fashion's altar during the past generation, or unveil the suffering
and deformity being borne by posterity at the present time, through
this slavery, the world would be thrilled with an indescribable
horror. Health, comfort, and human life have paid the penalty of a
criminal servitude to the modern juggernaut, before whose car millions
of our women are bowing in abject servility, knowing full well that at
each turn of its wheel new pains or fresh diseases will be inflicted.
And what power controls and gives life to this mistress of modern
civilization? At whose behest is this crime against reason, life, and
posterity perpetrated? _The cupidity of the shrewd and unscrupulous
and the caprice of the shallow and frivolous._
[Illustration: Vagaries of Fashion. A belle in the eighties.]
[Illustration: Vagaries of Fashion. A belle early in the sixties.]
The moral aspect of this subject is even more grave than the
hygienic. Anything which injures the physical body, whether it be
licentiousness, intemperance, gluttony, or vicious modes of dress, is
necessarily evil from an ethical point of view. Not simply because the
law of our being decrees that whatever drains or destroys the physical
vitality must sooner or later sap the vital forces of the brain; but
also because anything is ethically destructive which chains the mind
to the realm of animality, when, unfettered, it should be unfolding in
spiritual strength and glory. Thus it will be readily seen that any
article of clothing which presses upon the vitals of the body so as to
cause displacement of the delicate organism, or so cumbersome as to
cause general fatigue, anything, as is the case with high heels, which
throws the body out of its equilibrium, or any article of dress which
makes the mind ever conscious of the body by virtue of its
uncomfortableness, is injurious from an ethical point of view. This
fact which has been so generally overlooked will become more apparent,
if for the sake of illustration we suppose for a moment that a plant
is endowed with reason and sensation, and obeying the general law of
its being, and the persuasive and inspiring influence of the sun and
rain, is struggling to rise heavenward, and give to the radiant world
above its impearled wealth--its gorgeous bloom, its marvellous
fragrance and fruit; but by virtue of the bonds of a prison-house
below,--a small pot or a rocky encasement, its lifework is thwarted,
its bloom, perfume, and fruit, if they come at all, are stunted,
limited, and imperfect. For generations woman's condition has been
like that of the plant, the wealth of her nature has been dwarfed, the
marvellous richness of her life has been marred by the imprisoned
conditions of her body, and infinitely more sad and far-reaching have
been the baleful consequences upon millions of her offspring, dwarfed,
weakly, sickly, enfeebled in body and soul. _A mother whose thoughts
have voluntarily or involuntarily been held in the atmosphere of the
physical nature, necessarily imparts to her child a legacy of
animality which, like the corpse of a dead being, clings to the soul
throughout its pilgrimage._ Terrible as have been fashion's ravages on
woman's physical health, the curse which she has exerted when the
ethical aspect of the case is entertained, far transcends it.
It is a curious fact that almost all the opposition from women to
proposed reforms in woman's dress comes from two extremes in society.
