Consuelo and Alva Vanderbilt

by Amanda Mackenzie Stuart

  According to one authority, ‘the chief attraction was the “hobby horse quadrille,” for which the dancers wore costumes that made them look as if they were mounted on horses. The life-size hobby horses took two months to construct and were covered with genuine leather hides and flowing manes. Tails were attached to the waists of the dancers and false legs placed on the outside of richly embroidered horse blankets, giving the illusion that the dancers were mounted; “the deception”, one observer enthused, “was quite perfect”.’37 Ward McAllister organised the Mother Goose Quadrille himself (another compliment to the hosts) which involved participation from Jack and Jill, Little Red-Riding Hood, Bo-Peep, Goody Two-Shoes, Mary, Mary Quite Contrary, and My Pretty Maid. He was forced to concede, however, that it was the Star Quadrille containing the ‘youth and beauty of the city’ which was the most brilliant, for all the young ladies wore electric lights in their hair which produced ‘a fairy and elf-like appearance to each of them’.38 As Alva put it later, the 1883 Vanderbilt ball ‘marked an epoch in the social history of the city’. As well as consolidating the position of the Vanderbilts, it marked a change of pace in two other ways. Alva, ever mindful of maximum visibility, was the first hostess to allow a full report of the ball to be syndicated to the newspapers through the New York World and to allow reporters to wander through the house earlier in the day. It was one of the World’s earliest society scoops and set a precedent for press coverage of similar events in the following decades. The paper calculated that the ball cost $155,730 for the costumes, $11,000 for the flowers, $65,270 for champagne and music, and $4,000 for hairdressers. This meant that Mrs William K. Vanderbilt had also set a vertiginous new standard for just the kind of social expenditure that had come so close to defeating the Smiths when they returned from France to America.39

  When writing her memoirs in later life, Consuelo could recall very little of her early childhood. She remembered nothing of the ugly brownstone building where she was born. No-one registered her birth either, an oversight that subsequently caused a great deal of bureaucratic trouble. She moved into 660 Fifth Avenue with her parents in 1883, just before she was six, so the childhood she recollected began in surroundings of extraordinary affluence. She does not seem to have been present at the 1883 ball (unlike Cousin Gertrude who was two years older and went for part of the evening, dressed as a tulip). She remembered other parties, however: ‘How gay were the gala evenings when the house was ablaze with lights and Willie [her younger brother] and I, crouching on hands and knees behind the balustrade of the musicians’ gallery, looked down on a festive scene below – the long dinner table covered with a damask cloth, a gold service and red roses, the lovely crystal and china, the grown-ups in their fine clothes … the ladies a-glitter with jewels seated on high-backed tapestry chairs behind which stood footmen in knee-breeches.’40

  At other moments, there were distinct disadvantages to living like a princess in a neo-Gothic palace, which, like many houses built primarily for entertaining and display, could feel gloomy and frightening when no-one else was there. The fact that the stairway was carved in Caen stone was quite irrelevant when the princess happened to be cursed with a neo-Gothic imagination. ‘I still remember how long and terrifying was that dark and endless upward sweep as, with acute sensations of fear, I climbed to my room every night, leaving below the light and its comforting rays. For in that penumbra there were spirits lurking to destroy me, hands stretched out to touch me and sighs that breathed against my cheek.’41 Life in an urban chateau had its compensations, however. On the floor beside her bedroom there was a playroom big enough for bicycling with friends. There were horse-drawn sleigh rides in the streets of New York in winter, trips to the family box at the Metropolitan Opera to hear Adelina Patti sing, and weekly classes at Dodworth’s Dancing Academy marking her out as a junior member of New York’s elect from birth.

