What you are about to read is an essay I wrote to complete an optional course at the University of Helsinki. Once again, I chose Maria Callas as my topic, because reflecting on her elegance is simply one of my favorite things to do in life! 

I started my studies in Musicology in 2020 and have been deeply immersed in studying Callas' life and career since 2022. I lived in the center of Paris in 2024, and I finished this essay on December 28, 2024, just before returning to Helsinki. Naturally, while I was in Paris, I traced her footsteps in Paris and then re-read all of her letters and memoirs in French towards the end of the year, which inspired me to write this essay. This spring, I'm working on my Master's thesis on a different subject, but I will also share my thoughts on elegance here as much as I reasonably can. Enjoy your reading!

In Maria Callas' Shoes

Let us place ourselves for a moment in the shoes of the soprano Maria Callas (1923–1977). Of course, no one could ever fill her shoes in the history of opera, but we can still attempt to imagine what it might have felt like to be “Maria Callas.” How did it feel to sing with her lungs, and what did the resonance of her voice feel like in her head? What did the world look like through her myopic eyes from the height of her 172-centimeter-tall body? What was it like to speak English, Greek, Italian, and French fluently? How did her clothes and her diamond jewelry feel against her skin? How did it feel to hear the roar of applause night after night? What was it like to rehearse opera roles alone by the piano? And what did it feel like to walk in her shoes, from performance to performance, from city to city, often in the glare of flashbulbs?

The best way to find out what it felt like to live in Maria Callas’ shoes is to delve into the more than 300 letters she left behind, as well as the memoirs she dictated in 1956-57 and in 1977. The director and filmmaker Tom Volf compiled and translated the archival material into French for the book Maria Callas: Lettres et mémoires (2019). The book also includes numerous footnotes that clarify the letters’ content, along with a chronological list of Callas’ performances amidst the letters. The earliest letters recount her life already in 1946, and the last are dated just a few months before her death in Paris.

In my bachelor’s thesis, "The Elegance of a Female Singer’s Appearance and Performance: Maria Callas, Caterina Valente, and Barbra Streisand as Elegant Performers in the 1960s" (2023), I examined the concept of elegance through three televised performances from the 1960s, one of which was Callas’ performance of Georges Bizet’s Carmen(1875) aria L’amour est un oiseau rebelle at Hamburg’s Laeiszhalle in 1962. In the thesis, I presented a theory of three levels of elegance: first, elegance requires skillful selectivity; second, it demands the artful balancing of the selected elements; and third, achieving that balance must appear effortless. In other words, when effortlessness – or the illusion of it – is achieved, we can speak of true elegance. But now I wanted to deepen my understanding of elegance specifically in the case of Maria Callas. To do so, I read all her letters and memoirs and simultaneously compiled a list of every passage that in some way related to Callas’ personal appearance or to people’s appearances in general (Appendix 1).

It is undeniable that all the material things that surround us and that we place against our skin greatly influence our experience of life. While we cannot truly know what it felt like to live in Callas’ shoes on an emotional level, we can, in a sense, deconstruct the material, ideological, and social aspects related to her appearance to better understand what living in her shoes entailed. What was Callas’ social status, and why was it essential for her to look the way she did? What kind of efforts did constructing and maintaining her elegant appearance demand on a practical level? In which contexts was it particularly important for her to appear elegant, and in which was it less so? How do the ways we now perceive her appearance differ from how her contemporaries viewed it?

I limit this exploration specifically to the context of the 1950s because the ideal of elegance permeated the culture of Western women’s clothing and beauty practices during that period, and because Callas was at the height of her international career at the time. I use the concept of appearance in the same way as in my bachelor’s thesis, referring neutrally to all external aspects of a person, including clothing, accessories, physical looks, and their overall habitus.

