diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 07:46:10 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 07:46:10 -0800 |
| commit | 02ac951e6a1bec943be0c1da60d00625b68af0d4 (patch) | |
| tree | 7a45216b85feb8722c7ca2f4b919f0e24992026b /old/60054-0.txt | |
| parent | a7214c60f8ef3ad2c5fa7b01aed3d0b466dd8b04 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/60054-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/60054-0.txt | 26865 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 26865 deletions
diff --git a/old/60054-0.txt b/old/60054-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 2e38de7..0000000 --- a/old/60054-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,26865 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Romantic Love and Personal Beauty, by -Henry Theophilus Finck - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll -have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using -this ebook. - - - -Title: Romantic Love and Personal Beauty - Their development, causal relations, historic and national - peculiarities - -Author: Henry Theophilus Finck - -Release Date: August 4, 2019 [EBook #60054] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ROMANTIC LOVE AND PERSONAL BEAUTY *** - - - - -Produced by KD Weeks, Turgut Dincer and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note: - -This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. -Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. - -Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are -referenced. - -Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please -see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding -the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation. - - ROMANTIC LOVE - AND - PERSONAL BEAUTY - - THEIR - - DEVELOPMENT, CAUSAL RELATIONS, - HISTORIC AND NATIONAL PECULIARITIES - - BY - - HENRY T. FINCK - - - - - - - - - =New York= - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - LONDON: MACMILLAN & CO., LTD. - 1902 - _All rights reserved_ - - - - - - - - - COPYRIGHT, 1887 - BY HENRY T. FINCK - - --- - - SET UP AND ELECTROTYPED, 1887 - NEW EDITION, FEBRUARY, 1903 - - - - - - - - - Press of J. J. Little & Co. - Astor Place, New York - - - - - CONTENTS - - PAGE - EVOLUTION OF ROMANTIC LOVE 1 - COSMIC ATTRACTION AND CHEMICAL AFFINITIES 3 - FLOWER LOVE AND BEAUTY 7 - IMPERSONAL AFFECTION 11 - PERSONAL AFFECTIONS 16 - I. Love for Animals 16 - II. Maternal Love 19 - III. Paternal Love 20 - IV. Filial Love 22 - V. Brotherly and Sisterly Love 23 - VI. Friendship 24 - VII. Romantic Love 26 - OVERTONES OF LOVE 29 - I. Individual Preference 30 - II. Monopoly or Exclusiveness 30 - III. Jealousy 30 - IV. Coyness 30 - V. Gallantry 31 - VI. Self-Sacrifice 31 - VII. Sympathy 31 - VIII. Pride of Conquest and Possession 31 - IX. Emotional Hyperbole 32 - X. Mixed Moods 32 - XI. Admiration of Personal Beauty 32 - Herbert Spencer on Love 33 - LOVE AMONG ANIMALS 33 - Courtship 37 - (_a_) Jealousy 39 - (_b_) Coyness 40 - (_c_) Individual Preference 42 - (_d_) Personal Beauty and Sexual Selection 43 - (1) Protective Colours 48 - (2) Warning Colours 48 - (3) Typical Colours 48 - (4) Sexual Colours 49 - Love Charms and Love Calls 50 - Love Dances and Display 52 - LOVE AMONG SAVAGES 54 - Strangers to Love 54 - Primitive Courtship 56 - (1) Capture 56 - (2) Purchase 58 - (3) Service 58 - Individual Preference 59 - Personal Beauty and Sexual Selection 60 - Jealousy and Polygamy 62 - Monopoly and Monogamy 63 - Primitive Coyness 64 - Can American Negroes Love? 66 - HISTORY OF LOVE 67 - LOVE IN EGYPT 67 - ANCIENT HEBREW LOVE 69 - ANCIENT ARYAN LOVE 72 - Hindoo Love Maxims 73 - GREEK LOVE 75 - Family Affection 75 - No Love Stories 76 - Woman’s Position 77 - Chaperonage _versus_ Courtship 77 - Plato on Courtship 78 - Parental _versus_ Lovers’ Choice 78 - The Hetæræ 79 - Platonic Love 80 - Sappho and Female Friendship 81 - Greek Beauty 83 - Cupid’s Arrows 84 - Origin of Love 85 - ROMAN LOVE 86 - Woman’s Position 86 - No Wooing and Choice 87 - Virgil, Dryden, and Scott 89 - Ovid’s Art of Making Love 90 - Birth of Gallantry 91 - MEDIÆVAL LOVE 92 - Celibacy _versus_ Marriage 92 - Woman’s Lowest Degradation 93 - Negation of Feminine Choice 95 - Christianity and Love 97 - Chivalry—Militant and Comic 98 - Chivalry—Poetic 101 - (_a_) French Troubadours 102 - (_b_) German Minnesingers 103 - Female Culture 105 - Personal Beauty 107 - Spenser on Love 108 - Dante and Shakspere 109 - MODERN LOVE 111 - A Biologic Test 111 - Venus, Plutus, and Minerva 112 - Leading Motives 114 - Modern Coyness 114 - (1) An Echo of Capture 114 - (2) Maiden _versus_ Wife 115 - (3) Modesty 115 - (4) Cunning to be Strange 115 - (5) Procrastination 116 - Goldsmith on Love 116 - Disadvantages of Coyness 118 - Coyness lessens Woman’s Love 120 - Masculine _versus_ Feminine Love 120 - Flirtation and Coquetry 122 - Flirtation _versus_ Coyness 123 - Modern Courtship 125 - Modern Jealousy 127 - Lover’s Jealousy 129 - Retrospective and Prospective Jealousy 131 - Jealousy and Beauty 133 - Monopoly or Exclusiveness 133 - True Love is Transient 135 - Is First Love Best? 136 - Heine on First Love 137 - First Love is not Best 137 - Pride and Vanity 141 - Coquetry 142 - Love and Rank 143 - Special Sympathy 145 - How Love Intensifies Emotions 146 - Development of Sympathy 147 - Pity and Love 150 - Love at First Sight 152 - Intellect and Love 154 - Gallantry and Self-Sacrifice 157 - Active and Passive Desire to Please 159 - Feminine Devotion 160 - Emotional Hyperbole 162 - Mixed Moods and Paradoxes 166 - Lunatic, Lover, and Poet 172 - Individual Preference 173 - Sexual Divergence 174 - Making Woman Masculine 175 - Love and Culture 176 - Personal Beauty 177 - Feminine Beauty in Masculine Eyes 177 - Masculine Beauty in Feminine Eyes 178 - CONJUGAL AFFECTION AND ROMANTIC LOVE 180 - Romance in Conjugal Love 184 - Marriages of Reason or Love Matches? 187 - Marriage Hints 189 - OLD MAIDS 190 - BACHELORS 194 - GENIUS AND MARRIAGE 197 - GENIUS AND LOVE 201 - GENIUS IN LOVE 204 - (1) Precocity 204 - (2) Ardour 207 - (3) Fickleness 210 - (4) Multiplicity 213 - (5) Fictitiousness 215 - INSANITY AND LOVE 218 - Analogies 218 - Erotomania, or Real Love-Sickness 222 - THE LANGUAGE OF LOVE 223 - I. Words 223 - II. Facial Expression 224 - III. Caresses 225 - KISSING—PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE 227 - Among Animals 227 - Among Savages 228 - Origin of Kissing 229 - Ancient Kisses 232 - Mediæval Kisses 233 - Modern Kisses 234 - Love Kisses 235 - How to Kiss 237 - HOW TO WIN LOVE 238 - Brass Buttons 238 - Confidence and Boldness 239 - Pleasant Associations 240 - Perseverance 241 - Feigned Indifference 241 - Compliments 244 - Love Letters 246 - Love Charms for Women 250 - Proposing 253 - Diagnosis, or Signs of Love 254 - HOW TO CURE LOVE 255 - Absence 256 - Travel 257 - Employment 257 - Married Misery 257 - Feminine Inferiority 260 - Focussing Her Faults 262 - Reason _versus_ Passion 263 - Love _versus_ Love 264 - Prognosis, or Chances of Recovery 265 - NATIONALITY AND LOVE 265 - French Love 266 - Italian Love 274 - Spanish Love 277 - German Love 280 - English Love 288 - American Love 294 - SCHOPENHAUER’S THEORY OF LOVE 301 - Love is an Illusion 302 - Individuals Sacrificed to the Species 302 - Sources of Love 303 - (1) Physical Beauty 303 - (2) Psychic Traits 304 - (3) Complementary Qualities 305 - FOUR SOURCES OF BEAUTY 310 - I. Health 310 - Greek Beauty 313 - Mediæval Ugliness 314 - Modern Hygiene 316 - II. Crossing 318 - III. Romantic Love 322 - IV. Mental Refinement 324 - EVOLUTION OF TASTE 327 - Savage Notions of Beauty 327 - Non-Æsthetic "Ornamentation" 328 - Personal Beauty as a Fine Art 329 - Negative Tests of Beauty 331 - (_a_) Animals 331 - (_b_) Savages 333 - (_c_) Degraded Classes 333 - (_d_) Age and Decrepitude 334 - (_e_) Disease 334 - Positive Tests of Beauty 338 - (_a_) Symmetry 338 - (_b_) Gradation 339 - (_c_) Curvature 341 - Masculine and Feminine Beauty 342 - (_d_) Delicacy 343 - (_e_) Smoothness 344 - (_f_) Lustre and Colour 345 - (_g_) Expression, Variety, Individuality 348 - THE FEET 351 - Size 351 - Fashionable Ugliness 352 - Tests of Beauty 354 - A Graceful Gait 357 - Evolution of the Great Toe 359 - National Peculiarities 361 - Beautifying Hygiene 362 - Dancing and Grace 364 - Dancing and Courtship 365 - Evolution of Dance Music 367 - The Dance of Love 369 - Ballet-Dancing 370 - THE LOWER LIMBS 371 - Muscular Development 371 - Beautifying Exercise 372 - Fashionable Ugliness 375 - The Crinoline Craze 376 - THE WAIST 378 - The Beauty-Curve 378 - The Wasp-Waist Mania 379 - Hygienic Disadvantages 380 - Æsthetic Disadvantages 381 - Corpulence and Leanness 382 - The Fashion Fetish Analysed 386 - Individualism _versus_ Fashion 389 - Masculine Fashions 391 - CHEST AND BOSOM 394 - Feminine Beauty 394 - Masculine Beauty 397 - Magic Effect of Deep Breathing 397 - A Moral Question 399 - NECK AND SHOULDER 400 - ARM AND HAND 402 - Evolution and Sexual Differences 402 - Calisthenics and Massage 403 - The Second Face 405 - Finger Nails 406 - Manicure Secrets 407 - JAW, CHIN, AND MOUTH 408 - Hands _versus_ Jaws 408 - Dimples in the Chin 412 - Refined Lips 413 - Cosmetic Hints 421 - THE CHEEKS 423 - High Cheek Bones 423 - Colour and Blushes 425 - THE EARS 429 - A Useless Ornament 429 - Cosmetics and Fashion 431 - Physiognomic Vagaries 433 - Noise and Civilisation 434 - A Musical Voice 435 - THE NOSE 436 - Size and Shape 436 - Evolution of the Nose 438 - Greek and Hebrew Noses 440 - Fashion and Cosmetic Surgery 443 - Nose-Breathing and Health 445 - Cosmetic Value of Odours 446 - THE FOREHEAD 448 - Beauty and Brain 448 - Fashionable Deformity 450 - Wrinkles 451 - THE COMPLEXION 453 - White _versus_ Black 453 - Cosmetic Hints 460 - Freckles and Sunshine 462 - THE EYES 464 - Colour 465 - Lustre 469 - Form 472 - Expression 475 - (_a_) Lustre 476 - (_b_) Colour of Iris 478 - (_c_) Movements of the Iris 479 - (_d_) ” ” Eyeball 480 - (_e_) ” ” Eyelids 482 - (_f_) ” ” Eyebrows 485 - Cosmetic Hints 485 - THE HAIR 486 - Cause of Man’s Nudity 486 - Beards and Moustaches 489 - Baldness and Depilatories 492 - Æsthetic Value of Hair 494 - BRUNETTE AND BLONDE 496 - Blonde _versus_ Brunette 496 - Brunette _versus_ Blonde 498 - Why Cupid Favours Brunettes 499 - NATIONALITY AND BEAUTY 505 - FRENCH BEAUTY 506 - ITALIAN BEAUTY 511 - SPANISH BEAUTY 515 - GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN BEAUTY 522 - ENGLISH BEAUTY 528 - AMERICAN BEAUTY 535 - - - - - ROMANTIC LOVE & PERSONAL BEAUTY - - - - - EVOLUTION OF ROMANTIC LOVE - - -Of all the rhetorical commonplaces in literature and conversation, none -is more frequently repeated than the assertion that Love, as depicted in -a thousand novels and poems every year, has existed at all times, and in -every country, immutable as the mountains and the stars. - -Only a few months ago one of the leading German writers of the period, -Ernst Eckstein, wrote an essay in which he endeavoured to prove that not -only was Love as felt by the ancient Romans the same as modern Love, but -that it was identical with the modern sentiment even in its minutest -details and manifestations. He based this bold inference on the fact -that in Ovid’s _Ars Amoris_ directions are given to the men regarding -certain tricks of gallantry—such as dusting the adored one’s seat at the -circus, fanning her, applauding her favourites, and drinking from the -cup where it was touched by her lips. - -Curious and interesting these hints are, no doubt. But a closer -examination of Roman literature and manners shows that Dr. Eckstein has -been guilty of the common blunder of generalising from a single -instance. Gallantry is one of the essential traits of modern Love; and -far from having been a common practice in ancient Rome, the interest of -Ovid’s remarks lies in the fact that they give us the _first_ instance -on record of an attempt at gallant behaviour on the part of the men; as -will be shown in detail in the chapter on Roman Love. - -And as with Gallantry, so with the other traits which make up the group -of emotions known to us as Love. We look for them in vain among modern -savages, in vain among the ancient civilised nations. Romantic Love is a -modern sentiment, less than a thousand years old. - -Conjugal Love is, indeed, often celebrated by Greek, Hebrew, and other -ancient writers, but regarding Romantic—or pre-matrimonial—Love (which -alone forms the theme of our novelists), they are silent. The Bible -takes no account of it, and although Greek literature and mythology seem -at first sight to abound in allusions to it, critical analysis shows -that the reference never is to Love as we understand it. Greek Love, as -will be shown hereafter, was a peculiar mixture of friendship and -passion, differing widely from the modern sentiment of Love. - -It is because among the Romans the position of woman was somewhat more -elevated and modern than among the Greeks, that we find in Roman -literature a vague foreshadowing of _some_ of the elements of modern -Love. - -In the Dark Ages there is a relapse. The germs of Love could not -flourish in a period when women were kept in brutal subjection by the -men, and their minds refused all nourishment and refinement. The -Troubadours of Italy and France proved useful champions of woman, as did -the German Minnesingers, by teaching the mediæval military man to look -upon her with sentiments of respect and adoration. Yet their conduct -rarely harmonised with their preaching; and the cause of Romantic Love -gained little by their poetic effusions, which were almost invariably -addressed to married women. - -Not till Dante’s _Vita Nuova_ appeared was the gospel of modern Love—the -romantic adoration of a maiden by a youth—revealed for the first time in -definite language. Genius, however, is always in advance of its age, _in -emotions as well as in thoughts_; and the feelings experienced by Dante -were obviously not shared by his contemporaries, who found them too -subtle and sublimated for their comprehension. And, in fact, they _were_ -too ethereal to quite correspond with reality. The strings of Dante’s -lyre were strung too high, and touched by his magic hand, gave forth -harmonic overtones too celestial for mundane ears to hear. - -It remained for Shakspere to combine the idealism with the realism of -Love in proper proportions. The colours with which he painted the -passion and sentiment of modern Love are as fresh and as true to life as -on the day when they were first put on his canvas. Like Dante, however, -he was emotionally ahead of his time, as an examination of contemporary -literature in England and elsewhere shows. But within the last two -centuries Love has gradually, if slowly, assumed among all educated -people characteristics which formerly it possessed only in the minds of -a few isolated men of genius. - -Before we proceed to prove all these assertions in detail, it will be -well to cast a brief glance at the analogies to human Love presented by -cosmic, chemical, and vegetal phenomena; as well as to distinguish -Romantic Love from other forms of human and animal affection. This will -enable us to comprehend more clearly what modern Love is, by making -apparent what it is not. - - - - - COSMIC ATTRACTION AND CHEMICAL AFFINITIES - - -It is a favourite device of poets to invest plants and even inanimate -objects with human thoughts and feelings. The parched, withering flower, -tormented by the pangs of thirst, implores the passing cloud for a few -drops of the vital fluid; and the cloud, moved to pity at sight of the -suffering beauty, sheds its welcome, soothing tears. - - “And ’tis my faith, that every flower - Enjoys the air it breathes.”—WORDSWORTH. - - “The moon shines bright: in such a night as this, - When the sweet wind did gently kiss the trees, - And they did make no noise.” - . . . . . . . . - “Purple the sails, and so perfumed that - The winds were love-sick with them.”—SHAKSPERE. - -One of the first authors who thus endowed non-human objects with human -feelings was the Greek philosopher Empedokles, who flourished about -twenty-three centuries ago. Just as the last of the great German -metaphysicians, Schopenhauer, believed that all the forces of -Nature—astronomic, chemical, biological, etc.—are identical with the -human Will, of which they represent different stages of development or -“objectivation,” so Empedokles insisted that the two ruling passions of -the human soul, Love and Hate, are the two principles which pervade and -rule the whole universe. In the primitive condition of things, he -taught, the four elements, Earth, Water, Air, and Fire are mingled -harmoniously, and Love rules supreme. Then Hate intervenes and produces -individual, separate forms. Plants are developed, and after them -animals, or rather, at first, only single organs—detached eyes, arms, -hands, etc. Then Love reasserts its force and unites these separate -organs into complete animals. Strange monstrosities are the result of -some of these unions—animals of double sex, human heads on the bodies of -oxen, or horned heads on the bodies of men. These, however, perish, -while others, which are congruous and adapted to their surroundings, -survive and multiply. - -Thus Empedokles, “the Greek Darwin,” was the originator of a theory of -evolution based on the alternate predominance of cosmic Love and Hate; -Love being the attractive, Hate the repulsive force. - -In the preface to the first volume of _Don Quixote_, Cervantes refers -those who wish to acquire some information concerning Love to an Italian -treatise by Judah Leo. The full title of the book, which appeared in -Rome in the sixteenth century, is _Dialoghi di amore, Composti da Leone -Medico, di nazione Ebreo, e di poi fatto cristiano_. There are said to -be three French translations of it, but it was only after long searching -that I succeeded in finding a copy, at the Bibliothèque Nationale in -Paris. It proved to be a strange medley of astrology, metaphysics, -theology, classical erudition, mythology, and mediæval science. Burton, -in the chapter on Love, in his _Anatomy of Melancholy_, quotes freely -from this work of Leo, whom he names as one of about twenty-five authors -who wrote treatises on Love in ancient and mediæval times. - -Like Empedokles, Leo identifies cosmic attraction with Love. But he -points out three degrees of Love—Natural, Sensible, and Rational. - -By Natural Love he means those “sympathies” which attract a stone to the -earth, make rivers flow to the sea, keep the sun, moon, and stars in -their courses, etc. Burton (1652) agrees with Leo, and asks quaintly, -“How comes a loadstone to draw iron to it ... the ground to covet -showers, but for love? ... no stock, no stone, that has not some feeling -of love. ’Tis more eminent in Plants, Hearbs, and is especially observed -in vegetals; as betwixt the Vine and Elm a great sympathy,” etc. - -“Sensible” Love is that which prevails among animals. In it Leo -recognises the higher elements of delight in one another’s company, and -of attachment to a master. - -“Rational” Love, the third and highest class, is peculiar to God, -angels, and men. - -But the inclination to confound gravitation and other natural forces -with Love is not to be found among ancient and mediæval authors alone. -Paradoxical as it may seem, it is the “gross materialist,” Dr. Ludwig -Büchner, who exclaims rapturously: “For it is love, in the form of -_attraction_, which chains stone to stone, earth to earth, star to star, -and which holds together the mighty edifice on which we stand, and on -the surface of which, like parasites, we carry on our existence, barely -noticeable in the infinite universe; and on which we shall continue to -exist till that distant period when its component parts will again be -resolved into that primal chaos from which it laboriously severed itself -millions of years ago, and became a separate planet.” - -Büchner carries on this anthropopathic process a step farther, by -including all the chemical affinities of atoms and molecules as -manifestations of love: “Just as man and woman attract one another, so -oxygen attracts hydrogen, and, in loving union with it, forms water, -that mighty omnipresent element, without which no life nor thought would -be possible.” And again: “Potassium and phosphorus entertain such a -violent passion for oxygen that even under water they burn—_i.e._ unite -themselves with the beloved object.” - -Goethe’s novel, _Elective Affinities_, which was inspired by a late and -hopeless passion of its author, is based on this chemical notion that no -physical obstacle can separate two souls that are united by an amorous -affinity. But the practical outcome of his theory—that the psychic -affinity of two persons suffices to impress the characteristics of both -on the offspring of one of them—has nothing to support it in medical -experience; while the chemical analogy, with all due deference to -Goethe’s reputation as a man of science, is against his view. His notion -was that the children of two souls loving one another will inherit their -characteristics. But what distinguishes a chemical compound (based on -“affinity”) from a mere physical mixture, is precisely the contrary fact -that the compound does not in any respect resemble the parental -elements! Read what a specialist says in Watts’s _Dictionary of -Chemistry_:— - -“Definite chemical compounds generally differ altogether in physical -properties from their components. Thus, with regard to _colour_, yellow -sulphur and gray mercury produce red cinnabar; purple iodine and gray -potassium yield colourless iodide of potassium.... The _density_ of a -compound is very rarely an exact mean between that of its constituents, -being generally higher, and in a few cases lower; and the _taste_, -_smell_, _refracting power_, _fusibility_, _volatility_, _conducting -power for heat and electricity_, and other physical properties, are not -for the most part such as would result from mere mixture of their -constituents.” - -Chemical affinities, accordingly, cannot be used as analogies of Love. -Not even on account of the violent _individual preference_ shown by two -elements for one another, for this apparently _individual_ preference is -really only _generic_. A piece of phosphorus will as readily unite with -one cubic foot of oxygen as with another; whereas it is the very essence -of Love that it demands a union with one particular _individual_, and no -other. - -Equally unsatisfactory are all similar attempts to identify Love with -gravitation or other forms of cosmic attraction. Here is what a great -expert in Love has to say on this subject: “The attraction of love, I -find,” writes Burns, “is in inverse proportion to the attraction of the -Newtonian philosophy. In the system of Sir Isaac, the nearer objects are -to one another, the stronger is the attractive force. In my system, -every milestone that marked my progress from Clarinda awakened a keener -pang of attachment to her.” - -How beautifully, in other respects, does the law of gravitation simulate -the methods of Love! Does not the meteor which passionately falls on -this planet and digs a deep hole into it, show its love in this manner, -even as that affectionate bear who smashed his master’s forehead in -order to kill the fly on it? Does not the avalanche which thunders down -the mountain-side and buries a whole forest and several villages, afford -another touching illustration of the love of attraction, or cosmic -Love?—a crushing argument in its favour? Or the frigid glacier, in its -slower course, does it not lacerate the sides of the valley, and strew -about its precious boulders, merely by way of illustrating the amorous -effect of gravitation? And millions of years hence, will not this same -law of attraction enable the sun to prove his ecstatic love for our -earth by swallowing her up and reducing her to her primitive chaotic -state? Imagine a man and a woman whose love consists in this, that they -must be kept widely separated by a hostile force to prevent them from -dashing together, and reducing each other to atoms and molecules! _That_ -is the “love” of the stars and planets. - -But it is needless to continue this _reductio ad absurdum_ of -pantheistic or panerotic vagaries. The method of the writers on Love -here quoted—Empedokles, Leo, Burton, Büchner—has been to identify Love -with cosmic force simply because they possess in common the one quality -of attraction, by virtue of which the large earth hugs a small stone, -and a large man a small maiden. Modern scientific psychology objects to -this (_i.e._ not the hugging, but the method), because it does not in -the least aid us in understanding the nature of Love; and because it is -as irrational to call attraction Love as it would be to call a brick a -house, a leaf a tree, or a green daub a rainbow. For Love embraces every -colour in the spectrum of human emotion. - -Having failed to find a satisfactory solution of the mystery of Love in -the inorganic world, let us now see if the vegetable kingdom offers no -better analogies in its sexual phenomena. - - - - - FLOWER LOVE AND BEAUTY - - -Until a few decades ago, it was the universal belief that flowers had -been specially created for man’s exclusive delight. This was such an -easy way, you know, to overcome the difficulty of explaining the immense -variety of forms and colours in the floral world; and it was, above all, -so flattering to man’s egregious vanity. But one fine morning in May a -German naturalist, Conrad Sprengel, published a remarkable book in which -he pointed out that flowers owe their peculiar shape, colour, and -fragrance to the visits of insects. Not that the insects visit the -flowers in order to shape and paint and perfume them. On the contrary, -they visit them for the unæsthetic purpose of eating their pollen and -their honey; while the flowers’ scent and colour exist solely for the -purpose of indicating to winged insects at a distance where they can -find a savoury lunch. - -But why should flowers take such pains to attract insects by serving -them with a breakfast of honey, and by hanging out big petals to serve -as coloured and perfumed signal-flags? Nature is economical in the -expenditure of energy; and as the production of honey and large flowers -costs the plant some of its vital energies, we may be sure that this -expenditure secures the plant some superior advantage. Sprengel noticed -that the insects, while pillaging flowers of their honey, unwittingly -brushed off with their wings and feet some of the fertilising dust or -pollen, and carried it to the pistil or female part of a flower. But it -remained for Darwin to point out what advantage this transference of the -pollen secured to the flower. Darwin, says Sir John Lubbock, “was the -first clearly to perceive that the essential service which insects -perform to flowers consists not only in transferring the pollen from the -stamens to the pistil, but in transferring it from the stamens of one -flower to the pistil of another. Sprengel had indeed observed in more -than one instance that this was the case, but he did not altogether -appreciate the importance of the fact. Mr. Darwin however, has not only -made it clear from theoretical considerations, but has also proved it, -in a variety of cases, by actual experiment. More recently Fritz Müller -has even shown that in some cases pollen, if placed on the stigma of the -same flower, has no more effect than so much inorganic dust; while, and -this is perhaps even more extraordinary, in others, the pollen placed on -the stigma of the same flower acted on it like poison”—a curious analogy -to the current belief that close intermarriage is injurious to mankind. - -What Darwin and others have proved by their experiments is that -cross-fertilised flowers are more vigorous than those fertilised with -their own pollen, and have a more healthy and numerous offspring. With -this fact before us we need only apply the usual evolutionary formula to -account for the beauty of flowers. It is well known that Nature rarely, -if ever, produces two leaves or plants that are exactly alike. There is -also a natural tendency in all parts of a plant except the leaves to -develop other colours besides green. Now any plant which, owing to -chemical causes, favourable position, etc., developed an unusually -brilliant colour, would be likely to attract the attention of a winged -insect in search of pollen-food. The insect, by alighting on a second -flower soon after, would fertilise it with the pollen of the first -flower that adhered to its limbs, thus securing to the plant the -advantages of cross-fertilisation. Thanks to the laws of heredity, this -advantage would be transmitted to the young plants, among which again -those most favoured would gain an advantage and a more numerous -offspring. And thus the gradual development not only of coloured petals, -but of scents and honey, can be accounted for. - -What makes this argument irresistible is the additional fact, first -pointed out by Darwin, that plants which are not visited by insects, but -are fertilised by the agency of the wind, are neither adorned with -beautifully-coloured flowers, nor provided with honey or fragrance. And -another most important fact: Darwin found that flowers which depend on -the wind for their fertilisation follow the natural tendency of objects -to a symmetrical form; whereas the irregular flowers are always those -fertilised by insects or birds. This points to the conclusion that -insects and birds are responsible not only for the colours and fragrance -of flowers, but also for the shape of those that are most unique and -fantastic. And this _a priori_ inference is borne out by thousands of -curious and most fascinating observations described in the works of -Darwin, Lubbock, Müller, and many others. The briefest and clearest -presentation of the subject is in Lubbock’s _Flowers, Fruits, and -Leaves_, which no one interested in natural æsthetics should fail to -read. There is indeed no more interesting study in biology than the -mutual adaptation of flowers, bees, butterflies, humming-birds, etc.; -for just as these animals have modified the forms of flowers, so the -flowers have altered the shape of these animals. - -Many of the changes in the shapes of flowers are made not only with a -view to facilitate the visits of winged insects, but also for keeping -out creeping intruders, such as ants, which are very fond of honey, -but which, as they do not fly, would not aid the cause of -cross-fertilisation. Of these contrivances, “the most frequent are the -interposition of _chevaux de frise_, which ants cannot penetrate, -glutinous surfaces which they cannot traverse, slippery slopes which -they cannot climb, or barriers which close the way.” - -How obtuse are those who, with Ruskin and Emerson, accuse science of -destroying the poetry of nature! What poetry is there in the thought -that flowers were made for unæsthetic man, when not one man in a -thousand ever takes the trouble to examine one, while for every single -flower on which a human eye ever rests, a million are born to blush -unseen? - -But if we abandon the narrow anthropocentric point of view, and admit -that insects too have a right to live, how the scope of Nature’s poetry -widens! How easy it then becomes to share not only Wordsworth’s belief -that “every flower enjoys the air it breathes,” but to endow it with a -thousand thoughts and emotions like our own—delight in a gaily-coloured -floral envelope; hope that yonder gaudy butterfly will be attracted by -it; anxiety lest that “horrid” ant may steal some of its honey; -determination to breathe the sweetest perfume on this darling honey bee, -so as to induce it to speedily call again. - -Love dramas, too, tragic and comic, are enacted in this world of flowers -and insects. Thus the Arum plant resorts to the following stratagem to -secure a messenger of love for carrying its pollen to a distant female -flower:— - -“The stigmas come to maturity first, and have lost the possibility of -fertilisation before the pollen is ripe. The pollen must therefore be -brought by insects, and this is effected by small flies, which enter the -leaf, either for the sake of honey or of shelter, and which, moreover, -when they have once entered the tube, are imprisoned by the fringe of -hairs. When the anthers ripen, the pollen falls on to the flies, which, -in their efforts to escape, get thoroughly dusted with it. Then the -fringe of hairs withers, and the flies, thus set free, soon come out, -and ere long carry the pollen to another plant” (Lubbock). - -Then there are male flowers which go a-courting like any amorous swain -of a Sunday night. One of these belongs to the Valisneria plant, -concerning which the same writer observes that “the female flowers are -borne on long stalks, which reach to the surface of the water, on which -the flowers float. The male flowers, on the contrary, have short, -straight stalks, from which, when mature, the pollen detaches itself, -rises to the surface, and, floating freely on it, is wafted about, so -that it comes in contact with the female flowers.” - -But alas for the poor flowers! Few of them are thus privileged to roam -about and seek their own bride. Most flowers have no more free choice in -the selection of their spouse than an Oriental or a French girl. There -is no previous acquaintance, no courtship before marriage, hence no -Romantic Love, even if the undifferentiated germs of nervous protoplasm -in the plant were capable of feeling such an emotion. - -Poor flowers! Their honeymoon is without pleasure, unconscious. The wind -may woo, the butterfly caress them—but the wind has no thought of the -flower, and the insect’s attachment is mere “cupboard love.” The beauty -of one flower cannot exist for another which has no eyes to see it; its -honey and its fragrance are not for a floral lover’s delight, but for a -gastronomic insect’s epicurean use. No modest coyness, no harmless -flirtation, no gallant devotion and self-sacrifice, enter into the -flower’s sexual life; not even the bitter-sweet pangs of jealousy, for, -as Heine has ascertained, “the butterfly stops not to ask the flower, -‘Has any one kissed thee before?’ nor does the flower ask, ‘Hast thou -already flitted about another?’” - -Thus “flower-love,” with all its poetic analogies, has none of the -elements of Romantic Love. Even attraction fails, for plants are -commonly sessile, and cannot go forth to seek a mate. - - “I prayed the flowers, - Oh, tell me, what is love? - Only _a fragrant sigh_ was wafted - Thro’ the night.”—_German Song._ - -Two important lessons of this chapter should, however, be carefully -borne in mind; for though our search for Love has so far yielded only -negative results, some light has been thrown on the general laws of -Beauty in Nature. The lessons are:— - -(1) That there is in flowers a natural tendency towards Symmetry of -Form, all normal irregularities being due to the agency of insects and -birds. - -(2) That the superior Beauty of one flower over another is due to its -superior vitality or Health, which, again, is promoted by -cross-fertilisation or intermarriage—the choosing of a mate not in the -same but in another flower-bed. - -Regarding the beauty of flowers a further detail may be added. Some of -the coloured lines on flowers are so placed as to guide the visiting -bees to the nectar or honey. More complicated colour-patterns probably -owe their existence to the advantage of having an easy means of -recognition at a distance. It is well known that bees on any single -expedition visit the flowers of one species only. Now it has been -experimentally proved by Lubbock that bees can distinguish different -colours; and, if we may judge by analogy with the human eye, they can -distinguish colours at a greater distance than forms. Hence the -advantage to each flower of having its own colours in its flag. - - - - - IMPERSONAL AFFECTION - - -From the sexual life of plants we ought to pass on to that of animals; -but before doing so, it will be advisable to ascertain clearly what is -meant by Romantic Love, and how it differs from other forms of -affection, impersonal and personal; from the love for inanimate objects -and for plants and animals; from the family affections—maternal, -paternal, filial, brotherly, and sisterly love; from friendship; and -from conjugal love. - -Love is the most attractive word in the language, as Heine and Oliver -Wendell Holmes have remarked. Out of every half-dozen novels one is -likely to have the word Love in its title, as a bait sure to catch -readers. But whereas novelists always use this word in the sense of -Romantic or pre-matrimonial Love, in common language it is vaguely used -as a synonym for any kind of attachment, from that of Romeo to the -schoolgirl who “just _loves_ caramels.” For the verb _to love_ there is -perhaps no satisfactory and equally comprehensive substitute; but in -place of the noun _love_ it is advisable, at least in a scientific work, -to use the word Affection, which comprehends every form of love -mentioned above. In the present work Love, with a capital L, always -means Romantic Love. - -Professor Calderwood, in his _Handbook of Moral Philosophy_, says that -“Affection is inclination towards others, disposing us to give from our -own resources what may influence them either for good or ill. In -practical tendency, the Affections are the reverse of the Desires. -Desires absorb, Affections give out. Affections presuppose a recognition -of certain qualities in persons, and, in a modified degree, in lower -_sentient_ beings, but _not in things_, for the exercise of Affection -presupposes in the object of it the possibility either of harmony or -antagonism of feeling.” - -In other words, the eminent Scotch moralist thinks we can entertain -affections only towards human beings, and, to some degree, towards -animals; but not towards plants or inanimate objects. Careful analysis -of our emotions, however, does not sustain this distinction, which is as -unpoetic as it is anthropocentric and unscientific. Dr. Calderwood -obviously confounds affection with sympathy. Sympathy means literally to -suffer with another, or to share his feelings; and this, indeed, -“presupposes in the object of it the possibility either of harmony or -antagonism of feeling.” But affection, in his own words, “gives out,” -and hence can be bestowed, and _is_ bestowed, by all emotional and -refined persons on a variety of “things,” that are neither sentient nor -even animate; and a poetic soul will even feel _sympathy_ with such a -non-sentient thing as a crushed flower, for his imagination -unconsciously endows it with the requisite feeling. - -“Things” are of two kinds—those fashioned by man, and those produced by -Nature. A poem, a symphony, a violin, a novel come under the first head; -a tree, a precious metal, a mountain under the second. An author who has -passed through the whole gamut of emotion in writing his book, follows -its fate with a paternal pride and an affectionate anxiety as great as -if his bodily child had been sent into the world to seek its fortune. -Perhaps the story of the German soldier who was carried off his feet by -a cannon-ball, and who grasped first his pipe and then his severed leg, -is not a legend. For was not his pipe, like a good, friend, associated -with all the pleasant hours of his life? An artist certainly can -entertain for his favourite instrument an affection almost, if not -quite, human in quality. When Ole Bull suffered shipwreck on the -Mississippi, he swam ashore, holding his violin high above water, at the -risk of his life. And to an amateur who has often called upon his -pianoforte to feed his momentary mood with a nocturne or a scherzo, the -instrument soon assumes the functions of “a true friend, to whom,” as -Bacon would say, “you may impart griefs, joys, fears, hopes, suspicions, -counsels, and whatever lieth upon the heart to oppress it, in a kind of -civil shrift or confession.” - -As for “things” not produced by man, who that has ever spent a summer in -Switzerland is not quite willing to believe the legend of the Swiss -Heimweh—the exiled mountaineer’s reminiscent longing and affection for -his native haunts, which causes him to die of a broken heart, even if -wife and children accompany him in his exile? His feelings are not -identical with the æsthetic admiration of a tourist; for these imply a -certain degree of novelty and artistic perception foreign to his mind. -They are true _impersonal affection_, for the snowy summits, sluggish -glaciers, azure lakes, chasing clouds coyly playing hide-and-seek with -the scenery below; the balmy breezes, and boisterous storm-winds; the -green slopes studded with cows, whose welcome chimes alone interrupt the -sublime silence of the Alpine summits. For these sounds and scenes are -so interwoven with all his experiences, thoughts, and associations, that -he cannot live and be happy without them in a foreign land. - -The attitude of an æsthetically-refined visitor is thus expressed by -Byron: “I live not in myself, but I become portion of that around me; -and to me high mountains are a feeling”—a poetic anticipation of -Schopenhauer’s doctrine, that for true æsthetic enjoyment it is -necessary that the percipient subject be completely merged in the -perceived object,—the personal man and the impersonal mountain becoming -one and indistinguishable. - -Like Romantic Love, the affection for the grander aspects of Nature -appears to be essentially a modern sentiment. The Greeks, as has often -been pointed out, had