DRESS AND ORNAMENT.
Legitimate purposes of dress--as a covering, a regulator of
temperature, and a defence. Use of ornaments. Further thoughts on
dress. How clothing keeps us warm. Errors in regard to the material,
quality, and form of our dress. Tight lacing--its numerous evils.
Improvement of the lungs by education. Objections to the use of
personal ornaments.
When we remember that the threefold object of dress is to cover, warm
and defend us, and that the kind and quantity of dress which best does
this, is most conducive to our own and the public good, as well as to
the glory of God, we are led, very naturally, to the following
reflections:
1. We have no right to use that kind of dress which does not answer
well the purpose of a COVERING, ad long as we can lawfully obtain that
which would do it better. All fashions, moreover, which tend to remind
the beholder that our dress is _designed as a covering_, are nearly as
improper as those which do not effectually cover us.
And here let me say, with sufficient plainness, that there are such
fashions in existence; and that they ought to be shunned like the
plague. Does not the world in which we live, contain sources enough of
temptation, and avenues enough to vice, seduction and misery, without
increasing their number by our dress? [Footnote: I cannot refrain from
saying, in this place, that since I wrote the above paragraph, I have
received an excellent letter from a worthy minister of the gospel, on
the subject of female dress which, besides greatly confirming the views
I have expressed in this chapter, suggests the importance of having a
standard dress devised--to be formed on Christian principles, and made
fashionable by Christian example. If such a measure is desirable, it is
yours, young women, to put it in operation.]
I need to specify but one fashion in the list of those to which I
refer. It is the fashion of exposing the neck and a part of the chest.
I could tell young women, that it would be wisdom to remove this
dangerous custom, were health entirely out of the question. A word to
the wise--to adopt the language of Solomon--is sufficient. May it prove
so, in the present instance. Let not the young of the other sex,
miseducated as they now are, and the slaves of improper imaginations
and feelings, be longer trifled with in this matter.
2. We have no right to use any articles of clothing-when we have it in
our power, by lawful means, to prevent it--whose tendency is directly
contrary to what has been laid down as the second great object of
dress, that of ASSISTING TO KEEP OUR BODIES AT A PROPER TEMPERATURE.
It would be idle to pretend that clothing, in itself considered, is a
source of warmth to our bodies. It is only so by the relation it bears
to our bodies; or, in other words, by the circumstances in which it is
placed. Our own bodies--their internal, living machinery, rather--are
the principal sources of our heat. Clothing is useful in keeping us
warm, only by retaining, for some time, a portion of the heat of our
bodies, which would otherwise escape so rapidly into the ambient cooler
air, as to leave us with a sensation of chilliness. It should,
therefore, be adapted to the season. That clothing which conducts the
heat from the body in the slowest manner, or, in other words, impedes
most its progress, is best adapted to severe cold weather; provided,
however, it does not keep the heated air in contact with the body so
long as to render it impure. And, on the contrary, that clothing which
most readily allows the heat to escape from our bodies, is, in hot
weather, the best adapted to our health and happiness.
I have said that the internal machinery of out bodies is the great
source of our heat. Foremost, perhaps, in this work, are the lungs, the
stomach, the brain and nervous system, and the circulatory system,
including the heart, arteries, veins and absorbents. Our moving
powers--the muscles and tendons--have, indeed, much to do with
generating our heat; but it is principally by the assistance which they
render to the digestive, the nutritive, the respiratory, the
circulatory, and the thinking machinery. The fat of our bodies has also
something to do in promoting our warmth; but it is only on the same
principle as that by which it is done by our clothing; that is to say,
it prevents the heat from being conducted off too rapidly.
All these internal organs--and, in fact, all the living machinery of
our bodies--have the power to generate heat and diffuse it over the
system, in proportion to the freedom and energy of their action; or, to
express the same idea in fewer words, in proportion to their health.