I will begin with examining the context of the 1950s to understand what the ideal of women’s appearance in Western culture was like during that era. I will compare these ideals to Callas’ position as an international opera star and briefly consider how she viewed beauty and adornment before her major career breakthrough as a young soprano in the late 1940s. I draw on insights from Päivi Aikasalo’s dissertation Seuratkaamme järkevää ja terveellistä muotia: Naisten pukeutumisihanteet ja vaatevalinnat 1920-luvulta 1960-luvun lopulle (Let Us Follow Sensible and Healthy Fashion: Ideals of Women’s Clothing and Choices from the 1920s to the Late 1960s, 2000), particularly regarding the requisite of women’s elegance in the 1950s, as I did in my bachelor’s thesis.

The second important framework for this essay is the concept of glamour. In her detailed study Glamour: History, Women, Feminism, Carol Dyhouse explores how glamour and femininity are interconnected, the relationship between glamour and fashion, and what glamour has meant to women especially in the 20th century. Glamour is deeply intertwined with the shifting constructions of femininity, consumerism, popular culture, and celebrity (2010: 1). Dyhouse examines the concept of glamour in relation to clothing, cosmetics, and other material culture, which is fitting given that women’s social history is closely tied to these elements (2010: 7). Therefore, I will also consider how Callas’ appearance aligns with the concept of glamour and its history.

The essay progresses as though moving from the outside in. I first examine the external qualities of Callas’ elegance, then the practical arrangements involved in constructing her appearance, and finally the significant role that Callas’ inner beauty and elegance played in her appeal as a person. I find it important to also reflect on Callas’ inner elegance, as the concept of elegance inherently involves the dichotomy and interplay between external and internal qualities, as I demonstrated in my bachelor’s thesis. The essay reveals that Callas made considerable efforts regarding her appearance and successfully fulfilled the demands of 1950s women’s elegance by skillfully utilizing the visual elements of glamour. Ultimately, however, her external elegance is complemented by the fact that she also had inner elegance.

Callas and the Ideals of Women’s Appearance in the 1950s

Aikasalo succinctly summarizes in her dissertation the expectations placed on Western women’s appearance during the 1950s:

The 1950s seem to have been particularly demanding in terms of dressing. A polished appearance, appropriate clothing for the occasion, coordinated accessories, and well-matched outfits were part of the recommended way of dressing. It was important to avoid mistakes in dressing and to master etiquette. [...] The ideal woman of the 1950s was feminine and elegant, a housewife who primarily took care of the home and children. (2000: 258)

While Aikasalo specifically examines the ideals of appearance presented in the Finnish magazine Kotiliesi from the 1920s to the late 1960s, these ideals reflect the general cultural climate of the time regarding women’s appearance. Finnish housewives may not have received identical advice on dressing as, for example, sophisticated Parisian ladies, but the underlying requirement for elegance was the same for everyone. Women were expected to be carefully groomed and made up, and they generally were – far more than the women strolling on the streets today. Despite these expectations and countless dressing guidelines, not all women of the 1950s aimed for or achieved true elegance.

What about an international opera star like Callas? Undoubtedly, the expectations for her appearance were even more pronounced than for the more “ordinary” housewives. Callas, of course, had to polish her appearance when she wore stage makeup and costumes for her opera roles, but maintaining a stylish appearance was equally essential off stage. Callas lived a public life, constantly followed by the press and fans. If she had appeared in public without being well-groomed, it would have broken social norms. She needed to look presentable because, in a sense, she represented her own name wherever she went, much like royals represent their monarchy at all times.

It is nevertheless difficult to determine how interested Callas was in fashion and sprucing up her appearance. Did she genuinely want to appear elegant, or did she only invest in her appearance because of the demands of her social position? External motivation undoubtedly played a significant role, but it is likely that she also possessed some degree of internal motivation to look stylish and beautiful.

Young Callas’ Relationship with Her Appearance

While Callas had the opportunity to focus on her appearance and grooming in the 1950s, this was not the case earlier in her life. Callas grew up in relatively modest circumstances, particularly during the Axis occupation of Athens in World War II. Financially, she was unable to invest much in her appearance, let alone develop a sense of style. She recounts, for example, that she had neither any money nor a single piece of winter clothing when she boarded a ship to New York in 1945 at the age of 21 to advance her career (Appendix 1, observation 38; Volf 2019: 31). On another occasion, her singing teacher, soprano Elvira de Hidalgo, had asked her to wear the most elegant outfit she owned to meet an important person. Callas appeared in what she considered a very elegant outfit, but de Hidalgo was utterly dissatisfied with her choice and instructed her to learn how to dress better. Otherwise, she threatened, she would stop giving her lessons. (Observation 1.) While de Hidalgo’s threat was likely not entirely serious, Callas was embarrassed by her lack of style and understood how crucial proper attire could be for advancing her career.