little regard for the impersonal beauties of -Nature; and to make the forests, brooks, and mountains attractive to the -popular mind the poets had to people them with personal beauties; with -nymphs and dryads and goddesses. - -The latest phase of the modern passion for impersonal nature includes -even its most dismal and awe-inspiring aspects, with an ecstatic -predilection that would have seemed incomprehensible to an ancient -Greek. This phase has been thus beautifully described by Ruskin: “There -is a sense of the material beauty, both of inanimate nature, the lower -animals, and human beings, which in the iridescence, colour-depth, and -morbid (I use the word deliberately) mystery and softness of it—with -other qualities indescribable by any single words, and only to be -analysed by extreme care—is found to the full only in five men that I -know of in modern times; namely, Rousseau, Shelley, Byron, Turner, and -myself, differing totally and in the entire group of us from the delight -in clear-struck beauty of Angelico and the Trecentisti, and separated, -much more singularly, from the cheerful joys of Chaucer, Shakspere, and -Scott, by its unaccountable _affection_ for ‘Rokkes blok’ and other -forms of terror and power, such as those of the ice-oceans, which to -Shakspere were only Alpine rheum; and the Via Malas and Diabolic Bridges -which Dante would have condemned none but lost souls to climb or -cross,—all this love of impending mountains, coiled thunderclouds, and -dangerous sea, being joined in us with a sulky, almost ferine, love of -retreat in valleys of Charmettes, gulphs of Spezzia, ravines of Olympus, -low lodgings in Chelsea, and close brushwood at Coniston.” - -Ruskin flatters himself if he still imagines he is the sole living -possessor of this feeling. Though there is much hypocrisy and -guide-book-star-admiration among tourists, there are yet unquestionably -hundreds who enjoy the Via Malas, the ice-oceans and solitary Swiss -valleys they visit; and though their dismal delight may not be so -intense as Ruskin’s, it is yet sufficient to indicate the growth of a -general affection for impersonal nature in all her moods, whether -smiling or frowning. - -To a mind that can thus rise above human associations and utilities, the -sublimest thing in the world is the absolute solitude of an Alpine -summit. To the ignorant peasant the harsh cow-bell which interrupts this -silence is sweet music, because it suggests the abodes of mankind; and -on this primitive stage of æsthetic culture Jeffrey placed himself when -he wrote that, “It is man, and man alone, that we see in the beauties of -the earth which he inhabits.” - -Inasmuch as mountain solitudes are accessible to only a very small -proportion of mankind, the existence of true impersonal affection on a -large scale can be more easily demonstrated by recurring for a moment to -the floral world. A city belle is apt to look upon flowers merely from a -social or military point of view; the more bouquets, the more evidence -of admiration and conquest. of male hearts. And the city belle can -hardly be blamed for this callousness of feeling; for bunched flowers -have lost as much of their natural charm and grace as butterflies stuck -up on rows of pins in a museum. But watch that fair gardener in a -suburban cottage or a country seat; how she recognises every individual -plant, every single flower, as a friend for whose comfort she provides -with all the affectionate care which as a child she lavished on her -doll. If, after a refreshing shower, the flowers hold up their heads and -look bright and happy, her face reflects the same feeling; if a drouth -has parched them and dimmed their lustre, she will neglect her own -pleasures to bring them water, and derive from this charitable action -the same sympathetic pleasure as if they had been so many suffering -human beings. And if an early frost kills all her floral friends, her -sorrow and despair will find vent in a flood of tears. What is all this -but affection—true affection—though flowers be but “things,” and not -“sentient beings.” - -Obviously Professor Calderwood erred in his definition of affection; -for, as the above analysis shows, when the regard for an impersonal -object rises to the fervour of adoring interest, it does not -specifically differ from personal affections any more than, for example, -maternal love differs from friendship. Unemotional persons, who have had -no opportunities to cultivate their love of Nature, may feel inclined to -doubt this; but they should remember that just as there is an -intellectual eminence (Shakspere, Kant, Wagner) which the ignorant are -too lazy or too weak to climb, so there is an emotional horizon, beyond -which those only can see who have taken the trouble to ascend the summit -whence a wider scene is unfolded to the view. - -From one point of view, impersonal affections are even higher and nobler -than personal attachments. The evolution of emotions has been but little -studied, but so much is apparent—that there has been a gradual -development from utilitarian attachments to those that are less -utilitarian, or less obviously so. Personal affections are too often -exclusively selfish and based on material interests, as the loss of -“friends,” which commonly follows the loss of wealth or position, shows. -Whereas impersonal attachments are less apt to be interested, selfish, -and fickle, since they presuppose more intellectual power, more -imagination, more refinement. - -Again, although it must be admitted that man is the crown and compendium -of Nature, uniting in himself most of the excellences of the lower -kingdoms with others exclusively his own; yet it cannot be denied, -either, that the vast majority of these “crowns” of Nature are so full -of flaws in workmanship, and have lost so many of their jewels, that the -sight of them is anything but exhilarating. Indeed, it is obvious that -the average plant and the average animal are, _in their way_, far -superior to the average man, in beauty, health, vitality; natural -selection, which has been arrested in man, having made them so. No -wonder, then, that some of the greatest minds have turned away from -mankind, and devoted all their thoughts and energies to the world of -“things” and ideas. - -Goethe and other men of genius have often been accused of being cold and -unsympathetic, because they refused to shape their conduct so as to -please the people with whom they chanced to come into contact. Had they -wasted their affections and sympathies on their commonplace admirers and -acquaintances, instead of bestowing them on art and science, on the -great ideas that teemed in their brains, we should now be without many -of those glorious works which could never have been created had not -their authors ignored personal relations for the time being, and -bestowed all their warmest impersonal affections on their ideas. - -As compared with men of genius, women have achieved but little that can -lay claim to immortal fame; and the principal reason of this is that -their affections are apt to be too exclusively personal. A girl will -assiduously practice on the piano as long as that will assist her in -fascinating her suitors. But how many women, outside the ranks of -teachers, continue their practice after marriage, from the _impersonal_ -love of music itself? Needless to say they have no time; for every hour -devoted to emotional refreshment strengthens the nerves for two hours of -extra labour. - -As regards the love of Nature, woman is, indeed, artificially hampered. -She may botanise to some extent, but she cannot, as a rule, indulge in -those solitary walks in a virgin forest which alone can establish a deep -communion with Nature. If accompanied by friend, brother, husband, or -lover, her thought will inevitably retain a human tinge. No doubt there -is something comic in the ardent affection with which a German professor -hugs his pet theory regarding the Greek dative, or the origin of honey -in flowers, and in the ferocity with which he will defend it against his -best friends, if they happen to oppose it. But such complete devotion to -abstract crotchets is absolutely necessary to the discovery of original -ideas: and as women are rarely able or willing to emerge from the haunts -of personal emotion, this explains why they have achieved greatness in -hardly anything but novel-writing, which is chiefly concerned with -personal emotions. - - - - - PERSONAL AFFECTIONS - - I.—LOVE FOR ANIMALS - -Over inanimate objects and plants we have this great emotional advantage -that we can love them, whereas they cannot love us, nor even one -another, though related by marriage, like flowers. - -Animals, however, can love both us and one another and be loved; and -this establishes a distinction between them and lower beings, and a -relationship with us, that warrants us in placing their attachments -under the head of Personal Affections. - -Calderwood is sufficiently liberal to admit that, to a degree animals -may be included in our affections. But Adolf Horwicz who has written the -most complete, and, on the whole, most satisfactory analysis of the -human feelings in existence, denies this. “Love is and remains a -personal feeling,” he asserts; it “can only be referred to persons, not -to things. The tenderness of American ladies towards dogs and cats is -simply a gross emotional caricature.” - -So it is, very often, especially in the case of ladies who neglect their -children and make fashionable pets of animals, changing and exchanging -them with the fashion. But it is simply absurd to mention this case as a -fair instance of human love towards animals. How many of the greatest -geniuses the world has produced have become famous for their -affectionate devotion to their dogs! “A dog!” says an old English -writer, “is the only thing on this earth that loves you more than he -loves himself.” And should we be morally inferior to the dog—unable to -love him in return? especially when we remember that “histories,” as -Pope remarks, “are more full of examples of the fidelity of dogs than of -friends.” - -Vischer, the well-known German writer on æsthetics, goes so far as to -admit that whenever he is in society his only wish is, “Oh, if there was -only a dog here!” - -There is something much nobler and deeper than sarcasm on humanity in -Byron’s famous epitaph on his dog:— - - “Near this spot - Are deposited the remains of one - Who possessed Beauty without Vanity, - Strength without Insolence, - Courage without Ferocity, - And all the Virtues of man without his Vices.” - -I wonder if Horwicz could read the following exquisite prose poem of -Turgenieff without feeling ashamed of himself:— - -"We two are sitting in the room: my dog and I. A violent storm is raging -without. - -"The dog sits close before me—he gazes straight into my eyes. - -"And I too gaze straight into his eyes. - -"It seems as if he wished to say something to me. He is dumb, has no -words, does not understand himself; but I understand him. - -"I understand that he and I are at this moment governed by the same -feeling, that there is not the slightest difference between us. We are -beings of the same kind. In each of us shines and glows the same flame. - -"Death approaches, flapping his broad, cold, moist wings.... - -"And all is ended. - -"Who then will establish the difference between the flames which glowed -within us two? - -"No! We who exchange those glances are not animal and man. - -"Created alike are the two pairs of eyes that are fixed on each other. - -“And each of these eye-pairs, that of the man as well as that of the -animal, expresses clearly and distinctly _an anxious craving for mutual -caresses_.” - -It is a vicious trait of the human character that it soon grows callous -to caresses, and that the unmasked expression of tender emotion is -regarded as undignified and in “bad form.” It is the absence in the -dog’s mind of this ugly human trait that makes him such a delightful -friend and companion. However much you caress and fondle him, he will -always be anxious and grateful for the next gentle pat on the head, the -next kind look, and will never despise you for any excess of fond -emotion lavished on him. - -The greatest flaw in Christian ethics is, that it takes so little -account of this capacity of animals for affection, and our duties -towards them. The duty of kindness towards animals is indeed, as Mr. -Lecky remarks, “the one form of humanity which appears more prominently -in the Old Testament than in the New.” “Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth -of the ox that treadeth out the corn,” is a precept which deprecates -even a very modified form of cruelty to animals. Had this precept been -given in a more generalised and comprehensive form, what an incalculable -amount of suffering might have been saved the animals that had the -misfortune to be born in Christian countries, as compared with those in -the Oriental countries. - -According to Mr. Lecky, Plutarch was the first writer who placed the -duty of kindness to animals on purely moral grounds; “and he urges that -duty with an emphasis and detail to which no adequate parallel can, I -believe, be found in the Christian writings for at least 1700 years.” -Some of the earlier Greek philosophers had based this duty on the -doctrine of the transmigration of human souls into animal bodies; and it -is related that Pythagoras used to buy of fishermen the whole contents -of their nets, for the pleasure of letting the fish go again. Leonardo -da Vinci, from less superstitious motives, used to buy caged birds for -the same purpose; and similar traits are told of other men of genius who -were sufficiently refined to recognise the evidences of emotion in -animals. In our times, finally, we have a man, Mr. Bergh, who devotes -his whole life to the object of establishing the personal rights of -animals to kind treatment on legal grounds. - -But, after all, the most influential friend animals have ever possessed -was Darwin, who, by establishing their relationship to man on grounds -which no one who understands the evidence can question, for ever -vindicated for them the privilege of personal affection. The very -grammar of our language has been affected by Darwinism. Formerly, it was -customary to write “the dog _which_ jumped into the water to save a -child.” Now we say, “the dog _who_ jumped into the water.” In other -words, animals are no longer regarded as “things,” or animated machines, -but as persons. - - - II.—MATERNAL LOVE - -Within the range of impersonal emotions and affections, as we have seen, -women are vastly inferior to men; but in personal affections—partly -owing to their almost exclusive devotion to them—women are commonly -superior to men. Not always, however; for, as we shall see later on, the -prevalent dogma that woman’s Romantic Love is deeper and more ardent -than man’s is an absurd myth. But in conjugal affection—which differs -widely from Romantic Love—woman is generally more sincere, devoted, and -self-sacrificing than man. In friendship, too, women are more sincere -and ardent than men; for friendship is an ancient, rather than a modern -sentiment; and as women are more conservative than men, they have -preserved this sentiment (at least in early life), while among men it -has become nearly extinct:— - - “All friendship is feigning, all loving mere folly.”—SHAKSPERE. - -But the one affection in which woman stands infinitely above man is the -maternal, compared with which paternal love is ordinarily a mere shadow. -Romantic Love in man and child-love in woman are the two strongest -passions which the human mind entertains. - -In depth and strength these two passions are perhaps alike. In point of -antiquity, the maternal feeling has an advantage over the Love-passion; -for, of all personal affections, the maternal was developed first, and -the sentiment of Romantic Love last. - -Personal affections are of two kinds: (1) Those based on -blood-relationship—maternal, paternal, filial, brotherly, and sisterly -love; (2) Those not based on blood-relationship—friendship and Romantic -Love. Conjugal affection belongs psychologically to the first class. - -That of all relationships the one between mother and child is the most -intimate is obvious. The child is part and parcel of the mother: her own -flesh and blood and soul; and in loving it the mother practically loves -a detached portion of herself—thus uniting the force of selfish with -that of altruistic emotion. This is the primitive fountain of maternal -affection. A second source of it lies in the resemblance of the child to -the father, reviving in the mother’s memory the romantic days of -pre-matrimonial Love. It must be an unending source of interest in a -mother’s mind to note which of the child’s traits are derived from her, -which from the father. If she loves herself, and loves her husband, the -child that unites the traits of both must be doubly dear to her. The -fact that the child is inseparably associated with all the mother’s joys -and sorrows, from the wedding-day to death, constitutes a third source -of her attachment; and a fourth is the social regard and honour which an -energetic and gifted son, or a beautiful and accomplished daughter, may -reflect on her. - -The mother herself is of course unconscious of the complex nature of her -feeling and its origin; especially in the first days, when the new -feeling dawns upon her like a revelation. As in the case of budding -Love, the feeling is at first less individual than generic—less the -affection of this particular mother for this particular child than the -bursting out of the general feeling of motherhood, inherited by her in -common with all women. - -Natural selection helps us to explain how this general feeling of -motherhood was developed. As among animals, so among our savage and -semi-civilised ancestors, those mothers who fondly cared for their -infants naturally succeeded in rearing a larger and more vigorous -progeny than those mothers who neglected their children. And through -hereditary transmission this instinct gradually acquired, that -marvellous intensity and power which we now admire. - -The sublime and almost terrible height to which this emotion can rise is -most realistically depicted in Rubens’s famous picture in Munich, -representing the murder of the children at Bethlehem; in which mothers -grasp the naked daggers, and frantically expose their breasts to receive -the blows intended for their little ones. Throughout the animal kingdom, -including mankind, the female is less pugnacious than the male, less -provided with means of defence, and hence more gentle and timid; yet in -the moment of peril the mother’s affection absolutely annihilates fear, -and makes her face danger and death with a courage, supernatural -strength, and endurance, rarely equalled by man, with all his weapons -and natural consciousness of superior muscle. - -It is in this blind, impetuous, passionate willingness of self-sacrifice -that maternal affection most closely resembles the passion of Romantic -Love. - - III.—PATERNAL LOVE - -For paternal affection Natural Selection has done much less than for -maternal; and it is easy to understand why. For, useful as the father’s -assistance is in securing various advantages to the growing child, yet -even if he should cruelly abandon it altogether, the maternal love would -still remain interposed to save and rear it. - -Nor is it in the human race alone that paternal is weaker than maternal -love. Among mammals, as Horwicz remarks, we even come across a Herr Papa -occasionally who shows a great inclination to dine on his progeny. And -how irregularly the paternal—sometimes even the maternal—instinct is -displayed among savages is graphically shown by this group of cases -collected by Herbert Spencer:— - -“As among brutes the philoprogenitive instinct is occasionally -suppressed by the desire to kill, and even devour, their young ones; so -among primitive men this instinct is now and again overridden by -impulses temporarily excited. Thus, though attached to their offspring, -Australian mothers, when in danger, will sometimes desert them; and if -we may believe Angas, men have been known to bait their hooks with the -flesh of boys they have killed. Thus, notwithstanding their marked -parental affection, Fuegians sell their children for slaves; thus, among -the Chonos Indians, a father, though doting on his boy, will kill him in -a fit of anger for an accidental offence. Everywhere among the lower -races we meet with like incongruities. Falkner, while describing the -paternal feelings of Patagonians as very strong, says they often pawn -and sell their wives and little ones to the Spaniards for brandy. -Speaking of the children of the Sound Indians, Bancroft says they ‘sell -or gamble them away.’ According to Simpson, the Pi-Edes ‘barter their -children to the Utes proper for a few trinkets or bits of clothing.’ And -of the Macusi, Schomburgk writes, ‘the price of a child is the same as -an Indian asks for his dog.’ This seemingly heartless conduct to -children often arises from the difficulty experienced in rearing them.” - -Some light is thrown on the genesis and composition of parental -affection by the three reasons named by Spencer, why among savages and -semi-civilised peoples in general sons were much more appreciated than -daughters. While daughters were little more than an encumbrance to the -parents, useless before puberty, and lost to them after marriage, the -sons could make themselves useful in warding off the enemy, in avenging -personal injuries, and in performing the funeral rites for the benefit -of departed ancestors. - -In a higher stage of civilisation it is probable that utilitarian -considerations of a somewhat different kind still formed a principal -ingredient in parental love. A son was valued as an assistant in -workshop or field, a daughter as a domestic drudge. Feelings of a -tenderer nature were of course sometimes present, but that they were not -general is shown by the fact, attested by numerous historic examples, -that the aim of our paternal ancestors in centuries past was to make -their children fear rather than love them. - -A slight element of fear is indeed necessary for the maintenance of -filial respect and discipline; but our forefathers were too prone to -sacrifice their tender feelings of sympathy with their offspring to the -gratification of parental authority, for the obvious reason that the -latter feeling was stronger than the former. The frequency with which -daughters especially were forced to sacrifice their personal preferences -in marriage to the ambitions and whims of their father, affords the most -striking instance of the former embryonic state of parental affection. - -In modern parental love Pride is perhaps the most conspicuous trait. -This Pride has two aspects—one comic, one serious. Nothing is more -amusing than the suddenness with which the “pride of authorship” -converts a bachelor’s well-known horror of babies into the young -father’s fantastic worship. Yet though he feels “like a little tin god -on wheels,” he recognises the superior rank of the young prince, spoils -his best trousers in kneeling before him, allows him to pull his -moustache and whiskers, and, indeed, shows a disposition towards -self-sacrifice almost worthy of a lover. - -The serious side of the matter reveals one of the greatest differences -between paternal and maternal love. A mother’s love is largely -influenced by pity; hence she is very apt to lavish her fondest caresses -on that child which happens to be imperfect in some way—say a -cripple—and therefore unhappy. The father on the other hand, will show -most favour to his handsomest daughter, his most talented son; and -nothing will so swell a father’s heart and cause it to overflow with -affection as the news of some great distinction acquired by this son. - - - IV.—FILIAL LOVE - -Mr. Spencer is doubtless right in asserting that of all family -affections filial love is the least developed; and in tracing this -weakness especially to the parental harshness and disposition to inspire -excessive fear just referred to. In Germany the example of the Prussian -king who so unmercifully treated his children was extensively imitated. -The condition in France is indicated by the words of Chateaubriand: “My -mother, my sister, and myself, transformed into statues by my father’s -presence, only recover ourselves after he leaves the room;” and in -England, in the fifteenth century, says Wright, “Young ladies, even of -great families, were brought up not only strictly, but even -tyrannically.” And even two centuries later “children stood or knelt in -trembling silence in the presence of their fathers and mothers, and -might not sit without permission.” - -Among animals filial affection can scarcely be said to exist, except as -a very utilitarian craving for protection and sustenance. Among -primitive men it is a common practice to abandon aged parents to their -fate. The parents do not resent this treatment; and of the Nascopies -Heriot even says that the aged father “usually employed as his -executioner the son who is most dear to him.” Nor are cases of heartless -neglect at all uncommon even among modern civilised communities. But the -gradual change of fathers “from masters into friends” has tended to -multiply and intensify filial love at the same rate as paternal; and the -advance of moral refinement will tend to make the lot of aged parents -more and more pleasant, not only because the duty of gratitude for -favours received will be more vividly realised and enforced by example, -but because the cultivation of the imagination intensifies sympathy, -thus making it impossible for a son or daughter to be happy while they -know their parents to be unhappy. - -Our feelings are curiously complicated and subtly interwoven. Parents -feel a natural pride in their children. The best way therefore to repay -them for all their troubles is to act in such a way as to justify and -intensify that pride. On the other hand, the thought that the parental -pride is gratified also gratifies filial vanity, and proves an -additional incentive to ambitious effort. - - V.—BROTHERLY AND SISTERLY LOVE - -Young people of both sexes more frequently make confidants and “bosom -friends” of their playmates and classmates than of their brothers and -sisters. Why is this so? Novelty perhaps has something to do with it. -The domestic experiences and emotions of two brothers or sisters are apt -to be so much alike as to become monotonous; whereas a member of another -family may initiate them into a fresh and fascinating sphere of emotion -and a novel way of looking at things. Moreover, friendship is very -capricious in its choice; and as the number of brothers and sisters is -limited, the selection is apt to be made in the wider field outside the -domestic circle. Again, it is a peculiarity of human nature to appear in -great _négligé_ at home, and to regard the nearest relatives as the best -lightning-rods for disagreeable moods; and this does not tend to deepen -the love of brothers and sisters. - -It may be doubted whether this form of affection exists among animals or -among primitive men; and even among civilised peoples the bond is but a -weak one, except in the most refined families. Though brothers feel -bound to protect their sisters, they reserve most of their gallantry for -some one else’s sister; and though a sister will feel proud if her -brother is one of a victorious crew, her heart will beat twice as fast -if it is her lover instead of her brother. The English language has not -even a collective word for the love of brothers and sisters; and even -the partial terms, “sisterly love” and “brotherly love,” have more of an -ecclesiastic than a domestic flavour. The German language has a -collective word—and a big one too,—_Geschwisterliebe_; but it would -perhaps be misleading to infer from its existence and size that this -species of family love is more developed in Germany than in England. The -German’s advantage appears to be philological merely, and not -sociological. He is less of a traveller and colonist than the -Englishman, who is very often separated from his brothers and sisters -for years. Yet this sometimes is rather a gain than a loss; for it -destroys that excessive familiarity which, as just noted, makes -friendship rarer among members of the same hearth than between -individuals of different families. - -To the wider circles of blood-relationship—up to “forty-second -cousins”—the Germans pay much more regard than the English; and the -French perhaps go a step beyond the Germans. For in France each family, -with its ramifications, forms a sort of clique into which an outsider -can rarely enter. Needless to say that this forms a great impediment to -Love’s free choice. - - VI.—FRIENDSHIP - -If we now turn to the two remaining species of personal -affection—Friendship and Love—the emotional scenery undergoes a great -change. In all the cases so far considered, blood-relationship was _a -source of affection_; whereas in friendship it is commonly a -disadvantage, and in Romantic Love it is positively abhorred, except in -the more remote degrees. Some savage tribes, it is true, allow, or even -prescribe, marriages between brother and sister—especially a younger -sister; and cases occur of marriages between father and daughter, mother -and son. But civilised society—guided by religious precepts, and -possibly also by a vague instinctive recognition of the advantages of -cross-fertilisation—condemns such unions as hideous crimes; and the -mediæval theologians, in their extreme zeal, forbade all marriages -within the seventh degree of relationship. - -In the case of friendship the objection to blood-relationship is not -founded on a social or religious precept; but it exists all the same, as -already noted. Perhaps Jean Paul’s maxim that friends may have -everything in common except their room accounts for its existence. -Brothers and sisters are commonly too much alike in their thoughts and -tastes to become friends, in the special sense of the word. Hence it is -that there is apt to be a deeper attachment between those brothers and -sisters who have frequently been separated by school-terms than among -those who are always together. For in friendship, as in love, a short -absence is advantageous. - -Friendship is partly an outgrowth of the social instinct and partly a -result of special associations, habit, community of interests and -tastes. As a boy I had an opportunity to make some interesting -observations on friendship among animals, showing that it differed in -degree only, and not in kind or origin, from that of man. Among the -animals we kept at our country-house were a dog, a pet sheep, and some -pigs. The dog showed his confidence in the sheep’s amiable forbearance -by abandoning his cold kennel on winter nights and seeking warmer -quarters by the side of his woolly neighbour. For the pigs his friendly -regards were shown in a less utilitarian manner, by driving away, -unbidden and untaught, any swinish tramps that appeared, uninvited, to -share their meals. But the most peculiar relations existed between the -sheep and the pigs. In the absence of any other means of satisfying its -gregarious or social instincts, the sheep joined the pigs every morning -in their foraging expeditions in the woods, returning with them in the -evening. And, what was still more remarkable, when after a time a dozen -sheep were added to our stock of animals, the old pet remained faithful -to the pigs, and paid no attention whatever to the newcomers. Here the -friendly attachment, based on habitual association and the memory of -mutual pleasures of grazing, was strong enough to overcome the inherited -fellow-feeling for members of its own species. - -Between this instance and those ordinary cases of companionship among -men which are called friendship, there is hardly any difference. In the -more intimate cases of special friendship the craving for companionship -is strengthened by a community of thoughts and emotions. Bacon gives us -in a nut-shell three of the ingredients of friendship which are not to -be found in the primitive form just considered. The first is this, that -each friend becomes a sort of secular confessor, to whom the other may -confide all his hopes and fears, joys and sorrows; the second is this, -that “a friend’s wits and understanding do clarify and break up in the -communicating and discoursing with another;” so that “he waxeth wiser -than himself; and that more by an hour’s discourse than by a day’s -meditation;” the third is the “aid and bearing a part in all actions and -occasions” to be expected of a friend. - -Friendship is not a modern sentiment. Cases of it such as existed among -the ancient Greeks and Romans, characterised by an ardour that made -Friendship resemble the Love passion, are no longer to be met with, -although a somewhat less intense form frequently occurs among young men -at college or young ladies in high schools: thus illustrating the law -that the individual passes through the same stages of development as the -race. - -“The enthusiasm of friendship,” says Voltaire in his _Philosophic -Dictionary_, “was greater among the Greeks and Arabians than it is among -ourselves. The tales which these peoples have imagined on friendship are -delightful; we have nothing to match them. We are somewhat dry in -everything. I do not see a single grand trait of friendship in our -novels, in our histories, on our stage.” - -Why is this so? Let another Frenchman, La Rochefoucauld, answer: “The -reason why the majority of women are but little touched by friendship, -is because it seems insipid after one has experienced love.” - -Precisely. The reason why the ancients, in their histories and dramas, -made so much of friendship, while modern poets almost ignore it, is that -the latter have a subject a thousand times more fascinating than -friendship, a subject unknown to the ancients—the inexhaustible subject -of Romantic Love. - - VII.—ROMANTIC LOVE - -That Love is superior to friendship is apparent from the one -consideration that it includes _all_ the features of friendship, and -adds to them a thousand ecstasies of which friendship never dreams. The -lover, no less than the friend, gratifies his social instinct, his -desire for companionship, his need of confessing his own and sharing -another’s hopes and fears, his craving for stimulating conversation, his -sympathetic disposition to give and receive aid in the trials of life. -But if modern friendship ever had any moments to compare with the -romantic episodes, the tragic agonies and wild delights of love, would -it be conceivable that our realistic novelists and poets could neglect -it altogether and devote all their attention to Love? - -The other personal affections fare no better in comparison with Love. -How prosaic even Conjugal Love seems to us as compared with Romantic -Love, of which it is the metamorphosis and continuation, is shown by the -fact that novelists always end their stories with the marriage of the -hero and heroine. - -Maternal Love, however, has four traits which occasionally make it -resemble Romantic Love in intensity. They are: (1) a disposition toward -self-sacrifice; (2) jealousy; (3) an exaggerated adoration; and (4) -pride of ownership. But of these the first is the only one that ever -quite rises to the giddy heights of rapturous Love. Jealousy is often -aroused in mothers if their children display excessive fondness or -partiality for their father or a family friend; and they know well in -such a case how to make the latter understand that his presence is an -impertinence. But this momentary ebullition of feeling is but a storm in -a tea-kettle compared to the ferocity of a jealous lover seeking to -devour his rival. Nor does a mother’s excessive worship of the -self-evident beauty and accomplishments of her offspring ever quite -equal the hyperbolic illusion and folly of a lover. - -Again, Romantic Love is a monopolist who never shares his treasures of -affection with another, whereas a mother, if she has more than one -child, is obliged to divide her heart like an apple, so that each may -get a slice. Would you infer from this that the mother has a deeper fund -of affection than the lover, because she can love several at a time? -Impossible. The amount of emotion human nerves can bear is limited. The -more you widen it, the shallower does it become. The general love for -all mankind is the weakest and shallowest of all, the lover’s -concentrated affection for one person the deepest and strongest. See -what a terrible strain on his nerves this deep passion is: how he loses -flesh, grows pale and feverish, and prone to self-destruction. Could a -mother survive if she loved each one of five or ten children with the -depth and intensity of a lover? No, we must take back what we said a few -pages back. Maternal affection is after all a mere phantom compared with -Romantic Love. - -And the ace of hearts is yet to be played—in favour of Romantic Love. -The mother’s affection is bestowed on what after all is merely a severed -portion of her own individuality; whereas the two lovers are individuals -utterly unrelated. And herein lies the Miracle of Love: that it can in a -few days, ay, a few minutes, ignite between two young persons who have -perhaps never before seen each other, a passion more intense than that -which in the mother is the growth of months and years. - -It follows as a corollary from this that Romantic Love is not only more -intense, more concentrated, more immediate and irresistible than -parental affection, but also more just, more in accordance with the -highest precepts of morality, because more altruistic. For the mother -loves only her own flesh and blood, while the lover adores a stranger; -like Romeo, he may even adore the daughter of an enemy. - -Thousands of fathers and mothers, moreover, love their own ugly, -vicious, and stupid children more than the beautiful, well-behaved, and -clever children of their neighbours. Who, on the other hand, ever heard -of a young man loving his ugly sister more than the beautiful and -accomplished daughter of his neighbour? - -In consideration of the great importance of the family feelings as a -social cement, the parental injustice in question is pardoned and even -commended. But from the standpoint of progressive culture, under -guidance of the law of Natural Selection, it must be condemned; for it -favours demerit in preference to merit, and retards the advent of the -time when family and national prejudices will be forgotten and replaced -by a loverlike, cosmopolitan admiration of personal excellence wherever -and in whomsoever found. - -This matter, though it has a semi-humorous aspect, is of the deepest -philosophic import. If family affection, so important as the first step -in the development of society, were the only form of personal love, -close intermarriage between blood-relations would be unduly encouraged. -Fortunately the all-powerful instinct of Romantic Love comes in as a -corrective of family affection, basing its preferences not on -relationship and resemblance, but on differences and complementary -qualities, thus securing for the human race the advantages of -“cross-fertilisation.” We have already seen that flowers owe their -beauty to the cross-fertilisation brought about through the agency of -bees and butterflies. In the same way the human race owes its supreme -beauty to the cross-fertilisation—the union of complementary -qualities—brought about through the agency of Love. Is it perhaps for -this reason that Love is so much like a butterfly, and that Cupid has -wings? - -Instead of being merely a transient malady of youth, as cynics aver, or -only an epicurean episode in our emotional life, Love is thus seen to be -one of the greatest (if not _the_ greatest) moral, æsthetic, and -hygienic forces that control human life. And in face of this fact the -few pages, or lines, commonly devoted to this passion in psychologic -text-books, seem wofully inadequate. No apology is therefore needed for -our attempt to subject Romantic Love to a thorough chemical analysis, -and to discover its ingredients. We shall first enumerate and briefly -characterise these ingredients; then proceed to examine how many of them -are to be found in the love of animals and savages, of the ancient -nations and of our mediæval ancestors; and finally, we shall attempt to -describe these various component parts of the passion, as fully -developed in Modern Love. - - - - - OVERTONES OF ROMANTIC LOVE - - -First of all it is necessary to get rid of the prevalent illusion that -Love is a single emotion. It is, on the contrary, a most complex and -ever-varying _group_ of emotions. Love is not a diamond which drops from -a celestial body, cut and polished, and ready to be set into the human -soul. Rather is it the crown of life, composed of various jewels, some -of which, mixed with much coarse ore, may be found in the animal -kingdom, among primitive men and ancient civilised nations; but of which -no complete specimens are to be found till we come to comparatively -modern times. Each lover has his own crown, but no two of them are -exactly alike. The component jewels vary in size and brilliancy. Some—as -Coyness, Adoration, Gallantry, Jealousy—are occasionally missing or -lacking in lustre; and in Ancient Love those are habitually absent which -in Modern Love are most prominent and cherished. - -Perhaps the composite nature of Love can be still better illustrated by -a comparison with colours, and with “overtones” in music, between which -and the elements of Love there exists a wonderfully close analogy. - -Professor Helmholtz has proved that just as white is not a simple -colour, but a combination of all the hues of the rainbow, so any single -tone produced by the voice or a musical instrument is not simple, as it -seems, but contains, besides the _fundamental_ tone which the ordinary -listener alone hears, several partial or “overtones,” which blend so -closely with the fundamental tone, that it takes a very delicate ear and -close attention to distinguish them. Were it not for these overtones, -all instruments would sound alike, and music would lose all its charms -of “colour.” For the fundamental tones of instruments and voices are -identical, and the only thing that enables a musician to tell at a -distance whether a given note proceeds from a piano, voice, or violin, -is the presence of these overtones, which vary in their number, relative -loudness and pitch (or height), thus giving rise to the differences of -quality or _timbre_ in instruments. - -In Love the fundamental tone is the sexual relation—the fact that one of -the lovers is male, the other female. This fundamental tone does not -vary throughout Nature. It is the same among animals and savages as -among civilised men; and what distinguishes the passion of one of these -groups from that of the other is alone the overtones of love, which vary -in number, relative prominence, and refinement (“high-toned”). - -What are these overtones? - - - I.—INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE - -What first ennobles Love and raises it above mere passion, is the -stubborn preference for a particular individual. A savage chief ignorant -of Love would not hesitate a moment to exchange his bride for two or -three other women equally young and tempting; whereas a man under the -influence of Love would not give his beloved for the choice among all -the beauties of the Caucasus and Andalusia. “If we pass in review the -different degrees of love,” says Schopenhauer, “from the most transient -attachment to the most violent passion, we shall find that the -difference between them springs from their different degrees of -_individualisation_.” - - - II.—MONOPOLY OR EXCLUSIVENESS - -Closely connected with the first overtone is that of exclusiveness. True -Love is a monopolist. As in a sun-glass all the solar rays are -concentrated into one burning focus, so are the lover’s emotions on his -beloved. Not only does he care for _her_ alone of all women, but he -voluntarily offers her a monopoly of _his_ thoughts and feelings. In -return for this, however, he expects and exacts of her a like monopoly -of her affection and favours; and this leads to the next overtone. - - - III.—JEALOUSY - -This is the salt and pepper of Love. A little of it is piquant, too much -of it spoils the soup. The moral mission of Jealousy is, by means of -watchfulness and the inspiring of fear, to ensure fidelity and chastity, -and thus help to develop the romantic features of Love. - - - IV.—COYNESS - -This is a specially feminine trait of Love, which, by retarding the -eager lover’s conquest, augments and idealises his passion. In Modern -Love, Coyness varies in two directions—towards prudery on one side, -coquetry on the other. - - - V.—GALLANTRY - -If Coyness is a peculiarly feminine ingredient of Love, Gallantry, on -the other hand, is a specially masculine attribute. The eager desire to -please, it is true, is also present in a woman’s Love; but it shows -itself less as an active impulse to do something for the lover, than as -a desire to please him by making herself as attractive as possible. - - - VI.—SELF-SACRIFICE - -In the most violent cases of Love this overtone may reveal itself in two -ways: either as a mere exaggeration of Gallantry—a desire to please even -at the risk of life; or as a suicidal impulse in cases of hopeless -passion—when the one object which seemed to make life worth living has -been placed beyond reach. - - - VII.—SYMPATHY - -“In order to feel with another’s pain it is enough to be a man; to feel -with another’s pleasure it is needful to be an angel.” If this be true, -then lovers are angels. For not only do they share one another’s -pleasures, but it is impossible for the one to be really happy unless -the other enjoys the same emotion. “Does that other see the same star, -the same melting cloud; read the same book, feel the same emotion that -now delights me?”—these are, in Emerson’s words, the questions which the -lovers, when separated, ask incessantly. - - - VIII.—PRIDE OF CONQUEST AND POSSESSION - -In his suggestive but incomplete analysis of Love, in his _Principles of -Psychology_, Mr. Herbert Spencer names as two of the emotions which -enter into it, the Love of Approbation and Self-Esteem, which he thus -defines: “To be preferred above all the world, and that by one admired -beyond all others, is to have the love of approbation gratified in a -degree passing every previous experience: especially as, to this direct -gratification of it, there must be added that reflex gratification of -it, which results from the preference being witnessed by unconcerned -persons. Further, there is the allied emotion of self-esteem. To have -succeeded in gaining such attachment from, and sway over, another, is a -practical proof of power, of superiority, which cannot fail agreeably to -excite the _amour propre_.” - -This is well expressed, but the names are obviously not well chosen. It -is hardly correct to intimate that the “love of approbation” and -“self-esteem” constitute two of the group of emotions which we call -Love. What the lover _feels_ is not a “love of approbation,” etc., but -the emotion of _Pride_ at having conquered and gained possession of so -desirable a prize. - - - IX.—EMOTIONAL HYPERBOLE - -The lover sees, thinks, and feels only in superlatives. His eyes are no -longer mere “_windows_ of the soul,” but _microscopes_ which magnify all -the beloved’s merits on the scale of seven square miles to the inch. And -the hyberbolic imagery which constitutes the essence of love-poetry is -his everyday food—with a special _menu_ on Sundays. - - - X.—MIXED MOODS—MAJOR AND MINOR - -It is in Love that “confusion makes his masterpiece.” The lover is so -incessantly tossed on the ocean of turbulent emotion that he soon ceases -to know or care which is up and which down, and all that remains is an -all-engrossing sense of love-sickness. - - “Angels call it heavenly joy, - Infernal torture the devils say; - And men? They call it—Love.”—HEINE. - - - XI.—ADMIRATION OF PERSONAL BEAUTY - -This is the æsthetic overtone of Love; and so prominent is it that it is -commonly heard before and above all the others. “Beauty provoketh -thieves sooner than gold,” says Shakspere; and if you tell twenty of -your male acquaintances that you have been introduced to a young lady, -nineteen of them will ask immediately, “Is she pretty?” No reporter ever -writes about a girl murdered by a tramp or burnt in a house, without -describing her as a model of beauty, in order to double the reader’s -interest and quintuple his pity. Madame de Staël confessed that she -would have gladly exchanged her literary genius for beauty. With the -Greeks already the words Love and Beauty were inseparably associated; -and even the Chinese, who are not embarrassed by an excess of beauty, -have a proverb, “With one smile she overthrew a city, with another a -kingdom.” - -This completes the preliminary analysis of Love. I regret exceedingly -that I have been able to discover only eleven “overtones” in Modern -Love: but inasmuch as at least six of these—Nos. V. to X.—are only about -a thousand years old, there is reason to hope that some fine morning in -May a new one will be born to make up the round dozen. If so, it is to -be hoped it will assume in men the form of an absolute insistance on -feminine health, and an instinctive detestation of the hideous and -love-killing fashions with which women still persist in ruining their -beauty. - - - HERBERT SPENCER ON LOVE - -For the sake of comparison I may cite Mr. Spencer’s summary of the -elements which he thinks compose Love: “Round the physical feeling -forming the nucleus of the whole there are gathered the feelings -produced by personal beauty, that constituting simple attachment, those -of reverence, of love of approbation, of self-esteem, of property, of -love of freedom, of sympathy. All these, each excited in the highest -degree, and severally tending to reflect their excitement on each other, -form the composite psychical state which we call Love. And as each of -these feelings is in itself highly complicated, uniting a wide range of -states of consciousness, we may say that this passion fuses into an -immense aggregation, nearly all the elementary excitations of which we -are capable; and that from this results its irresistible power.” - -Let us now see how many of the characters of true Romantic Love are to -be found in the courtship of animals and savages. - - - - - LOVE AMONG ANIMALS - - -As comparative psychology is the youngest branch of philosophy, there -are still among us thousands of excellent but ignorant folks who cling -to the old mythologic notion that animals are animated machines or -things “which” are devoid of intellect and feeling, and guided by a -metaphysical fetish called “instinct.” To such the undertaking of a -search for Love—real Romantic Love—among animals, will seem not only -absurd, but a sort of high treason against human conceit. To mitigate -any possible indignation on the reader’s part, it may be advisable, -therefore, to begin by giving a few illustrations demonstrating the -existence of various family affections and friendship in the animal -world; after which, the possibility of finding traces of Love proper -will appear less remote. - -_Paternal, filial, brotherly, and sisterly_ love, comparatively weak and -undeveloped in man, are indeed almost absent in the lower animals. Birds -of the same brood do not recognise each other after they have left their -nest; and a dog will not hesitate to attack his own brother as a -stranger after a year’s separation. The part which a male bird takes in -feeding and protecting the young is, as Horwicz suggests, an element of -his conjugal rather than his paternal feeling; and a young animal that -would risk its own life in defence of its mother or father is yet to be -heard from. - -_Friendship_, however, does exist between animals, as we have already -seen; and not only among animals of the same species, but of different -species. “Happy families” of animals commonly hostile to each other have -been known outside of the showman’s cage. Büchner cites instances of -friendship between a robin and a cat; a fox and duck; dog and deer; cat -and mouse; and even such absurdly incongruous cases of attachment as -between a crow and a bull; a dog and an elephant; a cat and a -rattlesnake. But the deepest feeling of friendship which any animal is -capable of feeling is undoubtedly the dog’s love of his master. -“Professor Braubach,” says Darwin, “goes so far as to maintain that a -dog looks on his master as on a god.” “It is said,” he adds in a -footnote, “that Bacon long ago, and the poet Burns, held the same -notion.” - -_Maternal and conjugal_ affection, however, are, as in man, so in -animals, the two strongest forms of family attachment. A French author, -M. Menault, has written a special treatise on _L’Amour Maternel chez les -Animaux_, and Dr. Büchner exclaims, _à propos_: “If a human mother, with -certain destruction staring in her face, dashes into a burning house to -save her imperilled child, and thus finds her own death, this sacrifice -is no greater, no more heroic, than that of a stork-mother who, after -vain efforts to save her brood, is voluntarily burnt up with them in her -nest; or of those elephant-mothers who, as Schweinfurth narrates, in the -African hunting expeditions, when the bushes along the shore are ignited -in order to drive out the elephants, seek to save their young ones by -filling their trunks with water and sprinkling it over them, while they -themselves are roasting.” - -How low down in the scale of animal life traces of _conjugal_ attachment -are to be found is shown by the following case cited by Darwin: “An -accurate observer, Mr. Lonsdale, informs me that he placed a pair of -landsnails, one of which was weakly, into a small and ill-provided -garden. After a short time the strong and healthy individual -disappeared, and was traced by its track of slime over a wall into an -adjoining well-stocked garden. Mr. Lonsdale concluded that it had -deserted its sickly mate, but after an absence of twenty-four hours it -returned, and apparently communicated the result of its successful -exploration, for both then started along the same track and disappeared -over the wall.” Again, the naturalist, Mr. Bate, experimented on the -conjugal feelings of _Gammarus marinus_, or the sandskipper common on -English shores, by separating a male from its female, and imprisoning -both in the same vessel with many individuals of the same species. “The -female, when thus divorced, soon joined the others. After a time the -male was put again into the same vessel; and he then, after swimming -about for a time, dashed into the crowd, and without any fighting at -once took away his wife. This fact shows that in the Amphipoda, an order -low in the scale, the males and females recognise each other, and are -mutually attached.” - -Concerning birds, Darwin remarks: “It has often been said that parrots -become so deeply attached to each other that when one dies the other -pines for a long time; but Mr. Jenner Weir thinks that with most birds -the strength of their affection has been much exaggerated. Nevertheless, -when one of a pair in a state of nature has been shot, the survivor has -been heard for days afterwards uttering a plaintive call; and Mr. St. -John gives various facts proving the attachment of mated birds. Mr. -Bennett relates that in China after a drake of the beautiful mandarin -Teal had been stolen, the duck remained disconsolate, though sedulously -courted by another mandarin drake, who displayed before her all his -charms. After an interval of three weeks the stolen drake was recovered, -and instantly the pair recognised each other with extreme joy.” “Dr. -Buller says (_Birds of New Zealand_) that a male king lory was killed, -and the female ‘fretted and moped, refused her food, and died of a -broken heart.’” - -But there are exceptions to this rule of conjugal attachment and -fidelity, as is shown in the following quotation, which completes the -curious analogy between human and bird love connubial: “Mr. Harrison -Weir has himself observed, and has heard from several breeders, that a -female pigeon will occasionally take a strong fancy for a particular -male, and will desert her own mate for him. Some females, according to -another experienced observer, Riedel, are of a profligate disposition, -and prefer almost any stranger to their own mate. Some amorous males, -called by our English fanciers ‘gay birds,’ are so successful in their -gallantries that, as Mr. H. Weir informs me, they must be shut up on -account of the mischief which they cause.” - -So there are Don Juans even among pigeons! - -_Intermarriages_ or mixed unions also occur among birds. Says Darwin: -“It is certain that distinct species of birds occasionally pair in a -state of nature and produce hybrids. Many instances could be given: thus -Macgillivray relates how a male blackbird and female thrush ‘fell in -love with each other,’ and produced offspring. Several years ago -eighteen cases had been recorded of the occurrence in Great Britain of -hybrids between the black grouse and pheasant.... A male widgeon, living -with females of the same species, has been known to pair with a pintail -duck. Lloyd describes the remarkable attachment between a shield-drake -and a common duck. Many additional instances could be given; and the -Rev. E. S. Dixon remarks that ‘those who have kept many different -species of geese together, well know what unaccountable attachments they -are frequently forming, and that they are quite as likely to pair and -rear young with individuals of a race (species) apparently the most -alien to themselves, as with their own stock.’” - -In their _marriages_ animals have anticipated man in every possible -arrangement—promiscuity, polygamy, monogamy, polyandry. According to -Darwin, “Many mammals and some few birds are polygamous, but with other -animals belonging to the lower classes I have found no evidence of this -habit.” He has not “heard of any species in the Orders of Cheiroptera, -Edentata, Insectivora, and Rodents being polygamous, excepting that -among the Rodents the common rat, according to some rat-catchers, lives -with several females.” Among the terrestrial carnivora the lion seems to -be the only polygamist, while the marine carnivora are “eminently -polygamous.” - -Domestication sometimes has the bad effect of converting wild birds to -Mormonism. Thus “the wild duck is strictly monogamous, the domestic duck -highly polygamous.” - -It is among wild birds in general that the most remarkable cases of -conjugal attachment in the animal world are found. And since most birds -are monogamous, pairing sometimes even for life, we may hence draw the -important conclusion that among animals, as among men, monogamy seems to -favour the development of conjugal love. Polygamy, on the other hand, -everywhere introduces jealousies, rivalries, discords. Among Oriental -nations where polygamy prevails, each wife must have her own apartments, -and no one would dare to taste food prepared by another, for fear of -poison. On some animals polygamy seems to have a similar effect, for we -read that “Mr. Bartlett believes that the Lophophorus, like many other -gallinaceous birds, is naturally polygamous, but two females cannot be -placed in the same cage with a male, as they fight so much together.” - - - COURTSHIP - -The foregoing illustrations, many of which show the gross injustice -lurking in our expression “animal passion,” will have prepared the -reader’s mind for the search after the elements of _romantic_ or -pre-nuptial Love in animals. - -The development of romantic, as distinguished from conjugal love, -depends on the existence of _a more or less prolonged period of -courtship_. Where this is absent Love is absent, as among the ancient -nations and those of the moderns who lock up their women until they are -ready to be sold to a husband, at sight. - -Among animals the young females are not locked up or chaperoned. They -are free to meet the young males and fall in love with the one that -pleases them most. - -As a rule the preliminaries to animal marriages are doubtless brief. If -a healthy, vigorous male comes across a mature, healthy female, it is -usually a case of mutual _veni, vidi, vici_. - -In other cases, however, courtship is a more prolonged affair, owing -partly to the coyness of the female, partly to the rivalries among the -male suitors. - -Animal courtship is carried on either by single pairs in the romantic -shades of the forests, or else at special _nuptial mass meetings_, -resembling those held by some primitive tribes whose unmarried young -people assemble on certain days in the year to select partners. Of the -common magpie, for instance, Darwin relates that “Some years ago these -birds abounded in extraordinary numbers, so that a gamekeeper killed in -one morning nineteen males, and another killed by a single shot seven -birds roosting together. They then had the habit of assembling very -early in the spring at particular spots, where they could be seen in -flocks, chattering, sometimes fighting, bustling, and flying about the -trees. The whole affair was evidently considered by the birds as one of -the highest importance. Shortly after the meeting they all separated, -and were then observed by Mr. Fox and others to be paired for the -season.” - -This was known as the “great magpie marriage.” In Germany and -Scandinavia similar assemblages of black game are so common that special -names have been given to them. “The bowers of the bower-birds are the -resort of both sexes during the breeding season; and here the males meet -and contend with each other for the favours of the females, and here the -latter assemble and coquet with the males.” - -Two more cases may be cited: “With one of the vultures (_Cathartes -aura_) of the United States parties of eight, ten, or more males and -females assemble on fallen logs, ‘exhibiting the strongest _desire to -please_ mutually,’ and after many caresses each male leads off his -partner on the wing. Audubon likewise carefully observed the wild flocks -of Canada geese, and gives a graphic description of their love-antics; -he says that the birds which had been previously mated ‘renewed their -courtship as early as the month of January, while the others would be -contending or coquetting for hours every day, until all seemed satisfied -with the choice they had made, after which, although they remained -together, any person could easily perceive that they were careful to -keep in pairs. I have observed also that the older the birds the shorter -were the preliminaries of their courtship. The bachelors and old maids, -whether in regret or not caring to be disturbed by the bustle, quietly -moved aside and lay down at some distance from the rest.’” - -_Separate courtship_ may be illustrated by the following cases, the -first of which is also interesting as showing that it is not among men -alone that the female occasionally becomes the wooer; and the second as -showing how early in the scale of animal life a primitive sort of -courtship may be found. Concerning a wild duck brought up in captivity -Mr. Hewitt says that “After breeding a couple of seasons with her own -mallard, it at once shook him off on my placing a male pintail on the -water. It was evidently a case of _love at first sight_, for she swam -about the newcomer caressingly, though he appeared evidently alarmed and -averse to her overtures of affection. From that hour she forgot her old -partner. Winter passed by, and the next spring the pintail seemed to -have become a convert to her blandishments, for they nested and produced -seven or eight young ones.” - -The second case relates to the landsnail, concerning which Agassiz says: -“Quiconque a eu l’occasion d’observer les amours des limaçons ne saurait -mettre en doute la séduction déployée dans les mouvements et les allures -qui préparent et accomplissent le double embrassement de ces -hermaphrodites.” - -The opportunities for prolonged Courtship being thus given, the question -arises, “Do animals, while a-wooing, experience the same feelings as a -human lover?” In other words, Are any of the overtones of Romantic Love -present in the amorous passion of animals? - -Several of them no doubt are habitually absent. Animals have not -sufficient imagination to meditate consciously on their probable success -or failure in Courtship; and this lack of imaginative power excludes -those “overtones” which are chiefly dependent on that faculty; notably -Sympathy with the beloved’s feelings, Pride of Conquest and Possession, -Hyperbolic Adoration, Voluntary Self-Sacrifice for the other, and the -Woful Ecstasy of Mixed Moods. That Gallantry, or the Desire to Please, -_may_ be present is shown by the words I have italicised in the -quotation just made regarding the courtship of vultures, and is further -shown by the display of their ornamental plumage by male birds to excite -the attention of the female. Exclusiveness of affection is indicated by -the occasional indifference of the wooer to every rival; and when we -read of the German blackcock’s love-dances, during which, “the more -ardent he grows the more lively he becomes, until at last the bird -appears like a frantic creature”; and that “at such times the blackcocks -are so absorbed that they become almost _blind and deaf_, but less so -than the capercailzie,” so that “bird after bird may be shot on the -spot, or even caught by the hand”—when we read this, we feel tempted to -credit these birds even with those highest and most specialised forms of -lover’s madness which lead to oblivion—Self-Sacrifice and Ecstatic -Adoration. - -The four traits of Romantic Love which are doubtless present in the -passion of animals are Jealousy, Coyness, Individual Preference, and -Admiration of Personal Beauty. - -(_a_) _Jealousy._—Volumes might be filled with accounts of the tragedies -brought about through animal rivalry and jealousy during the season of -love. “The courage and the desperate conflicts of stags have often been -described,” says Darwin; “their skeletons have been found in various -parts of the world, with the horns inextricably locked together, showing -how miserably the victor and vanquished had perished.” “Male -sperm-whales are very jealous” at the season of love; “and in their -battles ‘they often lock their jaws together, and turn on their sides -and twist about’; so that their lower jaws often become distorted.” - -When birds gaze at themselves in a looking-glass, as they often do, the -same authority inclines to the belief that they do it from jealousy of a -supposed rival; and Mr. Jenner Weir, he states, “is convinced that birds -pay particular attention to the colours of other birds, sometimes out of -jealousy, and sometimes as a sign of kinship;” while “many naturalists -believe that the singing of birds is almost exclusively ‘the effect of -rivalry and emulation,’ and not for the sake of charming their mates.” - -Animal Jealousy is apparently dependent on the immediate presence of the -rival and the female; while the Jealousy of a human lover is also a -matter of the imagination, and smarts even more intensely during Her -absence; for his morbid fancy then loves to picture Her in the arms of -his victorious rival. He does not, however, except in some southern -countries, emulate the jealous lion by seeking to devour his rival, but -is contented if he can ward him off by stratagem, or make him appear in -a disadvantageous light in Her eyes. - -(_b_) _Coyness._—Just as the Jealousy displayed by two animals fighting -for a female is a gross, primitive emotion, so the Coyness of female -animals is crude and clumsy compared with the delicious subtlety with -which a human maiden veils a Yes under an apparent No. Yet it plays a -prominent _rôle_ in the courtship of animals. - -A human lover would often consider it a special privilege to be eaten -up, skin, bones, and all, by his mistress; but it is doubtful whether -spiders are ever madly enough in love to relish the conduct of their -females, as described by Darwin: “The male is generally much smaller -than the female, sometimes to an extraordinary degree, and he is forced -to be extremely cautious in making his advances, as the female often -carries her coyness to a dangerous pitch. De Geer saw a male that ‘in -the midst of his preparatory caresses was seized by the object of his -attentions, enveloped by her in a web, and then devoured’; a sight -which, as he adds, filled him with indignation and horror. Female fishes -also are apt to give a cannibal tinge to their coyness by eating up the -smaller males—actions to which remote human analogies may be found in -the coyness of mediæval dames, who sent their lovers to wars and into -lions’ dens as conditions of enjoying their favours; or, conversely, in -the habits of those Australians who eat their wives after they have -ceased to be either ornamental or useful.” - -Indubitable evidences of Coyness are found as low down as among insects; -as, for example, in the species called _Smynthurnus luteus_, “wingless, -dull-coloured, minute insects, with ugly, almost misshapen heads and -bodies,” concerning which Sir John Lubbock remarks: “It is very amusing -to see these little creatures coquetting together. The male, which is -much smaller than the female, runs round her, and they butt one another -standing face to face and moving backward and forward like two playful -lambs. Then the female pretends to run away, and the male runs after her -with a queer appearance of anger, gets in front and stands facing her -again; then she turns coyly round, but he, quicker and more active, -scuttles round too, and seems to whip her with his antennæ; then for a -bit they stand face to face, play with their antennæ, and seem to be all -in all to one another.” - -The Coyness of birds is illustrated by the following cases cited by -Büchner from Brehm and A. and K. Müller: “A genuine coquette is the -female cuckoo, who answers the call of the male with a peculiar -resonant, tittering or laughing love-call. ‘The call is seducing, -promising in advance, and its effect on the male simply enchanting.’ But -how long the lovers pursuing the siren have to wait before she accepts -one of them! A wild flight begins, among bushes and tree-tops, while the -female encourages the pursuers with repeated calls, and finally gets -them into a state of erotic excitement bordering on madness. At the same -time the female is no less excited than her frantic suitors. Her -favourite, no doubt, is the most eager of the lovers, and her apparent -resistance simply the desire to excite him still more!... The female of -the icebird (_Alcedo ispida_) often teases her lover half a day at a -time, by repeatedly approaching him, screaming at him, and flying away -again. At the same time she never loses sight of him, but in her flight -casts glances at him backwards and sidewise, moderates the rapidity of -her flight, and returns in a wide curve if the male suddenly ceases from -his pursuit.” - -Could anything be more naïvely, more humanly, more exquisitely feminine? -If a lover, says a French philosopher, fails in his suit, let him desist -for a moment, and she will presently call him back. - -No inquiry has ever been made by naturalists, so far as I am aware, as -to the origin of Coyness among animals. Two probable sources of this -feeling may therefore be here suggested. The first is a vague -instinctive presentiment (based on inherited cerebral impressions) that -with mating the labours of life will begin: the painful laying of eggs; -the loss of liberty during incubation—an incalculable loss to these most -active of all animals; and the care of the young, which, again, is not a -trifling matter, inasmuch as a family of starlings, for example, needs -for its daily food more than eight hundred snails, caterpillars, etc.; -and birds sometimes perish from exhaustion in the attempt to feed their -offspring. - -The second source of Coyness is probably another instinctive feeling -(based on inherited experience) which induces the female to defer her -choice until the combats and manœuvres of the males have shown which -one is the most energetic, courageous, and persistent: for he will -obviously be best able to support her brood, and protect it as well as -herself against enemies. Hence, during the combats of rival males, the -female is commonly a passive spectator, and at the end quietly marches -or flies off with the victor. All of which, by the way, shows that among -animals already masculine love is deeper than feminine. Indirectly, it -is true, feminine Coyness is the cause of Love—but only of _masculine_ -Love; for if the female animal always accepted the first male who asked -her— - - “My pretty maiden, may I venture - To offer you my arm and escort?” - -there would be no opportunity for the growth of pre-matrimonial passion. - -(_c_) _Individual Preference._—Owing to our scant information concerning -the courtship of animals in a state of nature, Darwin did not succeed in -discovering any cases among mammals of decided preference shown by a -male for any particular female; and regarding domesticated quadrupeds, -“The general impression amongst breeders seems to be that the male -accepts any female; and this, owing to his eagerness, is, in most cases, -probably the truth.” A few cases of special preference or antipathy in -dogs, horses, bulls, and boars, were, however, communicated to him. -Concerning birds Darwin remarks that “In all ordinary cases the male is -so eager that he will accept any female, and does not, as far as we can -judge, prefer one to the other, but ... exceptions to this rule -apparently occur in some few groups. With domesticated birds, I have -heard of only one case of males showing any preference for certain -females, namely, that of the domestic cock, who, according to the high -authority of Mr. Hewitt, prefers the younger to the older hens.” - -This, however, is at best only a polygamous sort of Preference, which, -after all, lacks the essential traits of Individualisation and -Exclusiveness. With the long-tailed duck (_Harelda glacialis_), M. -Ekström says, “It has been remarked that certain females are much more -courted than the rest. Frequently, indeed, one sees an individual -surrounded by six or eight amorous males.” Whether this statement is -credible Darwin does not know; but the Swedish sportsmen, he adds, shoot -these females and stuff them as decoys. - -In female animals, on the other hand, the “overtone” of Individual -Preference appears to be more frequently present. Darwin even asserts -that “the exertion of some choice on the part of the female seems a law -almost as general as the eagerness of the male;” but this is not borne -out by the numerous illustrations given by himself, showing that when -two or more males are engaged in jealous combat, “the female looks on as -a passive spectator,” and finally goes off with the victor, whichever of -the rivals he may prove to be, without showing the slightest concern for -the vanquished. An Australian forest-maiden might behave similarly under -these circumstances, but a civilised maiden would cling to the one who -had made the deepest impression on her previous to the combat; and if -wounded, would adore him all the more; for in her Love pity is a -stronger ingredient than even the love of prowess. - -That female birds, however, _sometimes_ exert a choice is admitted even -by Mr. A. R. Wallace (_Tropical Nature_, p. 199); and a few of the cases -referred to by Darwin may here be cited: “Audubon—and we must remember -that he spent a long life in prowling about the forests of the United -States and observing the birds—does not doubt that the female -deliberately chooses her mate; thus, speaking of a woodpecker, he says -the hen is followed by half a dozen gay suitors, who continue performing -strange antics ‘until a marked preference is shown for one.’ The female -of the red-winged starling (_Agelæus phœniceus_) is likewise pursued -by several males, ‘until, becoming fatigued, she alights, receives their -addresses, and soon makes a choice.’ He describes also how several male -nightjars repeatedly plunge through the air with astonishing rapidity, -suddenly turning, and thus making a singular noise; ‘but no sooner has -the female made her choice than the other males are driven away.’” - -Concerning domesticated birds we have seen that that gallinaceous -sultan, the domestic cock, shows a decided preference for the younger -hens in his harem. But the female is not a bit less frivolous and -capricious; for, according to Mr. Hewitt, she almost invariably prefers -the most vigorous, defiant, and mettlesome male; hence it is almost -useless, he adds, “to attempt true breeding if a game-cock in good -health and condition runs the locality, for almost every hen on leaving -the roosting-place will resort to the game-cock, even though that bird -may not actually drive away the male of her own variety.” - -(_d_) _Personal Beauty and Sexual Selection._—Mr. Wallace, who -discovered the law of Natural Selection independently of Darwin, admits, -as just stated, that “in birds the females do sometimes exert a choice”; -but he adds that “amid the copious mass of facts and opinions collected -by Mr. Darwin as to the display of colour and ornaments by the male -birds, there is _a total absence of any evidence that the females admire -or even notice this display_. The hen, the turkey, and the pea-fowl go -on feeding while the male is displaying his finery; and there is reason -to believe that it is his persistency and energy rather than his beauty -which wins the day.” - -Briefly stated, the difference between the views of these two eminent -naturalists is this: Darwin believes that in those cases where the sexes -are not alike, the differences are due to the _males_, originally plain, -having become modified through _Sexual_ Selection for _ornamental_ -purposes; while Mr. Wallace believes that colour is a normal product in -animal integuments, proportionate to their vitality, and that the sexual -differences in ornamentation are due to the _females_ having been -modified through _Natural_ Selection for the sake of _protection_. - -Perhaps the best brief _résumé_ Darwin has made of his views on this -subject is given on page 421 of the _Descent of Man_ (London edition, -1885), which may therefore be here cited in full: "If an inhabitant of -another planet were to behold a number of young rustics at a fair -courting a pretty girl, and quarrelling about her like birds at one of -their places of assemblage, he would, by the eagerness of the wooers to -please her and to display their finery, infer that she had the power of -choice. Now with birds the evidence stands thus: they have acute powers -of observation, and they seem to have some taste for the beautiful both -in colour and sound. It is certain that the females occasionally -exhibit, from unknown causes, the strongest antipathies and preferences -for particular males. When the sexes differ in colour or in other -ornaments, the males with rare exceptions are the more decorated, either -permanently or during the breeding season. They sedulously display their -various ornaments, exert their voices, and perform strange antics in the -presence of the females. Even well-armed males who, it might be thought, -would altogether depend for success on the law of battle, are in most -cases highly ornamented; and their ornaments have been acquired at the -expense of some loss of power. In other cases ornaments have been -acquired at the cost of increased risk from birds and beasts of prey. -With various species many individuals of both sexes congregate at the -same spot, and their courtship is a prolonged affair. There is even -reason to suspect that the males and females within the same district do -not always succeed in pleasing each other and pairing. - -“What then are we to conclude from these facts and considerations? Does -the male parade his charms with so much pomp and rivalry for no purpose? -Are we not justified in believing that the female exerts a choice, and -that she receives the addresses of the male who pleases her most? It is -not probable that she consciously deliberates; but she is most excited -or attracted by the most beautiful, or melodious, or gallant males. Nor -need it be supposed that the female studies each stripe or spot of -colour; that the peahen, for instance, admires each detail in the -gorgeous train of the peacock—she is probably struck only by the general -effect. Nevertheless, after hearing how carefully the male Argus -pheasant displays his elegant primary wing-feathers, and erects his -ocellated plumes in the right position for their full effect; or again, -how the male goldfinch alternately displays his gold-bespangled wings, -we ought not to feel too sure that the female does not attend to each -detail of beauty.” - -Now it was this very case of the Argus pheasant that first shook Mr. -Wallace’s “belief in ‘sexual,’ or, more properly, ‘female’ selection. -The long series of gradations by which the beautifully-shaped ocelli on -the secondary wing-feathers of this bird have been produced are clearly -traced out; the result being a set of markings so exquisitely shaded as -to represent ‘balls lying loose within sockets’—purely artificial -objects of which these birds could have no possible experience. That -this result should have been attained through thousands and tens of -thousands of female birds all preferring those males whose markings -varied slightly in this one direction, this uniformity of choice -continuing through thousands and tens of thousands of generations, is to -me absolutely incredible. And when, further, we remember that those who -did not so vary would also, according to all evidence, find mates and -have offspring, the actual result seems quite impossible of attainment -by such means.” - -According to Darwin’s own admission (_Descent of Man_, p. 211), he -advanced the theory of Sexual Selection because, in his opinion, Natural -Selection did not account for the various ornaments and attractions of -the males in question. Mr. Wallace, on the other hand, believes that -Sexual Selection does _not_, while Natural Selection _does_ account for -these ornaments; so, in place of Darwin’s view that the beauty of -certain male animals leads the females to prefer them to their less -ornamented rivals, he substitutes the theory that it is the superior -vitality, persistence, and vivacity of the favoured males that fascinate -the females, and that masculine beauty is simply a natural result of -superior vigour and superabundant health. - -Darwin doubtless errs in claiming an æsthetic sense for animals so low -in the scale of life as butterflies and other insects, and in -attributing to it such extraordinary effects in the development of -personal