But this is not all. They have not only the power of generating heat in
proportion to their healthiness, but also of resisting cold. Who does
not know that the living system, at ninety-eight degrees of Fahrenheit,
will resist a temperature nearly one hundred and fifty degrees lower
than this, [Footnote: During the present winter, the mercury in this
vicinity has ranged, in one or two instances, as low as 14 or 16
degrees below zero; which is 112 or 114 degrees below the heat of the
blood. In some parts of New England it has been 20 or 30 degrees
below.] and yet for some time not freeze? Perhaps this is done,
however, in the same way in which a more moderate amount of heat is
generated. Perhaps the increased muscular and nervous energy, and the
increased activity of the other organs, enable them to generate heat as
fast, as the increased cold around carries it off.
But the conclusion. I would at present enforce from these physiological
premises, is the following:--That whenever our dress, by means of its
material, form or quantity, has a tendency to weaken our internal
organs, or any one of them, and thus to prevent the free and energetic
performance of their several functions, it is injurious, and its use is
wrong, not to say sinful.
This is sometimes done by clothing which irritates and excites the
surface of the body too much. Coarse flannel is more irritating than
any other material in ordinary use, and should therefore never be used
when a sufficient amount of bodily heat can be maintained without it;
as its use weakens, in the end, the perspiratory, and calorific, and
depurating powers of the skin--for the skin has all these powers--and
even, in some cases, brings on eruptive and other diseases. Fine
flannel is more irritating than cotton; and the latter, more so than
linen. Still, there are multitudes who cannot get along without
flannel, at some seasons, either coarser or finer.
The evil of which I have spoken is, however, much oftener induced by
error in regard to the quantity of dress, than its quality. As to
quantity, we need no more than is just necessary, along with healthy
and vigorous exercise, to keep us from being sensibly cold or chilly.
Any amount beyond this, be its nature what it may, is debilitating, and
consequently more or less injurious.
But the form of our dress often does injury; as well as its material
and quantity. With some classes of our community, this is a greater
evil than either of the former; though with others, it is not.
All forms of dress which impede any kind of motion, especially those
which impede circulatory motion, are greatly injurious. It is, I
suppose, pretty well known, that all parts of the skin are full of
minute blood vessels, chiefly veins; in addition to which, there are
also a great number of veins still larger, immediately under the skin,
and connected with it, as may be observed by looking at the hands or
limbs of very aged or very lean persons. Now the tendency or course of
the blood in all the veins, is towards the heart; and this course is
slower or more rapid, according as the skin is more or less active,
healthy and free. A rapid course of the blood in these veins, is
desirable, because it has become, in the progress of its circulation,
greatly impure, and in the same proportion unfit to minister to the
purposes of health--and needs to go on to the heart, and through that
to the lungs, to be relieved of its load of impurities.
Is it not plain, then, that all compression of the skin by cravats,
wristbands, waistbands, belts, garters, or any other form of ligatures,
must be wrong! Must it not impede the motion of the venous blood in its
return to the heart? Must not even light boots, garters, stockings,
&c., do this? Is it not a task sufficiently difficult for the blood to
climb from the feet to the heart, directly against the power of
gravity, without being impeded, is its course, by compression of any
sort--and above all, by ligatures.
But if these ordinary compressions of the surface of our bodies are so
injurious, what are we to say of the practice of many females, and of
most young women--at least in fashionable life--of compressing the
chest?
For in compressing this part of the frame, though we do not impede the
action of _so much_ blood in its return to the heart as might be
supposed, we do a great deal more injury in many other respects than is
usually known. I must advert to the various items of this injury.
First--compressing the chest, by dress or otherwise, prevents free
motion of the trunk of the body. We can, indeed, bend the body a
little, notwithstanding the compression; but not so freely, and not
therefore so healthfully.
Secondly--compression of the chest prevents the lungs and heart--the
principal organs wholly contained in its cavity--from expanding, and
doing their work in a proper manner. If there were no compression by
ligatures or otherwise, of any other part of the system, and if the
impure blood came back to the lungs for renovation as fast as it ought,
still it would not be properly depurated or renovated, unless the lungs
acted in a full, healthy and rigorous manner. But this they cannot do,
unless the chest is left free from external compression. Their internal
expansion and enlargement is limited by the external, much in the same
way as the space in a bellows is limited or extended according as the
bellows itself is expanded or compressed.