Callas recalls being scolded for her appearance on another occasion as well. When she arrived at the final rehearsal of Giuseppe Verdi’s La Traviata (1853) in Florence in 1951, her maestro and mentor, Tullio Serafin, reprimanded her in front of everyone for looking too modest, claiming that she didn’t appear enough like a prima donna. Callas responded by explaining that she deliberately avoided behaving and dressing like a diva and hoped her collaborators would appreciate her simple demeanor instead (observation 7). She later reflected on this event in a letter to Serafin in 1961, admitting that she simply couldn’t afford to dress elegantly at the start of her career – only later, with the money she earned, was it financially possible for her to do so (observation 54).

Given that she began her career with no money and had endured significant hardships, including hunger during the occupation, she did not take the comfort she later enjoyed for granted (Volf 2019: 27). She recognized that she was content with very little and initially wanted to dress well to be attractive for her husband (observations 15, 20, 26). But as her career took off, she found herself increasingly wearing elaborate costumes on the opera stage, and this likely influenced her attention to her appearance in other areas of her life as well. This shift also reflects the cultural and social contexts in which she lived – contexts where status and the associated demeanor was of paramount importance.

Callas’ Status as an International Opera Star

It is worth delving deeper into Callas’ position as an international opera star. Why can we say that she held such a socially elevated status? It is important to remember that the perceived prestige of being an opera singer – or a full-time musician, actor, or entertainer – depends heavily on the historical context. Callas herself remarked that in her youth, it would have been downright shameful for her family if she had become a femme de scene – a performing woman. However, her ambitious mother paid little attention to such negative connotations and was determined to advance her daughter’s singing career despite societal judgment (Volf 2019: 23).

Thanks to her talent and her mother’s persistence, Callas became a full-time entertainer. Yet, the fact that she was an opera singer gave her status a more elevated tone, as opera had a long-standing position as being part of the popular culture of the European elite. Additionally, Callas earned admiration for her strong work ethic and for emphasizing, during her marriage, how important it was for her to fulfill the role of a good wife. In doing so, she aligned herself with the ideal of the feminine and elegant homemaker of the 1950s (Aikasalo 2000: 258). This was despite her demanding career as an opera singer and the fact that she had no children. On one hand, she cultivated the image of an elegant and faithful 1950s wife, while on the other hand, she was a modern, independent career woman in many respects.

How does Callas’ position compare to other female stars of her time, such as Hollywood actresses? What parallels exist between the context of the opera world in the 1950s and the Golden Age of Hollywood (1930s–1950s)? First, operas are musical theater, akin to musical films performed live on stage. Both films and operas require the combination of multiple art forms. Callas was, in a sense, the “star vehicle” and box office magnet of opera houses, much like leading actors were for Hollywood studios. Her name drew audiences to opera performances, including younger crowds, in an unprecedented way. Callas’ artistic interpretations and her charismatic personality fascinated audiences, and the media sensationalized every aspect of her life in much the same way as they did for Hollywood stars.

A crucial factor in Callas’ rise to international fame was the state of technological and print media development at the time of her career. The proliferation of her images and videos in the media greatly contributed to her global recognition. Without the press and the attention of millions of fans, it is unlikely that Callas would have become such a significant international phenomenon. Hollywood had already demonstrated in the 1930s how media could create fan hysteria around movie stars, and a similar phenomenon occurred in Callas’ case, as the press eagerly used their ink to dissect her every move – for better or worse. Furthermore, her friendships with figures like Greta Garbo and Grace Kelly placed her on the same social level as other Hollywood stars. Particularly during the 1960s, when Callas was Aristoteles Onassis’ partner, she often appeared in the same social circles as Kelly, drawing even more media attention. This was especially because both Callas and Kelly so effectively embodied the ideals of elegance.