  Alva always said that she loved motherhood. She remembered a sense of religious joy when she discovered she was to have her first baby. If it ever became fashionable to decry such feelings, she wrote, she would not join in. ‘So long as the world endures there will be women who will quiver to these emotions … no matter what freedom of expression is finally attained.’42 Consuelo’s birth in 1877 was followed by the arrival of her brothers William Kissam II (known as Willie K. Jr) in 1878, and Harold Stirling in 1884. Alva prided herself on the fact that, unlike members of the English aristocracy, she did not hand her children over to the care of others. ‘I dedicated the best years of my life to rearing and influencing and developing those three little beings who were my links with the future. I gave them an exclusive devotion. I considered their welfare before all else. I lived in their lives and cultivated no other apart from them for myself.’43

  In 1909 Alva announced that she was writing a book about her child-rearing methods, and though it never materialised, she told the New York City Journal: ‘[My children] were not put away to sleep in a room with the nurse; they slept in my room. The nursery was next to my room, and when they were older they slept there, but with the door open to I could look after them, and the smallest one slept in my room. I nursed all my children, though I don’t know that anyone is particularly interested in that.’44 By 1917, however, she had come to believe that excessive pre-occupation with her children had been misguided, and that mothers should not sacrifice themselves as she had done. ‘I want to say unhesitatingly that I believe this was wrong. I deplore the eternal sacrifice of women for another or others. Motherhood and Individuality should not conflict. Motherhood ought not to kill Personality in the mother and Personality in the mother ought not to injure the child.’45

  However much Alva enjoyed motherhood she was also ambivalent about it – largely on the grounds that many women became mothers just at the moment they were finding themselves. ‘It is a formative time for them so far as intellect goes … [A young mother is] in a sense a diamond already cut and ready to sparkle as she can find the light. Yet for the sake of developing the unknown quantity which her children are she gradually slips back into the darkness.’46 Alva always felt that the equation between the perfect woman and virtuous female martyr was wrong. ‘The whole history of most women’s lives is summed in self-sacrifice. If it is not for a child whose future is uncertain then it is for an aged parent whose life is done. Again and again people have pointed out to me some splendid woman who was burying her talent under care for a decrepit relative. “Isn’t her life beautiful!” they would exclaim. No, it is not beautiful. I think it is disgusting. I think it is wicked,’47 she told Sara Bard Field.

  In Alva’s case, talk of immolating maternal self-sacrifice should be treated with caution. This was not modern hands-on motherhood. Like other affluent households in New York in the 1880s, 660 Fifth Avenue had nursemaids, nannies, housemaids, governesses and cooks. The fact that Consuelo’s earliest years were so unmemorable has much to do with the disciplined and dull world of an affluent nineteenth-century nursery where the emphasis was on avoiding undue stimulation, building up the infant’s strength and avoiding infection. Even when her children were very young, Alva was occupied with other matters: designing and decorating houses with Richard Morris Hunt, ensuring the Vanderbilts were behaving like Medicis, taking her rightful place at the apex of New York society, as well as the complex task of managing two large households.

  There is also no sign that Alva’s personality was in any way dimmed by maternity, though as each child left the nursery she certainly exercised an increasing degree of control over its life. Alva saw a direct relationship between building houses and building children: ‘If one can judge of her own self I would unhesitatingly say that the two strongest characteristics in me are the constructive and the maternal. They are or ought to be associated.’48 Children were, of course, the greater responsibility for here one was building character. Alva’s view of maternal responsibility was first, that the mother was directly responsible for developing the character of each child; second, that each child
should be treated as an individual with an independent mind; and third, that it was the parent’s responsibility to ‘guide’ the child to the right course in life, based upon (and this was the rub) parental assessment of the child’s individual characteristics.

  This view of maternal responsibility was, in many ways, an extension of the way Alva had described how she played with her dolls as a child (‘I loved dolls … I took them very seriously. I put into their china or sawdust bodies all my own feelings.’49) She frequently expected Consuelo to behave with the submission of a doll, a ‘china body’ on to which Alva projected all her own feelings. Consuelo was to be the princess in Sleeping Beauty’s palace. ‘Gertrude and I were heiresses,’ Consuelo once told Louis Auchincloss. ‘There seemed never to have been a time when this was not made entirely clear.’50 She was even dressed to stand apart by Alva, forced into ‘period costume’ for parties and sniggered at by other children. However, this often clashed with Alva’s other view, which she held with equal conviction, that her children should be independent-minded individuals – like her, in other words. This contradiction at the heart of her approach to child-rearing was frequently irreconcilable and posed a very difficult conundrum for her offspring, especially Consuelo. Should they please her by submitting to her as doll-children? Or would Alva be more contented if they showed signs of independence? It was often very difficult to know.

