MR. WHITE,--Although a short time only has passed since I wrote you a
long letter, partly to fulfil a promise made before your Messenger
began to perform his most welcome peregrinations, yet the spirit
moveth me irresistibly to address you again. The immediate cause of
this second tax upon your patience being so soon levied, is the
perusal of an article published some time ago in that spirited paper,
the "Constitutional Whig" of your city,--wherein, to my great
gratification, its talented editor has lashed in well merited style,
that outrage upon the yet unsophisticated manners and customs of our
country, seen, I believe, for the first time in the city of Washington
last winter, as if in mockery of the character and memory of its
illustrious founder. I mean the "Fancy Ball," as it is styled by those
who have undertaken to describe it; although with all due deference to
their superior taste and knowledge, I would venture to suggest "the
frantic hurlyburly" as a more appropriate term. I do this from having
some reason to believe, that a more deplorable caricature of what was
designed to be represented, was never perpetrated by the would-be
fashionables in any country--either _in_ or _out_ of Christendom. This
foreign and apish intruder has not yet, thank heaven, gained such
footing among us, as altogether to preclude the hope of extirpating it
from the land, if a few such pens as that wielded by the editor of the
Whig, could be exerted for so laudable a purpose; and therefore it is
that I venture to cry--"to the rescue," in the hope that several
others will obey the call. Let it once be deemed "_the fashion_" to
have "Fancy Balls," and even the greatest clodhoppers among us are
sufficiently acquainted with the despotism of this tyrant, to know
that _his_ behests will bid defiance alike to reason, ridicule, and
reproof--to good sense, good manners, and good principles.
I am much gratified, Mr. Editor, at another circumstance brought to my
notice incidentally by this article in the "Whig." It is, that our
language, copious as it certainly is, does not yet afford terms of its
own to express several of the foreign fooleries and attempts to
corrupt our yet simple, unaffected character, described as a part of
this extraordinary exhibition, "the Fancy Ball;" such, for example, as
the waltz and the gallopade. For the benefit of those who may wish to
know the literal meaning of these outlandish terms, without the means
of gratifying such wish, I beg leave to offer the fruit of my
researches--aided, as I confess myself to have been, by far better
scholars than I am.
The first term--"_waltz_," is evidently of German extraction, being
plainly derived from the verb "_walzen_" which, with the adjunct
"_sich_," means to roll, welter, or wallow oneself; and with the
prefix "_das_" becomes the participle rolling, weltering, wallowing;
from which selfish process the transition is quite easy, to roll, or
welter, or wallow another. In either case the predominant idea is,
that the term describes some action natural to an animal of the order
Belluæ; for our English correlative terms are never applied to human
beings, but by way of derision or contempt expressed in figurative
language. Quere: how does it accord with human pride and vanity--how
far is it reconcileable to the lowest aspirations that we are ever
willing to acknowledge ourselves capable of feeling, to be ambitious
of imitating either hogs, horses, or monkies in our actions?
If there could be any doubt in regard to the derivation of the first
term "_waltz_," or the object of the practice of _waltzing_, the
etymology of the second term "_gallopade_," must settle the question
beyond farther controversy; and must prove that an imitation of
certain belluine gambols and gesticulations most be the grand
desideratum in adopting these exotic fashions. "_Gallopade_" is
manifestly from the French word "_galloper_," and that again from the
Greek "_kalpazein_" to gallop like a horse. From all this it seems
perfectly clear, that this latter dance at least, (if it may be so
called,) in order to honor its Greek Etymon, should be performed on
_all fours_; since for a biped successfully to imitate any action of a
quadruped, in which all its limbs are used, the biped must make its
arms, if it has any, execute the function of legs. The quadruped
resemblance then, which seems to be the thing coveted, would be
brought as near to perfection as the nature of the case could possibly
admit. Add to this, it is the best imaginable expedient for working
off that dissatisfaction at the ways of Providence which these
gallopading or galloping gentry appear to feel, at perceiving that all
the genera of the Belluæ order, (unless, perhaps, the Kangaroo may be
excepted,) have been so much more liberally dealt with, as to be
provided with one more pair of legs than they have. It may however be
well questioned, how far it is _good policy_ (to say no worse of it,)
to encourage this downward tendency, since the natural proclivity of
our species to indulge brute appetites and passions is generally
allowed to be already much greater than becomes us who claim to be the
only rational part of God's visible creation. Heaven knows that we
even _now_ approximate far too closely to the lower order of animals
in many of our propensities and practices, not to take any particular
pains, nor to use any extraordinary exertions to render this
approximation still more striking. If we can not prevail upon
ourselves to cherish higher aspirations, to act in a manner more
worthy of our exalted station among living and sentient beings, let us
at least strive hard _not to retrograde_.