However, compared to Hollywood stars, Callas’ public image was never as systematically “packaged” by opera houses. Hollywood produced both films and stars, transforming every incoming actor through grooming and styling. These actors’ public personas were meticulously crafted illusions, reinforced by media manipulation (Dyhouse 2010: 41, 47). While Callas was to some extent influenced by the production machinery of opera houses, she largely operated independently within the industry. Perhaps only La Scala in Milan held enough influence during Callas’ peak years to attempt shaping her public image and appearance.

Even so, Callas managed to present herself as a star just as stylish as the most iconic Hollywood actresses, without the support of a massive production system. While much of the credit for her sophisticated appearance goes to Callas herself, it is important to acknowledge that she received help from figures like her singing teacher Elvira de Hidalgo, her maestro Tullio Serafin, and especially her Milanese couturier, Biki (real name Elvira Leonardi Bouyeure).

Callas and the Concept of Glamour

According to Dyhouse, the concept of glamour was quite unclear before the 20th century (2010: 9); it was associated with a kind sorcerous mystique and magical allure (2010: 1). In the first two decades of the 1900s, glamour could refer to both men and women or describe something exotic, oriental, or modern, such as new technologies or the allure of travel (2010: 9, 10, 25, 28). From then on, the term glamour became strongly associated with the appearance and charm of American Hollywood stars from the 1930s to the 1950s (2010: 1, 162). The visual imagery of glamour particularly stems from the looks of determined and bold female actresses from 1930s–1940s Hollywood films (2010: 162). During these decades, the concept of glamour was used so extensively that by the 1950s, its use had decreased, and elegance became a more fashionable concept in its place (2010: 101). Glamour and elegance thus became almost opposite concepts. While elegance was associated with a more traditional, restrained, and controlled femininity, and Christian Dior’s famous "New Look" of 1947, glamour came to be seen as vulgar, cheap, and morally questionable (2010: 90, 101). Nevertheless, both concepts shared similar visual imagery, conveying conflicting ideas of femininity (2010: 102).

Glamour largely fell out of fashion in the 1960s, following changes in societal constructions and the image of women (2010: 4), only to make a major comeback in the 1980s (2010: 162). Over time, the connotations of glamour have shifted considerably, but according to Dyhouse, it has always been linked to an element of artifice, even cunning deception, as well as sophisticated and often sensual appeal (2010: 1). What has been considered glamorous has not always been fashionable, and vice versa (2010: 3).

Looking back at the 1950s with a certain nostalgia, it is easy to say that all the most famous female Hollywood stars embody the glamour of Hollywood’s Golden Age. The concept of glamour has thus lost its precision (2010: 168), as contemporaries used it to describe different kinds of female stars at various stages of Hollywood’s Golden Age. If we examine the visual imagery associated with glamour through the lens of Dyhouse’s research, key elements emerge, such as jewelry, furs, feathers, perfumes, makeup, and cosmetics. Based on my observations, jewelry and furs are particularly significant in Callas' case. To my knowledge, she almost never wore feathers, and there is only one mention of perfume from 1971, when Callas asked her maid Bruna Lupoli to send her a refill of the famous Hermès Calècheperfume to New York (observation 70).

It is interesting to consider how Dyhouse’s research reveals why items like jewelry, furs, and makeup were part of Callas’ appearance. If Callas had had her career a hundred years earlier, around the 1850s, her appearance would have been very different. Whether or not it would have been appropriate or possible for an opera singer to wear furs in the 1850s depends on various factors, but it is certain that the use of furs spread like wildfire among the growing middle class in the 19th century. Furs have always been considered a status symbol due to their strong associations with aristocracy and royal attire. However, by the 1920s, fur prices dropped, and demand increased. Gradually, furs began to enter the wardrobes of people of lower social status (2010: 23). In the 1930s, furs became an indisputable symbol of glamour (2010: 35), and in the 1940s, the fur trade – particularly mink furs – continued to boom (2010: 37). During World War II, people even saved coupons to buy furs because they were so warm, practical, and, on top of that, glamorous (2010: 62). By the 1950s, fur fashion began to change. Furs remained a symbol of wealth, success, luxury, and glamour, but as their prices continued to fall, their symbolic value began to suffer from inflation. The less exclusive furs became, the more they started to symbolize vulgarity and cheapness (2010: 88, 89). Despite the contradictory connotations of furs in the 1950s, we can say that on Callas, they still symbolized high status and material success. Though in the 1940s, Callas bought furs also because they were warm and practical (observation 25).