beauty. What Mr. Wallace has done in _Tropical Nature_ is to -show simply that it is quite unnecessary to invoke the aid of so -questionable an agency as Sexual Selection in order to account for the -ornaments of animals; and that the fundamental principle of Darwinism, -_Natural_ Selection, accounts for everything. - -He maintains that colour is a normal product of organisation, and that -not so much its presence as its absence needs accounting for. White and -black are comparatively rare and exceptional in nature, while the -various tints of red, blue, green, etc., are continually appearing -spontaneously and irregularly in the integuments of animals. These -irregular colours, if injurious to the species, will be at once -eliminated by Natural Selection; but if useful for purposes of -identification or protection, they will be preserved and intensified. - -Now colour, Mr. Wallace continues, is proportionate to integumentary -development, and is most conspicuous in the wings of butterflies and the -feathers of birds, for the reason that, just as “the spots and rings on -a soap-bubble increase with increasing tenuity,” similarly the -delicately-organised surface of feathers and scales is highly favourable -to the production of varied colour-effects. - -Colour being thus proportionate to integumentary development, we find -next that integumentary development is, in turn, proportionate to vigour -and vitality; the strongest animals having the largest feathers, scales, -horns, etc. Hence the most vigorous and healthy animals are also the -most beautiful, the most brilliantly coloured. And this correlation -between healthful vigour and beauty is still more strikingly shown in -this, that “The colours of an animal usually fade during disease or -weakness, while robust health and vigour adds to their intensity.... In -all quadrupeds a ‘dull coat’ is indicative of ill-health or low -condition; while a glossy coat and sparkling eye are the invariable -accompaniments of health and energy. The same rule applies to the -feathers of birds, whose colours are only seen in their purity during -perfect health; and a similar phenomenon occurs even among insects, for -the bright hues of caterpillars begin to fade as soon as they become -inactive preparatory to their undergoing transformation. Even in the -vegetable kingdom we see the same thing: for the tints of foliage are -deepest, and the colours of flowers and fruits richest, on those plants -which are in the most healthy and vigorous condition.” - -Add to all these considerations that “this intensity of coloration -becomes most developed during the breeding season, when the vitality is -at a maximum,” and we shall be prepared for Mr. Wallace’s summing up of -his case:— - -“If now we accept the evidence of Mr. Darwin’s most trustworthy -correspondents, that the choice of the female, so far as she exerts any, -falls upon ‘the most vigorous, defiant, and mettlesome male’; and if we -further believe, what is certainly the case, that these are as a rule -the most highly-coloured and adorned with the finest developments of -plumage, we have a real and not a hypothetical cause at work. For these -most healthy, vigorous, and beautiful males will have the choice of the -finest and most healthy females; and will be able best to protect and -rear those families. Natural Selection, and what may be termed Male -Selection, will tend to give them the advantage in the struggle for -existence; and thus the fullest and the finest colours will be -transmitted, and tend to advance in each succeeding generation.” - -By this strong chain of reasoning (to which my brief _>résumé_ of course -cannot do justice) Mr. Wallace shows that Darwin needlessly introduced -the principle of Sexual Selection into animal courtship; and at the same -time furnishes a new confirmation of Darwin’s compliment that he has “an -innate genius for solving difficulties.” - -What makes Mr. Wallace’s argument the more cogent is the fact that -Darwin himself, in speaking of the lowest classes of animals, explains -their beauty on the same principles as those which Mr. Wallace applies -to the higher animals. Thus he says: “We can, in our ignorance of most -of the lowest animals, only say that their bright tints result either -from the chemical nature or the minute structure of their tissues, -independently of any benefit thus derived.” “It is almost certain that -these animals have too imperfect senses, and much too low mental powers, -to appreciate each other’s beauty or other attractions, or to feel -rivalry.” “Nor is it at all obvious how the offspring from the more -beautiful pairs of hermaphrodites would have any advantage over the -offspring of the less beautiful, so as to increase in number, _unless -indeed vigour and beauty generally coincided_.” And once more, “The -sedentary annelids become duller-coloured, according to M. Quatrefages, -after the period of reproduction; and this I presume may be attributed -to their less vigorous condition at that time.” - -So far we have only considered the origin of animal colours in general. -Mr. Wallace, however, has not only made clear the general connection -between beautiful and vivid colours and health, but, by utilising his -own researches and those of Mr. Bates and other naturalists, he has been -able to show to what a great extent we can explain even the _particular_ -colours of the various classes of animals. He distinguishes four classes -of animal colours—Protective, Warning, Sexual, and Typical. - -(1) _Protective Colours._—These “are exceedingly prevalent in nature, -comprising those of all the white arctic animals, the sandy-coloured -desert forms, and the green birds and insects of tropical forests. It -also comprises thousands of cases of special resemblance—of birds to the -surroundings of their nests, and especially of insects to the bark, -leaves, flowers, or soil on or amid which they dwell. Mammalia, fishes, -and reptiles, as well as mollusca, present similar phenomena; and the -more the habits of animals are investigated, the more numerous are found -to be the cases in which their colours tend to conceal them, either from -their enemies or from the creatures they prey upon.” - -(2) _Warning Colours._—In this class, on the other hand, the object is -not to conceal the animal, but to make it conspicuous. Certain species -of gorgeously-coloured butterflies, _e.g._ are never eaten by birds, -spiders, lizards, or monkeys, who eagerly feed on other butterflies. -“The reason simply is that they are not fit to eat, their juices having -a powerful odour and taste that is absolutely disgusting to all these -animals. Now we see the reason of their showy colours and slow flight. -It is good for them to be seen and recognised, for then they are never -molested; but if they did not differ in form and colouring from other -butterflies, or if they flew so quickly that their peculiarities could -not be easily noticed, they would be captured, and though not eaten, -would be maimed or killed.” - -Mimicry is the name given to a second and still more marvellous class of -Warning Colours. They belong to defenceless creatures which so closely -resemble other brightly-coloured but nauseous or dangerous animals that -they are mistaken for the latter, and therefore left alone. _E.G._ -“Wasps are imitated by moths, and ants by beetles; and even poisonous -snakes are mimicked by harmless snakes, and dangerous hawks by -defenceless cuckoos.” - -(3) _Typically_-coloured animals are those species which are brilliantly -coloured in both sexes, “and for whose particular colours we can assign -no function or use.” This group “comprises an immense number of showy -birds, such as Kingfishers, Barbets, Toucans, Lories, Tits, and -Starlings; among insects most of the largest and handsomest -butterflies,” etc. “It is a suggestive fact that all the -brightly-coloured birds mentioned above build in holes or form covered -nests, so that the females do not need that protection during the -breeding season which I believe to be one of the chief causes of the -dull colour of female birds when their partners are gaily coloured.” - -(4) _Sexual Colours_, comprising those cases in which the sexes differ, -and with which Darwin’s theory of Sexual Selection is directly -concerned. Through no _direct_ fault of his own, Darwin leaves on his -readers the impression—which has become almost a commonplace of -conversation—that it is the general rule among animals for the males of -each species to be more ornamented than the females. The truth is, -however, that “with the exception of butterflies, the sexes are almost -alike in the great majority of insects. The same is the case in mammals -and reptiles; while the chief departure from the rule occurs in birds, -though even here in very many cases the law of sexual likeness -prevails.” - -The reason why I have devoted so much space to Mr. Wallace’s colour -theories is to emphasise the truth contained in this last sentence; the -fact, namely, that even if Sexual Selection were accepted as an active -principle, it would account in only a very limited number of cases for -the personal beauty of animals, and the reader of Mr. Wallace’s -_Tropical Nature_ and his _Contributions to the Theory of Natural -Selection_ cannot fail to be convinced that Sexual Selection does not -even hold good in this limited number of cases, but that “the primary -cause of sexual diversity of colour is the need of protection, -repressing in the female those bright colours which are normally -produced in both sexes by general laws.” - -Incidentally Mr. Wallace mentions as an additional function of colour -the fact that it may serve as a _means of recognition_ to the sexes. -“This view affords us an explanation of the curious fact that among -butterflies the females of closely-allied species in the same locality -sometimes differ considerably, while the males are much alike; for, as -the males are the swiftest, and by far the highest flyers, and seek out -the females, it would evidently be advantageous for them to be able to -recognise their true partners at some distance off.” - -To me it seems that this function of colour is, next to Protection, its -most important object, and that Mr. Wallace does not give it sufficient -prominence. He says, in speaking of _Typical Colours_, that we can -assign “no function or use for them.” But why should they not serve the -sexes as a means of recognition at at a distance? especially as colours -can be recognised at a greater distance than forms. Many years before -Darwin and Mr. Wallace wrote on this subject, Schopenhauer’s genius -anticipated this view of the matter. “The extremely varied and vivid -colours of the feathers of tropical birds,” he wrote, “have been -explained in a very general way, with reference to their efficient -cause, as due to the strong effect of the tropical light. As their final -cause I would suggest that these brilliant plumes are the gala uniforms -by means of which the species, which are so numerous there and often -belonging to the same genus, recognise each other; so that every male -finds his female. The same is true of the butterflies of different zones -and latitudes” (_Welt als Wille u. V._, ii. 381). - -Schopenhauer of course errs in attributing, in his ignorance of -Protective, Warning, and other colours, all the hues of birds and -butterflies to this agency. But it is probable that whenever colours and -other ornaments do not serve for purposes of protection (as _e.g._ the -lion’s mane and the horns of beetles, _vide_ _Tropical Nature_, p. 202), -they serve the purpose of sexual recognition of species. A case cited by -Darwin to prove that quadrupeds take notice of colour, is very -suggestive in this connection: “A female zebra would not admit the -addresses of a male ass until he was painted so as to resemble a zebra, -and then, as John Hunter remarks, she received him very readily.” - -It is probable, therefore, that in many cases the unique spots and -stripes and colours of animals subserve the special use of facilitating -the finding of a partner; and in this way they relate directly to the -courtship and Romantic Love of animals. Thus we see how the Love affairs -of animals may indirectly affect their Personal Beauty in a way quite -different from that suggested by Darwin. - - - LOVE-CHARMS AND LOVE-CALLS - -The same reasoning applies to the music of animals, vocal and -instrumental, on which Darwin lays great stress. In his opinion, the -music of some male animals serves to charm the females æsthetically, and -thus gives to the best musicians special advantages through Sexual -Selection. But the instances cited by him hardly warrant this -conclusion, and seem rather to point to the inference that the function -of animal music is chiefly to facilitate courtship, by making it easy -for the females to discover the whereabouts of a male of the same -species. The evidence tends to show that it is not the male whose voice -is most mellow and melodious that catches the female, but rather the one -who is most vigorous and persistent and has the loudest organ. As Jaques -says in _As You Like It_: “Sing it: ’tis no matter how it be in tune, so -it make noise enough!” - -Darwin himself quotes a naturalist’s statement, that “the stridulation -produced by some of the _Locustidæ_ is so loud that it can be heard -during the night at the distance of a mile;” and such cases as “the -drumming of the snipe’s tail, the tapping of the woodpecker’s beak, the -harsh, trumpetlike cry of certain water-fowl,” though Darwin tries to -dispose of them on the ground of a difference in æsthetic taste, -nevertheless incline one to the belief that the music of the forest -troubadours is not so much intended to gratify the æsthetic taste of the -female as to guide her to the spot where the male awaits her; for, -contrary to common opinion, it is the female in these cases that -searches for a male and not _vice versâ_. Montagu, for instance, asserts -that “males of song-birds and of many others do not in general search -for the female, but, on the contrary, their business in spring is to -perch on some conspicuous spot, breathing out their full and amorous -notes, which, by instinct, _the female knows, and repairs to the spot_ -to choose her mate.” And Dr. Hartman, speaking of the American _Cicada -septemdecim_, says: “The drums are now heard in all directions. This I -believe to be the marital summons from the males. Standing in thick -chestnut sprouts about as high as my head, where hundreds were around -me, I observed the females coming around the drumming males.” And, says -Darwin, “the _spel_ of the blackcock certainly serves as a call to the -female, for it has been known to bring four or five females from a -distance to a male under confinement; but as the blackcock continues his -_spel_ for hours during successive days, and in the case of the -capercailzie ‘with an agony of passion,’ we are led to suppose that the -females which are present are thus charmed.” - -There appears to be no _direct_ evidence, however, that female birds are -more _charmed_ by one male than another, and prefer him on account of -his superior song, as the theory of Sexual Selection postulates. And -when we remember that likewise there is no evidence that birds, etc., -are ever influenced in their choice by the superior colours of certain -males, and that in fact it is the rule for the female to follow -passively the most vigorous and victorious male, we are brought back to -the conclusion with which we set out—that it is not the superior -songster who wins the female by charming her, but the loudest and most -persistent songster, by guiding her to the courting-place. - -Darwin himself evidently felt the weakness of his position, for he -constantly speaks of “love-charms _or_ love-calls” in the same sentence. -Thus, “the true song of most birds and various strange cries are uttered -chiefly during the breeding-season, and serve as a charm, _or merely as -a call-note_, to the other sex.” Again: “It is often difficult to -conjecture whether the many strange cries and notes uttered by male -birds during the breeding-season serve as a charm or merely as a call to -the female.” The distinction between love “charms” and mere “calls” is -of course of the utmost importance. For if male song charms the females -and influences them in their choice, we have Sexual-æsthetic-female -Selection. But if the male song merely serves as a call to the female -and as a sign of species-recognition, then Natural Selection accounts -for everything, because the most vigorous, loudest, and most persistent -male will have the choice of the most numerous females brought to his -side by his musical efforts. - - - LOVE-DANCES AND DISPLAY - -There is one more important link in the chain of Darwin’s reasoning, -which must be broken before his theory of Sexual Selection can be -regarded as demolished. The mad antics of the blackcock and other birds -have been already referred to; and some of the lower animals seem to -endeavour to surpass them, as, for example, the male alligator, who -strives to attract the attention of the female by splashing and roaring -in the water; “swollen to an extent ready to burst, with its head and -tail lifted up, he spins or twirls round on the surface of the water, -like an Indian chief rehearsing his feats of war.” “To suppose,” says -Darwin, “that the females do not appreciate the beauty of the males, is -to admit that their splendid decorations, all their pomp and display, -are useless; and this is incredible.” - -But are there no other ways of accounting for all this “pomp and -display”? Certainly, several of them. We have seen that the most -vigorous males are those which are most highly ornamented, and that it -is the vigour and vivacity of the males that seems to decide the choice -of the females where there is any. Now instinct, _i.e._ inherited -experience, teaches the female the connection between vigour and display -of ornament, and influences her choice accordingly. Again, the males -indulge in their display for the purpose of arousing the attention of -the passive female. This supposition is rendered the more probable by -Darwin’s admission that “we must be cautious in concluding that the -wings are spread out solely for display, as some birds do so whose wings -are not beautiful.” - -A third motive of display is the need of finding an outlet for -overflowing nervous energy and excitement. To this Mr. Wallace refers as -follows: “At pairing time the male is in a state of excitement and full -of exuberant energy. Even unornamented birds flutter their wings or -spread them out, erect their tails or crests, and thus give vent to the -nervous excitability with which they are overcharged.” “It is not -improbable,” he continues,—and this suggests a fourth use of -display—"that crests and other erectile feathers may be primarily of use -in _frightening away enemies_, since they are generally erected when -angry or during combat." - -A fifth motive of display is suggested by an analogy furnished by human -butterflies and birds of Paradise. Among animals where the sexes differ, -it is commonly the male who is adorned the most. With us it is the -women. But woman’s fineries are not intended to charm the eyes of men, -but to excite one another’s rivalry and envy. Now it seems that male -birds, with whose plumes our heartless women are so fond of decking -themselves, are guilty of an analogous weakness. They will sometimes -display their ornaments, says Darwin, “when not in the presence of the -females, as occasionally occurs with grouse at their holy places, and as -may be noticed with the peacock; this latter bird, however, evidently -wishes for a spectator of some kind, and, as I have often seen, will -show off his finery before poultry or even pigs. All naturalists who -have closely attended to the habits of birds, whether in a state of -nature or under confinement, are unanimously of opinion that the males -take delight in displaying their beauty.” And, once more, “with birds of -Paradise a dozen or more full-plumaged males congregate in a tree to -hold a _dancing-party_, as it is called by the natives; and here they -fly about, raise their wings, elevate their exquisite plumes, and make -them vibrate; and the whole tree seems, as Mr. Wallace remarks, to be -filled with waving plumes.” - -But if it be the unanimous opinion of naturalists who have closely -studied the habits of birds, “that the males take delight in displaying -their beauty,” why should not the females also take pleasure in -witnessing this display? Perhaps they do, sometimes; for even Mr. -Wallace admits that “the display of the various ornamental appendages of -the male during courtship may be attractive” to the female. But there is -a world-wide difference between this assertion and the doctrine that the -females are so greatly and so constantly influenced by their æsthetic -taste that they always prefer among males those that are slightly more -beautiful than the others, thus increasing their personal beauty by -transmission. This is an assumption unsupported by facts, and rendered -unnecessary because Natural Selection accounts for all the phenomena in -question. - -Admiration of Personal Beauty does not appear, therefore, to enter -noticeably into animal love, except in so far as a slight amount of -æsthetic taste may be admitted in birds. This taste may be strengthened -by the sight of the brilliant masculine ornaments during the season of -love being associated with the remembered pleasures of courtship. - -Indirectly, however, female animals promote the cause of beauty by -preferring the more healthy and vigorous individuals, who are commonly -also the most beautiful ones. And is not the same true of females of the -human persuasion, who likewise are much less influenced in their choice -by the beauty than by the boldness, energy, vivacity, and “manliness” of -their suitors? It seems to hold true throughout nature that the female’s -Love is weak in the æsthetic element, her taste being little developed -and too often neutralised by unconscious utilitarian considerations. - - - - - LOVE AMONG SAVAGES - - - STRANGERS TO LOVE - -In passing from animals to human beings we find at first not only no -advance in the sexual relations, but a decided retrogression. Among some -species of birds, courtship and marriage are infinitely more refined and -noble than among the lowest savages; and it is especially in their -treatment of females, both before and after mating, that not only birds -but all animals show an immense superiority over primitive man; for male -animals only fight among themselves, and never maltreat the females. - -This anomaly is easily explained. The intellectual power and emotional -horizon of animals are limited; but in those directions in which Natural -Selection has made them _specialists_, they reach a high degree of -development, because inherited experience tends to give to their actions -an instinctive or quasi-instinctive precision and certainty. Among -primitive men, on the other hand, reason begins to encroach more on -instinct, but yet in such a feeble way as to make constant blunders -inevitable: thus proving that strong instincts, combined with a limited -intellectual plasticity, are a safer guide in life than a more plastic -but weak intellect minus the assistance of stereotyped instincts. - -If neither intellect nor instinct guide the primitive man to -well-regulated marital relations, such as we find among many animals, so -again his emotional life is too crude and limited to allow any scope for -the domestic affections. Inasmuch as, according to Sir John Lubbock, -gratitude, mercy, pity, chastity, forgiveness, humility, are ideas or -feelings unknown to many or most savage tribes, we should naturally -expect that such a highly-compounded and ethereal feeling as Romantic -Love could not exist among them. How could Love dwell in the heart of a -savage who baits a fish-hook with the flesh of a child; who eats his -wife when she has lost her beauty and the muscular power which enabled -her to do all his hard work; who abandons his aged parents, or kills -them, and whose greatest delight in life is to kill an enemy slowly amid -the most diabolic tortures? - -Or how could a primitive girl love a man whose courtship consists in -knocking her on the head and carrying her forcibly from her own to his -tribe? A man who, after a very brief period of caresses, neglects her, -takes perhaps another and younger wife, and reduces the first one to the -condition of a slave, refusing to let her eat at his table, throwing her -bones and remains, as to a dog, or even driving her away and killing -her, if she displeases him? These are extreme cases, but they are not -rare; and in a slightly modified form they are found throughout -savagedom. - -That Love is a sentiment unknown to savages has been frequently noted in -the works of anthropologists and tourists. When Ploss remarks that the -lowest savages “know as little of marriage relations as animals; still -less do they know the feeling we call Love,” he does a great injustice -to animals, as those who have read the preceding chapter must admit. -Letourneau, in his _Sociologie_, remarks: “Among the Cafres Cousas, -according to Lichtenstein, the sentiment of love does not constitute a -part of marriage. ‘The idea of love, as we understand it,’ says Du -Chaillu, in speaking of a tribe of the Gabon, ‘appears to be unknown to -this tribe.’” Monteiro, speaking of the polygamous tribes of Africa, -says: “The negro knows not love, affection, or jealousy.... In all the -long years I have been in Africa I have never seen a negro manifest the -least tenderness for or to a negress.... I have never seen a negro put -his arm round a woman’s waist, or give or receive any caress whatever -that would indicate the slightest loving regard or affection on either -side. They have no words or expressions in their language indicative of -affection or love.” - -Mr. Spencer, in commenting on this passage, remarks that “This testimony -harmonises with testimonies cited by Sir John Lubbock, to the effect -that the Hottentots ‘are so cold and indifferent to one another that you -would think there was no such thing as love between them’; that among -the Koussa Kaffirs there is ‘no feeling of love in marriage’; and that -in Yariba, ‘a man thinks as little of taking a wife as of cutting an ear -of corn—affection is altogether out of the question.’” - -Mr. Winwood Reade, on the other hand, informed Darwin that the West -Africans “are quite capable of falling in love, and of forming tender, -passionate, and faithful attachments.” And the anthropologist Waitz, -speaking of Polynesia, says that “examples of real passionate love are -not rare, and on the Fiji Islands it has happened that individuals -married against their will have committed suicide; although this has -only happened in the higher classes.” Unfortunately in these cases we -are left in doubt as to whether the reference is to Conjugal or to -Romantic Love; conjugal attachment, being of earlier growth than -Romantic Love, because the development of the latter was retarded by the -limited opportunities for prolonged Courtship and free Choice. - - - PRIMITIVE COURTSHIP - -In his anxiety to find cases of Romantic Love among North American and -other primitive peoples, Waitz is obliged to fall back on legends of -Lovers’ Leaps and Maiden Rocks, and on a poem about a South American -maiden who committed suicide on her lover’s grave to avoid falling into -the hands of the Spaniards. Legends and poems, unfortunately, do not -count for much as scientific evidence. At the same time, it would -doubtless be incorrect to assert on the strength of some of the -authorities just quoted that Love does not exist at all among savages, -and therefore to make the chapter on Love among Savages as brief as that -chapter on Snakes in Ireland. We shall find, on the contrary, that -several of Love’s “overtones” are occasionally present; and that though -full-fledged cupids may never appear with their poisoned arrows, -mischievous _amourettes_ sometimes do flit across the field of vision. -For the goddess of Love is ever watchful of an opportunity for one of -her emissaries to bag some game. - -Romantic Love is dependent on opportunities for Courtship. Among savages -and semi-civilised nations we find three grades of Courtship—Capture, -Purchase, and Service. These must be briefly examined in turn. - -(1) _Capture._—One of the most curious features of savage life is the -widely-prevalent custom called by M‘Lennan Exogamy, or marrying out. -This custom compels a man who wishes a wife of his own to steal or -purchase her of another tribe, private marriage within his own tribe -being considered criminal and even punishable with death. To this rule -of Exogamy Sir John Lubbock traces the origin of Monogamy. In his view -women were at first, like other kinds of property, held in common by the -tribe, any man being any woman’s husband _ad libitum_. No man could -therefore claim a woman for himself without infringing on the rights of -others. But if he stole a woman from another tribe, she became his -exclusive property, which he had a right to guard jealously, and to look -upon with the Pride of Conquest—a pride, however, quite distinct from -that which intoxicates a civilised lover when he finds, or fondly -imagines, that his goddess _has chosen him_ among all his rivals. The -primitive man’s pride is more like that of the warrior who wears a large -number of scalps in his belt; and as in his case marriage immediately -follows Capture, this feeling, moreover, belongs more properly to the -sphere of conjugal sentiment than to that of Love. - -This primitive form of courtship, it is obvious, is very much ruder than -that which prevails in the animal kingdom, where the males alone -maltreat one another, while in this early human courtship the woman, if -she resists, is simply knocked on the head, and her senseless body -carried off to the captor’s tent. Diefenbach relates concerning the -Polynesians that “if a girl was courted by two suitors, each of them -grasped one arm of the beloved and pulled her toward him; the stronger -one got her, but in some cases not before her limbs had been pulled out -of joint.” And Waitz says that “the girls were commonly abducted by -force, which led frequently to most violent fights, in which the girl -herself was occasionally wounded, or even killed, to prevent her from -falling into the hands of the enemy.” - -Mr. E. B. Tylor, after stating that marriage by Capture may be seen at -the present day among the fierce forest tribes of Brazil, continues: -“Ancient tradition knows this practice well, as where the men of -Benjamin carry off the daughters of Shiloh dancing at the feast, and in -the famous Roman tale of the rape of the Sabines, a legend putting in -historical form the wife-capture which in Roman custom remained as a -ceremony. What most clearly shows what a recognised old-world custom it -was, is its being thus kept up as a formality where milder manners -really prevailed. It had passed into this state among the Spartans, when -Plutarch says that though the marriage was really by friendly settlement -between the families, the bridegroom’s friends went through the pretence -of carrying off the bride by violence. Within a few generations the same -old habit was kept up in Wales, where the bridegroom and his friends, -mounted and armed as for war, carried off the bride; and in Ireland they -used even to hurl spears at the bride’s people, though at such a -distance that no one was hurt, except now and then by accident, as -happened when one Lord Howth lost an eye, which mischance seems to have -put an end to this curious relic of antiquity.” - -Moreover, we are told that “in our own marriages the ‘best man’ seems -originally to have been the chief abettor of the bridegroom in the act -of capture.” - -In a modified form “wife-capture” cannot be said to be extinct even in -this advanced age. Elopement is the modern name for it When the parents -dissent and the couple are very young, this climax of courtship -doubtless is often reprehensible. But in those cases where the consent -of all parties has been obtained, it ought to be universally adopted. -Sudden flight and an impromptu marriage would add much to the romance of -the honeymoon, and would enable the bridal couple to avoid the terrors -and stupid formalities of the wedding-day, the anticipation of which is -doubtless responsible for the ever-increasing number of cowardly -bachelors in the world. - -(2) _Purchase_ represents a somewhat higher stage of Courtship than -Capture. Like Capture this custom has existed among the peoples of the -five continents, and is still retained in some parts of Africa and -elsewhere. In Holstein, Germany, it prevailed in all its purity, -according to Ploss, till the end of the fifteenth century. Nor would it -be doing facts great violence to class our frequent money-marriages -under this head. - -There are two grades of the custom of Purchase. In the first the girl -has no choice whatever, but is sold by her father for so many cows or -camels, in some cases to the highest bidder. Among the Turcomans a wife -may be purchased for five camels if she be a girl, or for fifty if a -widow; whereas among the Tunguse a girl costs one to twenty reindeer, -while widows are considerably cheaper. In the second class of cases the -purchased girl is allowed a certain degree of liberty of choice, as we -shall see directly, under the head of Individual Preference. - -(3) _Service._—On the custom of securing a wife by means of services -rendered her parents, Mr. Spencer remarks: “The practice which Hebrew -tradition acquaints us with in the case of Jacob, proves to be a -widely-diffused practice. It is general with the Bhils, Ghonds, and Hill -tribes of Nepaul; it obtained in Java before Mahometanism was -introduced; it was common in ancient Peru and Central America; and among -sundry existing American races it still occurs. Obviously, a wife long -laboured for is likely to be more valued than one stolen or bought. -Obviously, too, the period of service, during which the betrothed girl -is looked upon as a future spouse, affords room for the growth of some -feeling higher than the merely instinctive—initiates something -approaching to the courtship and engagement of civilised peoples.” - - - INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE - -All the cases thus far referred to relate to what might be called -indirect or mediate courtship. When a girl is captured and knocked on -the head she can hardly be said to be courted and consulted as to her -wishes; and the man too, in such cases, owing to the dangers of the -sport, is apt to pay no great attention to a woman’s looks and -accomplishments, but to bag the first one that comes along. In courtship -by Purchase, again, the girl is rarely consulted as to her own -preferences, the addresses being paid to the father, who invariably -selects the wealthiest of the suitors, and only in rare cases allows the -daughter a choice, as among the Kaffirs if the suitors happen to be -equally well off. And thirdly, in courtship by Service, the suitor’s -work is not done to please the daughter, but to recompense the parents -for losing her. - -Yet there appear to be some instances of real courtship, in the modern -sense of the word, among the lower races, where the lovers pay their -addresses directly to the girl and she chooses or rejects at will. Thus, -among the Orang-Sakai, on the Malayan peninsula, the following custom -prevails, as described by Ploss: “On the wedding-day, the bride, in -presence of her relatives, and those of her lover, and many other -witnesses, is obliged to run into the forest. After a fixed interval the -bridegroom follows and seeks to catch her. If he succeeds in capturing -the bride she becomes his wife, otherwise he is compelled to renounce -her for ever. If therefore a girl dislikes her suitor, she can easily -escape from him and hide in the forest until the time allowed for his -pursuit has expired.” - -Darwin remarks, in trying to prove the existence of Sexual Selection -among the lower races, that “in utterly barbarous tribes the women have -more power in choosing, rejecting, and tempting their lovers, or of -afterwards changing their husbands, than might have been expected;” and -he cites the following cases, among others: “Amongst the Abipones, a man -on choosing a wife, bargains with the parents about the price. But ‘it -frequently happens that the girl rescinds what has been agreed upon -between the parents and the bridegroom, obstinately rejecting the very -mention of marriage.’ She often runs away, hides herself, and thus -eludes the bridegroom. Captain Musters, who lived with the Patagonians, -says that their marriages are always settled by inclination; ‘if the -parents make a match contrary to the daughter’s will, she refuses, and -is never compelled to comply.’ In Tierra del Fuego a young man first -obtains the consent of the parents by doing them some service, and then -he attempts to carry off the girl; ‘but if she is unwilling, she hides -herself in the woods until her admirer is heartily tired of looking for -her, and gives up the pursuit; but this seldom happens.’” - - - PERSONAL BEAUTY AND SEXUAL SELECTION - -Evidence proving that primitive women are influenced in their choice of -a mate by æsthetic considerations appears to be almost as scant as among -animals. Darwin, however, tries to prove that men owe their beards to -sexual or female selection; and the following more general instances may -be cited for what they are worth: Azara “describes how carefully a Guana -woman bargains for all sorts of privileges before accepting some one or -more husbands; and the men in consequence take unusual care of their -personal appearance.” Among the Kaffirs “very ugly, though rich men, -have been known to fail in getting wives. The girls, before consenting -to be betrothed, compel the men to show themselves off first in front -and then behind, and ‘exhibit their paces.’” - -In general, however, it seems that the women choose, not the handsomest -men, but those whose boldness, pugnacity, and virility promise them the -surest protection against enemies, and general domestic delights. Thus, -we read that “before he is allowed to marry, a young Dyack must prove -his bravery by bringing back the head of an enemy;” and that when the -Apaches warriors return unsuccessful, “the women turn away from them -with assured indifference and contempt. They are upbraided as cowards, -or for want of skill and tact, and are told that such men should not -have wives.” - -It must be remembered, however, that (as we have seen in the case of -plants and animals) the greatest amount of health, vigour, and courage -generally coincide with the greatest physical beauty; hence the -continued preference of the most energetic and lusty men by the superior -women who have a choice, has naturally tended to evolve a superior type -of manly beauty. - -In the case of men it seems much more probable that they frequently -select their wives in accordance with an æsthetic standard. The chiefs -of almost every tribe throughout the world have more than one wife; and -Mr. Mantell informed Darwin that until recently almost every girl in New -Zealand who was pretty, or promised to be pretty, was _tapu_ to some -chief; while among the Kaffirs, according to Mr. C. Hamilton, “the -chiefs generally have the pick of the women for many miles round, and -are most persevering in establishing or confirming their privilege.” In -the lower tribes, where “communal marriage” and marriage by Capture -alone prevail, æsthetic choice is of course out of the question, and -cannot make its appearance till we come to less pugnacious tribes, such -as the Dyacks, whose children “have the freedom implied by regular -courtship,” or the Samoans, whose children “have the degree of -independence implied by elopements when they cannot obtain parental -assent to their marriage” (Spencer). - -In general, however, among the lower races, Sexual or æsthetic Selection -leads to sorry results, owing to the bad taste of the selectors. The -standard of primitive taste is not harmonious proportion and capacity -for expression, but Exaggeration. The negro woman has naturally thicker -lips, more prominent cheek-bones, and a flatter nose than a white woman; -and in selecting a mate, preference is commonly given to the one whose -lips are thickest, nose most flattened, and cheek-bones most prominent: -thus producing gradually that monster of ugliness—the average negro -woman. What right we have to set ourselves up as judges, and claim that -our taste is superior to the negro’s, is a question which will be -discussed in a subsequent section of this treatise. - -One other point, however, may be referred to here, namely, that although -the æsthetic overtone of Love—the Admiration of Personal Beauty—may -enter into a savage’s amorous feelings, it is only the sensuous aspect -of it that affects him, the intellectual and moral sides being unknown -to him. His admiration is purely physical. He marries his chosen bride -when she is a mere child, and before the slightest spark of mental charm -can illumine her features and impart to them a superior beauty; and -subsequently, when experience has somewhat sharpened her intellectual -powers, hard labour has already destroyed all traces of her physical -beauty so that the combination of physical and mental charms which alone -can inspire the highest form of Love is never to be found in primitive -woman. - - - JEALOUSY AND POLYGAMY - -The moral mission of Jealousy, as stated on a preceding page, is, by -means of watchfulness and the inspiring of fear, to ensure fidelity and -chastity. Darwin says that from the strength of the feeling of jealousy -all through the animal kingdom, as well as from the analogy of the lower -animals, especially those which come nearest to man, he “cannot believe -that absolutely promiscuous intercourse prevailed in times past, shortly -before man attained to his present rank in the zoological scale.” This -may be true, yet it is astonishing to find how many of the lower tribes -are utterly unconcerned regarding the morals both of married and -unmarried women. A vast number of cases illustrating this absence of -jealousy are collected in Waitz’s _Anthropology_, Spencer’s _Sociology_, -the works of Lubbock, and especially in Ploss’s _Das Weib_, i. 205-214. -In some cases girls are allowed to do as they please until after -marriage, when they are jealously guarded; in other cases the reverse is -true. In some parts of Africa a breach of faith on the wife’s part is -regarded as an attack not on the husband’s honour but on his property; -hence a pecuniary compensation is all that is required. Lubbock -enumerates a large number of races among whom the lending of a wife or -daughter is a common and obligatory form of hospitality. And the -Chibchas of South America went so far in their indifference to virginity -that they considered a virgin bride to be unfortunate, “as she had not -inspired affection in men.” - -Jealousy for the possession of a woman, however, was much sooner -developed than jealous regard for her conduct. The statement of Sir John -Lubbock about the men of an Indian tribe, that they “fight for the -possession of the women, just like stags,” and similar statements -regarding other savages, imply that, just like stags, these men feel the -pangs of primitive Jealousy. - -Among polygamous nations the women, too, often fight for the men, -whose favourites in their absence are apt to suffer much at the hands -of jealous rivals. It is among the polygamous semi-civilised nations -in general that Jealousy asserts itself in the most shrill and -dissonant manner. It is not that bitter-sweet romantic Jealousy which -by its constant fluctuations between hope and doubt fans a modern -lover’s passion into brighter flames; it is a more vicious kind of -conjugal Jealousy which destroys domestic peace and plots the ruin of -rivals. In Madagascar, Mr. Spencer tells us, “the name for -Polygyny—‘fampovafesana’—signifies ‘the means of causing enmity’”; and -that kindred names are commonly applicable to it we are shown by their -use among the Hebrews: in the Mishna a man’s several wives are called -‘tzârot,’ that is, troubles, adversaries, or rivals. In modern Persia, -where polygamy prevails, the same state of affairs is encountered. -Says Ploss: “If there are several women in the house, each one -inhabits a separate division; in the houses of the wealthy each wife, -moreover, has her own servants. Constantly apprehending evil -intentions, no woman touches the dishes of a rival.” - -It is among the polygamous nations of the East, too, that history -records such a profusion of bloody wars of succession waged by -half-brothers; for how could fraternal or any other kind of domestic -affection flourish in families where the mothers are constantly goaded -by Jealousy into deadly hatred of one another? - - - MONOPOLY AND MONOGAMY - -The United States being a “free country,” its government has sometimes -been blamed by “freethinkers” for attempting to repress Mormon Polygamy. -But a free country is not one in which social experiments injurious to -public welfare are to be necessarily allowed. Readers of history and -anthropology know that polygamy is an experiment which has been tried so -often with disastrous social results, that it may be looked upon safely -as criminal and treated accordingly. Even the forcible argument of that -spiteful old pessimist, Schopenhauer, that polygamy should be introduced -because it would rid the world of old maids, does not save the -institution; since it is well—for the prospects of Beauty, at any -rate—that some women should be “eliminated” in the form of old maids. - -Among the causes which tended to make polygamy the commonest form of -marriage among savages, four may be briefly enumerated: (1) The constant -wars among the tribes decimated the men, leaving a larger proportion of -women than men, although this was to some extent neutralised by the -habit of female infanticide, which the women indulged in to make -themselves more cherished through scarcity and, possibly, to preserve -their beauty; (2) The women being commonly secured as booty in war, it -was naturally looked on as an honour and a sign of valour to have more -than one wife; (3) Women being regarded and treated as slaves, the more -a man had of them the more they could, by their combined labour, -increase his wealth and influence in the tribe; (4) The rapid decay of -the youthful beauty of primitive woman, naturally inclined her husband, -whose affection was solely based on those physical charms, to add a -second or third, younger woman to his harem. - -As woman’s position improved with advancing civilisation, these -influences favouring polygamy were gradually weakened; and as in -treating of Love among Animals, we found the most remarkable instances -of affection—conjugal and romantic—among birds, who are mostly -monogamous; so, among the lower races of man, monogamy is commonly a -sign of superior culture and higher development of the affections. And -this might have been foreseen _a priori_, inasmuch as monogamy is the -only marital relation compatible with that Monopoly of affection which -is one of the conditions of Romantic Love. How could a man feel an -exclusive amorous interest in his bride, knowing that in a few months or -years another would come to claim half his interest? or how could the -bride concentrate all her Love on a man of whom she knew that he could -give her only half or a smaller fraction of his affection? - -A similar view is taken by Mr. Spencer. Monogamic unions, he says, “tend -in no small degree indirectly to raise the quality of adult life, by -giving a permanent and deep source of æsthetic interest. On recalling -the many and keen pleasures derived from music, poetry, fiction, the -drama, etc.; and on remembering that their predominant theme is the -passion of love, we shall see that to monogamy, which has developed this -passion, we owe a large part of the gratifications which fill our -leisure hours.” - - - PRIMITIVE COYNESS - -Among the Samoiedes, says Klemm, “a man purchases a wife for a number of -reindeer, varying from five to twenty; the bride, as is the case also in -Greenland, struggles violently against leaving the paternal house, and -commonly she has to be caught forcibly and bound on the bridegroom’s -sledge.” In some of the Bedouin tribes the destined bride runs from tent -to tent to escape being brought to the bridegroom. When an Esquimaux -girl is asked in marriage, says Kranz (quoted by Mr. Spencer), she -“directly falls into the greatest apparent consternation and runs out of -doors, tearing her bunch of hair; for single women always affect the -utmost bashfulness and aversion to any proposal of marriage, lest they -should lose their reputation for modesty.” So among the Bushmen a -lover’s attentions “are received with an affectation of great alarm and -disinclination on her part”; while an Arab bride “defends herself with -stones, and often inflicts wounds on the young men, even though she does -not dislike the lover; for according to custom, the more she struggles, -bites, kicks, cries, and strikes, the more she is applauded ever after -by her own companions.” - -Obviously these glacier, forest, and desert belles have a somewhat -cruder way than our city belles of hiding their feelings. - -Mr. Spencer refers to the Coyness of these maidens as one motive or -cause of wife-capture, but he does not inquire into the origin of -Coyness itself, which is a much more interesting point in the psychology -of Love. The fear “lest they should lose their reputation for modesty,” -mentioned above, is the most obvious cause of this exaggerated -resistance, as it is of the excessive prudishness often encountered in -some European civilised countries of to-day. Again, the sight of the -harsh treatment to which her married sisters or friends are subjected, -would make the primitive bride naturally averse to exchange her maiden -freedom for conjugal slavery. - -It seems, however, that in most cases, the Coyness is less real than -simulated; and for this form of Coyness—reversing Mr. Spencer’s -reasoning—we may say that Exogamy, or Capture, is responsible. For since -Capture implies courage and valour on the part of the husband, it may -have been to secure the “prestige of a foreign marriage”—as fashionable -novelists would say—that the form of Capture was imitated in cases where -there was no opposition, either on the part of the girl or her parents. - -Another explanation of sham Coyness is afforded by the following case: -Among the inhabitants of the Volga region, in Russia, the bride is -occasionally captured and carried off, though here too there is no -opposition on her part or from her parents. The cause of this procedure -is the desire to avoid the expenses of the marriage ceremony, which in -that region are out of all proportion to the means of the lower classes. - -Finally it may be suggested that Coyness, so far as it really exists in -the primitive maiden, owes its origin to the instinctive perception that -the men value them more if they do not throw themselves into their arms -on the first impulse. And more than anything else, this attitude of -reserve feeds the flames of Romantic Love by transferring its delights -and pangs to the imagination. - -Yet, after all, manifestations of Coyness must be the exception and not -the rule in the lower races, inasmuch as in the vast majority of cases, -where no choice is allowed the bride, there is little or no opportunity -for the exercise of such a trait. - -Of GALLANTRY I have not succeeded in discovering any traces in the -records of savage life, except possibly in the case of the natives of -Kamtchatka, where the wooer has to go into service for his bride, and -during this time endeavours constantly to lighten her labours and make -himself agreeable to her. So far as Gallantry occurs, it is more likely -to be a feminine trait—as among one of the North American Indian tribes, -where the maiden cooks her suitor’s game, and sends him back the best -morsels with presents; or as with another tribe, the Osages, where the -maidens pay court to the warriors by offering them ears of corn. - -As for the remaining characters of Romantic Love, which require a vivid -imagination and persistent emotions for their realisation, it would be -useless to look for them in Savagedom—except perhaps in those -infinitesimal proportions in which various chemical substances are found -by analysts in mineral waters. The following may be offered as an -approximate list of the ingredients in the Love of savage and -semi-civilised peoples:— - - Selfishness 25·7684 - Inconstancy 20·3701 - Jealousy 0 to 20·7904 - Coyness ” 10·5523 - Individual Preference ” 5·0073 - Personal Beauty ” 5·7002 - Monopoly ” 7·3024 - Pride of Possession 4·5082 - Sympathy 0·0000 - Gallantry 0·0006 - Self-Sacrifice Traces - Ecstatic Adoration ” - Mixed Emotions ” - - - CAN AMERICAN NEGROES LOVE? - -It is a very interesting question how far the negroes transplanted to -America, who have adopted so many of the habits and ways of thinking of -their white neighbours, are capable of forming a true romantic -attachment, characterised by the various traits described in this work. -I have not been able to find any conclusive evidence on this head; and -should any readers of this book positively know any cases, I should be -greatly obliged if they would forward a detailed account of them to me, -in care of the publisher. - -As regards a negro’s capacity for falling in Love with a white woman, -the following interesting communication[1] appeared in the _New York -Nation_, 12th February 1885: “In corroboration of ‘Bill Arp’s’ view, -referred to in No. 1020 of the _Nation_, that negroes, as a race, do not -desire to ‘mix’ with the white race, I may cite a remark recently made -by a negro carpenter to a friend of mine. The latter said to him, as a -village belle passed them on the street, ‘Charles, don’t you think -that’s a very handsome young lady?’ ‘I reckon so,’ he answered -doubtfully, and immediately added, ‘Fact is, boss, us coloured folks -don’t think white ladies handsome; we like ’em coloured the best.’ - -“Had it been otherwise there would, doubtless, have been innumerable -instances, in the North as well as at the South, of love-longings on the -part of negro men toward girls of the dominant race. Yet during all the -years I have spent in the Southern States, I never knew or heard of any -instances of this kind, and their exceptional character in the North -must be known to all your readers. The hopelessness of such attachments -would, of course, diminish their number; but fancy is always free, and -‘hopeless attachments’ among members of the same race are as common now -as when Petrarch sighed for Laura, and Tasso wrote ‘The throne of Cupid -has an easy stair,’ himself having climbed it uninspired by hope. The -existence of many persons of mixed blood throughout the country affords -no proof that the two races feel toward each other the attraction of -love; for the fathers, in these cases, are almost invariably white, and -the offspring cannot be called ‘love-children,’ but the fruit of mere -passion linked with opportunity.” - -Footnote 1: - - Signed Sue Harry Clagett. - - - - - HISTORY OF LOVE - - -It would be a profitless task to hunt for the first traces of the -various elements of Love in the records of all the nations of antiquity; -for we meet almost everywhere with the same old story of Romantic Love -impeded in its growth or its very existence by the degraded position of -women, and by the absence of opportunities for courtship, and for free -matrimonial choice. A few remarks, however, must be made concerning Love -among the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, Greeks, Romans, and our Aryan -kinsfolk in India, before passing on to Mediæval and Modern Love. - - - - - LOVE IN EGYPT - - -Dr. Georg Ebers, the Leipzig professor, and author of the popular series -of historic Egyptian novels, remarks that “if it is true that a nation’s -degree of culture can be estimated by the more or less favourable -position accorded its women, then Egyptian culture ranks above that of -all other ancient peoples.” - -The women of ancient Egypt were not kept in seclusion like those of -Greece. They did their own marketing, and had other domestic and public -liberties and privileges which astonished the Greek historian Herodotus, -who also mentions that although polygamy was tolerated among them, -monogamy was the rule. Inasmuch as the Egyptians had an advanced -culture, invented many arts, promoted the sciences, and were industrial -rather than militant in their occupations, it is possible that several -of the more refined elements of Romantic Love may have existed among -them; for just as we have seen that some animals have higher notions of -love, conjugal and romantic, than some savages, although the latter -represent a later stage of evolution, so it seems probable that among -the nations of antiquity Love did not progress steadily, year by year; -but that some nations had more and some less of it; while the -acquisitions of one period may have been lost in evil and corrupt times -following, as was certainly the case in India. - -Since we have no such extensive literature of Egypt as we have of the -Greeks, Romans, and Hebrews, it is not easy to arrive at definite -conclusions. But the Egyptian custom of forming “trial marriages” for -one year, and the ease with which a husband could divorce and expel his -wife by simply pronouncing three words in her presence do not harmonise -with our modern notions of Love. How scornfully a modern Romeo would -reject the very notion of such a trial-marriage! for does he not feel -_absolutely_ certain that his Love is eternal and unalterable? - -The institution of trial-marriages seems to point to the conclusion that -the Egyptians, like the Greeks, looked upon marriage primarily as a -means of augmenting the family and the state, and not as a union of -loving souls—children or no children—which is the modern ideal. - -Professor Ebers of course has a right to make use of a poetic license in -painting the Love affairs of his Egyptian heroes and heroines in modern -colours, as Shakspere does in _Antony and Cleopatra_. At the same time -it would give an added flavour to historic romances if their pictures of -domestic and public life were characterised by _emotional realism_ as -well as by general antiquarian accuracy. The elaborate analysis of Love, -for the first time attempted in the present monograph, should facilitate -this task for novelists. - - - - - ANCIENT HEBREW LOVE - - -It is almost startling to find, on consulting a Concordance of the Old -and New Testaments, that in the whole of the Bible there is not a single -reference to Romantic Love. Had this sentiment existed among the ancient -Hebrews as it does among their descendants to-day, it is obvious that it -could not possibly have been ignored in the Book of Books, which so -eloquently and poetically discourses of everything else that is of vital -interest to man. Conjugal Love (which apparently antedates Romantic Love -in every nation) is indeed repeatedly referred to and enjoined, as well -as the other family affections; but in the remaining cases the word Love -is always used in the sense of religious veneration, or of regard for a -neighbour or an enemy. - -This absence of any reference to Romantic Love is all the more -surprising in view of the fact that among the ancient Hebrews woman was -held more in honour than with any other Oriental nation, ancient or -modern. Thus we are told in M‘Clintock and Strong’s _Cyclopædia of -Biblical etc. Literature_, that “the seclusion of the harem and the -habits consequent upon it were utterly unknown in early times, and the -condition of the Oriental woman, as pictured to us in the Bible, -contrasts most favourably with that of her modern representative. There -is abundant evidence that women, whether married or unmarried, went -about with their faces unveiled. An unmarried woman might meet and -converse with men, even strangers, in a public place; she might be found -alone in the country without any reflection on her character; or she -might appear in a court of justice.” The wife “entertained guests at her -own desire in the absence of her husband, and sometimes even in defiance -of his wishes.” - -Since, therefore, the Hebrew woman was not “the husband’s slave but his -companion,” how are we to account for the absence of Love? - -Some light is thrown on the matter by the prevalence of polygamy, which, -as we have seen, is inimical to the growth of Love. Polygamy, though not -universal, was sanctioned by the Mosaic law, except in the case of -priests. “The secondary wife was regarded by the Hebrews as a wife, and -her rights were secured by law.” In the cases of Abraham and Jacob, -polygamy was resorted to at the request of their own wives, “under the -idea that children born to a slave were in the eye of the law the -children of the mistress.” Now if a woman advises her own husband to -take another wife, there must be a total absence of Jealousy and -Monopoly—the two elements of Romantic Love which pass into conjugal -affection without diminution of force. - -Again, although Hebrew women are said to have had considerable liberty -of going about alone in town and country, this probably refers in most -cases to the privilege of tending sheep and of fetching water at the -well. “From all education in general,” says Ploss, “as well as _from -social intercourse with men, woman was excluded_; her destination being -simply to increase the number of children, and take care of household -matters. She lived a quiet life, merely for her husband, who, indeed, -treated her with respect and consideration, but without feeling any -special tenderness toward her.” - -It is the line which I have italicised in the above quotation that -suggests the principal reason of the non-existence of Love in Biblical -times: There were no meetings of the young, no opportunities for -Courtship, the indispensable condition of Love, which requires time and -opportunity for its growth. And not only were there no regular -opportunities for Courtship, but if they offered themselves casually, -the young folks could not derive much benefit, from them; for not only -the daughter’s choice, but even the son’s was neutralised by the -parental command. “Fathers from the beginning considered it both their -duty and prerogative to find or select wives _for their sons_ (Gen. -xxiv. 3; xxxviii. 6). In the absence of the father, the selection -devolved upon the mother (Gen. xxi. 21). Even in cases where the wishes -of the son were consulted, the proposals were made by the father (Gen. -xxxiv. 4, 8); and the violation of this parental prerogative on the part -of the son was ‘a grief of mind’ to the father (Gen. xxvi. 35). The -proposals were generally made by the parents of the young man, except -when there was a difference of rank, in which case the negotiations -proceeded from the father of the maiden (Exod. ii. 21), and when -accepted by the parents on both sides, sometimes also consulting the -opinion of the adult brothers of the maiden (Gen. xxiv. 51; xxxiv. 11), -the matter was considered as settled, _without requiring the consent of -the bride_” (M‘Clintock and Strong). - -But how about the Song of Solomon—the Song of Songs? Is not that a song -of Love, and an exception to our general statement? It appears so at -first sight; and the German writer Herder, in his detailed and glowing -analysis of it, declares that it depicts love “from its first origin, -from its tenderest bud, through all stages and conditions of its growth, -its flowering, its maturing, to the ripe fruit and new offshoot.” -Herder, however, is a very unsafe and shallow guide in this matter. An -attempt has lately been made to rehabilitate him in Germany, where his -fame has become almost extinct; but in vain, for his pompous, stilted -rhetoric and imagery cannot conceal from modern readers his lack of -ideas and limited knowledge of facts. He asserts that, as there is only -one Goodness, one Truth, so there is but one Love (or Affection). If you -do not love your wife, he says, you will not love your friend, parents, -or child. A writer whose notions of the psychology of love are so -excessively crude cannot be considered a trustworthy judge in the matter -in question. So far as love is referred to in the Song of Solomon, it is -probable that conjugal affection is meant. - -It is a curious fact that of the famous German, English, and French -theologians who have written commentaries on the Song of Songs, no two -seem to agree in their interpretation of its plot and significance. It -is now generally agreed, too, that the Song was not written by Solomon, -but some time after him. It seems, indeed, incredible that a monarch who -had a thousand wives, and whose affections must have been torn into a -thousand shreds, and cannot have been very lasting, should have written -these marvellous lines: “For love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel -as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most -vehement flame. Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods -drown it: if a man should give all the substance of his house for love, -it would utterly be contemned.” - -This passage has a remarkably modern and romantic sound—so modern and -romantic that it would not seem out of place in Shakspere. But it needs -no knowledge of Hebrew to see that the responsibility for this modern -sound rests with the English translators. Luther’s more literal version -appears much less modern. Indeed, throughout the Song of Solomon the -English translators have idealised the language of passion, in harmony -with modern notions on the subject; so that it is only on reading -Luther’s version that one begins to understand why the Talmudists did -not allow the Jews to read this book before their thirtieth year. - -Perhaps the most ingenious and consistent of the numerous -interpretations of the Song of Solomon is that given by M. Chas. Bruston -in the _Encyclopædie des Sciences Religieuses_ (ii. 610-612). The -repetition of the flatteries occurring in the poem he explains by -showing that the second time they refer, not to the Sulamite, but to a -princess of Lebanon whom Solomon married. Hence, he insists, the -repetition is not so much a literary blemish as an indication “combien -est vil et méprisable l’amour sensuel et polygame, qui prodigue -indifférement les mêmes flatteries a des femmes différentes.” - -The imaginative and poetic terms in which feminine charms are depicted -in the Song of Songs show that, nevertheless, at least the sensuous -phase of the overtone of Personal Admiration was strongly developed -among the ancient Hebrews; not strongly enough, however, to lead them, -as it led other ancient nations, to embody their ideals of feminine and -masculine beauty in marble monuments of sculpture. - - - - - ANCIENT ARYAN LOVE - - -As it is among the Aryan or “Indo-Germanic” races of Europe and America -that Modern Love has produced its most beautiful blossoms, it is, even -more than in the case of the non-Aryan Jews and Egyptians, of interest -to know something concerning its prevalence among the Asiatic peoples -who appear as the nearest modern representatives of our remote Aryan -ancestors. - -In no country, perhaps, has the position of woman differed so greatly at -various epochs as in India. Previous to the introduction of Brahminism, -women were held in esteem, enjoyed diverse privileges, and were allowed -free social intercourse with the men, while monogamy was the recognised -form of marriage. The Brahmins, however, introduced polygamy, setting a -good example by sometimes marrying a whole family, “old and young, -daughters, aunts, sisters, and cousins”; and one case is known of a -Brahmin who had 120 wives, according to Schweiger Lerchenfeld. Family -feeling was subordinated to considerations of caste, and by a -sophistical interpretation of ancient laws the Brahmins introduced the -custom of Suttee, or the burning alive of widows on the deceased -husband’s funeral pyre. This habit is sometimes regarded as the very -apotheosis of conjugal affection, but it was simply what is known in -modern psychology as an epidemic delusion; the poor women being rendered -willing to sacrifice themselves by the doctrine that to die in this way -was something specially voluptuous and meritorious; while those who -refused to be immolated were treated as social outcasts who were not -allowed to marry again or to adorn their persons in any way. - -The references to women in the laws of Manu show in what low esteem they -came to be held in India. A few of the maxims contained in this work may -be cited: “Of dishonour woman is the cause; of enmity woman is the -cause; of mundane existence woman is the cause; hence woman is to be -avoided.” “A girl, a maiden, a wife shall never do anything in -accordance with her own will, not even in her own house.” “A woman shall -serve her husband all life long, and remain true to him even after -death; even though he should deceive her, love another, and be devoid of -good qualities, a good wife should nevertheless revere him as if he were -a god; she must not displease him in anything, neither in life nor after -his death.” So wretched, indeed, became woman’s lot that Indian mothers, -it is said, “often drown their female children in the sacred streams of -India, to preserve them from the fate awaiting them in life.” Letourneau -states that “up to modern times Hindoo laws and manners have been -modelled after the sacred precepts. When Somerat made his voyage, it was -considered improper for a respectable woman to know how to read or -dance. These futile accomplishments were left to the courtesan, the -Bayadere.” - - - HINDOO LOVE MAXIMS - -That such a state of affairs was not favourable to Romantic Love is -obvious. Nevertheless there appears to have been a period—about 1200 or -1500 years ago—when some of the inhabitants of India were familiar with -most of the emotions which enter into Modern Love. This evidence is -contained in the _Seven Hundred Maxims of Hâla_, a collection of poetic -utterances dating back not further than the third century of our era, -and comprising productions by various authors, including as many as -sixteen of the female persuasion. They are written in a sister-language -of Sanscrit, the Prâkrit; and their form indicates that they were -intended to be sung. Herr Albrecht Weber remarks in the _Deutsche -Rundschau_ with reference to this collection: “At the very beginning of -our acquaintance with Sanscrit literature, towards the end of the last -century, it was noticed, and was claimed forthwith as an eloquent proof -of antique relationship, that Indian poetry, especially of the amatory -kind, is in character remarkably allied to our own modern poetry. The -sentimental qualities of modern verse, in one word, were traced in -Indian poetry in a much higher degree than they had been found in Greek -and Roman literature; and this discovery awakened at once, notably in -Germany, a sympathetic interest in a country whose poets spoke a -language so well known to our hearts, as though they had been born among -ourselves.” - -Some of these maxims apparently depict the family life of the lower -classes; others appear rather as if they had been intended to be sung by -the Bayaderes, or singing and dancing girls of the Buddhist temples, who -emancipated themselves from the domestic and educational restrictions -placed on other women, and sought to fascinate men with their wit, love, -and æsthetic accomplishments. This suggestion is borne out by the fact -that most of the maxims are feminine utterances, and often of -questionable moral character. Although, therefore, some of these -revelations of early Aryan Love have an unpleasant by-flavour, they are -yet extremely interesting as showing how dependent Romantic Love is on -the freedom and the intellectual and æsthetic culture of woman. - -We find in the maxims of Halâ evidences of that important overtone of -Love, Ecstatic Adoration or Poetic Hyperbole, which we have not -encountered elsewhere, so far. What could be more modern than this:— - -“Although all my possessions were burnt in the village fire, yet is my -heart delighted, since _he_ took the buckets from me when they were -passed from hand to hand.” - -Or this:— - -“O thou who art skilled in cookery, restrain thy anger! The reason why -the fire refuses to burn, and only smokes, is that it may the longer -drink in the breath of your mouth, fragrant as the red potato-blossoms.” - -The following two show how Personal Beauty was appreciated:— - -“He sees nothing but her face, and she too is quite intoxicated by his -looks. Both, satisfied with each other, act as if in the whole world -there were no other women or men.” - -“Other beauties likewise have in their faces beautiful, wide black eyes, -with long lashes,—but no one else understands as she does how to use -them.” - -How Love establishes his Monopoly in heart and mind, tolerating no other -thought, is thus shown:— - -“She stares without a (visible) object, draws a deep sigh, laughs into -empty space, mutters unintelligible words—forsooth, there must be -something on her heart.” - -Ovid himself might have written the following, showing Love’s -inconstancy:— - -“Love departs when lovers are separated; it departs when they see too -much of each other; it departs in consequence of malicious gossip; aye, -it departs also without these causes.” - -The nature of Coyness is evidently understood, for the lover is thus -admonished:— - -“My son, such is the nature of love, suddenly to get angry, to make up -again in a moment, to dissemble its language, to tease immoderately.” - -And yet the poet deems it necessary to tell a sweetheart that— - -“By forgiving him at first sight, you foolish girl, you deprived -yourself of many pleasures,—of his prostration at your feet [a trace of -Gallantry], of a kiss passionately stolen.” - -The sadness of separation thus finds utterance:— - -“As is sickness without a physician; as living with relatives when one -is poor,—as the sight of an enemy’s prosperity,—so is it difficult to -endure separation from you.” - -Thus we find in Ancient Aryan Love some of the leading features of -modern romantic passion. - - - - - GREEK LOVE - - -The Greeks, too, were Aryans, and they were the most refined and -æsthetic nation of antiquity; yet we look in vain in their literature -for delineations of that Romantic Love which, according to our notions, -ought to accompany so high a degree of culture. - - - FAMILY AFFECTIONS - -Conjugal tenderness and the other family affections appear; indeed, to -have been known and cherished by the Greeks at all times, in the days of -Athenian supremacy, when women were kept in entire seclusion, no less -than in Homeric times, when they seem to have enjoyed more liberty of -action. Plutarch tells us in his _Conjugal Precepts_ that “With women -tenderness of heart is indicated by a pleasing countenance, by sweetness -of speech, by an affectionate grace, and by a high degree of -sensitiveness;” and Mr. Lecky thus eloquently sums up the evidence that -the Greeks appreciated the various forms of domestic affection:— - -“The types of female excellence which are contained in the Greek poems, -while they are among the earliest, are also among the most perfect in -the literature of mankind. The conjugal tenderness of Hector and -Andromache; the unwearied fidelity of Penelope, awaiting through the -long revolving years the return of her storm-tossed husband, who looked -forward to her as the crown of all his labours; the heroic love of -Alcestis, voluntarily dying that her husband might live; the filial -piety of Antigone; the majestic grandeur of the death of Polyxena; the -more subdued and saintly resignation of Iphigenia, excusing with her -last breath the father who had condemned her; the joyous, modest, and -loving Nausicaa, whose figure shines like a perfect idyll among the -tragedies of the _Odyssey_—all these are pictures of perennial beauty, -which Rome and Christendom, chivalry and modern civilisation, have -neither eclipsed nor transcended. Virgin modesty and conjugal fidelity, -the graces as well as the virtues of the most perfect womanhood, have -never been more exquisitely portrayed.” - - - NO LOVE-STORIES - -But Mr. Lecky, ignoring, like most writers, the enormous difference -between conjugal and romantic love, forgets to notice the absolute -silence of Greek literature on the subject of pre-matrimonial -infatuation. Not one of the Greek tragedies is a “love-drama”; romantic -love does not appear even in the writings of Euripides, who has so much -to say about women, and who named most of his plays after his heroines. -Had Love been known to Sophokles and Euripides, as it was known to -Shakspere and Goethe, we should no doubt have a Greek _Romeo and Juliet_ -and a Greek _Faust_. For although there were certain limitations as to -the scope and the _dramatis personæ_ of a Greek play, there was nothing -whatever to exclude a love-story. And when we consider how the sentiment -of Love colours all modern literature; how almost impossible it is for a -play or a novel to succeed unless it embodies a love-story: the absolute -ignoring of this passion in Greek literature forces on us the inevitable -conclusion that Romantic Love was unknown to them, or only so faintly -developed as to excite no interest whatever. - -And this conclusion harmonises with the dictum of the best Greek -scholars. It is true that Becker, in his _Charikles_, referring to the -frequency with which the comedians introduce a youth desperately -enamoured of a girl, faintly objects to the statement that “There is no -instance of an Athenian falling in love with a free-born woman, and -marrying her from violent passion,”—made by Müller in his famous work on -the Dorians. But he makes the fatal admission that “Sensuality was the -soil from which such passion sprang, and none other than a sensual love -was acknowledged between man and wife.” No one, of course, would deny -that sensual passion prevailed in Athens; but sensuality is the very -antipode of Romantic Love. - - - WOMAN’S POSITION - -How are we to account for this anomaly—the absence of sexual romance in -a nation which was so passionately enamoured of Beauty in its various -forms? - -The answer is to be found in the non-existence of opportunities for -courtship, and the degraded position of woman. The following sentences, -culled at random from Becker’s classical work, show how the Greek men -regarded their women, whom they considered inferior to themselves in -heart as well as in intellect. Iphigenia herself is made to admit by -Euripides that one man is worth more than a myriad of women:— - - εἶς γ’ ανὴρ κρείσσων γυναικῶν μυρίων. - -“The ἀρετή (virtue) of which a woman was thought capable in that age -differed but little from that of a faithful slave.” “Except in her own -immediate circle, a woman’s existence was scarcely recognised.” “It was -quite a Grecian view of the case to consider a wife as a necessary -evil.” "Athenians, in speaking of their wives and children, generally -said τέκνα καὶ γυναῖκας, putting their wives last: a phrase which -indicates very clearly what was the tone of feeling on this subject" -(Smith). - -Women “were not allowed to conclude any bargain or transaction of -consequence on their own account,” though Plato urged that this -concession should be made to them; and it was even “enacted that -everything a man did by the counsel or request of a woman should be -null.” “There were no educational institutions for girls, nor any -private teachers at home.” “Hence there were no scientifically-learned -ladies, with the exception of the Hetæræ.” - - - CHAPERONAGE _VERSUS_ COURTSHIP - -In such an arid, rocky soil Love of course could not grow or even -germinate. Still more fatal to the romantic passion, however, was the -absolute seclusion of the sexes, precluding all possibility of courtship -and free choice among the young. Greek women were not allowed to enjoy -the society of men, nor to attend “those public spectacles which were -the chief means of Athenian culture,” and which would have afforded the -young folks an opportunity of seeing and falling in love with one -another. The wife was not even permitted to eat with her husband if male -visitors were present, but had to retire to her private apartments, so -absurd was the jealousy of the men. “The maidens lived in the greatest -seclusion till their marriage, and, so to speak, regularly under lock -and key,” which had the “effect of rendering the girls excessively -bashful, and even prudish,” and so stupid, in all probability, that no -wonder the men considered marriage a punishment, and sought -entertainment with the educated Hetæræ—as to-day in France. Even young -married women were obliged to have a chaperon. “No respectable lady -thought of going out without a female slave.” “Even the married woman -shrank back and blushed if she chanced to be seen at the window by a -man.” - - - PLATO ON COURTSHIP - -It is one of the most remarkable facts in the history of Love and of -social philosophy that Plato, the most modern of all ancient thinkers, -_foresaw the importance of pre-matrimonial acquaintance_ as the basis of -a rational and happy marriage choice long before any other writer. -Making allowance for the fact that Greek notions as to what is within -“the rules of modesty” differed from our own, the following passage -cannot be too deeply pondered: “People,” Plato tells us in the sixth -book of the _Laws_ (p. 771), “must be acquainted with those into whose -families and to whom they marry and are given in marriage; in such -matters as far as possible to avoid mistakes is all-important, and with -this serious purpose let games be instituted, in which youths and -maidens shall dance together, seeing and being seen naked, at a proper -age and on a suitable occasion, not transgressing the rules of modesty.” - - - PARENTAL _VERSUS_ LOVERS’ CHOICE - -Marriages in Greece were often arranged for girls while they were mere -children, of course without any reference to their choice, since they -were looked upon as the _property_ of the father, who could dispose of -them at his pleasure. Besides these early betrothals there was an -obstacle to free choice in the Athenian law which forbade a citizen -under very severe penalties to marry a foreigner. And again, “In the -case of a father dying intestate, and without male children, his heiress -had no choice in marriage; she was compelled by law to marry her nearest -kinsman, not in the ascending line.... Where there were several -co-heiresses, they were respectively married to their kinsmen, the -nearest having the first choice”—a law resembling one in the Jewish -code, and exemplified