So much, Mr. Editor, for _the degradation_ of these foreign fooleries.
But their _demoralizing tendencies_ are matters of much higher
concern--of infinitely deeper interest. Let me endeavor to point them
out. The perfection of the "_waltz_" consists in exhibiting to the
gaze of a numerous company of both sexes, the female form in every
variety of position and attitude into which activity of body and
suppleness of limb can throw it--short of what all would exclaim
against as absolutely indecent, continually however verging to that
point. No modest woman ever beheld it for the first time, without the
burning blush of shame and confusion. As to the horse galloping dance,
I know not what allurement _that_ may in time be capable of producing,
since it is not yet sufficiently domesticated to be well understood,
nor very skilfully executed--to say nothing of the very reasonable
doubts yet entertained by many nice calculators on such intricate
subjects, whether such a thing be possible as either an alluring or
graceful gallop performed by horse, man, or woman. But that which I
have said of the "_waltz_," none can deny, however some may be
disposed to palliate it, by alleging that all its numerous postures
and gyrations are still practised under that powerful sense of decorum
which the ladies of our country, (God bless them,) who venture to
indulge in it, have not yet been able entirely to subdue. But the
anxious question is,--_can this always last?_ Can a sense of _decorum_
or of _any thing else_ continue under the constant operation of causes
tending powerfully, nay, inevitably, to annihilate it? There is
nothing so great that time cannot destroy--nothing so small that it
may not increase to an almost inconceivable magnitude. Thus it is,
comparatively speaking, with our best principles--our most approved
manners. Injuries too slight at first to be regarded or feared,
accumulate by unperceived or neglected degrees, until at last they
grow past remedy, and all is lost that was worthy of preservation. Can
our beloved wives and daughters--beloved, because still uncontaminated
by foreign corruptions--can _they_ suffer themselves to be continually
whirled about in all the giddy, exciting mazes of the licentious
waltz, like so many French or Italian Opera girls, without impairing
or losing all self-respect--all that most lovely and endearing modesty
for which they have ever been so justly celebrated, so highly prized?
Can not polished manners, easy carriage, graceful deportment, be
taught at less sacrifice, less risk, than by calling in for the
purpose these deleterious foreign auxiliaries? Surely--_most surely_
they may; for all, I think, will admit, that no more admirable and
perfect examples of these qualities _can_, or probably ever _will_ be
found, than among the ladies of what may be called _the old school_,
many of whom to our own great happiness, are yet spared to teach their
daughters, among numerous useful lessons, that neither waltzing nor
horse-like-galloping is at all necessary to gain for them all the
esteem, regard, and devoted love which they can possibly deem
essential to their happiness in the present life. Thoughtless as too
many of our young men are, and desirous as they may often be to choose
waltzing and gallopading young ladies for _partners in a dance_, most
rarely do they yet commit the egregious folly of seeking them as
_partners for life_. However giddy, rash, and improvident some of them
may be in other respects, they are too well aware that a fondness for
these indecorous displays of the person--these ridiculous, antic
gambols, will do any thing rather than fit their practitioners for the
various, complicated, and arduous duties of the married state--through
_not one of which_ can either a waltz or a gallopade carry them with
the least credit to themselves or benefit to their families.
