On the Nature of Friendship – James Cumberlidge and David Garrick
For the last two years the Black Chiswick through History project has explored the story of James Cumberlidge. We gained insight into his early life; the years he spent as a page boy and assistant to Lady Dorothy Boyle Countess of Burlington; his time as a trumpeter for King George II and III, and retirement in sleepy Walton-on-Thames, Surrey. Over his lifetime, James interacted with renowned individuals from various backgrounds, including the actor and playwright David Garrick, who enjoyed the cordial support of Lady Dorothy and 4th Duke of Devonshire. The Garrick’s spent their honeymoon at Chiswick in July 1749.
This blog, written by Jessica Francis, postgraduate student at UAL, looks at two letters written by Garrick that refer to James across a time period of 6 years (1749-55) and what they tell us about the true nature of their relationship.
Caption: Letter from Garrick to Lady Burlington’s son-in-law the 4th Duke of Devonshire in July 1755, describing how Garrick was obliged to his ‘friend Mr Cumberlidge’.
The relationship between James Cumberlidge and David Garrick takes place under the shadow of class, race and power in the 18th century. Once a household servant of the Earl and Countess of Burlington, turned royal trumpeter, James Cumberlidge captured the interest of actor and playwright David Garrick. A surviving letter between Garrick and Countess Burlington illustrates the way in which Cumberlidge’s life was turned into a subplot, material that could enlighten their curiosities. These accounts put into question whether elites like Garrick were able to call black individuals like Cumberlidge friends whilst also viewing them like experiments, pets or favourites.
Caption: Letter from David Garrick to Lady Burlington, Sept 1749 along with editor’s footnotes assuming Jimzy and Kitt were pets in the household.
In letters between Countess Burlington and Garrick, Garrick uses language like “second black genius” to describe Cumberlidge. This language from Garrick creates a version of friendship or mentorship that seems more generous than would usually be allowed at that time. However, he simultaneously uses loaded language like “creature” when describing James. These act as reminders of power and ownership over individuals like Cumberlidge. Their relationship sits between elements of what some may consider closeness and control, as Garrick simultaneously makes jokes and praises Cumberlidge throughout the letter.
The letter also brought confusion to editors, as seen through their notes when Garrick uses the nickname “Jimzy” to refer to James, they believe he is “evidently a pet” in the Burlington household. Also, the idea that Garrick had favourites between James and his brother Kitt highlights the lack of stability in the idea of him being classed as an actual friend over more of a possession to be cherished.
The social and racial context of the 18th century also plays a part in uncovering the real relationship between Cumberlidge and Garrick. Even though James had the opportunity to become educated, he was at that time dependent on the white patrons for whom he worked. At any point, they could remove their support from him, leaving his future hanging in the balance.
It begs the question of what James would think if he came across the words Garrick had written. Maybe elements of him would be pleased seeing himself ranked as “the second black genius”. On the other hand, it might cause him great pain to understand what so-called friends like Garrick really thought about him. Making him question whether all of their exchanges were even genuine.
It’s important to question ideas around this seemingly ideal presentation of friendship versus how it might work in practise. Reflecting on the context of friendship in the 18th century, thinkers like Hume and Kant explore its meaning and limitations, both having quite different ideas.
Hume saw friendship as something that was nurtured over time, steady, “a calm and sedate affection”, a relationship that was built upon having mutual respect for one another and shared experience rather than self-interest. It was when “obligations were given and received” that relationships really thrived.
In contrast, Kant believed that a perfect friendship relationship was more of an ideal, “the union of two persons through equal mutual love and respect”. In reality, he understood that this type of perfection wasn’t something that could really exist. That within friendships, you had to be careful, being too open could create the erosion of respect and dignity.
In relation to these philosophical ideas concerning Garrick and Cumberlidge it can be questioned whether their relationship, which some may consider as rooted in social hierarchy and patronage, could ever meet either one of Kant’s or Hume’s criteria. Parts of the letter come across as more affectionate towards James, like when Garrick calls him the “second black genius”. Simultaneously, the language makes James an object of exhibition as if he were some kind of successful experiment. The relationship between them is still very much structured by racial hierarchy; therefore, It would be difficult to argue that the type of ideal and equal friendship Hume and Kant explain can actually be developed between the two.
Garrick’s story and becoming successful in the theatre was not as simple as some may believe. He himself was a grandchild of Huguenot refugees, with his family having to flee from exile and religious persecution. Garrick created material that appealed to those who had an imperial way of thinking, wearing blackface and elaborate turbans when he played Othello. It is ironic to think that Garrick, an individual who came from a family that had fled from prosecution, went on to create performances that helped to build and stabilise racial hierarchy.
James wasn’t Garrick’s only so-called black friend; he also had what some may consider a friendship with Ignatius Sancho the black British composer, writer and abolitionist. Even though exchanges between the two may have been considered more reciprocal, the exchanges were still occurring within unequal structures. Allowing us to question the nature of their relationship, much like his with James Cumberlidge.
Thinking back on Cumberlidge’s time at Chiswick and the relationship between him and Garrick, it raises the question of whether you are really able to call someone your friend in a world at a time that keeps one person subordinate to the other. Whilst Garrick could write about their “friendship” in his letters, would James himself have considered this to be true?
Jessica Francis is a postgraduate journalism student specialising in art and lifestyle, with an interest in race and class structures and making connections between the hidden lives of black individuals and influencers of art and culture in the 18th century.
