The Green Lacquer
Pavilion by Helen Beauclerk
celebrates its centenary around now. The author was 32 when she completed the
book in 1925, and it was published in the Spring lists of the following year. In 1924, she had met, and become the partner of, the
artist Edmund Dulac, who illustrated the book. This graceful fantasy is written
in a light pastiche of early 18th century prose, somewhat
modernised, and it is set at the cusp of the Queen Anne/Georgian period. Its
framework is not dissimilar to a Thomas Love Peacock satire of a century later:
a group of genteel eccentrics gather at a country house for conversation, fine
dining and dalliance.
On his journey
there, we are privy to the thoughts of one guest, Mr Valentine Clare. He is
“naturally of a speculative turn of mind” and thinks the house he is to visit holds
a “spiritual mystery” , though he cannot quite define what this is. Taveridge
Hall, near Guildford, Surrey, seems to him to be under a spell, “as though
behind every door, concealed behind every curtain, or hidden in the grass of
the garden, there was an enigma you could not understand”. This spell is
enhanced by the presence of Miss Julia Cherrivale, whose acquaintance he hopes
to cultivate. Among the party also is the saturnine Mr Horace Gilvry, “sage and
philosopher”, a Luciferian “known for his great interest in astrology and all
magical arts”, who believes there are spirits in trees and stones and flowers.
While his robust,
horsey host and a similar guest talk politics and Mr Gilvry murmurs on arcane
matters, Clare falls into a reverie in which he sees objects with a heightened
sensibility: “the very room was turned to some dream chamber”. This is a
prelude to a more dramatic vision, this time seen by all the party, when a
Chinese lacquer screen in the drawing room opens out and becomes the pavilion
of the title. This in turn gives onto an unfamiliar landscape, and the group
are now beguiled into another world. Once in this domain, each of them meets
adventures that seem, as E.F. Bleiler observed, especially suitable to their
character, and in particular their foibles, whether rumbustious or delicate,
bluff or visionary.
The author indulges
in a fairly freewheeling exotic fantasy of the Arabian Nights type, involving
pirates, a Sultan, a Grand Vizier, a King, Princess, a Sacred Phoenix, scheming
courtiers and flourishes of magic. There is perhaps a hint of Lord Dunsany or
of Ernest Bramah in this polished, semi-facetious, and somewhat distanced
cavalcade.
Critics didn’t quite
know what to make of it. A contemporary review in The Spectator said: “An
air of easy artifice suffuses the book, which provides much gently agreeable
reading, and would make a most acceptable gift out of season, or birthday
present at a reasonable price.” This is pleasant enough, but a bit diminishing.
The New York Times appeared rather bewildered: “If everything were as
good as Miss Beauclerk's style, “The Green Lacquer Pavilion” would be a notable
book”. It was written with “the utmost grace and ease . . . But her subject
matter is by no means so good, is sometimes bearable only because of the style.
She has attempted romantic fantasy in the modern manner, . . . lightly freaked
with satire and irony, and she has somehow not quite succeeded with it.”
Helen Beauclerk went
on to write five more novels, of which the most noted is The Love of the
Foolish Angel (1929), a fantasy about a fallen angel, again involving a
Luciferian theme. The Green Lacquer Pavilion has some affinity in its
rich style with such books as Ronald Fraser’s Flower Phantoms of the
same year, Robert Nichols’ Under the Yew (1928), John Rosenberg’s The
Desperate Art (1955), and similar rococo fantasies. It is a beautifully
sustained conceit, as if Jane Austen had sent her characters to the
court of the Chinese Emperor rather than Bath. The prose is perfectly balanced,
the characters tart and persuasive, and the bold fantastical dimension is
deftly introduced. It used to be quite common to see the title in shelves of
old hardback fiction (it went into several editions), but it seems to be less
visible now.
(Mark Valentine)