Those who do no independent thinking, taking all their thoughts and
opinions from the expressed views of the men with whom they associate,
and the profoundly earnest and thoughtful, but conservative women of
society. The opposition of the former class is merely the echo of
husbands, brothers, fathers, and lovers; but the others are moved by
conviction, and for this reason their views are worthy of
consideration. They fear that any radical change will exert an immoral
influence. Their minds are swayed by ancient thought which throughout
all ages has cast its baleful shadow over the brain of the world. They
are held under the spell of a conservatism which unquestioningly
tolerates established institutions and existing orders, but has no
confidence in aught that proposes to break with these, even though the
new has reason and common sense clearly on its side. Thus time and
again fashions have been tolerated, although known to be morally
enervating and singularly repulsive to all refined sensibilities;
while proposals from without for reforms based on the laws of health
and beauty have called forth the most determined opposition from this
conscientious class, merely because the proposed innovations have not
conformed to ideas entertained by virtue of prevailing fashions, and
have been therefore regarded immoral. And herein lies an important
point to be considered. Anything which is radically unlike prevailing
standards or styles to which we have become accustomed will impress
most persons as being immodest or indecent. _The unusual in dress is
usually denounced as immoral_ because we are all prone to allow our
prejudice to obscure our reason and o'ersway our judgment. This point
_must_ be recognized before any real reform can be accomplished. When
humanity has grown sufficiently wise to reason broadly and view
problems on their own merits, aside from preconceived opinion or
inherited prejudice, real instead of false standards of morality will
prevail, and we shall cease to condemn anything as pernicious simply
because it is unusual, radically unlike that to which we have been
accustomed or revolutionary in its tendency. Let me make this if
possible more apparent by an illustration, because it bears such an
important relation to the main issue. If men had for ages worn long
flowing robes, completely enveloping their bodies, but on a certain
day with one accord exchanged them for a costume similar to that now
seen throughout the civilized world, society would experience a
distinct shock; immoral, indecent, pernicious, and vulgar would mildly
express the sentiment of conventional thought, until the same society
had become accustomed to the change. To us at the present time it is
difficult to conceive how women of sense and refinement submitted to
the swinging-cage paraphernalia of the sixties, or the Grecian bend
of a later date. Yet in those days the severely plain skirts of the
present would have seemed positively indecent. It has been necessary
to dwell on this thought in order to sufficiently remove existing
prejudice to enable a fair consideration of the question in its
broader aspects. I have also introduced fair examples of prevailing
fashions during the past generation and reproductions of Greek,
Shakespearian and other simple costumes worn at the present time by
the queens of the stage, to show by comparison how infinitely more
graceful, beautiful, comfortable, healthful, and by their very
elements of comfort and healthfulness, ethically superior, are these
costumes to those which conventionalism sanctioned in the sixties,
seventies, and eighties. Is there anything immodest, indecent, or
suggestive of impropriety in Mary Anderson in the graceful Grecian
costume of Parthenia, presented on the preceding page? Of the tens of
thousands of people who have witnessed the performances of Madame
Modjeska, Miss Anderson, Julia Marlowe, or Margaret Mather in the
costumes given in this paper, it is not probable that a perceptible
number have seen aught improper or even injuriously suggestive,
notwithstanding they are so radically unconventional. Surely no mind
accustomed to think broadly and view problems on all sides, and
unaccustomed to revel in the sewer of sensualism would see in the
attire of these estimable ladies aught but costumes at once graceful,
refined, and apparently infinitely more comfortable and healthful than
those represented in any of the fashion plates I have reproduced, and
which millions of women of good sense have under the stress of
conventionalism been compelled to wear. Let us compare Miss Anderson's
Grecian costume with the dress of a society belle in the seventies,
which required from twenty to thirty yards of material, and when
completed and fitted transformed the wearer into a monstrosity with an
unsightly hump on the back, and a street cleaner of immense dimensions
trailing for several feet in her rear.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: _From copyrighted photo by Sarony._ MARY ANDERSON AS
PARTHENIA.]
From artistic, hygienic, economical, and ethical points of view, to
say nothing of common sense and comfort, is not the simple and
beautiful costume of Parthenia incomparably superior to that which
marked the second decade of the past generation? Would not woman
to-day clothed in close-fitting garments of silk or woollen fabric,
with an outer robe or loose dress fashioned something after the order
of the ancient Grecian or Roman pattern, be far more beautiful than
she is as a slave to fashion's fickle fancy, while the requirements of
life, health, and comfort would be fully met? Again, let us compare
one of the plates of the sixties with its wonderful expanse of skirt
to the simple, graceful attire of Miss Marlowe as Viola in the
"Twelfth Night," and laying aside all preconceived opinions (with the
influence which we have seen the unusual plays in fashioning our ideas
of propriety,) does not our reason and common sense sustain the view
that the latter is far more refined, simple, and less vulgarly
ostentatious than the inflated garment of the early sixties? Or if we
compare the pictures of Modjeska and Miss Marlowe in Shakespearian
roles, or that of the former in the neat and graceful gathered gown,
and Miss Mather in the simple peasant dress, are they not one and all
far more chaste, artistic, sensible, and healthful than the
hoop-skirt, bustle, and train, or the tie-back? Do not, however,
understand that I advocate the introduction of any of these costumes.