Yet, nothing communicated worldly success as effectively as precious jewelry. All kinds of jewelry were important during Hollywood’s Golden Age, but where pearls signified a more modest, “classic” elegance, diamonds dazzled with their blinding sparkle. Harry Winston’s jewelry store supplied many celebrities with jewelry, lending it to them for events at no charge (2010: 32). Callas also ordered jewelry for her use by sending a telegram to Harry Winston in 1968 when she was about to attend the premiere of an opera starring soprano Renata Tebaldi at the Metropolitan Opera (observation 65).

It is also interesting to note that in a 1951 letter to de Hidalgo, Callas asked if she could have her teacher’s old stage jewelry (observation 39). The question was phrased in a very respectful and cautious tone, suggesting that de Hidalgo may have been emotionally attached to those pieces as symbols of her own success. Callas felt comfortable asking this because, by that point, she had achieved considerable success herself and had a close relationship with de Hidalgo, although it remains unclear from her correspondence whether she ever received the jewelry. She probably didn’t need those pieces but wearing them would have had great sentimental value for her, as she owed her career success to her teacher’s guidance.

Hollywood’s Golden Age was also a significant catalyst for the development of makeup, as cosmetics and makeup products were improved along with the quality of films (2010: 42). Applying lipstick became one of the major conventions of glamour, signaling both confidence and provocation (2010: 67). However, it is important to remember that wearing makeup, including lipstick, was not socially accepted during the Victorian era and only became fashionable in the 1920s. It became a new way for younger women to express themselves and thus a key element of the new, "modern" lifestyle (2010: 17). By the 1950s, makeup had become a normal part of women’s daily routines, and Callas was no exception. She wore bold black eyeliner for much of her life, making it essential for her to have effective makeup remover (observation 62; observation 70: for example, Orlane’s Lauria makeup remover). There is also a mention that she asked her father, George Callas, who lived in the United States, to send her a particular lipstick (observation 47).

Given all of this, Callas’ appearance included clearly the key elements of Hollywood glamour, but judging by Dyhouse’s research, contemporaries likely viewed Callas more as an elegant star than a glamorous one. As noted, by the 1950s, glamour had begun to take on vulgar and morally questionable connotations, while elegance referred to the softer and more conservative feminine ideal of the time. Callas positioned herself more within the latter category, which is why furs and jewelry appeared more elegant than glamorous on her.

The Practical Arrangements for Building Callas' Elegant Appearance

Her Appearance on Opera and Concert Stages

What efforts were required for Callas to build and maintain her elegant appearance in practical terms? And how crucial was looking stylish in each context? It was of utmost importance that Callas had an appropriate appearance when performing on opera and concert stages and constructing her looks required considerable practical arrangements. Acquiring the costumes, wigs, and accessories for opera roles was one of the first things Callas had to arrange with her collaborators once she agreed to sing in a particular opera production (observations 31, 41).

Today, typically the costume departments of opera houses handle all costume-related work, but this was not always the case especially early in Callas' career. If the opera house did not provide costumes for her, she would try to find suitable costumes from their stock or commission a tailor to make the necessary outfits (observations 41, 45). Procuring costumes herself meant additional work for Callas beyond rehearsing her opera roles (observation 56). Her letters from the early stages of her career express her joy whenever she successfully found a good tailor or wig-making atelier where she could purchase the necessary clothes and wigs for her performances (observations 4, 14, 18). On the other hand, even in productions where Callas did not have to do the actual legwork in building her costumes, her letters indicate that it still required a fair amount of thought and correspondence (observation 48). In a few letters, she also expresses gratitude to her costume designers, like Lilla de Nobili (observation 40), Umberto Tirelli, and Piero Tosi (observation 76).

