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, rather 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)



