_de_triomphe.html Senat.fr. “The Speaker of the Senate.” Accessed May 5, 2015. http://www.senat.fr/lng/en/organisation/the_speaker.html