by Ruth, as pointed out in Smith’s _Dictionary_. - -How Sexual Selection was rendered impracticable in Greece is further -shown in the following citations from Becker: “The choice of the bride -seldom depended on previous, or at least on intimate acquaintance. More -attention was generally paid to the position of a damsel’s family, and -the amount of her dowry, than to her _personal qualities_.” "It was -usual for a father to choose for his son a wife, and one perhaps whom -the bridegroom had never seen." “Widows frequently married again; this -was often in compliance with the testamentary dispositions of their -husbands, as little regard being paid to their wishes as in the case of -girls.” - -Thus we see that three causes combined to prevent the growth of Romantic -Love in Greece—the degraded position of women, the absence of direct -Courtship, and the impossibility of exercising Individual Preference. - - - THE HETÆRÆ - -That the absolute seclusion and chaperonage of the young women, and -their consequent ignorance and insipidity, were the reasons why they -could neither feel nor inspire Romantic Love, is shown by the fact that -there existed in Greece in the time of Perikles a mentally superior -class of women who appear to have aroused Love, or something very like -it, by means of the artistic and intellectual charms which they united -with their physical beauty. These women were called Ἡταίραι, or -_companions_, evidently to distinguish them from the domestic women who -were no “companions” after the first charm of novelty had worn away: a -state of affairs for which of course the men themselves, who gave them -no education and locked them up, were to blame. - -What seems paradoxical is that these women, who were morally inferior to -the others, should have been the first to inspire in men a more -_refined_ sort of Love; but the paradox is rendered the more probable by -the circumstance that in India, likewise, we found the first traces of -Romantic Love among the Bayaderes, a class corresponding to the Hetæræ. - -There is reason to believe that Aspasia, who aided the greatest -statesman of antiquity in writing his stirring speeches, inspired not -only him but other great contemporaries with true Romantic passion—which -they were enabled to feel because men of genius are not only -intellectually but also emotionally ahead of their time. - -Diotima was another of these women. She was also revered as a -prophetess, and is credited by Plato with having given Sokrates, and -through him Greece, the first adequate discourse on Love—a discourse, we -may add, in which some flashes of true modern insight are mingled with -the curiously confused notions of the Greeks on the subject of Love and -Friendship. What these notions were is best seen by briefly considering -the peculiarities of - - - PLATONIC LOVE - -On this subject the most incorrect and absurd notions universally -pervade modern literature and conversation. As commonly understood, -“Platonic Love” means a friendship between a man and a woman from which -all traces of passion are excluded. Such a notion is utterly foreign to -Plato’s way of thinking, and is nowhere referred to in his writings. -Platonic love has nothing to do with women whatever. It is an attachment -between a man and a youth, which may be defined as friendship united -with the ecstatic ardour which in modern life is associated only with -Romantic Love. - -Mr. George Grote thus describes what he calls the “truly Platonic -conception of love”. It is “a vehement impulse towards mental communion -with some favoured youth, in view of producing mental improvement, good, -and happiness to both persons concerned: the same impulse afterwards -expanding, so as to grasp the good and beautiful in a larger sense, and -ultimately to fasten on goodness and beauty in the pure Ideal.” - -Once more, Platonic love might be defined as _creative friendship_, -which has for its object the conception of great ideas,—of works of art, -literature, philosophy. Such a friendship, Plato tells us, should be -formed between a man and a youth, not too young, but when his beard -begins to grow and his intellect to develop; and such a friendship is -apt to last throughout life. - -Perhaps the most striking instance in Greek literature of Platonic love -is that given in Plato’s _Symposium_ as existing between the pure-minded -Sokrates, who kept aloof from all Greek vices, and the beautiful young -Alkibiades. This youth thus describes the effect which the discourse of -Sokrates has on him: “When I hear him, my heart leaps in my breast, more -than it does among the Korybantes, and tears roll down my cheeks at his -words, and I notice that many others have the same experience. When I -heard Perikles and other excellent orators, I came to the conclusion -that they spoke well; but this experience was different from the other, -and my soul did not lose its control or gnash its teeth like a prostrate -slave, but by this Marsyas (= Sokrates) I was put into such a mood that -the condition in which I found myself did not seem praiseworthy.” - -He further describes Sokrates as being always “in love with beautiful -youths, and talking with them, and being quite beside himself”; hence -when he (Alkibiades) appears at the Symposium, and finds Sokrates -sitting next to the most beautiful man in the company, he chides him in -words which have exactly the sound of Jealousy inspired by _Romantic_ -Love: “And why did you recline here and not next to Aristophanes, or -some other wit, or would-be wit, but, instead, crowded forward in order -to be next to the handsomest?” - -To which Sokrates replies: “Agathon, come to my assistance; for my love -for this person has cost me dearly. Ever since I have loved him, I have -not been allowed to look at anybody, or to talk with any one who is -beautiful, or else this youth, in his jealousy and envy, does -unheard-of-things, and chides me, and hardly refrains from violence. Be -on your guard, therefore, that he may not resort to violence now, and -reconcile us, or if he dares to become unruly, assist me; for I very -much fear his madness and infatuation.” - -Although this was probably said in the playful tone common to Sokrates, -it yet is noticeable how closely the language used resembles the -language of modern Romantic Love. - - - SAPPHO AND FEMALE FRIENDSHIP - - -To this form of Platonic or mono-sexual love there existed a female -counterpart, as shown in some of the lyric effusions of Greek poets. -Some of these poets, it is true, especially Anakreon, knew naught of the -imaginative side of Love—of its protracted tortures and intermittent -joys. Like a butterfly that kisses every flower on its way, he “cared -only for the enjoyment of the passing moment.” But Sappho apparently -wrote of Love in terms worthy of Heine or Byron, as shown even in this -crude translation of one of her poems:— - - “While gazing on thy charms I hung, - My voice died faltering on my tongue, - With subtle flames my bosom glows, - Quick through each vein the poison flows; - Dark dimming mists my eyes surround, - My ears with hollow murmurs sound. - My limbs with dewy chillness freeze, - On my whole frame pale tremblings seize, - And losing colour, sense, and breath, - I seem quite languishing in death.” - -Longinus calls this the most perfect expression in all ancient -literature of the effects of Love. It happens, however, to have nothing -to do with Love. For, as Plato’s “love” is merely ecstatic friendship -between man and youth, so Sappho’s love is friendship between two women. -This is the opinion of Bode and Müller, and it is entirely borne out by -the language of the original text. - -It has been suggested that Sappho, being a woman, and a Greek woman, -could not have addressed such glowing words to a man without violating -the current notions of decorum; and hence wrote as if she were a man -addressing a woman. But Sappho was one of the Æolian women who had -greater liberty than the Athenians; and she was, moreover, a -blue-stocking who would not have stuck at such a trifle as shocking -Greek notions regarding woman’s privileges. And in some of her poems she -_does_ mention a youth “to whom she gave her whole heart, while he -requited her passion with cold indifference” (Müller). - -One of the Platonists, Maximus Tyrius (_dis._ 24, p. 297), takes the -same view regarding Sappho. “The love of the Lesbian poet,” he says, -“what can it be, if we may compare remote with more recent things than -the Sokratic art of love? For both appear to promote the same -_Friendship_, she among women, he among men. They both confess they love -many, and are captivated by all beauties. For what Alkibiades and -Charmides are to Sokrates, Gyrinna and Atthis and Anaktoria are to -Sappho.” “Even Sokrates confesses that it was from Sappho that he partly -derived his noble views of the enthusiastic _love of mental beauty_” -(_Phædon_, c. 225). - -To one of the girls just referred to, Sappho addresses these words: -“Again does the strength-dissolving Eros, that bittersweet, resistless -monster, agitate me; but to thee, O Atthis, the thought of me is -importunate; thou fliest to Andromeda.” “It is obvious,” says Müller, -“that this attachment bears less the character of maternal interest than -of passionate love; as amongst Dorians in Sparta and Crete analogous -connections between men and youths, in which the latter were trained to -noble and manly deeds, were carried on in a language of high-wrought and -passionate feeling, which had all the character of an attachment between -persons of different sexes. This mixture of feelings, which among -nations of a calmer temperament have always been perfectly distinct, is -an essential feature of the Greek character.” - -Greek Love, _i.e._ Friendship, being thus tinged and strengthened, as we -see in the cases of Sokrates and Alkibiades, Sappho and Atthis, by -jealousy, ecstatic adoration, exclusiveness, admiration of personal -beauty, and other qualities which modern civilisation has transferred to -Romantic Love, we are enabled to understand why Friendship was so much -more potent and prevalent in antiquity than it is now, when, having lost -these traits _through the differentiation of emotions_, it seems -“insipid to those who have tasted Love.” - -The lesson to be learned from this whole discussion on Greek Friendship -is of extreme importance to the psychology of Love. It is this: The -Greeks were too intellectual and refined not to have at least a vague -presentiment of the higher possibilities and charms of imaginative Love. -But Greek women—with the rare exceptions referred to—were too stupid to -enable the men to realise their vague ideal. Hence they sought it in -ardent attachments to youths, who _were_ quick-minded and able to -_sympathise_ with their intellectual aspirations. And thus Greek Love -became identical with male friendship—the female friendship referred to -being a sort of compensating echo. - -Greek Love is symbolised in the mythic youth Narcissus, who scorns all -the beautiful nymphs that are eager for his caresses, and falls in love -with his own image reflected in the water. - - - GREEK BEAUTY - -It even seems as if, apart from Love, the Greeks admired youthful -masculine beauty more than feminine charms; and many of them would -probably have agreed with Schopenhauer that men are more beautiful than -women. Certain it is that, as the most eminent critic of Greek art, -Winckelmann, points out “the supreme beauty of Greek art is male rather -than female.” - -The following citation from Grote’s famous work on Plato suggests some -reasons for this fact, besides reflecting further light on points -discussed in the preceding pages:— - -“In the Hellenic point of view, upon which Plato builds, the attachment -of man to woman was regarded as a natural impulse and as a domestic, -social sentiment; yet as belonging to _a commonplace rather than to an -exalted mind_, and seldom or never rising to that pitch of enthusiasm -which overpowers all other emotions, absorbs the whole man, and aims -either at the joint performance of great exploits, or the joint -prosecution of intellectual improvement by continued colloquy. We must -remember that the wives and daughters of citizens were seldom seen -abroad; that she had learned nothing except spinning and weaving; that -the fact of her having seen so little and heard as little as possible, -was considered as rendering her more acceptable to her husband; that her -sphere of duty and exertion was confined to the interior of the family. -The beauty of women yielded satisfaction to the senses, but little -beyond. It was the masculine beauty of youth that fired the Hellenic -imagination with glowing and impassioned sentiment. The finest youths, -and those, too, of the best families and education, were seen habitually -uncovered in the Palæstra and at the public festival-matches; engaged in -active contention and graceful exercise, under the direction of -professional trainers. The sight of the living form in such perfection, -movement, and variety, awakened a powerful emotional sympathy, blended -with æsthetic sentiment, which in the more susceptible natures was -exalted into intense and passionate devotion. The terms in which this -feeling is described, both by Plato and Xenophon, are among the -strongest which the language affords—and are predicated even of Sokrates -himself. Far from being ashamed of this feeling, they consider it -admirable and beneficial, though very liable to abuse, which they -emphatically denounce and forbid. In their view it was an idealising -passion, which tended to raise a man above the vulgar and selfish -pursuits of life, and even above the fear of death. The devoted -attachments which it inspired were dreaded by the despots, who forbade -the assemblage of youths for exercise in the Palæstra.” - -Another reason for the Greek preference of masculine beauty is suggested -by Mr. Lecky, who attributes it to the fact that the principal art of -the Greeks, sculpture, is “especially suited to represent male beauty, -or the beauty of strength”; whereas “female beauty, or the beauty of -softness,” became the principal object of the painters, after -Christianity had won attention for the feminine virtues of gentleness -and delicacy. (For further remarks on Greek Beauty, see the chapters on -“Four Sources of Beauty,” and “The Nose.”) - - - CUPID’S ARROWS - -Possibly some of my readers have not yet quieted all their doubts -regarding the existence of real Love among the Greeks; for did they not -have special deities of love—Aphrodite and Eros, Venus and Cupid? Quite -so; but those familiar with Greek history know that the cult of Venus -had but a remote connection with imaginative or Romantic Love, which -alone is here under consideration. Yet our modern poets owe a vast debt -of gratitude to the ancient bards for these mythic deities, whom they -have simply taken and idealised, like Love itself. There is, especially, -the mischievous Dan Cupid, who, in his modern metamorphosis, is still -“the anointed sovereign of sighs and groans.” This little fellow seems -to have been taken very seriously indeed by the earliest Greeks. He has -one attribute—wings—which we readily understand, as Love is inconstant -ever; but another of his attributes would excite the greatest surprise -in our minds were we not so accustomed to it as to accept it as a matter -of course, namely, his arrows. It would seem more in accordance with -modern notions that he should produce his magic effects by means of -Love-potions or other Love-charms, rather than with such a warlike -weapon as an arrow. - -A German feuilletonist, Dr. Michael Haberlandt, has lately advanced an -ingenious theory to account for this weapon. The ancient Greeks had the -peculiar belief that all diseases were caused by the invisible poisoned -arrows of evil or angry deities; as in the well-known case of the -offended Apollo sending his pest-laden arrows among the Hellenes. Now -love, in the irresistible and maddening, though primitive form known to -the early Greeks, was doubtless looked on as a real, mysterious -affliction, and not merely as love sickness in the figurative modern -sense: what more natural therefore than to attribute it to the arrows of -a mischievous deity? - -In course of time poetic fancy added to the image of Cupid other -attributes that naturally suggested themselves: the wings to symbolise -fickleness; a bandage to indicate blindness; while the arrows were -represented as dipped in poison, gall, or honey. The curious fact may be -added that the ancient East Indians, whose deities numbered 330,000,000 -(in round numbers), likewise had a god of love armed with bow and -arrows: a conception which they seem to have originated independently of -the Greeks. - - - ORIGIN OF LOVE - -Plato’s _Symposium_ contains two curious theories of the cause and -origin of love, which, in conclusion, may be briefly summarised, as they -help to characterise Greek notions on this subject. The first is placed -in the mouth of Sokrates, who says he heard it of the Hetaira Diotima. -What, she asks, is the cause of this love-sickness, this anxiety of men -and animals, first to get a mate, and then to take care of the -offspring? It is, she replies, the desire to perpetuate themselves. For -just as the famous heroes and heroines—Alkestis, Achilles, Kadros—would -not have so nobly sacrificed their lives had they not been sustained by -the thought that their fame and glory would survive among future -generations; so the fact that parents in the affection for their young -will even go so far as to sacrifice their own lives to protect them, is -due to their craving for immortality in their offspring. - -This theory may be regarded as a vague foreshadowing of Schopenhauer’s, -which will be considered in another place. - -The second theory of the origin of love is attributed by Plato to -Aristophanes, who relates it in the form of a myth. Human nature, he -begins, was not always as it is now. At the beginning there were three -sexes: one, the male, descended of the sun-god; the second, female, -descended of the earth; and the third, which united the attributes of -both sexes, descended of the moon. Each of these beings, moreover, had -two pairs of hands and legs, and two faces, and the figure was round, -and in rapid motion revolved like a wheel, the pairs of legs alternately -touching the ground and describing an arc in the air. - -These beings were fierce, powerful, and vain, so they attempted to storm -heaven and attack the gods. As Zeus did not wish to destroy them—since -that would have deprived him of sacrifices and other forms of human -devotion—he resolved to punish them by diminishing their strength. So he -directed Apollo to cut each of them into two, which was done; and thus -the number of human beings was doubled. Each of these half-beings now -continually wandered about, seeking its other half. And when they found -each other, their only desire was to be reunited by Vulcan and never be -parted again. “And this longing and striving after union—this is what is -meant by the name of Love.” - -The waggish Aristophanes appends a caution to human beings not to offend -Zeus again, because it was that god’s intention, on a repetition of the -offence, to split human beings once more, so that they would have to hop -about on one leg! - -One of the metaphors used by the comic poet is very pretty, even if -translated into terms of Modern Love. He compares the two divided halves -of one human being to the dice which among the ancients were used as -marks of hospitality, being broken into two pieces, of which each person -received one, and which were afterwards fitted together in token of -recognition. A pair of lovers, then, are like these halved dice, -naturally belonging to each other, and craving to be reunited. - - - - - ROMAN LOVE - - - WOMAN’S POSITION - -Among the Romans the domestic position of women was on the whole much -more favourable to the growth of feminine culture than in Greece. They -were not jealously guarded in special apartments, but were allowed to -retain their seat at the table and join in the conversation when guests -arrived, as Cornelius Nepos points out with a pardonable sense of -superiority. Becker, in his _Gallus_, thus states the difference between -Greek and Roman treatment of women: “Whilst we see that in most of the -Grecian states, and especially in Athens, the women (_i.e._ the whole -female sex) were little esteemed and treated as children all their -lives, confined to the gynaikoreitis, shut out from social life and all -intercourse with men and their amusements, we find that in Rome exactly -the reverse was the case. Although the wife is naturally subordinate to -the husband, yet she is always treated with open attention and regard. -The Roman housewife always appears as the mistress of the whole -household economy, instructress of the children, and guardian of the -honour of the house, equally esteemed with the paterfamilias both in and -out of the house.” - -“Walking abroad was only limited by scruple and custom, not by a law or -the jealous will of the husband. The women frequented public theatres as -well as the men, and took their places with them at festive banquets.” -"Even the vestals participated in the banquets of the men." Although -“learned women were dreaded,” a knowledge of Greek and the fine arts was -in later times counted an essential part of feminine culture. “Certain -advantages accrued to those who had many children, _jus trium -liberorum_.” Masculine “voluntary celibacy was considered, in very early -times, as censurable and even guilty;” and from Festus “we learn that -there was a celibate fine.” The statement apparently credited by Mr. -Lecky that for 520 years there was no case of divorce in Rome, has been -shown to rest on a misconception of a passage in Gellius. Yet “manners -were so severe, that a senator was censured for indecency because he had -kissed his wife in the presence of their daughter.” It was also -considered “in a high degree disgraceful for a Roman mother to delegate -to a nurse the duty of suckling her child.” - - - NO WOOING AND CHOICE - -Yet amid all these domestic virtues and family affections we search in -vain for the prevalence of Romantic Love. We have already seen that for -the growth of this sentiment something more is needed than domestic -affection, and that something is comprised in the word WOOING. There was -no wooing at Rome. In most cases, the father took his daughter’s heart -in his hand, and, treating it as a piece of personal property, bestowed -it on the suitor who best “suited” him. “From the earliest times,” says -Ploss, “it was customary in Rome to marry girls when they had barely -reached their twelfth or thirteenth year; engagements were probably made -at a still earlier age. Although legally the daughter’s consent was -required, in actual practice _she exercised no choice_; her extreme -youth in itself preventing this. Often a marriage contract was a mere -matter of agreement between two families in which love and personal -favour were disregarded; nor did even the betrothal bring the future -couple into closer intimacy.” With reference to the laws of the Twelve -Tablets, M. Legouvé remarks, in his _Histoire Morale des Femmes_, that -“Rome was worthy of Athens. Not only did a Roman father dispose of his -daughter against her inclination, but he even had the right to dissolve -a marriage into which she had entered, and to take away from his -daughter the husband he had given her, whom she loved, and by whom she -had children.” In justice, however, it must be added that this latter -right was rarely exercised; but the fact that the Romans could tolerate -the very notion of such a law shows what little account was made of -love. - -Another absurd impediment to personal choice was raised by the -Theodosian Code, which compelled a girl to marry a man who had the same -calling as her father—a custom which, indeed, seems to prevail in parts -of Europe to the present day, and which is as incompatible with Love as -the ancient Hebrew rule that the oldest daughter must be married first—a -rule which compelled Jacob to marry Leah before he could get his beloved -Rachel, for whom he had laboured seven years. “First come first served” -is a rule which Cupid rarely heeds in the case of several sisters. - -In the case of the men it is possible that Sexual Selection occasionally -came into play, when early betrothals did not prevent it; for the old -Romans were too rational to anticipate the silly and criminal French -custom of bargaining for a bride before they had even seen her. In such -a case, if the bride was attractive, the suitor’s imagination, dwelling -on the fact that this vision of loveliness was to be his own, -exclusively, for ever, may have been warmed for a moment with something -very like romantic sentiment. But beauty in Rome, Ovid informs us, was -very rare—"How few are able to boast it!"—so that even with the men who -had a choice, Individual Preference based on Personal Beauty could have -been rarely exercised. And as for the women who had no choice, they may -have felt a temporary elation on first meeting their destined husbands; -but this feeling was merely the manifestation of a vague instinct, -comparable to the “love” which a bevy of modern boarding-school “buds” -show for the only man they are allowed to see regularly,—their ugly -teacher,—and the unreality and silliness of which they laugh at -themselves when they are at last allowed to meet the man of their own, -individual, free choice, who teaches them the feeling of real Romantic -Love. - - - VIRGIL, DRYDEN, AND SCOTT - -Nevertheless, compared with Greek literature, the works of the Roman -poets show an advance in their conception of Love; for they avoid at -least the Hellenic confusion of love with friendship. Compared with the -best modern poets, however, who labour with the pure gold of Love alone, -the Roman poet’s productions still show much of the base ore from which -the modern gold has been extracted. It is interesting, in this -connection, to read what Dryden has to say concerning Virgil’s -conception of Love, and Scott’s comments on Dryden. - -In his dedication of the _Æneid_, Dryden speaks of Book IV. as "This -noble episode, wherein the whole passion of love is more exactly -described than in any other poet. Love was the theme of his fourth book; -and though it is the shortest of the whole Æneis, yet there he has given -its beginning, its progress, its traverses, and its conclusion; and had -exhausted so entirely his subject, that he could resume it but very -slightly in the eight ensuing books. - -“She was warmed with the graceful appearance of the hero; she smothered -those sparkles out of decency; but conversation blew them up into a -flame. Then she was forced to make a confidante of her whom she might -best trust, her own sister, who approves the passion, and thereby -augments it: then succeeds her public owning it; and after that the -consummation. Of Venus and Juno, Jupiter and Mercury, I say nothing; for -they were all machining work; but, possession having cooled his love, as -it increased hers, she soon perceived the change, or at least grew -suspicious of a change; this suspicion soon turned to jealousy, and -jealousy to rage; then she disdains and threatens, and again is humble -and entreats, and nothing availing, despairs, curses, and at last -becomes her own executioner. See here the whole process of that passion, -to which nothing can be added.” - -Sir Walter Scott, however, does add, in a foot-note to his edition of -Dryden: “I am afraid this passage, given as a just description of love, -serves to confirm what is elsewhere stated, that Dryden’s ideas of the -female sex and of the passion were very gross and malicious.” - - - OVID’S ART OF MAKING LOVE - -Gross and malicious also are the ideas of the female sex and the passion -frequently encountered in the poems of Ovid; not so coarse and cynical, -indeed, as in Martial and Catullus, but sufficiently so to have -confounded the æsthetic judgment of the present generation, and spread -the notion that Virgil and Horace are greater poets than Ovid, whereas, -from the point of view of originality and imaginativeness, by far the -greatest of the three is Ovid, who also had much more influence on the -great writers of the best period of English literature than his rivals, -as Professor W. Y. Sellar has pointed out. - -Both these circumstances are to be regretted—the undervaluation of -Ovid’s genius as well as his frequent frivolity on which it is based. -For Ovid was unquestionably the first poet who had a conception of the -higher possibilities of Love; in fact he was the greatest, and the only -great, Love-poet before Dante. His rare genius enabled him to anticipate -and depict the modern imaginative side of Love, even while he seemed -wholly devoted to the ancient sensual side. And, in reading his poems, -great caution is necessary, lest these _emotional anticipations_ of his -quasi-modern genius be supposed to have been common and prevalent among -less gifted Romans of his time. - -Ovid was a profound observer and psychologist, and had a most subtle -knowledge of contemporary feminine nature; Although the principal object -of his _Ars Amoris_ is to teach men how to out-trump the natural cunning -of women, yet he does not forget his feminine readers, but gives them -numerous hints regarding the best way of fascinating fickle men. In the -_Remedia Amoris_ he describes various remedies for healing Cupid’s -wounds, most of which are approved to the present day; and the _Elegies_ -and _Heroides_, too, are full of pretty modern touches and flashes of -insight. A few of these points may be briefly alluded to. - -Coyness, although often manifested by the Roman women in almost as crude -a manner as among savages, does not appear to have been appreciated by -all of them at its full value; so the poet frequently counsels them as -to the more subtle ways of exercising it; one of his rules for women -being, that if they have offended an admirer, the best way to make him -forget it is to pretend to be offended themselves, which will restore -the equilibrium. How the consciousness of being beautiful makes a woman -courageous, coy, and cruel is shown in another place. That eyes have a -language plainer than speech is not a modern discovery; and that a short -absence favours, long absence kills, passion was also known to Ovid. He -warns men against the danger of feigning love, because this may end in -arousing genuine passion. Men are informed that courage and confidence -in one’s ability to win a woman are half the battle. And disappointed -lovers are assured that failure sometimes turns into an advantage, for -it may arouse pity, and love enter in the guise of friendship. - -The emotional hyperbole and mixed feelings of Love are not strangers to -Ovid. He compares the tortures of Love to the berries on the trees in -number, to the shells on the sea-beach; for true Love, he says, always -creates anguish and pain; and “the sweetest torment on earth is woman.” -Among the companions of Cupid are “flattery and illusion.” But “even if -the beloved deceives me with false words, hope itself will yield me -great enjoyment,” could only have been written by one who realised the -imaginative side of love. And in another passage the poet directly -enjoins the necessity of intellectual culture to take the place of the -faded charms of youth. - -Hero’s Letter to Leander in the _Heroides_ contains some pretty touches. -Leander has informed his love that when the storm prevents him from -swimming over to her, his mind yet hastens to meet her. But Hero is in -great trouble at his prolonged absence, and her deepest anguish is -Jealousy of a possible rival: in the absence of real grounds of -apprehension, her imagination invents them, as in a modern lover’s mind. -She suspects that his passion has lost the ardour which sustained him in -his difficult feat; and, too weak to quite swim over to him and back -again, and anxious to save him the double journey, she suggests that -they should meet in the middle of the sea, exchange a kiss, and each -return to the shore whence they came. - -Is there anything more exquisitely romantic or pathetic in all modern -Love-poetry—in Shakspere, Heine, Burns, or Byron? - - - BIRTH OF GALLANTRY - -Becker says of the Greeks that “The men were very careful as to their -behaviour in the presence of women, but they were _quite strangers to -those minute attentions which constitute the gallantry of the moderns_.” -This holds true apparently of all other nations of antiquity; and to a -student of the history of Love it is therefore of exceeding interest to -find in Ovid’s poetry the first evidences of the existence of -Gallantry—a disposition on the part of the men to sacrifice their own -comfort to the pleasures and whims of women. - -Mr. G. A. Simcox was the first writer, so far as I know, who pointed out -Ovid’s priority in this matter (in his _History of Latin Literature_). -In Ovid, he says, “The whole description of gallantry implies that the -idea was a novelty, and that the lover would require a great deal of -encouragement to enable him to make the sacrifice of paying such -attentions as could be commanded from a servant. This throws a new light -on the habit the Augustan poets have of calling their mistress _domina_, -which is more noteworthy, for they call no man _dominus_. One does not -trace the idea at all in Latin comedy, where the heroines are for the -most part _only too thankful to be caressed and protected_. One finds -the word in Lucilius, but even in Catullus it is hardly established.” - -Instances of gallant behaviour are not rare in Ovid’s poetry; but the -didactic tone in which they are detailed makes it almost appear as if -the poet were recommending to his countrymen the value of a nice little -discovery of his own which would convert crude love-making into a fine -art. Never be so ungallant—he says in effect, though he does not use the -word—as to refer to a woman’s faults or shortcomings. Compliment her, on -the contrary, on her good points—her face, her hair, her tapering -fingers, her pretty foot. At the circus applaud whatever she applauds. -Adjust her cushion, put the footstool where it ought to be, and keep her -comfortable by fanning her. And at dinner, when she has tasted the wine, -quickly seize the cup and put your lips to the place where she has -sipped. - -Unfortunately this morning dawn of Romantic Love, as depicted in the -pages of Ovid, was soon hidden beneath the dark clouds of mediæval -barbarism, not to emerge again till a thousand years later. - - - - - MEDIÆVAL LOVE - - - CELIBACY _VERSUS_ MARRIAGE - -Were I asked to name the four most refining influences in modern -civilisation I would answer: Women, Beauty, Love, and Marriage. Were I -asked to name the essence of the early mediæval spirit I would say: -Deadly Enmity toward Women, Beauty, Love, and Marriage. - -This pathologic attitude of the mediæval mind was at first a natural -reaction against the incredible depravity and licentiousness that -prevailed under the Roman Empire. But the reaction went to such -preposterous extremes that the resulting state of affairs was even more -degrading and deplorable than the original evil. It was like inoculating -a man with leprosy to cure him of smallpox. It was bad enough to treat -marriage as a _farce_, as did the later Romans, among whom there were -women who had their eighth and tenth husband, while one case is related -of a woman “who was married to her twenty-third husband, she herself -being his twenty-first wife”; while the public looked upon this case as -a “match” in a double sense, the survivor being publicly crowned and -feted as champion. But a thousand times worse was the mediæval notion -that marriage is a _crime_. And this preposterous notion—that a relation -on which all civilisation is based, which is sanctioned even by many -animals and ignored by only the very lowest of the savages—this criminal -notion was foisted on the world by the fanatical priesthood in whose -hands unfortunately Christianity was placed for centuries, to be -distorted, vitiated, and utilised for political, criminal, and selfish -purposes. - -“The services rendered,” says Mr. Lecky, “by the ascetics in imprinting -on the minds of men a profound and enduring conviction of the importance -of chastity, though extremely great, were seriously counterbalanced by -their noxious influence upon marriage. Two or three beautiful -descriptions of this institution have been culled out of the immense -mass of patristic writings; but in general it would be difficult to -conceive anything more coarse and more repulsive than the manner in -which they regarded it.... The tender love which it elicits, the holy -and beautiful domestic qualities that follow in its train, were almost -absolutely omitted from consideration. The object of the ascetic was to -attract men to a life of virginity, and, as a necessary consequence, -marriage was treated as an inferior state.” - -“The days of Chivalry were not yet,” we read in Smith’s _Dictionary of -Christian Antiquities_, “and we cannot but notice even in the greatest -of the Christian fathers a lamentably low estimate of woman, and, -consequently, of the marriage relationship.” - -What an inexhaustible source of mediæval immorality this contemptuous -treatment of marriage by the most influential class of society proved, -has been so often depicted in glaring colours that these pages need not -be tainted with illustrations. - - - WOMAN’S LOWEST DEGRADATION - -Woman was represented by the Fathers “as the door of hell, as the mother -of all human ills. She should be ashamed at the very thought that she is -a woman; she should live in continual penance on account of the curses -she has brought upon the world. Women were even forbidden by a -provincial council in the sixth century, on account of their impurity, -to receive the Eucharist into their naked hands. Their essentially -subordinate position was continually maintained” (Lecky). - -Not even the Koran took such a degrading view of woman as these early -“Christian Fathers.” For the current notion that the existence of a soul -in woman is denied by the Mahometan faith is contradicted by several -passages in the Koran. - -The lowest depths of feminine degradation and the sublimest heights of -fanatical folly and crime, however, were not reached in this early -period, but some centuries later, when the incredible brutalities of the -witchcraft trials began. The vast majority of the victims were women; -and Professor Scherr, in his _Geschichte der Deutschen Frauenwelt_, -estimates that _in Germany alone_ at least one hundred thousand -“witches” were burnt at the stake. No one on reading the accounts of -these trials can help feeling that Shakspere made a mistake when he -wrote that - - “All the world’s a stage, - And all the men and women merely players.” - -He should have said, - - “All the world’s a madhouse, - And all the men are fools and demons.” - -More demons than fools, however. Superstition was, indeed, epidemic -during the Middle Ages; but those who superintended the witches’ -trials—the rulers and the clergy—were not the persons affected by it. If -they did execute 100,000 victims in Germany; if they did murder girls of -twelve, ten, eight, and even seven years, on the accusation of having -borne children whose father was Satan, or of having murdered persons who -in some cases were actually present at the trial—the reason of this was -not because the authorities believed this cruel nonsense. The real -reason is given by Scherr: “The circumstance that the property of those -who were burnt at the stake was confiscated, two-thirds of it getting -into the hands of the landowner (Grundherr), the other third into those -of the _judges, clergy, accusers, and executioners_, has beyond doubt -kindled countless witch-fires.... During the Thirty Years’ War, -especially, the trials for witchcraft became a greedily-utilised source -of profit to many a country nobleman in reduced circumstances, and no -less to bishops, abbots, and councillors, who were in financial straits. -Indeed, as early as the sixteenth century, one of the opponents of -witches’ trials, Cornelius Loos, justly observed that the whole -proceeding was simply ‘a newly-invented alchemy for converting human -blood into gold.’” - -What difference is there between these civilised savages and the -Australian who eats his wife when he gets tired of her? Let those who -are fond of seeking needles in haystacks search for traces of Romantic -Love under such circumstances. - - - NEGATION OF FEMININE CHOICE - -Feudal legislation combined with clerical contempt and criminal -persecution in lowering woman’s position. There were numerous and -stringent enactments which “rendered it impossible for women to succeed -to any considerable amount of property, and which almost reduced them to -the alternative of marriage or a nunnery. The complete inferiority of -the sex was continually maintained by the law; and that generous public -opinion which in Rome had frequently revolted against the injustice done -to girls, in depriving them of the greater part of the inheritance of -their fathers, totally disappeared.” Beaumanoir says that “Every husband -may beat his wife if she refuses to obey his orders, or if she speaks -ill of him or tells an untruth, provided he does so with moderation.” -Early German law permitted the father, and subsequently the husband, to -sell, punish, or even kill the wife; and in England wife-beating has not -yet died out. - -“If, in the times of St. Louis,” says Legouvé, “a young vassal of some -royal fief was sought in marriage, it was necessary for her father to -get his seigneur’s permission for her marriage; the seigneur asked the -king’s consent to his permission, and not till after all these -agreements (father, seigneur, king) was _she_ consulted regarding this -contract which affected her whole life.” How beautifully such a law must -have fostered the sentiment of Love which depends on Individual -Preference and Special Sympathy! - -Such laws no doubt were simply echoes of clerical teachings. “The girl,” -says St. Ambrose of Rebecca, whom he holds up herein as an example, “is -not consulted about her espousals, for she awaits the judgment of her -parents; inasmuch as a girl’s modesty will not allow her to choose a -husband” (!). Irish “bulls” appear to have crept even into ecclesiastic -enactments, for we read in Smith’s _Dictionary of Christian Antiquities_ -that “An Irish council in the time of St. Patrick, about the year 450 -lays it down that the will of the girl is to be inquired of the father, -and that the girl is to do what her father chooses, inasmuch as man is -the head of the woman.” “Even widows,” we read further, “under the age -of twenty-five were forbidden by a law of Valentinian and Gratian to -marry without their parents’ consent; and St. Ambrose desires young -widows to leave the choice of their second husbands to their parents.” - -Compayré states in his _History of Pedagogy_ that in the seventeenth -century “woman was still regarded as the inferior of man, in the lower -classes as a drudge, in the higher as an ornament. In her case -intellectual culture was regarded as either useless or dangerous; and -the education that was given her was to fit her for a life of devotion -or a life of seclusion from society.” - -Still more, of course, was this the case in the times of St. Jerome, who -in his letter to Læta on the education of her daughter Paula, tells her -that the girl must never eat in public, or eat meat. “Never let Paula -listen to musical instruments.” Even her affections must be -suppressed—all except the devotional sentiments. She must not be “in the -gatherings and in the company of her kindred; let her be found only in -retirement.” “Do not allow Paula to feel more affection for one of her -companions than for others.” And this ascetic moralist even recommends -uncleanliness as a virtue: “I entirely forbid a young girl to bathe;” -which may be matched with the following, also cited from Compayré: “The -first preceptors of Gargantua said that it sufficed to comb one’s hair -with the four fingers and the thumb; and that whoever combed, washed, -and cleansed himself otherwise was losing his time in this world.” - -In such a rough atmosphere of masculine ignorance, fanaticism, and -cruelty the feminine virtues of sympathy, tenderness, grace, and -sweetness could not have flourished very luxuriantly. Consequently there -is doubtless more than a grain of truth in mediæval proverbs about -women, cynical and brutal as some of them are. Here are a few -specimens:— - -“Women and horses must be beaten.” - -“Women and money are the cause of all evil in the world.” - -“Women only keep those secrets which they don’t know.” - -“Trust no woman, and were she dead.” - -“Between a woman’s yes and no there isn’t room for the point of a -needle.” - -“If you are too happy, take a wife.” - -When we read that “Montaigne is of that number, who, through false -gallantry, would keep woman in a state of ignorance, on the pretext that -instruction would mar her natural charms;” and that the same author -recommends poetry to women, because it is “a wanton, crafty art, -disguised, all for pleasure, all for show, just as they are”; we recall -with a smile John Stuart Mill’s sarcastic reference to the time, “Some -generations ago, when satires on women were in vogue, and men thought it -a clever thing to insult women for being what men made them.” - - - CHRISTIANITY AND LOVE - -Christianity claims to be pre-eminently the religion of love, in the -widest sense of that term, including, especially, religious veneration -of a personal Deity and love of one’s enemy. It has been asserted by -Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and others that Christianity has done little -or nothing in aid of woman’s elevation; and it cannot be denied that -much good would have resulted if more emphasis had been placed by the -Apostles on certain phases of the domestic relations. That Romantic Love -is not alluded to in the New Testament need not cause any surprise, for -that sentiment cannot have existed in those days when Courtship and -Individual Choice were unknown. But there are passages in St. Paul’s -writings which were probably the seeds from which grew the mediæval -contempt for marriage and women. And although marriage is now zealously -guarded by the Church, Love of the romantic sort is no doubt looked upon -even to-day by many an austere clergyman as a harmless youthful -epidemic—a sort of emotional measles—rather than as a new -æsthetico-moral sentiment destined to become the strongest of all -agencies working for the improvement of the personal appearance, social -condition, and happiness of mankind. - -On the other hand, even agnostics must admit on reflection that -Christianity contained elements which, despite the vicious fanaticism of -many of its early teachers, slowly helped to ameliorate woman’s lot. In -the first place, Protestantism, as embodied in Luther, performed an -invaluable service by restoring and enforcing universal respect for the -marriage-tie. He set a good example by not only defying the degrading -custom of obligatory celibacy, but by marrying a most sensible woman—a -nun who had escaped with eight others from a convent at Nimtsch. - -Mariolatry, or the cult of the Virgin Mary, is the second avenue through -which Christianity influenced the development of the tender emotions. -The halo of sanctity which it spread at the same time over virginity and -motherhood has been of incalculable value in raising woman in the -estimation of the masses. - -A third way in which Christianity influenced woman’s position is -suggested by the following remarks of Mr. Lecky, who has done valuable -service to philosophy, in showing how emotions as well as ideas change -with time: “In antiquity,” he says, “the virtues that were most admired -were almost exclusively those which were distinctively masculine. -Courage, self-assertion, magnanimity, and, above all, patriotism, were -the leading features of the ideal type; and chastity, modesty, and -charity, the gentler and the domestic virtues, which are especially -feminine, were greatly undervalued. With the single exception of -conjugal fidelity, none of the virtues that were highly prized were -virtues distinctively or pre-eminently feminine.” Now the “religion of -love,” by especially insisting on these “feminine virtues,” became a -powerful agent in undermining the coarse mediæval spirit with its -masculine, military “virtues,” _alias_ barbarisms. - - - - CHIVALRY—MILITANT AND COMIC - -In the howling wilderness of mediæval masculine brutality and feminine -degradation there was one sunny oasis in which the flowers of Love were -allowed to grow undisturbed for a few generations,—until military -ambition trod them again underfoot. This brief episode of gentler -manners is known as the period of Chivalry. - -Ever since the fifth century the worship of the Virgin Mary had -increased in ardour, and it was to be expected that at some favourable -moment this adoration would be extended to the whole female sex, or at -least its nobler representatives. This was the mission taken upon -themselves by the knights and poets of chivalrous times. - -Chivalry, it is true, was so often a mixture of clownishness and -licentiousness, its practice was so much less refined than its theory, -that in opposition to those historians who have sung its praises others -have doubted whether its influence was on the whole for good or for -evil. For, although the knights vowed especially to protect widows and -orphans, and respect and honour ladies, yet it was precisely under their -_régime_ that, when cities were taken and castles stormed, women were -subjected to the most brutal treatment. - -The difficulty is best solved by distinguishing between two kinds of -Chivalry—the Militant and the Poetic. The militant type of -knight-errantry was less inspired by the desire to benefit womankind -than by ambition to gratify silly masculine vanity. So thoroughly was -the mediæval mind imbued with ideas of war that these knights could not -conceive even of love except in a military guise. So they rode about the -country in quest of adventure, ostensibly in the service of an adored -mistress, but really to find an outlet, in times of peace, for pent-up -military energy and ambition. - -Spain and Southern France were the principal home of Chivalry Militant, -because there a warm climate and smiling nature offered most favourable -conditions to wandering knights in quest of adventure. Fortunately the -world possesses, in _Don Quixote_, a lifelike picture of -knight-errantry; for although the aim of Cervantes was to make fun, not -so much of Chivalry as of trashy contemporaneous romances of Chivalry, -yet in doing this he could not avoid depicting the comic side of the -institution itself, concerning which it is indeed _difficile satiram non -scribere_. - -It appears to have been the custom of these knights to wander about the -country interfering in every quarrel, and, in default of a disturbance, -creating one. - -Each knight had a Dulcinea, whom he had perhaps never seen, but in whose -honour and for whose love he engages in all these combats. And whenever -he meets another knight he forthwith challenges him to admit that this -Dulcinea, whom the other has of course never seen, is the most beautiful -lady in the world. The other knight echoes the challenge in behalf of -_his_ Dulcinea; and the result is a combat in which the victor, by the -inexorable logic of superior strength, proves the superior beauty of his -chosen lady-love. - -The vanquished knight is then sent as prisoner to the victor’s mistress -with a message of love. - -The Germans do not often originate anything; but if they take up an idea -or institution they work it more thoroughly than any other nation. So -with the fantastic side of Chivalry, which was introduced after the -second crusade, during which German knights had come into close contact -with French knights. - -“Spain,” says Professor Scherr, “has imagined a Don Quixote, but Germany -has really produced one.” - -His name was Ulrich von Lichtenstein, and he was born in the year 1200. -“From his boyhood, Herr Ulrich’s thoughts were directed towards -woman-worship, and as a youth he chose a high-born and, be it well -understood, a married lady as his patroness, in whose service he infused -method into his knightly madness. The circumstance that meanwhile he -himself gets married does not abate his folly. He greedily drinks water -in which his patroness has washed herself; he has an operation performed -on his thick double underlip, because she informs him that it is not -inviting for kisses; he amputates one of his fingers which had become -stiff in an encounter, and sends it to his mistress as a proof of his -capacity of endurance for her sake. Masked as Frau Venus, he wanders -about the country and engages in encounters, in this costume, in honour -of his mistress; at her command he goes among the lepers and eats with -them from one bowl.... The most remarkable circumstance, however, is -that Ulrich’s own spouse, while her husband and master masquerades about -the land as a knight in his beloved’s service, remains aside in his -castle, and is only mentioned (in his poetic autobiography) whenever he -returns home, tired and dilapidated, to be restored by her nursing.” - -When a German knight had chosen a Dulcinea, he adopted and wore her -colour, for he was now her _love-servant_, and stood to his mistress in -the same relation as a vassal to his master. “The beloved,” Scherr -continues, “gave her lover a love-token—a girdle or veil, a ribbon, or -even a sleeve of her dress; this token he fastened to his helmet or -shield, and great was the lady’s pride if he brought it back to her from -battle thoroughly cut and hewn to pieces. Thus (in _Parzival_) Gawan had -fastened on his shield a sleeve of the beautiful Olibet, and when he -returned it to her, torn and speared, ‘Da ward des Mägdlein’s Freude -gross; ihr blanker Arm war noch bloss, darüber schob sie ihn zuhand.’” - -The attitude of the knight-errants may be briefly described as -_Gallantry gone mad_. We have seen that a few traces of Gallantry are -found in the pages of Ovid; but it was during the age of Chivalry that -this overtone of Love made itself heard for the first time distinctly -and loudly. And as, when a new popular melody appears, everybody takes -it up and sings and whistles it _ad nauseam_; so these knights, -intoxicated with the novel idea of gallant behaviour toward women, took -it up and carried it to the most ridiculous extremes. - -The women, naturally enough, unused to such devotion, became as -extravagantly coy as the men were gallant. They subjected this Gallantry -to the most absurd and even cruel tests. The knights were sent to war, -to the crusades, into the dens of wild animals, to test their devotion; -and few were so manly as the knight in Schiller’s ballad, who, after -fetching his lady’s glove from the lion’s den, threw it in her face, -instead of accepting her willing favours. - -It is with reference to these coy and cruel tests of Gallantry that -Wolfram von Eschenbach bitterly accuses Love of having caused the death -of many a noble knight. - -Yet, despite these absurdities, the trials and procrastinations to which -the knights were subjected had one good result: they helped to give Love -a supersensual, imaginative basis. This fact is brought out clearly in -the following statement made by Dr. Bötticher in his learned work on -_Parzival_. When, he says, after the middle of the twelfth century, the -Troubadour love-poetry became known in Austria, “it was especially the -idea of Minnedienst (love-service) that was seized upon with avidity: -the knight wooes and labours for a woman’s love, but she holds back and -grants no favours until after a long trial-service. The final object of -this service, the possession of the beloved, is regarded as _quite -subordinate to the pangs and pleasures of wooing and waiting_.” - -Here was a novelty in Love, indeed! And, as good luck would have it, -fashion lent its powerful aid to the innovation. The sentiment was that -“Whoever is not in the service of love is unworthy to be a courtier”; -and thus many a boor who would have very much preferred to continue -treating women as servants, had to put his head into the yoke of -Gallantry, in order to be “fashionable.” - - - CHIVALRY—POETIC - -If these knights of Chivalry bestrode their warlike Rosinantes to show -an astonished world for the first time what could be done in the way of -Gallantry, the peaceful poets of Chivalry—the Troubadours and -Minnesingers—in turn mounted their winged Pegasus, and soared for the -first time to the dizzy heights of Ecstatic Adoration or Emotional -Hyperbole. - -“Woman was regarded,” says Mr. Symonds, “as an ideal being, to be -approached with worship bordering on adoration. The lover derived -personal force, virtue, elevation, energy from his enthusiastic passion. -Honour, justice, courage, _self-sacrifice_, contempt of worldly goods -flowed from that one sentiment, and love united two wills in a single -ecstasy. Love was the consummation of spiritual felicity, which -surpassed all other modes of happiness in its beatitude. Thus, Bernard -de Ventadour and Jacopo da Lentino were ready to forego Paradise, unless -they might behold their lady’s face before the throne of God. For a -certain period in modern history this mysticism of the amorous emotion -was no affectation. It formulated a genuine impulse of manly hearts, -influenced by beauty, and touched with the sense of moral superiority in -woman, perfected through weakness, and demanding physical protection. By -bringing the tender passions into accord with gentle manners and -unselfish aspirations, it served to temper the rudeness of primitive -society; and no little of its attraction was due to the conviction that -_only refined natures could experience it_. This new aspect of love was -due to chivalry, to Christianity, to the Teutonic reverence for woman, -in which religious awe seems to have blended with the service of the -weaker by the stronger.” - -These remarks, though applicable to Chivalrous poetry in general, refer -especially to the Italian species. The most important varieties of -Chivalrous poetry, however, are those of the Provençal, or French, -Troubadours, and the German Minnesingers. These must be briefly -considered in turn, as they present national differences of importance -to the history and psychology of Love. - -(_a_) _French Troubadours._—As we live in a period in which the -newspaper has become the greatest of moral forces, we can most easily -realise the social influence of the Troubadours on reading, in Thierry, -that “In the twelfth century the songs of the troubadours, circulating -rapidly from castle to castle, and from town to town, supplied the place -of periodical gazettes in all the country between the rivers Isère and -Vienne, the mountains of Auvergne and the two seas.” - -The wandering minstrels who wielded this poetic power were recruited -from all classes—nobility, artisans, and clergy. But, as Dr. F. Hueffer -remarks in his entertaining work on Provençal life and poetry, “By far -the largest number of the Troubadours known to us—fifty-seven in -number—belong to the nobility, not to the highest nobility in most -cases, it is true. In several instances, poverty is distinctly mentioned -as the cause for adopting the profession of a troubadour. It almost -appears, indeed, as if this profession, like that of the churchman, and -sometimes in connection with it, had been regarded by Provençal families -as a convenient mode of providing for their younger sons.” - -In a time when distinctions of rank were so closely observed, it was -perhaps of special importance that these singers should be chiefly -persons of noble blood. Women, it is true, have at all times shown a -disposition to ignore rank in favour of bards and tenors; but the -mediæval nobles might have hesitated, frequently, to extend to commoners -the unlimited hospitality of their castles, and the privilege of adoring -their wives in verse and action. These husbands, in fact, appear to have -shown remarkable forbearance towards their poetic guests. No doubt it -flattered their vanity (overtone of _Pride_) to have the charms of their -spouse sung by a famous poet in person; and on account of the social -influence wielded by the Troubadours, owing to their successive -appearance at all the castles in the land, it was, moreover, wise not to -forfeit their goodwill. Sometimes, however, Jealousy held high carnival, -as, in the case of Guillem, the hero of Hueffer and Mackenzie’s opera, -_The Troubadour_, who was murdered by the injured husband, and the -faithless wife compelled to drink of the wine called “the poet’s blood,” -adulterated in a horribly realistic manner. The women, likewise, were -frequently moved by Jealousy—not in behalf of their husbands but of the -Troubadours, of whose art and adoration they desired a Monopoly, whereas -these bards were very apt to transfer their fickle affections to other -women. - -Fickleness, however, was not the greatest fault of these Troubadours. -Their great moral shortcoming was that they paid no attention to the -borderline between conjugal and romantic love. Dr. Hueffer does not -recollect a single instance amongst the numerous love-stories told in -connection with the Troubadours, in which the object of passion was not -a married lady—a strange point of affinity with the modern French novel -to which he calls the attention of those interested in national -psychology. A case in point is that of Guirant (1260), one of whose -pastorals is analysed by Hueffer: “The idea is simple enough: an amorous -knight, whose importunate offers to an unprotected girl are kept in -check by mere dint of graceful, witty, sometimes tart reply.” These -offers of love are repeated at intervals of two, three, seven, and six -years, and finally transferred to the woman’s daughter, always with the -same bad luck. His own wife, meanwhile, is never considered a proper -object for his poetic effusions. Concerning the German imitator of -foreign customs—Ulrich von Lichtenstein, mentioned a few pages back—we -have likewise seen that his wife never entered his mind except when he -came home “tired and dilapidated, to be restored by her nursing.” - -Besides pastorals of the kind just referred to, the Troubadours had -several other classes of songs, among them the tensons, or contentions -which were “metrical dialogues of lively repartee on some disputed -points of gallantry.” These may have given ground for the myth that -aristocratic ladies of this period “instituted Courts of Love, in which -questions of gallantry were gravely discussed and determined by their -suffrages,” as, _e.g._ whether a husband could really love his wife. The -question whether any such debating clubs for considering the ethics and -etiquette of love existed is still debated by scholars; but the best -evidence appears to be negative. - -(_b_) _German Minnesingers._—The German wandering minstrels also -belonged mainly to the aristocracy, and imitated their French colleagues -in paying their addresses chiefly to married women—a fact for which, in -both cases, the rigid chaperonage of the young must be held responsible; -for man _will_ make love, and if not allowed to do so properly he will -do it improperly. Yet on the whole the Minnesingers, at least in their -verse, were less amorous than the Troubadours. As Mr. L. C. Elson -remarks in his _History of German Song_: “The Troubadour praised the -eyes, the hair, the lips, the form of his chosen one; the Minnesinger -praised the sweetness, the grace, the modesty, the tenderness of the -entire sex. The one was concrete, the other abstract.” - -Abstractness, however, is not a desirable quality in poetry, the very -essence of which is concrete imagery. Accordingly we find that with few -exceptions the German Minnesingers are not as poets equal to their -French prototypes. It was Schiller himself who passed the severest -judgment on these early colleagues of his. “If the sparrows on the -roof,” he once remarked to a friend, “should ever undertake to write, or -to issue an almanac of love and friendship, I would wager ten to one it -would be just like these songs of love. What a poverty of ideas in these -songs! A garden, a tree, a hedge, a forest, and a sweetheart—these are -about all the objects that are to be found in a sparrow’s head. Then we -have flowers which are fragrant, fruits which grow mellow, twigs on -which a bird sits in the sunshine and sings, and spring which comes, and -winter which goes, and nothing that remains except—_ennui_.” - -Schiller’s criticism, however, is too sweeping, for there were notable -exceptions to these sparrow-poets, concerning one of whom, Hadlaub, the -late Professor Scherer gives the following fascinating information in -his _History of German Literature_: "He introduces human figures into -his descriptions of scenery, and shows us, for instance, in the summer a -group of beautiful ladies walking in an orchard, and blushing with -womanly modesty when gazed at by young men. He compares the troubles of -love with the troubles of hard-working men, like charcoal-burners and -carters. - -“Hadlaub tells us more of his personal experiences than any other -Minnesinger. Even as a child, we learn, he had loved a little girl, who, -however, would have nothing to say to him, but continually flouted him, -to his great distress. Once she bit his hand, but her bite, he says, was -so tender, womanly, and gentle, that he was _sorry the feeling of it -passed away so soon_. Another time, being urged to give him a keepsake, -she threw her needle-case at him, and he seized it with sweet eagerness, -but it was taken from him and returned to her, and she was made to give -it him in a friendly manner. In later years his pains still remained -unrewarded; when his lady perceived him, she would get up and go away. -Once, he tells us, he saw her fondling and kissing a child, and when she -had gone he drew the child towards him and embraced it as she had -embraced it, and kissed it in the place where she had kissed it.” - -The gradual change in woman’s position, social and amorous, is indicated -by the differences between the earlier and the later Minnesongs. In the -early poems Professor Scherer remarks, "The social supremacy of noble -woman is not yet recognised, and the man wooes with proud -self-respect.... Another refuses himself to a woman who desired his -love.... A fourth boasts of his triumphs. ‘_Women_,’ says he, ‘_are as -easily tamed as falcons_.’ In another song a woman tells how she tamed a -falcon, but he flew away from her, and now wears other chains.... - -“In the later Minnesongs it is _the women who are proud, and the men who -must languish_.” - -A still more remarkable change is noticed in the German Folk-songs which -followed the periods of Minnesong proper. “The women of these popular -love-songs are not mostly married women; _they are, as a rule, young -maidens_” [at last, pure Romantic Love!] “who are not only praised but -also turned to ridicule and blamed. The woes of love do not here arise -from the capricious coyness of the fair one, but are called forth by -parting, jealousy, or faithlessness. Feeling is stronger than in the -Minnesong, and seeks accordingly for stronger modes of expression.” - -It is not a mere accident that true Romantic Love should have first -appeared in these Folk-songs. For these were the products of gifted -individuals in the lower classes, where chaperonage—arch enemy of -Love—was less strict than among the higher classes. - - - FEMALE CULTURE - -That the women were not ungrateful to the mediæval bards who first -discovered in them the possibilities of higher charms and virtues, is -shown by their treatment of Heinrich von Meissen, Minnesinger, who was -called Frauenlob, because he constantly sang the “praise of woman.” When -he died at Mainz in 1317 they carried his bier to church with their own -hands, and then, in accordance with the custom of the time, poured -libations of wine on his bier so freely that the whole floor of the -church was covered. - -And there is every reason to believe that the women of Frauenlob’s -period deserved his praises, because they were in æsthetic, moral, and -intellectual culture far superior to the women before or directly after -their time. We read in Gottfried von Strassburg’s poem how Tristan, -while Isolde healed his wound, instructed her in the arts and manners of -court life. Isolde knew French and Latin besides her own language. She -played the violin and the harp, and sang; she wrote letters and poems, -and would indeed have been a model of culture even at the present day. -The twelfth century even had a genuine blue-stocking, the nun Herrad von -Landsberg, who wrote a cyclopædia of all human knowledge, in the Latin -tongue, called the _Hortus Deliciarum_. Learning throughout the mediæval -ages was all concentrated in the monasteries; but at the period in -question the monks did not retain everything for themselves, but aided -the knights and the poets in instructing the women of the court and -nobility. - -Nor did these women neglect their domestic affairs or physical exercise. -They accompanied the men on their falcon-hunting parties, and at home -learned to spin, weave, sew, and make clothing for themselves and their -husbands and children. At the tournaments and other games they appeared -as Queens of Beauty to distribute prizes and inspire their admirers to -heroic deeds; and at banquets and other social gatherings they seem to -have supplied more of the wit and entertainment than the men, whose -military occupations left them less time for the cultivation of the -arts. - -At the same time one cannot help smiling at the elementary rules of -conduct which had to be given even to women of the nobility. You must -not stare at a man long, or refuse to return his salutation, young -ladies were told; nor must you in walking take too long or too short -steps. A poet of the middle of the thirteenth century (quoted by Mr. -Hueffer) gives this advice to a girl: “If a gentleman takes you aside -and wishes to talk of courtship to you, do not show a strange or sullen -behaviour, but defend yourself with pleasant and pretty repartees. And -if his talk annoys you and makes you uneasy, I advise you to ask him -questions,” and contradict his statements, in order “to give a harmless -turn to the conversation.” - -Like Greek and Roman civilisation, like the palmy days of Persian and -Arabian culture, this mediæval period of feminine ascendancy and -refinement unfortunately did not last many generations. Although, -undoubtedly, chivalry accomplished real good for the time being, most of -what went by that name was, after all, too much of a sham—less a matter -of actuality than of poetic fancy. “Sincere and beautiful as the -chivalrous ideal may have been,” says Mr. Symonds, “it speedily -degenerated. Chivalry, though a vital element of feudalism, existed, -even among the nations of its origin, more as an aspiration than a -reality. In Italy it never penetrated the life or subdued the -imagination of the people. For the Italo-Provençal poets that code of -love was almost wholly formal.” Petrarch, like Alberti and Boccaccio, -indulges again in abuse of women as coarse and brutal as that of the -early “Christian Fathers”; and when we come to the sixteenth century, -the scholar Cornelius Agrippa complains of the old state of -affairs—woman’s complete subjection: “Unjust laws,” he says, “do their -worst to repress women; custom and education combine to make them -nonentities. From her childhood a girl is brought up in idleness at -home, and confined to needle and thread for sole employment. When she -reaches marriageable years, she has this alternative: the jealousy of a -husband, or the custody of a convent. All public duties, all legal -functions, all active ministrations of religion are closed against her.” - -The manner in which a great English poet, much later still, treated the -women of his household was quite in consonance with the customs of -preceding times. As an English author wrote, forty years ago, “Milton -taught his daughters to pronounce Greek and Latin, so that they might -read the classics aloud for his pleasure, but forbade their -understanding the meaning of a word for their own—for which he deserved -to be blind.” - -Regarding France we read in Compayré that “Even in the higher classes, -woman held herself aloof from instruction, and from things intellectual. -Madame Racine had never seen played, and had probably never read, the -tragedies of her husband.” Mme. de Lambert “reproaches Molière for -having excluded women from recreation, pastime, and pleasure.” Fénelon -advised girls to learn to read and write correctly and to learn grammar, -which “surpassed in the time of Fénelon the received custom.” “No one -knew better than Fénelon the faults that come to woman through -ignorance—unrest, unemployed time, inability to apply herself to solid -and serious duties, frivolity, indolence, lawless imagination, -indiscreet curiosity concerning trifles, levity, and talkativeness, -sentimentalism, and ... a mania for theology: women are too much -inclined to speak decisively on religious questions.” - - - PERSONAL BEAUTY - -Rarer even than feminine culture, Personal Beauty appears to have been -throughout the Middle Ages. Most of the portraits of women and men, as -well as the ideal heads and figures in paintings and sculpture, are -repulsively ugly and inexpressive of higher traits. The general causes -of mediæval ugliness—neglect of personal hygiene and sanitary measures, -hard manual labour, prevention of love-matches, etc.—will be considered -elsewhere. In this place only one cause need be alluded to. The old -Church Fathers, it is well known, were not only unæsthetic but -positively anti-æsthetic. Everything pleasing to the senses was -denounced by them, especially the physical beauty of women, which they -looked upon as a special gift of the devil. Such an attitude on the part -of the leading social class could hardly tend to encourage the -cultivation of personal charms; and during the trials for witchcraft -special efforts appear to have even been made to eliminate beauty -forcibly; for the mere possession of unusual beauty sometimes sufficed -to bring a poor girl to trial, outrage, torture, and death. - -It may have been due partly to a natural reaction against asceticism, -partly to the rarity of spiritual beauty, that the mediæval poets in -enumerating the charms of their mistresses, confine themselves almost -exclusively to their physical features. Professor Scherr, after quoting -Ariosto’s description of his heroine Alcina in _Orlando Furioso_ (vii. -11, _seq._), for comparison with similar efforts of German poets, -observes: “It is very remarkable that, as in this female portrait -sketched by Ariosto, so with mediæval poets in general, including those -of Germany, the principal accent is placed on the bodily charms of the -women. Almost all sketches of this kind are purely material. -Intellectual beauty, as expressed in the features, is barely mentioned. -These old romanticists were much more sensual than modern writers would -have us believe.” - - - SPENSER ON LOVE - -That Love, too, continued to be looked at from a material point of view, -long after the chivalric efforts to idealise it, is shown strikingly by -the way in which Spenser compares love with friendship and family -affection. In the fifth book of the _Faery Queene_ he asks— - - “Whither shall weigh the balance down; to wit, - The dear affection unto kindred sweet, - Or raging fire of love to womankind, - Or zeal of friends, combined by virtues meet?” - -Like an ancient Greek he decides in favour of friendship— - - “For natural affection soon doth cease, - And quenched is with Cupid’s greater flame, - But faithful friendship doth them both suppress,” - (for) - “_Love of soul doth love of body pass._” - -Could anything attest better than this the general mediæval ignorance of -the psychic traits or “overtones” which constitute Romantic Love? - - - DANTE AND SHAKSPERE - -Long before the day of Spenser there lived, however, in Florence, a poet -whose transcendent genius enabled him to feel and describe for the first -time the real romantic sentiment of Love. It is true that some of the -poets of Chivalry had before him attempted to depict the supersensual, -æthereal side of the passion. But their portraits lacked the touch of -realism: they described what they imagined; Dante what he felt. - -Dante was born in 1265: Modern Love was born nine years later—613 years -ago. “Nine times already since my birth,” says Dante, “had the heaven of -light returned to the self-same point almost, as concerns its own -revolution, when first the glorious lady of my mind was made manifest to -mine eyes; even she who was called Beatrice (she who confers blessing) -by many who knew not wherefore.... From that time onward, Love quite -governed my soul.... But seeing that were I to dwell overmuch on the -passions and doings of such early youth, my words might be counted -something fabulous, I will therefore put them aside,” etc. - -These are the opening lines of the _Vita Nuova_, in which Modern Love is -for the first time portrayed with an air of sincerity, and concerning -which Professor C. E. Norton justly remarks that “so long as there are -lovers in the world, and so long as lovers are poets, will this first -and tenderest love-story of modern literature be read with appreciation -and responsive sympathy.” - -What a privilege to describe First Love not only in an individual but a -_historic_ sense, as Dante did in this poem, which Rossetti calls “the -auto-biography or auto-psychology of Dante’s youth, till his -twenty-seventh year.” - -After that first sight of Beatrice one of her sweet smiles was the -highest goal of his desires; but so powerful was the spell of her -presence that he was obliged to avoid her. “From that night forth the -natural functions of my body began to be vexed and impeded, for I was -given up wholly to thinking of this most gracious creature; whereby in -short space I became so weak and so reduced that it was irksome to many -of my friends to look upon me ... the thing was so plainly to be -discerned in my countenance that there was no longer any means of -concealing it.” Such words as “trembling,” “confusion,” “weeping,” -constantly occur as the narrative proceeds. Love, he says, “bred in me -such overpowering sweetness that my body, being all subjected thereto, -remained many times helpless and passive.” When for the first time -Beatrice denied him her smile, “I became possessed with such grief that, -parting myself from others, _I went into a lonely place_ to bathe the -ground with most bitter tears.” And in one of the sonnets interspersed -he says— - - “My face shows my heart’s colour, - No sooner do I lift mine eyes to look - Than the blood seems as shaken from my heart, - And all my pulses beat at once and stop.” - -But by far the most remarkable thing in the _Vita Nuova_, is Dante’s own -indirect testimony that such Love as he felt, such supersensual, -æsthetic Love, _was a novelty and a puzzle to his contemporaries_. For -he tells how he met some ladies who gazed at him and laughed till one of -them asked: “To what end lovest thou this lady, seeing that thou canst -not support her presence? Now tell us this thing that we may know it: -for certainly the end of such a love must be worthy of knowledge.” - -No doubt it was worth knowing; for, as the author of the admirable -article on “Poetry,” in the eighth edition of the _Encyclopædia -Britannica_ (1859), remarks: “When in modern times the attempt was made -to revive tragedy, it proved totally unsuccessful until this principle -(of romantic love) was admitted into the drama to give it warmth and -life. Of that species of composition which in its proper sense is -peculiar to the moderns, viz. the novel and romance, it forms, as we all -know, the moving power. In short, it influences, more or less, every -department in which the imagination has exerted itself with success -since the revival of literature.” - -Once more it is well to state that there are geniuses in the emotional -as in the intellectual world. Dante was both; and the realistic -descriptions he has given of the effects of Romantic Love have helped to -sustain the notion that Love is immutable, and has existed at all times. -But the indirect testimony to the contrary just quoted, and the whole -argument of this chapter on Mediæval Love, make it apparent that Dante’s -Love was the exception which proves that among the others Love did not -exist. And even Dante was not entirely modern in his Love. A modern -lover would not have attempted to conceal the object of his Love, but -would have made it apparent to all by his foolish actions that he was in -Love with this particular girl and no other; he would perhaps have wooed -more persistently, and his feelings would not have remained unchanged -after her marriage to another. Like Petrarch, moreover, Dante cannot be -quite acquitted of the suspicion that, after the first flush of -excitement, the excessive and persistent purification and idealisation -of his passion was based not so much on real amorous feelings and -motives, as on an author’s craving for an object on which to lavish his -literary art of embellishment. - -Dante, in a word, hyper-idealised his passion. He became quite deaf to -the fundamental tone of Love, and heard only its overtones. And herein -lies his inferiority to Shakspere. It is in the works of Shakspere that -the various motives and emotions which constitute Love—sensuous, -æsthetic, intellectual—are for the first time mingled in proper -proportions. Shakspere’s Love is Modern Love, full-fledged, and -therefore calls for no separate analysis. It is a primitive passion, -purified and refined by intellectual, moral, and æsthetic culture. And -though by no means universal, or even common, at the present day, it is -yet of frequent occurrence, and will become more and more prevalent as -time rolls on. To facilitate its progress by pointing out its -characteristics, its evolution, and the measures that must be taken to -foster it, is one of the principal objects of this monograph. - - - - - MODERN LOVE - - - A BIOLOGIC TEST - -Writers on evolution have a very simple and convenient way of verifying -their inferences, by applying the rule—which seems to hold true -universally—that the different stages through which an individual passes -in his development—physical and mental—correspond to the periods of -development through which the whole race has passed. - -This principle, applied to our present problem, fits exactly, and proves -that the account given in the preceding pages of the development of Love -is