  In practice, submission to Alva’s will generally took priority. It was, in any case, an age when inculcating obedience in children was widely considered a major parental responsibility, the first step in developing moral character. Childcare manuals of the period recommended that obedience training should start as early as twelve or fourteen months to encourage ‘self-control and self-denial, and advancing a step towards the mastery of [the child’s] passions’.51 If obedience was important in boys, it was essential in girls. ‘We were the last to be subjected to a harsh parental discipline,’ Consuelo wrote. ‘In my youth, children were to be seen but not heard; implicit obedience was an obligation from which one could not conscientiously escape.’52

  Even by the standards of the day, however, Alva was a ferocious disciplinarian, administering corporal punishment with a riding-whip for the most minor acts of delinquency. When Alva was a child, her mother’s whippings had had little effect. But a less headstrong personality like Consuelo could still feel the impact in old age. ‘Such repressive measures bred inhibitions and even now I can trace their effects,’53 she wrote later. Most difficult of all, perhaps, was the stomach-knotting tension induced by a mother with a volatile and ferocious temper: ‘Her dynamic energy and her quick mind, together with her varied interests, made her a delightful companion. But the bane of her life and of those who shared it was a violent temper that, like a tempest, at times engulfed us all.’54

  While Alva certainly took time to be with her children it was not quite the unalloyed pleasure for her offspring that she seemed to imagine. ‘The hour we spent in our parents’ company after the supper we took with our governess at six can in no sense be described as the Children’s Hour,’ wrote her daughter. ‘No books or games were provided; we sat and listened to the conversation of the grown-ups and longed for the release that their departure to dress for dinner would bring.’55 Alva lunched with her children almost every day for seventeen years, refusing (or so she later claimed) all social invitations in the middle of the day so that she could be available to her children. While she maintained that these lunches were the ‘children’s dining table’, an ‘open forum’ at which ‘everyone’s opinion was gravely received’ even when there were adult guests present, Consuelo remembered longing to express a view but invariably being repressed by a look from Mamma.

  Having one’s character developed by Alva could also be a brutal experience. ‘Sitting up straight was one of the crucial tests of ladylike behaviour. A horrible instrument was devised which I had to wear when doing my lessons. It was a steel rod which ran down my spine and was strapped at my waist and over my shoulders – another strap went around my forehead to the rod. I had to hold my book high when reading, and it was almost impossible to write in so uncomfortable a position.’56 Later, however, Consuelo attributed her famous straight back in old age to this dreadful device.

  One result of Alva’s passionate involvement in her children’s upbringing was that, unlike cousin Gertrude who went to school, Consuelo was educated almost entirely at home so that Alva could oversee her doll-child’s educational curriculum. Alva wanted to educate her sons at home too but lost the battle. ‘I regretted very much the sending of my sons to preparatory schools. Personally I did not see the necessity of it. When parents have the intelligence required to guide and direct youth, I think it is better for children to stay at home as long as possible. I neither appreciate nor approve the theory held by many as to the value of outside influence in the rearing of children.’57 In particular Alva objected to the ‘one-size-fits-all approach to education she felt had failed her badly as a child. It is likely that William K. was just as certain that only boarding school stood four square between his sons and total domination by their mother.

  Consequently, Consuelo bore the brunt of Alva’s educational experiments and maternal philosophy. Alva insisted on proficiency in foreign languages, an accomplishment that was also encouraged by William K. ‘At the age of eight I could read and write in French, German and English. I learned them in that order, for we spoke French with our parents, my father having been partly educated in Geneva,’58 wrote Consuelo. She was made to recite long poems in French and German to her parents every Saturday so that by the time she was ten she was capable of reciting ‘Les Adieux de Marie Stuart’ at a solfège class concert with such emotion that she burst into tears and was thrown a bouquet.