If the muscles concerned in moving the chest---near a hundred in
number--do not properly act; if the breast-bone, when we inhale air, is
not thrown forward, and the ribs thrown outward and upward so as to
increase, very greatly, the size of the internal cavity; then the
venous blood which is brought into the lungs to be purified and
cleansed, cannot--I repeat it--be purified and cleansed as it ought to
be; and the whole system must suffer the consequences, in being fed and
nourished on impure, and I might say poisonous blood.
This is the case when the lungs are compressed during a single breath:
how great, then, is the evil, when the compression continues an
hour--during which period we probably breathe ten or twelve hundred
times! How much greater still, when it is continued through the waking
hours of a day, say fifteen or sixteen--in which period we breathe
nearly twenty thousand times--and a young woman of twelve to fifteen
years of age, probably more! But think of the evil as extended to a
year, or three hundred and sixty-five days! or to a whole life of
thirty, fifty or seventy years!
How much poisoned blood must go through the living system in sixty or
seventy years, should the injured system last so long! And how many bad
feelings, and how much severe pain and suffering, and chronic and acute
disease, must almost inevitably be undergone!
Thirdly--this poisoning of the blood, however, is not all. The chest,
so constantly compressed, even if the compression is not begun in early
infancy, shrinks to a much smaller size than is natural, and in a few
years becomes incapable of holding more than half or two thirds as much
air as before; so that if the compression is removed, the injury cannot
be wholly restored--though if removed any time before thirty-five years
of age, _something_ may be done towards restoration. But not only is
the cavity diminished permanently in size; the bones and tendons are
bent out-of their place, and made to compress either the lungs
themselves, or the other contiguous organs, as the heart, the liver and
the stomach, and to disturb the proper performance of their respective
offices or functions.
Fourthly-tight lacing, as I have already said, compresses the heart as
well as the lungs, and impedes the motion of this important organ. The
suffering and disease which are thus entailed on transgression, if not
quite so great in amount as that which is induced by the abuse of the
lungs, is yet very great--and added to the former, greatly diminishes
the sum total of human happiness, and increases, in the same
proportion, our miseries and our woes.
Fifthly--the stomach is also a sufferer--and the liver; and, indeed,
all the other organs. There is suffering, not only from being in actual
contact with each other, but also from sympathy and fellow feeling. I
have adverted to that law, by which, if one member or organ of the
human system suffer, all the others suffer with it. This is very
remarkably the case with the lungs, when they suffer. Other organs
suffer with them from mere sympathy; and that to a very great extent.
This is especially true of the cerebral and nervous system; and of that
portion of the _general_ system which gives to woman her peculiar
prerogative, as well as her distinctive character.
Let no young woman forget, moreover, that she lives, not for herself
alone, but for others; and that if she injures health and life by
improper dress, she does it not for herself alone, but for all those
who shelter their abuses under her example, as well as for all those
who may hereafter be more immediately influenced by her present
conduct. Let her neither forget her responsibility nor her
accountability. Would to God that she could see this matter as it truly
is, and as she will be likely to see it in years to come!
Let it be remembered, moreover, that as we can diminish the size of the
chest by compressing it, so we can enlarge it, gradually--especially in
early life--by extra effort; or by general exercise; but especially
such general exercise as I have mentioned in a former chapter--I mean,
moderate labor in the garden or in the field, and in house-keeping. Nor
is spinning on a high wheel--which requires not only walking to and
fro, but also considerable motion of the arms and chest--a very bad
exercise. A great deal may also be done by reading aloud in a proper
manner, and by conversation; and especially by singing.