Even if Callas had had help in acquiring the costumes for a production, it did not necessarily mean that things always went smoothly before the premiere. Ideally, her costumes would always be ready well in advance, waiting in her dressing room before the opening night, but this was not always the case. There could be logistical issues or concerns regarding the arrival of costumes (observation 26). When performing in Mexico in 1950, Callas was worried that the costumes sent by her husband, Giovanni Battista Meneghini, would not arrive in time (observations 29, 30). The costumes did arrive on time (observation 32), but Meneghini had forgotten to send the overcoat that was part of the costume for the fourth act of Giuseppe Verdi’s Il Trovatore (1853). As a result, Callas had to either buy a similar one locally or go on stage without it (observation 35).

In 1949, Callas had to borrow costumes from a colleague for the production of Giuseppe Verdi’s Aida(1871) in Brescia at the last minute before the premiere because the costumes sent to her were completely unsuitable for her needs. She had delegated the task of acquiring the costumes to someone else, but when she arrived at her dressing room before the opening night, she found only a couple of pieces of fabric with a plain hole for her head and armholes at the sides (observation 5). The theater's wig options were so poor that she decided to perform without a wig, styling her own brown hair in a bun instead (observation 6). In a performance in Trieste in 1948, she encountered another problem with her costumes because the costumes that the theater had prepared for her smelled so strongly of sweat that Callas and her fellow performers nearly fainted as the dressing room reeked so badly (observation 12).

It seems that not all opera houses at the time had very professional or systematic arrangements for such matters, which is why it's not surprising that Callas was worried about her costumes. Of course, she was not always the only one concerned about her looking good on stage. For example, Callas mentions it was touching when Maestro Serafin came once to check her costumes to ensure they looked good (observation 22).

Primarily, of course, Callas' costumes had to support her work with her role. She mentions how, over the years, she would alter the details of her costumes depending on which aspects of her characters she wanted to emphasize (observation 79). For example, she highlighted the tougher side of the character Medea from Luigi Cherubini's Medea(1797) by using darker makeup below her chin (observation 81), and later in her career, she emphasized the more human side of Medea's character by choosing a softer hairstyle (observation 80).

On the other hand, feeling beautiful in her costume could indirectly support Callas' performance by boosting her confidence. Of course, not every character was meant to look particularly beautiful, so Callas' professionalism also included the ability to perform in costumes that were not the most comfortable, flattering, or to her personal taste. For example, in 1948, she performed in the role of Vincenzo Bellini’s Norma (1831) wearing a wig with red hair, which she personally considered to be of poor taste (observation 13). In an open letter to Life magazine, she also mentioned that while she would miss the audiences of New York's Metropolitan Opera, she would not miss the opera house's costumes, which she found so awful and outdated that they made her look like an old fashion plate (observation 51).

At times, her confidence was diminished by occasional skin issues, which were not helped by the need to darken her face with makeup for the title role in Aida – as was customary in performances of that era (observations 36, 37). Considering how much frustration and discomfort costume arrangements caused her, we can imagine her joy on those occasions when she could wear costumes she considered exquisite and feel beautiful on stage (observations 35, 37). For instance, in 1949, she wrote to Meneghini from Buenos Aires that her costumes for the production of Giacomo Puccini’s Turandot (1926) were magnificent, and that she wanted to have her photo taken in them (observation 19).

Callas’ correspondence shows that costume preparation was also a significant topic of discussion with her colleagues, collaborators, and close ones. Many understood that finding beautiful, high-quality costumes, accessories, and wigs was not always easy, and they sometimes gave them to her as gifts. For example, an older colleague gave as a gift her old wig made from real hair (observation 11). Callas also occasionally received costumes as gifts from Antonio Ghiringhelli, the director of La Scala, perhaps to mark the conclusion of a successful season (observation 49).