  While instruction was given by tutors and governesses, Alva kept a very close eye on her curriculum, saying that she ‘knew the books from which [Consuelo] was being mentally fed as I knew the food that nourished her body.’59 Alva later told the New City Journal that Consuelo often had three governesses at any one time, but ‘it was a great nuisance to have them around’.60 At the same time, Consuelo’s education as a linguist did represent genuine encouragement of individual talent, though it was along strictly approved lines. She showed an early talent for languages and everything was done to promote it; and when she occasionally did something well enough to please Alva, the praise was worth having.

  Physical independence was also encouraged. At Idle Hour, no-one could have been less like a conventional nineteenth-century mother than Alva. The children crabbed, fished and experienced a taste of the autonomy Alva enjoyed as a child, though even here she could not resist instruction. She had a pond specially constructed so that they could learn to sail and she could dispense geography lessons:

  As the knowledge of navigation increased a mast and sail were added. The row boat, like a caterpillar, put on wings and became a butterfly of the water, a sail boat. With this craft and the pond we developed the Geography of the whole world. Now we were going from Dover to Calais on the choppy Channel. Now we were coming from New York to Liverpool on the perilous Ocean. William, the elder boy, by continuous exertion rocked the boat so successfully that we believed in storms and what they could accomplish for we were all pitched into the pond … no young friend who ever visited us met me at the luncheon table attired in her or his clothes.61

  A governess was also pitched into this pond by the children, who promptly received one of Alva’s more memorable thrashings. In spite of her impulse to control every aspect of her children’s lives, Alva could be great fun, and courageous if things went wrong. At least once she prevented a serious accident when she jumped up and seized the bridle of a galloping pony as it bolted with Consuelo towards a water hydrant.

  In a household where the children were waited on hand and foot, Alva thought it necessary to provide a play house where they could acquire some self-reliance. It was called ‘La Récréation’ and was one aspect of chil
dhood which Alva and Consuelo later agreed had been a success. ‘The German governess and my daughter made preserves there and did a great deal of cookery. In fact, they superintended the cooking while my eldest son was the carpenter and waiter. I and my friends often went there for afternoon tea. It was prepared and served by the children and was most excellent,’62 wrote Alva. These hours in La Récréation gave Consuelo an early taste of the pleasure of running houses where she was in control. ‘This playhouse was an old bowling alley, and when my mother handed it over to us she insisted as a matter of training that we should do all the housework ourselves,’ wrote Consuelo. ‘Utterly happy, we would cook our meal, wash the dishes and then stroll home by the river in the cool of the evening.’63

  The children were also given a garden where they grew flowers and vegetables which they were encouraged to take to the nearby Trinity Seaside Home for convalescent children, Alva’s first philanthropic undertaking. She told Mary Young that she started the home after watching her delicate eldest son grow into a robust boy and grasped the extent to which wealth had assisted his recovery from precarious health in infancy. Realising that poor mothers lost children because they could not afford the necessary care, Alva purchased land and built a home where convalescing children from poor homes were looked after by Protestant sisters. This was also Consuelo’s first exposure to the lives of those less fortunate than herself.

  Consuelo’s nurse ‘as near a saint as it is possible for a human being to be’,64 was another person responsible for drawing back the curtain a little further so that one of the most protected little girls in America had a glimpse of how other people lived. In conversation with a workman from Bohemia responsible for cutting the grass at Idle Hour, Consuelo discovered that he had a crippled child. Encouraged by her nurse, she loaded up her pony-cart with presents and went over to see the child, an experience which forced her to realise for the first time ‘the inequalities of human destinies with a vividness that never left me’.65 At other times, the children sold the vegetables they grew at La Récréation to their mother in an exercise in elementary capitalism: ‘I know that they have grown up to profit by these lessons,’66 wrote Alva. In one respect she was right. Behind her back her children gave themselves elementary lessons in gambling. ‘My brother Willie, who was of an impatient nature, would pull up the potatoes long before they were ripe,’ wrote Consuelo. ‘Our earliest bets were made on the number we would find on each root.’67