_(To the Editor of the Mirror.)_
If you think the following observations conformable to the plan of your
useful and entertaining publication, perhaps you may be induced to give
them a place, or notice the subject I have in view, in some other way.
Notwithstanding the host of publications periodically issuing from the
press, independent of the incalculable list of newspapers and reviews; and
though the rage for periodicals is so great, that a single event will give
rise to one, yet there does not appear to me to be any thing like those
works which used to amuse and instruct our great grandfathers. I mean the
"Spectator," "Tatler," and others, whose influence extends to the present
day, and which are continually affording pleasure to cultivated minds by
the soundness of their doctrines, aided by the extensive knowledge of
human nature that the authors display throughout. But as they are now
become standard works, they are not so capable of "shooting folly as it
flies," and being as it were aged in the service, can only have a proper
effect when folly will stand still to listen to them; but as that is, in
most instances, out of the question, we want something more active, or in
other words, something new; and novelty being the order of the day,
attention is thereby excited, and the follies and extravagances of the
"age," may possibly have some advantageous pruning.
Caricatures, whether exhibited in pantomimes or print shops, (though often
got up for any other purpose than instruction) are not sufficient; they
are too ridiculous, though sometimes not devoid of humour, instance the
picture of a lady striving ineffectually to make a way through Temple Bar,
but is prevented by the enormous size of her bonnet, which shows likewise
that this extravagance in dress is not confined to the west end. But as
these things are only laughed at, some other means ought to be adopted;
and I should think myself extremely fortunate if I could be the humble
means of inducing you, or your correspondents, to take the matter in hand.
Certainly not the least to be deprecated are the "ladies' present dresses;"
the extravagances of which are not confined to the head, but are exhibited
also all down the arm (not unaptly likened to series of balloons) and are
also, in most instances, by some unusual "bustling," equally absurd. I
wonder what would be said by Mr. Addison, were he to witness the present
fashions. He would certainly think that all the care he took to keep the
fair sex in order was in vain; and though enormous head dresses were not
in vogue in his time, he seems to have anticipated that they would be, by
his recommending the perusal of his 98th paper of the "Spectator" to his
female readers by way of prevention, but which, alas! has not been studied
with the attention it merits. Probably the transcription of one passage
will not be misapplied here:--
He says, "I would desire the fair sex to consider how impossible it is for
them to add any thing that can be ornamental to what is already the
masterpiece of nature. The head has the most beautiful appearance, as well
as the highest station, in a human figure. Nature has laid out all her art
in beautifying the face; she has touched it with vermilion, planted in it
a double row of ivory, made it the seat of smiles and blushes, lighted it
up and enlivened it with the brightness of the eyes, hung it on each side
with curious organs of sense, given it airs and graces that cannot be
described, and surrounded it with such a flowing shade of hair as sets all
its beauties in the most agreeable light. In short she seems to have
designed the head as the cupola to the most glorious of her works; and
when we load it with such a pile of supernumerary ornaments, we destroy
the symmetry of the human figure, and foolishly contrive to call off the
eye from great and real beauties to childish gew-gaws, ribbons, and
bone-lace."
Womankind, Mr. Editor, I do not believe, are naturally vain; but as they
were made for us and for our comfort, it is natural that they should
endeavour to gain our esteem; but they carry their endeavours too far; by
straining to excite attention they overstep the mark, become vain and
coquetish, one strives to outdo another, others say they must do as other
women do, and they thus make themselves ridiculous unknowingly. It is
really painful to see a woman of sense and education become a slave to the
tyranny of fashion--and injuring both body and mind--and it is, I think,
an insult to a man of understanding to endeavour to excite his attention
by any such peculiarities.
Having now generally stated the subject that I should wish to be taken up
by abler hands than mine, I will conclude by recommending all your
town-bred, and coquetish ladies to study and restudy a letter signed "Mary
Home," in No. 254 of the excellent work before alluded to, "The Spectator."
--H. M--._Great Surrey Street, Aug. 1828_.
* * * * *