According to Schopenhauer, the great value which all attach to small
feet “depends on the fact that small feet are an essentially human
characteristic, since in no animal are the tarsus and metatarsus
together so small as in man, which peculiarity is connected with his
erect attitude: he is a plantigrade.” But it is difficult to see any
force in this reasoning, since not one person in a hundred thousand
knows what the bones called tarsus and metatarsus are, nor cares whether
they are larger in man or in animals; while, as regards the upright
position, large feet would appear more suitable for maintaining it than
small ones.
If smallness were the test of beauty in man, why should we not feel
ashamed to have larger heads than animals, or envy the elephant, who,
for his size, has the smallest foot of all animals?
Those who believe that human beauty consists in the degree of remoteness
from animal types, will derive satisfaction from the fact that apes have
feet that are larger than ours. Topinard gives these figures showing the
relative sizes: man, 16·96; gorilla, 20·69; chimpanzee, 21·00; orang,
25. But why should man feel a special pride in the fact that his feet
are somewhat smaller than those of his nearest relatives, whom, until
recently, he did not even acknowledge as such?
It is, moreover, unscientific to compare man’s foot with the ape’s too
closely, because they have different functions—being used by man for
walking, by the ape for climbing—and therefore require different
characteristics. It is only in those organs that have a like function—as
the jaws, teeth, nose, eyes, and forehead—that a direct comparison is
permissible, and a progress noted in our favour.
Again, as M. Topinard tells us, “The hand and the foot of man, although
shorter than those of the anthropoid ape, do not vary among races
according to their order of superiority, as we should have supposed. _A
long hand or foot is not a characteristic of inferiority._”
The same is true among individuals of the same race. Mme. de Staël was
one of the most intelligent women the world has ever seen, yet her feet
were very large; and conversely, some of our silliest girls have the
smallest feet.
Since, then, there is no obvious connection between small feet and
superior culture, it follows that the beauty of a foot is not to be
determined by so simple a matter as its length. There are other
peculiarities, of greater importance, in which the laws of Beauty
manifest themselves. First, in the arched instep, which is not only
attractive because it introduces the beauty-curve in place of the
straight, flat line of the sole, but which is of the utmost importance
in increasing the foot’s capacity for carrying its burden, just as
architects build arches under bridges, etc., for the sake of the greater
strength and more equable distribution of pressure thus obtained.
Secondly, in the symmetrical correspondence of the toes and contours of
one foot with those of its partner; in the gradation of the regularly
shortened toes, from the first to the fifth; in the delicate tints of
the skin which, moreover, is smooth and not (as in apes) covered with
straggling hairs and deep furrows, which would have concealed the
delicate veins that variegate the surface, and give it the colour of
life.
Professor Carl Vogt, in his _Lectures on Man_, vividly illustrates the
principles on which our judgment regarding beauty in feet is based, by
comparing a negro’s foot with that of civilised man: “The foot of the
negro, says Burmeister, produces a disagreeable impression. Everything
in it is ugly; the flatness, the projecting heel, the thick, fatty
cushion in the inner cavity, the spreading toes.... The character of the
human foot lies mainly in its arched structure, in the predominance of
the metatarsus, the shortening and equal direction of the toes, among
which the great toe is remarkably long, but not, like the thumb,
opposable.... The toes in standing leave no mark, but do so in
progression. The whole middle part of the foot does not touch the
ground. Persons with flat feet, in whom the middle of the sole touches
ground, are bad pedestrians, and are rejected as recruits.... The negro
is a decided flat foot ... the fat cushion on the sole not only fills up
the whole cavity, but projects beyond the surface.”
Inasmuch as it is the custom among all civilised peoples to cover the
foot entirely, many of its aspects of beauty are rendered invisible
permanently, so that it is perhaps not to be wondered at that in their
absence Fashion should have so eagerly fixed on the two visible
features—size and arched instep—and endeavoured to exaggerate them by
Procrustean dimensions and stilt-like high heels. Yet in this matter
even modern Parisians represent a progress over the mediæval Venetian
ladies, who, according to Marinello, at one time wore soles and heels
over a foot in height, so that on going out they had to be accompanied
by several servants to prevent them from falling. _Mais que voulez
vous?_ Fashion is fashion, and women are women.
By the ancient Greeks the feet were frequently exposed to view; hence,
says Winckelmann, “in descriptions of beautiful persons, as Polyxena and
Aspasia, even their beautiful feet are mentioned.” Possibly in some
future age, when Health and Beauty will be more worshipped than vulgar
Fashion fetishes, a clever Yankee will invent an elastic, tough, and
leathery, but transparent substance that will protect the foot while
fitting it like a glove and showing its outlines. This would put an end
to the mutilations resorted to from vanity, guided by bad taste, and
would add one more feature to Personal Beauty. And the foot, as
Burmeister insists, has one advantage over every other part of the body.
Beauty in all these other features depends on health and a certain
muscular roundness. But the foot’s beauty is independent of such
variations, as it lies mainly in its permanent bony contours and in its
fat cushion, which alone of all adipose layers resists the ravages of
disease and old age. Hence a beautiful foot is a thing of beauty and a
joy for ever, long after all other youthful charms have faded and fled.