It is for woman and woman alone to decide what she will wear, and in
this paper I am merely seeking to second the splendid work that has by
her been inaugurated, and by speaking as one of the younger men of
this decade, to voice what I believe American womanhood will find to
be the sentiment of the rising generation, whenever she makes a
concerted effort to emancipate herself from the slavery of Parisian
fashions. There are many evidences that the hour is ripe for a
sensible revolt, and that if the movement is guided by wise and
judicious minds it will be a success. Two things seem to me to be of
paramount importance.
[Illustration: _From copyrighted photo by Falk, N. Y._ JULIA MARLOWE.]
[Illustration: HELENA MODJESKA.]
[Illustration: MARGARET MATHER.]
[Illustration: HELENA MODJESKA.]
(1.) The commission of women acting for the Council should decide
definitely upon the nature and extent of changes desired. The ideal
costume should be clearly defined and ever present in their mind. But
it would be exceedingly unwise to attempt any radical change at once.
This has been more than anything the secret of the partial or total
failures of the movements of this character in the past. The changes
should be gradually made. Every spring and autumn let an advance step
be taken, and in order to do this an American fashion commission or
bureau should be established, under the auspices of the dress reform
committee of the Women's Council, which at stated intervals should
issue bulletins and illustrated fashion plates. If the ideal is kept
constantly in view, and every season slight changes are made toward
the desired garment, the victory will, I believe, be a comparatively
easy one, for the splendid common sense of the American women and men
will cordially second the movement. _Concerted action, a clearly
defined ideal toward which to move, and gradual changes_--these are
points which it seems to me are vitally important. One reason why the
most ridiculous and inartistic extremes in fashion have been generally
adopted is found in this policy of gradual introduction, a fact which
must impress anyone who carefully examines the fashions of the past.
First there has been a slight alteration, shortly becoming more
pronounced, and with each season it has grown more marked, although
perhaps not for four or six years has the extreme been reached. At
every step there have been complaints from various quarters, but
steadily and persistently has the fashion been pushed until it reached
its climax, after which we have had its gradual decline. This was the
history of the hoop skirt and the Grecian bend, and has been that of
most of the extremes which have marked the past, and we can readily
believe that in no other way could womanhood have been insnared by
such supreme and criminal folly as has characterized fashion's
caprices in unnumbered instances.
[Illustration: _From copyrighted photo by Falk, N. Y._ MISS MARLOWE AS
VIOLA.]
(2.) Another very essential point is the proper education of the girls
of to-day, for to them will fall, in its richest fruition, the
blessings of this splendid reform if it be properly carried on, and if
they be everywhere instructed to set health above fashion, and seek
the beauty of Venus de Medici rather than the pseudo beauty of the
wretched, deformed invalid, who at the dictates of the modern Babylon
has trampled reason and common sense, health and comfort, the
happiness of self and the enjoyment of her posterity under foot. Teach
the girls to be American; to be independent; to scorn to copy fashion,
manners, or habits that come from decaying civilizations, and which
outrage all sentiment of refinement, laws of life, or principles of
common sense. The American girl is naturally independent and well
endowed with reason and common sense. Once shown the wisdom and
importance of this _American_ movement, and she will not be slow to
cordially embrace it. In many respects the hour is most propitious,
owing to a combination of causes never before present, among which may
be mentioned the growing independence of American womanhood; the
enlarged vision that has come to her through the wonderfully diverse
occupations and professions which she has recently embraced; the
growing consciousness of her ability to succeed in almost every
vocation of life. The latitude enjoyed by her in matters of dress in
the mountains and seashore resorts; the growth of women's gymnasiums;
the emphasis given to hygienic instruction in schools, and the recent
quiet introduction of a perfectly comfortable apparel for morning
wear, which, strange to say, has originated where one would least
expect, among the most fashionable belles of the Empire city.[5] This
significant innovation which is reported by the daily press, as
becoming quite popular among the young ladies of the wealthy districts
of New York, consists of a comfortable blouse worn over knickerbocker
trousers. Clad in this comfortable attire, the belles come to
breakfast, nor do they subsequently change their dress during the
morning if they intend remaining indoors. If a sedate or fastidious
caller is announced, a beautiful tea-gown, which is at hand, is
slipped into, and the young lady is appropriately clad to suit even
conventional requirements. The bicycle and lawn tennis costumes now
becoming so popular also exercise a subtile but marked influence in
favor of rational dress reform, not only giving young ladies the
wonderful comfort and health-giving freedom which for ages have been
denied her sex, but also by accustoming them to these radically
unconventional costumes.[6]
[5] In speaking of this practical dress reform on the part
of the belles of New York, the Boston _Daily Globe_ recently
observed editorially: The great question now agitating the
fashionable women of Fifth Avenue is: "Do you wear
knickerbockers?"
