Comparing and Contrasting Taverns and Salons

Colonial Tavern (up); Salon during Enlightenment (down)

After reading about taverns, I drew a parallel between the role of taverns and salons. Taverns during the American Revolution played a similar role to Salons during the Enlightenment, in that they encouraged discussion, debate and psychological progress, however there were fundamental differences in how they impacted their respective societies. Salons were hosted by wealthy, upperclass women, who invited intelligent, upperclassmen to discuss enlightenment-ideas such as "general will" or "the social contract". The actual discussion of such ideas was part of a larger public sphere, and in the process of debate, ideas were built upon or created by individuals so that ultimately there was an infinite amount of ideas being created. During the enlightenment, salons invited the upperclass to experience ideas that were formerly confined to highly intelligent philosophers during the scientific revolution. Salons allowed the upperclass to expose themselves to ideas that were thought of by philosophers, and that were formerly limited to these philosophers.

In the 1770s, taverns were a staple part of American towns, and cities. The appeal of Taverns were that they "provided alcoholic drinks,... where people could meet and talk openly in public" (Brinkley, 106). However, in addition to being a social establishment, Taverns were very similar to salons in that they played a huge role in the public sphere, because here, "taverns and pubs became the central meeting places for airing the ideas that fueled resistance to British policies" (Brinkley, 106-107). Essentially, taverns provided privacy and comfort for all colonists, where opinions could be discussed freely. Naturally, a lot of these opinions centered on politics and either outrage or content with the British government. Furthermore, just as in the salons, public resistance accumulated rapidly as ideas (about resistance) were debated, discussed and tossed around; ultimately resulting in brand new ideas that were supported by the masses. Eventually, this 'brainstorming' led to actual resistance groups such as the Sons of Liberty, who actively resisted Parliament.

Both Salons and Taverns generated an overwhelming surplus of ideas that spread because of the public sphere, however there was a major difference between the two. Taverns were entered by "educated and uneducated men alike... those who could not read---and there were many---could learn about the contents of Revolutionary pamphlets from listening to tavern conversations" (Brinkley, 107). Taverns, unlike salons, encouraged all facets of society to discuss revolutionary ideas, while the discussions in salons were attended solely by educated men (who were invited by high class women). The consequences of this disparity were that ideas created in taverns influenced the poor, the uneducated AND the upper class, while the ideas in salons only influenced the educated men and the wealthy hostesses. Perhaps, the added volume of participants in taverns led to more emotion, and subsequently more active resistance than salons, which primarily only encouraged more thinking (and not so much, active resistance). Perhaps, this is why the American Revolution was an actual, violent revolution, while the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution were merely intellectual movements.

Do you agree with me that salons and taverns played similar roles in their respective revolutions? What do you think were the consequences of taverns influencing the poor and the rich alike? And the consequences of salons only being attended by the high class?

http://candiceroland.umwblogs.org/page/2/
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Salon_de_Madame_Geoffrin.jpg