FullReads

Still later in 1669, when the most uncompromising of the Port Royalists seemed to tax Madame de Sable with lukewarmness that she did not join them at Port-Royal-des-Champs, we find her writing to the stern M. de Sevigny: “En verite, je crois que je ne pourrois mieux faire que de tout quitter et de m’en aller la. Mais que deviendroient ces frayeurs de n’avoir pas de medicines a choisir, ni de chirurgien pour me saigner?”

Mademoiselle, as we have seen, hints at the love of delicate eating, which many of Madame de Sable’s friends numbered among her foibles, especially after her religious career had commenced. She had a genius in
friandise
, and knew how to gratify the palate without offending the highest sense of refinement. Her sympathetic nature showed itself in this as in other things; she was always sending bonnes bouches to her friends, and trying to communicate to them her science and taste in the affairs of the table. Madame de Longueville, who had not the luxurious tendencies of her friend, writes: “Je vous demande au nom de Dieu, que vous ne me prepariez aucun ragout. Surtout ne me donnez point de festin. Au nom de Dieu, qu’il n’y ait rien que ce qu’on peut manger, car vous savez que c’est inutile pour moi; de plus j’en ai scrupule.” But other friends had more appreciation of her niceties. Voiture thanks her for her melons, and assures her that they are better than those of yesterday; Madame de Choisy hopes that her ridicule of Jansenism will not provoke Madame de Sable to refuse her the receipt for salad; and La Rochefoucauld writes: “You cannot do me a greater charity than to permit the bearer of this letter to enter into the mysteries of your marmalade and your genuine preserves, and I humbly entreat you to do everything you can in his favor. If I could hope for two dishes of those preserves, which I did not deserve to eat before, I should be indebted to you all my life.” For our own part, being as far as possible from fraternizing with those spiritual people who convert a deficiency into a principle, and pique themselves on an obtuse palate as a point of superiority, we are not inclined to number Madame de Sable’s friandise among her defects. M. Cousin, too, is apologetic on this point. He says:

“It was only the excess of a delicacy which can be really understood, and a sort of fidelity to the character of
precieuse

. As the
precieuse

did nothing according to common usage, she could not dine like another. We have cited a passage from Mme. de Motteville, where Mme. de Sable is represented in her first youth at the Hotel de Rambouillet, maintaining that woman is born to be an ornament to the world, and to receive the adoration of men. The woman worthy of the name ought always to appear above material wants, and retain, even in the most vulgar details of life, something distinguished and purified. Eating is a very necessary operation, but one which is not agreeable to the eye. Mme. de Sable insisted on its being conducted with a peculiar cleanliness. According to her it was not every woman who could with impunity be at table in the presence of a lover; the first distortion of the face, she said, would be enough to spoil all. Gross meals made for the body merely ought to be abandoned to
bourgeoises

, and the refined woman should appear to take a little nourishment merely to sustain her, and even to divert her, as one takes refreshments and ices. Wealth did not suffice for this: a particular talent was required. Mme. de Sable was a mistress in this art. She had transported the aristocratic spirit, and the
genre precieux

, good breeding and good taste, even into cookery. Her dinners, without any opulence, were celebrated and sought after.”