I believe that by a proper education of the lungs--instead of the
modern custom of _un_educating them--it would be possible, in the
course of a few successive ages, greatly to enlarge the cavity
containing them. And if this can be done, it will be a means of
promoting, in the same degree, the tone and vigor, not only of the
lungs themselves, but also of the whole physical frame; and the
aggregate gain to our race would be immense. Let us think of the
amazing difference between a race which has been deteriorating in body
and mind, from generation to generation, and at the same time suffering
from disease in a thousand forms, and one which is not only free from
primitive disease, but gradually improving, both bodily and mentally,
and in a fair way to go on improving for centuries--perhaps thousands
of years--to come!
3. We have no right to use that dress as a DEFENCE which does not
answer this purpose, so long as we can get that which does; provided it
answers neither of the other two purposes already mentioned.
Now, are there not a great number of articles of clothing worn, whose
use cannot be justified on these principles? Does not the greater part
of human time and labor which is expended on dress, both by the maker
and the wearer, go to answer other purposes than these? Is it not
expended for mere ornament? And is such an expenditure right?
My own conviction is, that we are bound, as Christians--and as such, I
must consider my readers in this favored country--to use that dress,
and that alone, which answers the great purposes of dress; and that
were the subject viewed in its true and just light, all beyond this
should be regarded as sinful. What I suppose these great purposes of
dress are, has already been mentioned.
In short, I suppose that our duty is, to dress in such a way, if our
circumstances permit it, as will be best for the purposes of merely
clothing, tempering and defending our bodies. That material, that
quantity, and those forms of dress, which we suppose best accomplish
this, should be adopted as fast as they are known.
Such a view will, of course, be opposed by the devotees of fashion; but
not, I think, by many of those who know they cannot serve two
masters--God and mammon, or God and the fashions--and that it is their
duty to devote themselves, unreservedly, to the worship and service of
the former.
I shall also be opposed by another class--the devotees of utility, or a
species of what I call utilitarianism. They will say that _I_ am a
utilitarian, of the rankest sort; that I would destroy all just taste,
all industry, all division of labor, all commerce, and all wealth.
But is it so? Is that proved to be a just taste, to which the views
here presented seem to be opposed? Where is the proof, and by whom has
it been adduced? I am no advocate for a utilitarianism which excludes
just taste: but _I believe our tastes to be depraved by the fall, no
less than our affections;_ that they are not, as some suppose, _free
from sin_--though less sinful, perhaps, than our moral tastes and
preferences. I believe that a taste which is not conformed to the
nature of things and to the law of God, is a perverted taste; and that
the modern taste in regard to dress and ornament, is, to a great
extent, of this description.
And does there remain no room for industry when personal ornaments are
excluded? As well might it be said that the exclusion of all drinks but
water, would strike a death-blow at industry. Is there nothing left for
people to do, because you take away ornament?
Perhaps, indeed, if _all_ personal ornament were to be taken away
suddenly, it might give a temporary check to industry, and seem to
conflict with the principal of a division of labor. But this cannot
happen, except it were by miraculous agency. The utmost that can be
rationally expected at present by the most sanguine, would be, that
professing Christians should exclude it; nor could they, as a body, be
expected to do it at once. One here, and another there, would renounce,
as wrong, what he had been accustomed to think right; and this would
give society time to adjust itself, and preserve its balance; as it has
done in the case of every great and important change of public opinion.
But we are gravely told by several writers on this subject, that as a
nation's wealth is derived from a division of labor, it follows, that
to deny ourselves all ornament, would be a great injury to the
community.
What a strange inference! Is there nothing for people to do, in this
world, I again ask, but to make ornaments? Or can it be that they form
so important a division of human labor, that to dispense with them in
the only way in which it is possible, humanly speaking, to do so--that
is, by enlightening public opinion, and appealing to the
conscientious--is to take away the wealth of the nation?
I deny, most resolutely, that mere artificial ornaments make any
considerable part of a nation's real wealth. That which tends to make
us healthier in all the functions of our bodies--which developes and
improves all the faculties of our minds--and which developes and
cultivates, to the highest possible extent, all the good affections of
the soul-is alone worthy of the name of wealth.