When it comes to Callas' appearance in her solo concerts, her letters and memoirs do not reveal anything regarding the practical arrangements for them. Nonetheless, creating and acquiring concert attire undoubtedly required considerable effort, and it was crucial for Callas to look stylish and elegant during her performances. As previously mentioned, her Milanese couturier, Biki, designed most of her clothing for concerts and other occasions, likely ensuring that her evening gowns were both glamorous and comfortable enough for singing.

Callas' solo concerts are particularly fascinating because she appeared as her public self at the beginning, end, and between arias, but during the arias, she identified to some extent with the opera character being portrayed. She was not dressed in any specific opera costume, so she appeared as herself, but her look still needed to be dramatic enough to match the grandeur of the opera repertoire. In these concerts, she performed as herself while adapting her way of acting to suit the concert stage. As I demonstrated in my bachelor's thesis, Callas' solo concerts provide an especially suitable context for the manifestation of elegance, precisely because she appeared as herself, yet was elevated to a platform where she could showcase her artistry.

Her Appearance in Public and Private Life

Living in the spotlight of the press, it was essential for Callas to look stylish also outside the opera and concert stages. She had to think of her reputation when giving interviews, assisting cultural events, and while mingling with the Western high society. Investing in the attire required for these occasions naturally demanded time, energy, money, and logistical planning.

At the very beginning of Callas’ career Meneghini enabled the purchase of beautiful and elegant items (observation 43), as he acted as both her manager and patron. However, Meneghini soon began using the money Callas earned to fund her clothing and accessories. After their separation in 1959, Callas financed her lavish appearance entirely on her own. Her loyal maid, Bruna Lupoli, helped with the practical arrangements for these acquisitions (observations 61, 65). For instance, Callas once asked her to inquire about the price of a certain pair of earrings at the jeweler Van Cleef & Arpels, and the cost of a wristwatch at another store (observation 61). As for clothing, Callas’ letters reveal that she commissioned fur coats during the early stages of her career in Buenos Aires and Mexico (observations 24, 25, 42) and had a coat dyed in Italy (observation 10).

As a globe-trotting artist, Callas lived out of a suitcase and constantly had to decide which items to bring with her (observations 21, 28). She could not always carry everything she needed for her appearance and often could not predict the weather or clothing requirements in different destinations (observation 34). This required various logistical arrangements. For example, she once asked Meneghini to bring the clothes and jewelry she needed for attending the premiere of Alban Berg's opera Wozzeck (1925) together (observation 27). The weather was colder than expected, so she also asked him to bring her fur coat (observation 26). Once Callas had everything she needed to create her desired look, she seemed to enjoy the process of dressing up and appearing beautiful in public (observations 27, 71). Sometimes appearing in her expensive looks involved fears as well. Callas occasionally worried about her jewelry being stolen (observation 33), and at least once, her fears were realized when her jewelry was stolen in Los Angeles (observation 64).

If it was important for Callas to appear stylish in her public life, what about her private life? Style was not as much of a priority in her private life; it depended largely on how she wanted to appear to herself and her two servants. Considering how much of her life required her to be dressed up, it is likely that she found it luxurious to occasionally not be put-together. For instance, she mentioned wanting to immediately take off her costume and remove her makeup after a performance (observation 9). Toward the end of her life, she would even receive friends at home without makeup, wearing only a dressing gown (observations 59, 78). This suggests that her confidence was not overly dependent on how put-together she appeared. She trusted that her friends appreciated her as Maria, even if her appearance was not as glamorous as the public image of “La Divina,” the opera star.

Callas' Inner Elegance

We have established that Callas held a high professional and social standing, which required her to always appear presentable, whether on opera or concert stages or in other areas of public life. She gradually learned to present herself as elegant in the 1950s since her relatively modest beginnings during wartime did not allow her to focus on elegance earlier in her career.

The beauty ideals for Western women in the 1950s were demanding, but Callas eventually met them successfully, enhancing her popularity and placing her among the most admired stars of her era. Her appearance included elements like fur, jewelry, and makeup – historically tied to the iconography of glamour but, in her case, conveying elegance. Maintaining an appropriate appearance in every setting required significant practical arrangements and resources, and she received considerable help from her close associates, collaborators, and colleagues.