Better--far better would it be for these daughters to live and die
utterly ignorant of what dancing is, than to be qualified to
participate in its pleasures, at the hazard of soiling, in the
slightest degree, that spotless purity of feelings and character,
which _we men_ rank (and long, very long may we have a right to do
so,) as the richest, the most precious by far of all our moral
possessions. Deprive us of these, and we shall be poor--miserably poor
indeed! Rather let our beloved girls be subject forever to the
ridicule and contempt of all the infatuated votaries of these modern
and foreign[1] corruptions, both of our manners and principles, than
to be longer exposed to their deeply pernicious influence.
[Footnote 1: That your readers may know what our English friends think
of waltzing and gallopading, I take the liberty to add the following
extract from an article in the New Monthly Magazine, "on the
Revolutions of the 19th century." Here it is--
"Look at our balls: In 1800, modest woman danced modestly; and let the
conversation which passed between two partners, standing as far
distant from each other as people ordinarily do in a drawing room, be
what it might, it could do no harm in the way of example. Within this
century it has become the fashion for a delicate girl, who would, as
Fielding's 'Huncamunca' says--'shudder at the gross idea' of man's
advance, to permit herself, and be permitted by her mother--aye, or
her husband, to flourish about a room to a wriggling German air, with
a strange man's arm round her waist, and her delicate hand upon his
brawny shoulder. This thing is called--_a waltz_: there is another of
the same character, called--_a gallopade_, where the same operations
are performed, and in which, instead of turning the woman about until
she gets giddy, the fellow makes no more ado, but claps her up in his
paws, and hurries right on end from one corner of the room to
another."
Thus speaks one of the most popular periodicals in England of these
foreign abominations; and it is for Virginia parents and heads of
families to say, whether they shall be naturalized among us, or
banished from our society as a moral pestilence.]
I am no enemy, sir, to dancing; for I believe it to be not only an
exhilirating, healthful, and joyous amusement, but also entirely
innocent, when not carried to excess: quite as innocent as any other
imaginable thing that can properly be called amusement, in which the
two sexes participate together. But at every hazard of incurring the
ridicule and scorn of our American exquisites, I denounce waltzing and
gallopading, because, from my inmost soul, I dread any thing and every
thing that threatens, in the slightest degree, to change, for the
worse, the character of _the Virginia lady_; for upon _that character_
I most conscientiously believe, the happiness both of ourselves and
our children--aye, and of our children's children, vitally depends. I
cling to _it_ therefore as our best, our last hope, to guard us
against all corrupting innovations. Those upon which I have ventured
to address you, will probably be deemed very trivial matters, I dare
say, by thousands; but many of our ladies, I trust, whose opinions
have still much influence in all our social circles; many who will
acknowledge me for their true, devoted friend, although quite too old
to be their beau, will decide, that I have not ascribed too much power
to these exotic fashions. Like all other corrupting influences, they
have gradually insinuated themselves into favor; their approach has
not been so sudden and violent as to excite alarm. Of this fact, there
is no stronger evidence, than that which is furnished by the history
of the waltz itself, which, trifling as it may seem, _will and must_
have a powerfully demoralizing effect, especially when followed up by
its congenial ally, Masquerades,--of which the fancy-ball-folly is the
certain precursor. Mark the prediction, sir, for I know it will be
laughed to scorn by all the fashionables of the present day, although
I ask only two years for its fulfilment, but expect it much sooner.
When the waltz first made its appearance in this country, it was
exhibited only on the public stage, and _even there_ met with almost
universal reprobation, except from a few reckless profligates, whose
sole object in life is mere sensual indulgence. None so much as
surmised that such a dance could ever be introduced into private
society. At last, a few adventurous foreigners succeeded in
introducing it into private parties: but, for a considerable time,
_they themselves_ were the only performers. It was long before our
country-women could so far forget the early lessons of decorum, self
respect, and modesty, taught them by their mothers, as to make that
public display and spectacle of their persons, which must unavoidably
be made, in waltzing at all, if executed as the fashion required. But
these most natural and laudable feelings, which caused them to revolt
at such an innovation, such an outrage against all their preconceived
notions of propriety, have gradually yielded to the almost resistless
force of example "_in high places_," until the waltz has not only
domiciliated itself permanently in nearly all our towns and cities,
but has enlisted in its defence many bold country advocates. The few
ladies, (comparatively speaking,) among us, who yet have firmness and
moral courage enough, to resist what they deem a very pernicious
example, cannot, I fear, long maintain their most laudable opposition,
against such a host of assailants. Even _you_, Mr. Editor, (if you
will pardon my freedom in making the remark,) seem a little
inclined--judging by some late comments of your's upon waltzing--to
submit to the practice without further resistance.
