Fanny Brawne having complained to Keats that he seemed to ignore all her
other qualities and have eyes for her beauty alone, Keats thus justified
himself: “Why may I not speak of your beauty, since without that I could
never have loved you? I cannot conceive any beginning of such love as I
have for you but beauty. There may be a sort of love for which, without
the least sneer at it, I have the highest respect, and can admire it in
others: but it has not the richness, the bloom, the full form, the
enchantment of love after my own heart.”
Fanny Brawne is not the only girl who has thus complained to her lover
about his exclusive emphasising of her Personal Beauty. But all such
complaints are useless. In Modern Love the Admiration of Personal Beauty
is by far the strongest of all ingredients, and is becoming more so
every year: fortunately, for thereby Romantic Love is becoming more and
more idealised and converted into a pure æsthetic sentiment. Goldsmith,
indeed, laid stress on the virtue of choosing a wife on the same
principle that guided her in choosing a wedding-ring—for qualities that
will wear. But Personal Beauty _does_ wear, with proper hygienic care.
_Feminine Beauty in Masculine Eyes._—In masculine Love, regard for
youthful feminine Beauty has always played a _rôle_ more or less
important. But the effects of this kind of sexual selection in the lower
races in increasing the amount of physical beauty in the world, have
been commonly neutralised by the crude æsthetic notions prevailing among
men as to what constituted feminine beauty. The weakness of the æsthetic
overtone in Love, moreover, has hitherto prevented it from competing
successfully with other marriage-motives. On the continent of Europe, to
this day, the ugliest girl with a dowry of a few thousands is sure to
find a husband and transmit her bodily and his mental ugliness to her
offspring; while girls who could transmit a considerable amount of
beauty, physical and mental, to their children, are left to fade away as
old maids, because they have no money.
In this respect America sets a noble example to most parts of Europe.
Thousands of young Americans marry penniless beauties every year,
although they might have rich ugly girls for the asking. This is one of
the things Frenchmen and Germans cannot understand, and class as
“Americanisms.” And then they wonder why it is that there are so many
pretty girls in Canada and the United States. Another “Americanism,”
gentlemen. These pretty girls are the issue of Love-matches. Their
mothers were selected for their Beauty, not for money or rank.
Not but that there are numerous exceptions to this golden rule of Love.
Were there not, ugly women would be scarcer than they are, even in
America.
_Masculine Beauty in Feminine Eyes._—In woman’s Love the admiration of
Personal Beauty has played a much less significant _rôle_ than in man’s
Love. If, nevertheless, the average man in most countries is perhaps a
better specimen of masculine Beauty than the average woman of feminine
Beauty, this is owing to the facts that sons as well as daughters may
inherit their mother’s beauty, and that men, leading a more active and
athletic life, are more beautiful than women in proportion as they are
more healthy.
In the past barbarous times the constant wars and the unsettled state of
social affairs made it important for women to select men not for their
beauty, but for their energy, courage, and manly prowess. Desdemona
falls in Love with the Moor despite his colour and ugliness; and why?
Othello himself tells us—
“She loved me for the dangers I had passed,
And I loved her that she did pity them.”
And it is on beholding Orlando vanquishing the Duke’s wrestler that
Rosalind falls in Love with him. As Celia remarks: “Young Orlando, that
tripped up the wrestler’s heels and your heart, both in an instant.”
Women are conservative; and in the ludicrous feminine eagerness to make
immortal heroes of the ephemeral victors in a boat-race or baseball
match, we see an echo, in these peaceful days, of a feminine trait
imprinted on them in warlike times.
Intellectual supereminence, in the meantime, was ignored by women.
Petrarch’s verses made no impression on Laura, and Dante could not even
win Beatrice with such poetic beauties as these lines—
“Whatever her sweet eyes are turned upon,
Spirits of Love do issue thence in flame,
Which through their eyes who then may look on them
Pierce to the heart’s deep chamber every one.
And in her smile Love’s image you may see
Whence none can gaze upon her steadfastly.”
There is, however, already a large class of superior women who have
discovered that brains have displaced muscle in the successful struggle
for existence, and that strong nerves are the true storage-batteries of
courage and vigour in modern life. Hence the homage paid to men of
genius.
In regard to masculine Beauty a change likewise has come over the
feminine mind. Fashionable young ladies appear, indeed, to be as
exacting in the matter of what they consider Personal Beauty as their
beaux are. A barber’s pet is their pet, even as the fashionable man’s
ideal of femininity is a milliner’s model. There can be hardly any doubt
that this is an improvement on the taste of those savages who prefer
their women black, with thick lips, flat noses, and tattooed, or smeared
with a half-inch coat of paint.
Says a writer in the _London Magazine_ (1823): “The pale poet, whose
works enchant us all, is nobody in the park: with his shrunk cheeks and
spindle legs, he sneaks along as little noticed as a fly; while a
thousand fond eyes are fixed on the gay and handsome apprentice there,
with just enough intellect to make the clothes which make him.”
Serves the pale poet quite right. His genius does not give him any right
to neglect his health, or to allow the tailor’s apprentice to surpass
him in attention to his personal appearance. _Génie oblige._ And whether
geniuses or not, men should pay just as much attention to their dress
and personal attractiveness as women.
A convincing illustration of my thesis that Personal Beauty is to-day a
more important factor in woman’s Love than formerly, is afforded by the
circumstance that formerly Love had the effect of making a man neglect
his beard, and hands, and clothes, and indulge in general slovenliness,
as we see in Rosalind’s summary of the symptoms of masculine Love, as
well as in various passages in Cervantes and other authors; whereas
to-day it is just the reverse, as noted under the head of Gallantry. It
is most amusing to watch a man smitten with sudden passion: how
carefully he adjusts his cravat, curls his moustache, brushes his hat
and boots, polishes his finger-nails, removes spots from his coat,
regards himself in the mirror, and—wishes he were a millionaire.
So much for the general relations between Love and Beauty. It now
remains to consider in detail what peculiarities of personal appearance
are and have been specially favoured by Love. This involves an
æsthetico-anatomical analysis of every part of the human body from toe
to top. To this analysis almost one half of this work will be
devoted—showing the preponderating importance of Personal Beauty over
the other factors in Modern Love. But before proceeding to this pleasant
task it will be well, for the sake of continuity, to discuss the
remaining aspects of Modern Love: how it differs from conjugal
affection; how men of genius behave when in Love; what are the
peculiarities of the physical expression of Love in features and
actions; how Love maybe won and cured; and how the leading modern
nations differ in their amorous peculiarities. A consideration of
Schopenhauer’s theory of Love will then naturally lead us to the second
part of this treatise, in which Personal Beauty alone will form our
theme.