Stripped of all apologetic circumlocution, "knickerbockers"
are simply loose, easy trousers, above which is worn a
becoming blouse waist, and thus attired, the belles of New
York come down to breakfast. Nor are the trousers
subsequently removed while the ladies are about the house,
unless some conservative caller is announced, when a stylish
tea-gown can be jumped into in a second, and the lady is in
faultless female costume.
That women should be handicapped in their locomotion in
their own homes is simply a relic of oriental slavery and
prudery, and the revolt against it is sensible and
wholesome. That they have come to stay is evident, while
improved costumes for shop girls, and other women engaged in
business every day in the year, are certain to follow in the
order of progress.--_Boston Globe._
It might be well also for the council to recommend the
formation of societies in each community where social or
society gatherings of those interested might be held at
stated intervals, at which all members would appear in
dresses made with special regard to health, comfort, and
beauty, and in which all garments would conform to the
general ideal recommended by the council.
[6] As the paper is being set up my attention has been attracted
to a remarkably sensible signed editorial in the Boston
_Sunday Globe_, of July 26, by the brilliant writer and
sensible thinker, Adelaide A. Claftin, from which I extract
the following:
Bishop Coxe's fulmination against the riding of bicycles by
women has attracted considerable attention, but to the
student of social movements it is not strange that Bishop
Coxe should object. The real oddity is that scarcely anybody
else, apparently, has objected.
That young girls from the best families should within a
short time have betaken themselves to whirling through the
public thoroughfares, like so many boys, is certainly a new
departure from all old fashioned canons of feminine decorum,
at least as startling as many that have brought down all
sorts of thunderbolts from pulpit and press. Had it been a
prerequisite that an amendment to the United States
Constitution, or even a statute of a State Legislature
should be obtained, the girls would doubtless have had to
wait many a weary year.
It is not long since another church dignitary, Dr. Morgan
Dix, objected to the entrance of girls into universities,
because it was not "proper for young women to be exposed to
the gaze of young men, many of whom were less bent upon
learning than upon amusement."
However little she may realize it, every girl who rides her
steel horse is a vivid illustration of one of the greatest
waves of progress of this century, the advancement of women
in freedom and opportunity.
A wise physician once said that the opinion that a good
woman should stay closely at home had killed more women than
any other one cause. In the days of our grandmothers the
suggestion of regular gymnastic training or athletics for
girls would have been received with horror. It was hardly
proper for a woman to have any knowledge of the construction
of her physical system.
It is a curious historical fact that the first women
lecturers upon physiology were women's rights women, and
viewed by the majority of people as dangerous to female
modesty, while the Ladies' Physiological Institute in Boston
was at first much disapproved of by the clergy. So long,
too, as old-fashioned "stays" (laced up sometimes by the aid
of equally old-fashioned bed-posts) remained in vogue,
neither physiology nor athletics stood much chance with
women.
But the often derided dress reformer has had her way, to a
great extent. Bathing dresses, gymnastic and tennis suits
which would have frightened an eighteenth century dame into
one of her favorite fainting fits.