Having made up my mind, Mr. Editor, to meet as I can, for this attack
upon foreign fashions, the sneers and scoffs of all our American
exquisites, should any condescend to notice me--a class of bipeds (by
the way,) who bear the same sort of resemblance to their European
prototypes, that the buffoon does to the head performer in a company
of tumblers and rope dancers--I shall say nothing to deprecate their
displeasure. But I must still beg leave to assign a few of my chief
reasons for addressing you on this occasion, lest that numerous and
highly respectable portion of your readers, whose good opinion I am
anxious to retain, may mistake my motives. Without some satisfactory
explanation, some of them might even be tempted to exclaim at me, as
old Edie Ochiltree did at the Antiquary--"Lordsake! he's gaun
gyte!"--"he has run crazy, to venture upon taking by the horns this
mad creature, Fashion, as if his feeble arm could at all check the
wild headlong course of such an animal." To prevent such comments, if
possible, I will urge in my own justification, should any be
necessary, that I have done this deed, because I deem it an essential
part of every aged person's obligations to his fellow men, as long as
life lasts, to oppose either orally or in print, for the benefit of
the youth of our country, every innovation, be it what it may, which
threatens to affect them injuriously. Whether they will listen to him
or not, depends upon themselves; _his duty_ in this behalf will have
been fulfilled. I have done it too, because I believe, that the most
feeble laborer with honest intentions, in a good cause, may accomplish
some good which will amply compensate him for his efforts. I have done
it, because apparent trifles are rarely noticed in books, although
many of these trifles have a most powerful and deleterious influence,
not only on our principles of action, but over our manners and
conduct. And lastly, I have done it, because I believe, without the
most remote possibility of this conviction ever being changed, that
the happiness of _the present_, as well as of _every future
generation_, depends upon preserving unsullied the purity of the
female character. _The matrons_ of our country are the first, the most
watchful, the best guardians of our children, where they themselves
have been virtuously educated. _They_ form the manners and character
of these children: _they_ sow the seeds of all their good qualities:
_they_ first discover and cherish with boundless affection and
solicitude, the earliest dawnings of each amiable disposition; and
never relax while life lasts, their anxious efforts to fit them both
for their present and future state of existence. How momentous then!
how vitally important it is! that, when the mothers depart hence to
another and a happier world, their surviving daughters should be
qualified to take their places, with equal capacity to fulfil all
their duties. But this, alas, cannot possibly be, without the most
zealous, unremitting and assiduous care, to guard them, as we would
the most inestimable of our possessions, against all demoralizing
influences whatever. Corrupt the source, and what will be the effect
of its streams? Poison the fountain, and who can drink of its waters
without death--death, both in a figurative and literal sense? An atom
of dust in itself is unworthy of notice; but in reference to the great
planet we inhabit, it is a constituent and essential part. A drop of
water alone, is apparently valueless; yet the mighty ocean itself is
composed of individual drops, without which its bed would be an arid
desert.
The application of these general remarks to our subject, is too
manifest, I hope, to be mistaken. Let nothing, therefore, however
trivial it may appear on a cursory view, be deemed unworthy of serious
attention, which either directly or indirectly, can injuriously affect
the yet distinctive, still unsullied character of our justly and
dearly beloved country-women.
Having thus thought and felt, as long as I have been at all capable of
serious reflection, it is quite too late to change: I am consequently
prepared to submit unmoved to whatever sentence may be pronounced
against this second communication, from your friend, and constant
reader,