There is no denying that Callas' beauty and striking appearance contributed to her appeal as an artist – to the extent that she is now considered a fashion icon. Nonetheless, her inner elegance was even more remarkable. Overall, Callas seemed to focus much more on ensuring the artistic quality of her performances than on perfecting her external appearance, which is why she is remembered primarily as an exceptionally skilled soprano and actress.

In my opinion, after all my reflections, this is the crux of the matter: Callas genuinely and sincerely dedicated herself to her work and her art – she put her whole self and personality into it. Inner elegance, of course, can encompass countless attractive qualities, but authenticity and sincerity are undoubtedly among the most essential ones. These qualities continue to resonate in Callas' case even 47 years after her death.

Ultimately, no matter how much we try to list the traits that make someone truly elegant or charismatic, something always remains outside those definitions. An elegant person is more than the sum of their parts. Because these ineffable qualities cannot be fully defined, they are often referred to with terms like “je ne sais quoi” in French, “x-factor” in English, or even “tähtipöly” (stardust) in Finnish. Genuine elegance and other charismatic appeal are typically seen as innate, radiating effortlessly from a person. It is a deeply holistic quality, well-described by these words from fashion designer Carolina Herrera:

Glamour is something that is born with you. – – But it’s not a tragedy not to be glamorous. Same thing with elegance. Elegance is not only what you’re wearing, it’s the way you choose what to wear, it’s the way you think, it’s the way you move, it’s the way you have art in your house, it’s the way you read – it’s so many things all mixed, but it’s not about beauty or money. (Herrera 2017)

Undeniably, Callas embodied an intriguing mix of many of the qualities Herrera mentions, as can be seen especially in her interviews, letters and memoirs. Beyond these traits, it is also important that a person is not fully aware of the effect they have on others. In a 1967 interview, Callas was asked if she understood the enchanting impact she had on people even in everyday situations. She replied that she had heard people mention it, but that: “In fact, I’m amazed that it does happen, because sometimes I feel so silly!” (Downes & Callas 1967).

This kind of innate and unconscious elegance and allure is illustrated by what Callas’ close friend Leo Lerman wrote in his personal diary after visiting her in her Paris apartment in 1977 shortly before her death. Lerman beautifully described how, from the first moment he met Callas in 1953, he always seemed to hear the sound of applause when he looked at her – but now, that applause had fallen silent. Despite the physical and emotional challenges Callas faced in 1977, Lerman took joy in seeing her radiant smile, which remained as charming as ever.

Callas passed away unexpectedly that year from a heart attack at the age of 53. She was still practicing singing diligently, even though she had not really performed publicly since her recital tour in the early 1970s with tenor Giuseppe di Stefano. There was hope for her to return to the stage. A recording of a private rehearsal session at the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées in Paris in 1977 demonstrates that she was in surprisingly good vocal condition (Callas 1977). She also had a meeting scheduled with her agent on the day she passed away, September 16, to discuss the possibility of recording La Traviata (Volf 2019: 539). Unfortunately the meeting and her return to the stage never came to fruition, and her death was untimely.

Callas’ life is often compared to Greek tragedies, given her Greek heritage, but I would prefer not to overemphasize the suffering in her life. Her life was not necessarily as tragic as is often suggested. We can also imagine that Callas would not have wanted future generations to dwell on everything she endured or to view her only as a flawless, inhuman idol either. Her artistic achievements may have sometimes reached an ideal of perfection, but as a person, she was as imperfect as the rest of us.

Judging by all the material that is left of her for us to examine, it is clear that she aimed to maintain a positive outlook on life as much as possible. Despite everything, she succeeded in building a magnificent and historic career. We can learn something from the way she approached the challenges she faced. Living a happy and fulfilling life often involves adopting an optimistic attitude and striving for authenticity. It is interesting to examine to what extent Callas achieved this and where she fell short. Callas undoubtedly felt bitterness about certain aspects of her life and great gratitude for others, but ultimately, everything seems to balance out on the positive side. Consequently, we have every reason to remember her as a person with immense outer and inner elegance – and first and foremost as a captivating artist.

Appendix 1. Observations from Maria Callas’ letters and memoirs