Meanwhile the girls have mounted their bicycles. Bless you,
my children; what endless vistas of good times are before
you! What glorious landscape views and ocean moonrises, what
freedom, what fresh, airy delight in young life and
strength!
Already one young doctor has departed with his bride on a
wedding tour to Texas, each upon a bicycle. Other strange
affairs will no doubt take place. By and by the bishops will
see no more irreverence in bidding Godspeed to girls
starting on a journey to California upon bicycles than to
girls departing to Europe on a steamship.
Another encouraging sign of the times is the increasing demand on the
great and fashionable house of Liberty & Co., of London, for the Greek
and other simple costumes by fashionable ladies, who are using them
largely for home wear. I have reproduced two recent styles of dresses
made by Liberty. All fabrics used are rich, soft, and elegant, and the
effect is said to be gratifying to lovers of art, as well as far more
healthful and comfortable than the conventional dress. The most
important fact, however, is the effect or influence which is sure to
follow this breaking away from the ruling fashions in wealthy circles.
When conventionalism in dress is fully discredited, practical reform
is certain to follow. The knell of the one means the triumph of the
other.
[Illustration: Some of Liberty's recent dresses. The Grecian Costume.]
[Illustration: Some of Liberty's recent dresses. _The Juliet._]
Believing as I do that the cycle of woman has dawned, and that
through her humanity will reach a higher and nobler civilization than
the world has yet known, I feel the most profound interest in all that
affects her health, comfort, and happiness; for as I have before
observed, her exaltation means the elevation of the race. A broader
liberty and more liberal meed of justice for her mean a higher
civilization, and the solution of weighty and fundamental problems
which will never be equitably adjusted until we have brought into
political and social life more of the splendid spirit of altruism,
which is one of her most conspicuous characteristics. I believe that
morality, education, practical reform, and enduring progress wait upon
her complete emancipation from the bondage of fashion, prejudice,
superstition, and conservatism.
UN-AMERICAN TENDENCIES.
BY REV. CARLOS MARTYN, D. D.
The monarchial conception is that a few are born booted and spurred to
ride, and that the many are born saddled and bridled to be ridden. The
republican theory is that "Everybody is cleverer than anybody," to
quote the epigram attributed to Talleyrand; and that government, in
Lincoln's phrase, should be "of the people, by the people, and for the
people."
The United States is the only nation in history which has dared to
base itself upon an absolute trust in the people.
There have been republics (so-called) _ad infinitum_ and _ad nauseam_.
"Greece," cries one of the foremost of our orators, "had her
republics, but they were the republics of one freeman and ten slaves;
and the battle of Marathon was fought by slaves unchained from the
doorposts of their master's houses. Italy had her republics; they were
the republics of wealth and skill and family, limited and
aristocratic. Holland had her republic, the republic of guilds and
landholders, trusting the helm of state to property and education. The
Swiss republics were groups of cousins. And all these which, at their
best, held but a million or two within their narrow limits, have gone
down in the ocean of time."
The Spanish-American Republics are nondescripts. They owe their
existence to _pronunciamientos_. They are the puppets of successful
soldiers, and are administered by generals who follow one another like
the ghosts that walked in the vision of "Richard Third," and do not
hold office long enough to be photographed. They are based on mongrel
races, steeped in ignorance, cramped by superstition, and physically
rotten before they get ripe.
Our fathers built a commonwealth on the foundation of manhood. They
recognized no other qualification, save for a period of inconsistency,
_color_; which, happily, is now wiped out of the fundamental law,
though not entirely out of popular prejudice.
The faith in the people which Jefferson, Sam Adams, and the men of '76
cherished as the distinctive tenet of their political creed, has been
justified by results. Their gigantic creation launches into the second
decade of its second century, belted with power, aggrandized with _El
Dorados_, the amazement of the world, the "Arabian Nights" translated
into every-day reality.
Unfortunately, however, in the face of this unprecedented record of
prosperity, certain un-republican tendencies begin to exhibit
themselves among us. These may well give thoughtful patriots startled
concern.