I do not deny, that he who makes two stalks of grain grow where only
one grew before, is a public benefactor. I do not deny that, for
certain purposes in the arts--in architecture, especially--he who
polishes a gem, or a block of marble, may also be a public benefactor.
This is a very different thing from preparing and applying ornaments to
our persons; and may be, to some extent, useful. But I am still
assured, that those who make a person healthier than before, or improve
his intellect, or are a means of awakening in him a love to God and
man, and of promoting its growth where it is already awakened, are
benefactors to the world in a degree infinitely higher, and add to its
_true_ riches almost infinitely more.
It is health, knowledge and excellence--we again say--which exalt a
nation; and these are its true wealth. Fifteen millions of free men,
all as healthy as the most perfect specimen which could now be found
among us; all as wise as the wisest man in the world; and all as
virtuous and excellent as Aristides, or Howard, or Benezet, or John,
the beloved apostle, himself--what a national treasure they would be!
what a revenue of true wealth they would afford!
Now, if fifteen millions of such people would be a source of national
wealth before unheard of, would not every individual of this whole
number be a source of wealth? And would not every element which should
go to make up the sum total of the excellences of each individual, be a
part of this mighty treasure?
If the richer part of the community have money to spare, why should
they not spend it in increasing the health, the knowledge, and the
morality of the needy around them--by giving employment to those who
are capable of promoting these blessings, and who want employment?
It will be said, I know, that the great multitude of persons around us
are not fit for more elevated employments. No; nor will they ever be,
in any considerable numbers, until they come to be employed in this way
much more frequently than they now are. Let there be an urgent demand
in the market for a commodity, and it usually soon comes to be
abundant. Let there be a demand for laborers in the mental and moral
field--in this more elevated garden of the Lord--and they will, ere
long, be furnished; and the more persons there are employed in this
way, and who consequently come into the habit of fitting themselves to
be thus employed, the richer will be the national treasury.
That many young women, who read this chapter, will wholly lay aside
their ornaments, and fit themselves, as fast as possible, for the noble
purpose of ornamenting those around them, by promoting their physical,
intellectual and moral well being, can hardly be expected. But I do
hope that I shall lead a few to expend less of time and money in
dressing and ornamenting their persons than heretofore, and more in
dressing and ornamenting the immortal mind, as well as more in
promoting health of body.
I cannot but hope to live to see the day, when every person who
professes the name of Jesus Christ, and not a few who make no
professions at all, will entertain similar views in regard to the
purposes of dress and their own duty in relation to it, to those which
I have endeavored to inculcate. Such a day must surely come, sooner or
later; and I hope that those who believe this, will make it their great
rule to _expend as little on themselves as possible_, and yet answer
the true intentions of the Creator respecting themselves.
There is a very wide difference between spending as _much_ as we can on
our persons--in the gratification, I mean, of the wants of our depraved
tastes, under the specious plea that it encourages commerce and
industry--and spending as _little_ as we can on ourselves, and as much
as possible in promoting the health, the learning, and the piety of
ourselves and those around us. The former has been tried for
centuries--with what result, let the state of society and our misnamed
refinement bear witness. Let the latter be tried but half as long, and
the world will be surprised at the results.
Foremost in this work of reform, should be our millions of young women.
They should be so for two reasons. First, because their influence and
responsibilities to coming generations are great, and, secondly,
because they are at present greatly involved in the practical error of
loving external ornaments too well, and of valuing too little the
ornaments of a healthy body, a sound mind, and a good heart.
I am often pained to hear the reproach cast upon females, and
especially upon the younger of the sex, that they are fond of the
"far-fetched" and "dear-bought," even when they are the less valuable.
It should not be so. They should be above the suspicion of such a
weakness.
What else can be expected, however, when those who should be the
guardians of the public taste--and who should, as Christian citizens,
strive with all their might to elevate it--engage in pandering to the
follies, not to say the depravities, of the age? Let young women rise
above themselves, and escape the snares thus laid for them by those who
ought to be their guides to the paths of wisdom, and virtue, and
happiness.