correct. - -Historically we have seen that of all affections Maternal Love is the -earliest and (until after Romantic Love appears) the strongest. Then -paternal, filial, and fraternal love are gradually developed, followed -by friendship (Greek), and finally by Love proper. - -Just so with the individual. The baby’s first love is for its mother, -whose tender expression and beaming eyes throw the first reflected smile -on its face, and touch the first cord of sympathetic attachment. Then -the father comes in for his share of attention, followed by sisters and -brothers. At school begins the era of friendship, representing -“classical” love, and often as ardent and Love-like as among the ancient -Greeks. Finally Romantic Love appears on the scene, eclipsing every -other emotion. And, like historic Love, it generally passes through a -blind, silly, chivalric stage, known as “calf-love,” which at last is -succeeded by real, intense romantic passion, that leads to monogamous -marriage, the central pillar of modern civilisation. - -Not only have we seen that Romantic Love is the latest and the strongest -of all affections, but the causes which retarded its development have -been indicated. Chief among these were the negation of Individual -Preference, and the absence of opportunities for Courtship, already -deplored by Plato. As long as women were captured, or bought, or -disposed of by father or mother without any reference to their own will, -Sexual Selection on the female’s part was of course out of the question; -and on the man’s part it was rendered impossible by the absence of -Courtship. Wooing a woman was not winning _her_ favour, but impressing -her father with a display of wealth or social power. Thus there were no -opportunities on her part for the display of personal charms or the -cunning art of Coyness, or for inflaming and feeding his passion through -Jealousy by bestowing an occasional mischief-making smile on his rivals; -there were no lover’s quarrels followed by sweet reconciliations and an -increase of Love; no short absences fanning Love with sighs; no -alternate feelings of hope and despair, inspired by his or her fickle or -uncertain actions; no chance for displays of Gallantry and mutual -Self-sacrifice and assistance; no sympathetic exchange and consequent -doubling of pleasures, real or anticipated; none, in fact, of the more -subtle traits and emotions which make Romantic Love what it is. - - - VENUS, PLUTUS, AND MINERVA - -It cannot be said that these obstacles to Love have been as radically -removed as they ought to be. Oriental chaperonage is still rampant in -France, to the extinction of all true romantic sentiment. In other -countries Parental Tyranny has considerably abated, but the Goddess of -Love still has formidable rivals in Plutus, the god of wealth, and -Minerva, the goddess of “wisdom” or expediency. Thus it happens that -even in the case of persons who are refined enough to experience Love, -it is too often absent when they marry; and, as a German pessimist -sneeringly points out, no one has yet dared to tempt bride and -bridegroom to perjury, by asking when the knot is tied, “Do you _love_ -this woman?” “Do you _love_ this man?” - -Nevertheless public sentiment is continually making war on Plutus and -Minerva, and siding with Venus. Probably the mercantile element in -marriage will not die out till a few weeks before the millennium, -although Herbert Spencer is optimistic enough to believe it will sooner. -“After wife-stealing,” he says, “came wife-purchase; and then followed -the usages which made, and continue to make, considerations of property -predominate over considerations of personal preference. Clearly, -wife-purchase and husband-purchase (which exists in some semi-civilised -societies), though they have lost their original gross form, persist in -disguised forms. Already some disapproval of those who marry for money -or position is expressed; and this growing stronger may be expected to -purify the monogamic union, by making it in all cases real instead of -being in some cases nominal.” - -It is indeed a most hopeful sign of progress, this strong and growing -modern sentiment in favour of Romantic Love as against rival motives -matrimonial. Novelists, when the wills of the lovers and the parents -clash, invariably and unconsciously side with the lovers; and should a -novelist make an exception, many of his readers would close the book, -and the others would finish it under protest and disappointedly. Even -when we read a newspaper reporter’s thrilling and dramatic narrative of -the elopement of a foolish young couple, fresh from the high-school, our -hearts throb with sympathetic anxiety lest the irate parent should -succeed in capturing the runaway couple. - -No doubt this instinctive modern prejudice in favour of Romantic Love -will ultimately throw a halo of sacredness around it, which will raise -Cupid’s will to the dignity of an Eleventh Commandment—a consummation -devoutedly to be wished; for although the conjugal affection which grows -out of Romantic Love is not always deeper than that which results from -unions not based on Love, the physical and mental qualities of the -children commonly show at a glance whether or not the parents were -brought together by Sexual Selection. - - - LEADING MOTIVES - -The psychic elements of Love which thus far have been compared to -overtones, might also be regarded from a Wagnerian point of view as -_Leitmotive_ or leading motives in the Drama of Historic Love. In the -first scenes, where the actors are animals and savages, followed by -Egyptians, Hebrews, Hindoos, Greeks, and Romans, and mediæval clowns and -fanatics, these leading motives are heard only as short melodic phrases, -and at long intervals, pregnant, indeed, with future possibilities, but -isolated and never combined into a symphony of Love. In the last act, -however, which we have now reached, all these motives appear in various -combinations, in the gorgeous and glowing instrumentation of modern -poets, with all possible figurative, harmonic, and dynamic nuances; and -at the same time so intertwined and interwoven that no one apparently -has ever succeeded in unravelling the poetic woof and distinguishing the -separate threads. For us, however, who have followed these motives from -the moment when they first appeared in a primitive form, it will be easy -to distinguish them and subject each one to a separate analysis. We -shall first consider those which, like Coyness and Jealousy, are already -familiar and need only be considered in their modern forms, and then -pass on to those which are more and more exclusively modern. - - - MODERN COYNESS - -At least five sources or causes of modern female Coyness may be -suggested:— - -(1) _An Echo of Capture._—Why are modern city-folks so fond of picnics? -It was Mr. Spencer, I believe, who suggested somewhere that it is -because picnics awaken in civilised men and women a vague and agreeable -reminiscence of the time when their ancestors habitually took their -meals on meadows in the shade of a tree. If it is possible for such -experiences to re-echo, as it were, in our nervous system through so -many generations, thanks to the conservatism of oft-repeated cerebral -impressions, then it does not seem so very fantastic to suggest that one -cause of female Coyness may be a similar echo, or reminiscence, of the -time when the primitive ancestresses of modern women were “courted” by -Capture or Purchase, and so badly treated as wives that in course of -time an instinctive impulse was formed in their minds to shrink back and -say No to man’s proposals. - -(2) _Maiden_ versus _Wife_.—It is hardly necessary, however, to rely -upon such a remote sociological echo, so to speak, for an explanation of -a girl’s hesitation to become a wife even if her suitor pleases her. The -thought of exchanging her maiden freedom for conjugal restrictions and -duties; of giving up the homage and admiration of all men for the -possible neglect of one; of probably soon losing her youthful beauty, -etc.—such thoughts would make many girls even more coy than they now -are, did not the fear of becoming an old maid act as a counterbalancing -motive in favour of marriage. - -(3) _Modesty._—Esquimaux girls, as we have seen, “affect the utmost -bashfulness and aversion to any proposal of marriage, lest they should -lose their reputation for modesty.” And the greatest analyst of the -human heart puts the same philosophy into the mouth of Juliet in a -passage which, although everybody knows it by heart, must yet be quoted -here— - - “O gentle Romeo, - If thou dost love, pronounce it faithfully: - Or if thou think’st I am too quickly won, - I’ll frown and be perverse and say thee nay, - So thou wilt woo; but else, not for the world. - In truth, fair Montague, I am too fond, - And therefore thou may’st think my ’haviour light: - But trust me, gentleman, I’ll prove more true - Than those that have more _cunning to be strange_. - I should have been more strange, I must confess, - But that thou overheard’st, ere I was ware, - My true love’s passion: therefore pardon me, - And _not impute this yielding to light love_, - Which the dark night hath so discovered.” - -(4) _Cunning to be Strange._—No huntsman (except a monarch) would care -to go to an enclosure and shoot the deer confined therein, nor a -fisherman to catch trout conveniently placed in a pond. But to wade up a -mountain brook all day long, climbing over slippery rocks, and enduring -the discomforts of a hot sun and wet clothes, with nothing to eat, and -only a few speckled trifles to reward him—that is what he considers -“glorious sport.” - -The instinctive perception that a thing is valued in proportion to the -difficulty of its attainment is what taught women the “cunning to be -strange.” Seeing that they could not compete with man in brute force, -they acquired the arts of Beauty and of Coyness, as their best weapons -against his superior strength—the Beauty to fascinate him, the Coyness -to teach him that in Love, as in fishing, the _pleasure of pursuit_ is -the main thing. - -At first this Coyness was manifested in a very crude manner, as among -the primitive maidens who hid in the forest; or among the Roman women -celebrated by Ovid, who locked their door and compelled the lover to beg -and whine for admission by the hour; or among the mediæval women who, to -gratify their caprices and enjoy the sense of a newly-acquired power, -sent their admirers to participate in bloody wars before recognising -their addresses. And so coarse-grained were the men that as soon as the -women ceased to tease they ceased to woo; as, for instance, in mediæval -France, about the time of the _Chansons de Geste_, “the man who desires -a woman yet does not appear as a wooer; for he knows he is certain of -her favour,” as we read in Ploss. Hence Cleopatra’s brief and pointed -rejoinder to Charmian when he advises her, in order to win Antony’s -love, to give him way in everything, cross him in nothing: “Thou -teachest like a fool; the way to lose him.” - -(5) _Procrastination._—Love at first sight is frequent at the present -day, but in ancient Greece and Rome marriage at first sight appears to -have been more common. The classical suitor’s wooing was generally -comprised in three words: _Veni, Vidi, Vici_; _i.e._ I Came, Saw the -girl’s father, Conquered his scruples by proving my wealth or social -position. Sufficient brevity in this, no doubt: but _brevity is not the -soul of Love_. - -“Tant plus le chemin est long dans l’amour, tant plus un esprit délicat -sent de plaisir,” says Pascal, announcing a truth of which ancient and -mediæval nations had no conception until female Coyness taught it them. -Goethe evidently had the same truth in mind when he mentioned as a phase -of ancient love (Roman _Elegies_)— - - “In der heroischen zeit, da Götter und Göttinen liebten - Folgte Begierde dem Blick folgte Genuss der Begier.” - -That is, in prose, there were no preliminaries in the love-drama, which -had only one act, the fifth, in which the marriage is celebrated. - -_Goldsmith on Love._—In Goldsmith’s _Citizen of the World_ there is a -chapter on “Whether Love be a Natural or Fictitious Passion,” in which -reference is likewise made to the value of procrastination. As this -passage shows Goldsmith to have been the first author who had an -approximate conception of the development and psychology of Love, I will -quote it almost entire. It is in the form of a dialogue, and one of the -speakers remarks: "Whether love be natural or no ... it contributes to -the happiness of every society in which it is introduced. All our -pleasures are short and can only charm at intervals; love is a method of -protracting our greatest pleasure; and surely that gamester who plays -the greatest stake to the best advantage will, at the end of life, rise -victorious. This was the opinion of Vanini, who affirmed that ‘every -hour was lost which was not spent in love.’ His accusers were unable to -comprehend his meaning; and the poor advocate for love was burned in -flames; alas! no way metaphorical. But whatever advantages the -individual may reap from this passion, society will certainly be refined -and improved by its introduction; all laws calculated to discourage it -tend to embrute the species, and weaken the state. Though it cannot -plant morals in the human breast, it cultivates them when there: pity, -generosity, and honour receive a brighter polish from its assistance; -and a single _amour_ is sufficient entirely to brush off the clown. - -“But it is an exotic of the most delicate constitution: it requires the -greatest art to introduce it into a state, and the smallest -discouragement is sufficient to repress it again. Let us only consider -with what ease it was formerly _extinguished in Rome_, and with what -difficulty it was _lately revived in Europe_: it seemed to sleep for -ages, and at last fought its way among us through tilts, tournaments, -dragons, and all the dreams of chivalry. The rest of the world, _China -only excepted_, are, and have ever been, utter strangers to its delights -and advantages. In other countries, as men find themselves stronger than -women, they lay a claim to rigorous superiority: this is natural, and -love, which gives up this natural advantage, must certainly be the -effect of art—an art calculated to lengthen out our happier moments, and -add new graces to society.” - -To this conclusion the lady interlocutor in the dialogue objects on the -ground that “the effects of love are too violent to be the result of an -artificial passion”; and suggests, by way of accounting for the absence -of love, that “the same efforts that are used in some places to suppress -pity, and other natural passions, may have been employed to extinguish -love”; and that “those nations where it is cultivated only make nearer -advances to nature.” - -Goldsmith thus leaves it in doubt whether he considers Love a natural or -an artificial passion. In the three passages which I have italicised, he -errs: first, in saying that Love was “extinguished” in Rome, when in -fact it never existed there, except incompletely in the poetic intuition -of Ovid and possibly one or two other poets; secondly, he errs in -remarking that it was lately “revived” in Europe, when in fact it was -newly-born; and his excepting China, in speaking of the absence of Love, -can only be looked on in the light of a joke in view of the absolute -subjection of women to parental dictation, and the fact that, as one -writer remarks, “a union prompted solely by love would be a monstrous -infraction of the duty of filial obedience, and a predilection on the -part of the female as heinous a crime as infidelity.” But his definition -of Love as “the effect of art—an art calculated to lengthen out our -happier moments and add new graces to society” is exceedingly good. The -art in question is known as Courtship: and it is the latest of the fine -arts, which even now exists in its perfection in two countries -only—England and America. The Italian language has no equivalent for -Courtship, as Professor Mantegazza tells us in his _Fisiologia dell’ -Amore_; and a German commentator on this passage in Mantegazza comments -dubiously: “Das Eutsprechende deutsche Wort _dürfte wohl_ Werbung sein;” -“the corresponding German word is presumably _Werbung_.” “Presumably” is -very suggestive. Yet the Germans have another expression of mediæval -origin apparently, namely, “Einem Mädchen den Hof machen”—"to pay court -to a girl," which, though somewhat conversational, has evidently the -same historic origin as our word Court-ship; implying that formerly it -was the custom at court alone to prolong the agony of Love by gallant -attentions to women, which enabled them to exercise the “cunning to be -strange.” - -_Disadvantages of Coyness._—Beneficial as are no doubt the effects which -have been brought about by female Coyness in developing the art of -Courtship, there are corresponding evils inherent in that mental -attitude which make it probable that Coyness will gradually disappear -and be succeeded by something more modern, more natural, more refined. - -There are four serious objections to Coyness, one from a masculine, -three from a feminine point of view. - -Men, in the first place, can hardly approve of Coyness; for it certainly -indicates a coarse mediæval fibre in a man if he is obliged to confess -that he can love a girl not for her beauty and amiability, but only -because she tantalises and maltreats him: - - “Spaniel-like, the more she spurns my love, - The more it grows and fawneth on her still.” - -Or, in Heine’s delightful persiflage of this attitude— - - “Ueberall wo du auch wandelst, - Schaust du mich zu allen Stunden, - Und jemehr du mich misshandelst, - Treuer bleib ich dir verbunden. - - “Denn mich fesselt holde Bosheit - Wie mich Güte stets vertrieben; - Willst du sicher meiner los sein - Musst du dich in mich verlieben.” - -In one English sentence: Your amiability repels, your malice attracts -me; if you wish to get rid of my attentions, you must fall in love with -me. - -If a refined man can feel ardent affection for an animal, a friend, a -relative, without being “spurned” and consequently “fawning,” why should -not the same be true of his love for a beautiful girl? It is true; and -hence the cleverest women of the period, feeling this change in the -masculine heart, have adopted a different method of fascinating men and -bringing them to their feet, as we shall presently see. - -Women, in turn, are injured by Coyness; first, because it makes them act -foolishly. French and German girls are systematically taught to take -immediate alarm at sight of a horrid man (whom they secretly consider a -darling creature, with _such_ a moustache) and conceal themselves behind -their mamma or chaperon, like spring chickens creeping under the old hen -at sight of a hawk. This sort of _spring-chicken coyness_ does -infinitely more harm than good; it makes the girls weak and frivolous, -and as for the men, if they are systematically treated as birds of prey, -how can they avoid falling in with their _rôle_? If men are to behave -like gentlemen they must be treated as gentlemen, as they are in England -and America. - -Coyness, again, makes women deceitful and insincere. “Amongst her other -feminine qualities,” says Thackeray of one of his characters, “she had -that of being a perfect dissembler.” And in another place, “I think -women have an instinct of dissimulation; they know by nature how to -disguise their emotions far better than the most consummate courtiers -can do.” It cannot be said that dissimulation is a virtue, though it may -be a useful weapon against coarse and selfish men. If not the same thing -as hypocrisy, it is next door to it; and it cannot have a beneficial -effect on a woman’s general moral instincts if she is compelled -constantly to act a part contrary to her convictions and feelings. -Though as deeply in love as her suitor, she is commanded to treat him -with indifference, coldness, even cruelty,—in a word, to do constant -violence to her and his feelings, and to lacerate her own heart perhaps -even more than the unhappy lover’s. Thus instead of mutually enjoying -the period of Courtship, and indulging in harmless banter, “they gaze at -each other fiercely, though ready to die for love”; or, as Heine puts -it— - - “Sie sahen sich an so feindlich, - Und wollten vor Liebe vergehen.” - -And why all this perverseness, this unnaturalness, this emotional -torture? Simply because—once more be it said—the men of former days, the -men who lived on pork and port, who delighted in bear-baiting, -cock-fights, and similar æsthetic amusements, had nerves so coarse and -callous that to make any impression on them the women had to play with -them as a cat does with a mouse to make it tender and sweet. - -_Coyness lessens Woman’s Love._—One more charge, the gravest of all, -remains to be piled on top, as a last crushing argument against crude -Coyness. An emotion, like a plant, requires for its growth sunshine, -light, and open air; if kept in a dark cellar and stifled, it soon -becomes weak and pale and languishes. Man’s superior strength and -selfish exercise of it have compelled women to cultivate Coyness as an -art of dissembling, hiding, and repressing their real feelings. But to -repress the manifestations of anger, of pity, of Love, is to suppress -them; hence Coyness has necessarily had the effect of weakening woman’s -Love. It weakens it in the same proportion as it strengthens man’s. And -hence, as I have said before, the current notion that women love more -ardently, more deeply, than men is an absurd myth. The poets have always -shown a predilection for this, as for all other myths; and as it is -still served up as a self-evident truth in a thousand books every year, -it is worth while to clear away the underbrush and let in some daylight -on the subject. - -_Masculine_ versus _Feminine Love_.—One thing may be conceded at the -outset: that woman’s Love, when once kindled, is apt to endure longer -than man’s. Shakspere’s “’Tis brief, my Lord, as woman’s love” is -therefore a libel on the sex. The difficulty is to get it under way. It -takes so much of the small kindling wood of courtship (“sparking” it is -called) to set a female heart aflame, that many men give it up in -despair and remain bachelors; or else, like the young man in _Fidelio_, -they finally tell their girl, “If you will not love me, at least marry -me.” - -It may also be conceded that Rousseau exaggerates when he says that -“Women are a hundred times sooner reasonable than passionate: they are -as unable to describe love as to feel it.” This may have been true in -his day; but that there have since been some female authors who have -correctly described Love, and thousands of women who have been deeply in -Love, it would be absurd to deny. All that is here maintained is that -Love is of less frequent occurrence in women than in men; and when it -does occur in women it is not usually so deep, so passionate, so -maddening. The average woman knows little of Romantic Love. She has read -about it in novels, in poems, and thinks how delightful it must be. The -faintest symptom is taken for an attack, just as in perusing a medical -book people commonly fancy they have symptoms of the disease they chance -to be reading about. Thus it happens that young girls so easily “fall in -love,” as they imagine, and are ready to elope with the first music -teacher or circus rider that comes along— - - “A blockhead with melodious voice - In boarding-school may have his choice, - And oft the dancing-master’s art - Climbs from the toe to touch the heart.”—SWIFT. - -It is quite probable that Coleridge was right when he wrote— - - “For maids as well as youths have perished - From fruitless love too fondly cherished;” - -although this does not seem to agree with the opinion of Shakspere and -Thackeray regarding the rarity of broken lovers’ hearts. Morselli’s work -on Suicide does not contain any definite statistics _à propos_; but I -have seen the statement in a newspaper that in Italy, during 1883, -thirty-six men and nine women committed suicide—four to one; and the -proportion will appear larger still if it is remembered that girls often -commit suicide from an anguish deeper than a refusal. - -The myth that woman’s passion is deeper than man’s is commonly expressed -in the form given to it by Byron: that in man’s life love is only an -episode, whereas to a woman it is all in all. Allowing for poetic -exaggeration, it does not at all follow that because a man does not -brood all his life over Love, he therefore loves less. The fact that -Goethe, the poet, also wrote treatises on botany and physics, and made -landscape sketches, did not decrease the depth of his poetic feeling but -added to it. For it is a fundamental law of psychology—except in -pathologic cases—that continuous brooding over an emotion weakens and -exhausts it; but after intervals of rest it emerges more fresh than -ever. The various objects and ambitions that occupy man only serve to -strengthen his feelings, his capacity for Love. That women are more -easily swamped and carried away by emotions does not prove their -feelings to be deeper, but themselves to be weaker. One lake may be -entirely full, and yet not contain half as much water as a larger lake -which is only half-full. - -It was evidently with a vague desire to justify or excuse woman’s -comparative weakness in Love that Ninon de L’Enclos wrote “Women and -flowers are made to be loved for their beauty and sweetness, rather than -themselves to love.” And that intelligent observer Mrs. Childs adds the -weight of her feminine testimony by confessing her belief “That men more -frequently marry for love than women.” - -To remove all lingering doubt, consider the “overtones” of Love -separately. Is woman ordinarily as absurdly or ferociously Jealous as -man, or quite so Proud of her conquest? Is she so deeply absorbed in -Admiration of his Personal Beauty? Is she as Gallant, and as ready for -Sacrifices? or does she not rather take his devoted services for -granted, and consider them rewarded by a smile or some other trifle? -Indeed, the only element of Love which in woman is stronger than in man -is Coyness; and Coyness, as has been shown, weakens woman’s Love in the -same degree as it increases man’s. - -Of course it would be unjust to attribute to the effects of Coyness all -the difference between man’s and woman’s Love. Much is due to the -physiologic law that emotional capacity—amorous included—depends on -brain capacity (_not_ on the “heart”); and man’s brain is more powerful -than woman’s. But crude mediæval Coyness must bear a large share of the -blame; and it is probable that now, having played its _rôle_ of bringing -men to terms and making them gallant and polite towards women, it will -disappear gradually. - -“Der Mohr hat seine Schuldigkeit gethan, Der Mohr kann gehen.” - -Already, however, there is, especially in America and England, a -superior class of women who, despising Coyness as crude, artificial, and -silly, have adopted in its place a much more refined method of making -men fall in love with them. In one word, they have substituted -Flirtation for Coyness. As this statement will to many appear -paradoxical, if not absurd, it is necessary first to distinguish between -Flirtation and Coquetry before trying to justify it. - -_Flirtation and Coquetry._—These two words are so constantly confused by -careless or ignorant writers that some girls are almost as much offended -if accused of Flirtation as of Coquetry. It was bad enough for Winthrop -to say that “A woman without coquetry is as insipid as a rose without -scent, champagne without sparkle, or corned beef without mustard” (!), -but there is no excuse whatever for “Ik Marvel’s” saying that “Coquetry -whets the appetite; flirtation depraves it. Coquetry is the thorn that -guards the rose (!), easily trimmed off when once plucked. Flirtation is -like the slime on water-plants, making them hard to handle, and when -caught only to be cherished in slimy waters.” No excuse, I say, because -the dictionaries on our table tell us the very reverse. Flirtation, in -Webster, is simply “playing at courtship,” without any cruel intentions; -while Coquetry is an attempt “to attract admiration, and gain -matrimonial offers, from a desire to gratify vanity, and with the -intention to reject the suitor.” - -That this is the correct definition is shown beyond question by the -adjectives which are commonly coupled with those nouns: a “harmless -Flirtation,” a “heartless Coquette.” - -A Coquette seeks to fascinate for the sake of fascinating. Like a miser, -she mistakes the means for the end, and feeds on one-sided passion and -admiration, until one morning she wakes up and finds her beauty gone, -and herself the most disappointed and unamiable of old maids. Or again, -she might be compared to a bank clerk who refused his salary because he -was satisfied with the tinkling of the money which he heard all day -long. The Flirt, on the other hand, displays her accomplishments, her -wit, and personal charms, for the sake of enlarging the facilities of -Courtship, the possibilities of rational Choice. - -One reason why Flirtation and Coquetry are so apt to be confounded is -because the English peoples alone have the word Flirtation—naturally -enough, as they alone allow their young people the blessings of -Courtship and rational choice promoted by it. Foreigners, not -appreciating exactly what is meant by the word, are apt to translate it -as Coquetry. One Frenchman, who has lived long in England, has tried to -define Flirtation for his countrymen by saying it consisted of -“attentions without intentions.” This definition was widely welcomed as -very clever. Clever it may be, but it is a definition of Coquetry not of -Flirtation. For Flirtation never excludes _possible_ intentions. - -_Flirtation_ versus _Coyness_.—Flirtation, from the feminine point of -view, may be defined as _the art of fascinating a man and leaving him in -doubt whether he is loved or not_. There is no reason why a beautiful -and bright girl should not charm, _i.e._ flirt with, every man who -interests her, and to whom she has been properly introduced. No reason -why she should not dispense her sweet smiles with complete impartiality, -until she has made up her mind whom she wishes to marry. In so far as -Coyness simply means reserve and dignity, she will of course still be -coy; but she will not run away to conceal herself in the forest, or lock -the front door, or hide behind a chaperon’s back, or affect to be -cynically indifferent to men, or treat the one she likes best with -affected cruelty. With refined men of the period Flirting, _i.e._ -fascinating and leaving in doubt, is quite as effective in kindling -adoration to ecstasy as crude Coyness was with the coarse-fibred men of -the past. Flirtation, indeed, is much more tantalising than Coyness, and -therefore a complete modern substitute for it. - -There is a passage in Hume’s _Dissertation on the Passions_ which, -though occurring in a different connection, strikes home the truth of -the last sentence most forcibly. “Uncertainty,” he says, “has the same -effect as opposition. The agitation of the thought, the quick turns -which it makes from one view to another, the variety of passions which -succeed each other, according to the different views: all these produce -an agitation in the mind; and this agitation transfuses itself into the -predominant passion. Security, on the other hand, diminishes the -passions. The mind, when left to itself, immediately languishes; and in -order to preserve its ardour, must be supported every moment by a new -flow of passion.” - -Of course to those of a girl’s admirers who are for a while left in -doubt and finally “get left” altogether, female flirtation may seem a -cruel pastime. But there is a sort of _historic justice_ in this torture -which, indeed, almost amounts to an excuse for _Coquetry_; it is a -species of feminine revenge for the long centuries of slavery in which -muscular man held weak woman. Besides, no man has ever died of a broken -heart, except in novels. And, again, who is to blame a pretty girl for -having fascinated an unsuccessful lover? A rose yields its fragrance and -beauty to all who wish to admire it. If a conceited young man comes -along, imagines that all its beauty is for him alone, and tries to pluck -it, he has only himself to blame if he feels the thorn of -disappointment. - -When Lord Chesterfield wrote, “I assisted at the birth of that most -significant word ‘flirtation,’ which dropped from the most beautiful -mouth in the world,” he perhaps hardly realised how very significant a -factor of social life Flirtation was destined to become. Mr. Galton -wrote, not long ago, that without female Coyness “there would be no more -call for competition among the males for the favour of the females; no -more fighting for love in which the strongest male conquers; no more -rival display of personal charms in which the best-looking or -best-mannered prevails. The drama of courtship, with its prolonged -strivings and doubtful success, would be cut quite short, and the race -would degenerate through the absence of that sexual selection for which -the protracted preliminaries for love-making give opportunity.” When Mr. -Galton wrote this, he did not apparently realise the social revolution -that is going on, or understand that frank and natural Flirtation, which -recognises every man as a gentleman until he has proved the contrary, -affords much better opportunity for Sexual Selection and “protracted -preliminaries of love-making” than crude, hypocritical, unnatural -Coyness, which regards every gentleman as a beast of prey and a -libertine. - -Flirtation being the modern art of widening the field of amorous -competition and prolonging the duration of Courtship, it follows that -there cannot be too much of it—quantitatively speaking. Qualitatively it -easily degenerates into frivolity, as in the case of those girls who get -engaged repeatedly before marriage, which shows a lack of judgment, of -tact, and especially of delicacy, because a peach should never be -touched on the tree but allowed to retain its first blush for the man -who is to eat it. - -Refined flirtation, in truth, requires much more wit, more tact and -culture, than Coyness, or than Prudery, which is the north-pole of -Coyness. Prudery bears much resemblance to the artificial dignity of a -certain class of young men who, by means of persistent reticence, gain a -reputation for aristocratic and cynical superiority. Coquetry even is -preferable to Prudery, for it is at any rate entertaining. - -To sum up this matter in one sentence: The coy Prude says No, even when -she means Yes; the cold Coquette says Yes and always means No; the -modest and refined Flirt says neither Yes nor No, but looks and smiles a -sweet “Perhaps—if you can win my Love.” - -_Modern Courtship._—What a grotesque and topsy-turvy parody of history -it is, this modern comedy of Courtship, in which the man is the slave -and walks on his knees! And how gracefully the newly-crowned girl-queen -plays her _rôle_, little suspecting that in the next act the husband -will probably throw away his self-assumed mask, and insist again on his -historic rights as lord and master of the household! - -The shock which follows this transition from the romance of Courtship to -the realism of conjugal life is much the greatest in the case of the -Prude. The Coquette need not be considered; she was born without a -heart, and marriage will not give her one. But the Prude often owes her -unnaturalness solely to an absurd educational system, and may be at -heart the best of women. Previous to marriage she is taught to rely on -passive Coyness to arouse the desires of man. After marriage, when she -yields herself up, body and soul, she loses this weapon, the lover -recovers his courage and lowers the pitch of his devotional ecstasy. -This alarms the girl, who eagerly endeavours to recover the romantic -Adoration by trying to please and coax and caress. But pleasing—or -_active_ fascination—being an art which she never has practised, she -does it in a bungling way—overdoes it, in fact—thus increasing the -husband’s indifference. Had she learned the art of refined Flirtation, -_i.e._ active fascination with wit and accomplishments, this domestic -tragedy would never have been enacted. Her skill and tact would then -have enabled her to preserve her husband’s Gallantry, by supplying a -constant variety and novelty in those feminine charms and graces in -which a superior woman is as fertile as a man of genius in ideas. - -By her extremely reserved and passive attitude during Courtship the -Prude not only mars the probabilities of conjugal happiness, she also -weakens her own Love directly, through Coyness, and indirectly, by -making the man too servile and over-anxious to worship. For if a man -immediately yields up his sword and proclaims himself fatally stabbed by -a white wench’s black eye, there can be in her mind none of those small -obstacles and doubts which, like short absences, increase Love. -Love-making should be a duel of wit and mutual fascination. The Flirt -does her part of the fencing; the Prude simply hides behind her shield -and waits to see if the man can break it, or coax her to throw it away. -With a Flirt a man need not be a servile worshipper, but he may be a -Flirt likewise: which is a much more desirable attitude, not only -because male flirtation will fan the woman’s Love into a brighter flame -through the stimulus of uncertainty, but also because it enables the man -to preserve his dignity. Hence Beatrix’s pointed advice to Henry Esmond: -“Shall I be frank with you, Harry, and say that if you had not been down -on your knees, and so humble, you might have fared better with me? A -woman of my spirit, cousin, is to be won by gallantry and not by sighs -and rueful faces. All the time you are worshipping I know very well I am -no goddess, and grow weary of the incense.” - -The girl of the period is the girl who flirts, and who expects every -eligible man to take up her challenge for a tournament of wit and -playing at Courtship. The reason why there is much more Romantic Love in -America and England than in other countries is because there is more -Flirtation, more opportunity for Courtship. On the Continent young folks -are too constantly regarded from the marriage point of view. In Italy -and France, when a young lady comes back from boarding-school, she is -married as quickly as possible before she has had a chance to fall in -love with a man of her choice. Consequence: she falls in love _after_ -marriage, and not always with her husband. In Germany a young lady is -allowed to see young men and even to walk with them in the street, in -the daytime or in the evening, if properly chaperoned; but under no -circumstances will she take a young man’s arm, for that would imply an -engagement. In America it is otherwise; but even there, in the South, it -is taken for granted that if a young man calls on a young lady three or -four times he can have no other object than to marry her. His object may -be to marry, but not necessarily _her_. What he wants is to become -acquainted, and if acquaintance “by summer’s ripening breath” blossoms -into Love, so much the better; if not, it is a thousand times better he -should be allowed to depart in peace than that two beings should be -mated who do not feel really sympathetic and companionable. How is a -young man to find his Juliet if he is not allowed to see a number of -women, without being called fickle? And how is Juliet to find her Romeo, -if mothers frighten young men into bachelorhood by such absurd customs? - -The word Courtship, in fact, should have a wider meaning than it has -now. It should be almost synonymous with Flirtation, which provides the -means of bringing together, from a wide circle of acquaintances, two -beings who are really suited to each other, instead of two whom blind -chance, a few “calls,” or the advantages of intimacy resulting from -cousinship, have fortuitously mated for a life of probable conjugal -misery. - -Plato’s advice that opportunity should be given to the sexes to become -acquainted before marriage is much more followed to-day than at any -previous time in the world’s history; but there is still vast room for -improvement. - - - MODERN JEALOUSY - -Jealousy may be defined as a painful emotion on noticing, or imagining, -that some one dear to us loves another more than us. Unlike affection in -general, and like sympathy, it therefore necessarily refers to a -sentient being and a possible reciprocation of affection. It is a form -of rivalry, of which there are two kinds: rivalry for the possession of -an object or a position; and rivalry for the first place in a person’s -affections. The first is not incompatible with friendship, for two rival -candidates for a political office or a college fellowship are not -necessarily personal enemies. But the second kind, which, when allied -with doubt is called Jealousy, is a deadly enemy of good-will; and there -is probably no cause that has broken so many friendships as the -“green-eyed monster,” among women no less than among men. - -Modern psychology agrees with St. Augustine that “he that is -not jealous, is not in love.” There can be no love without -Jealousy—potential at any rate, for in the absence of provocation it may -perhaps never manifest itself. But there can be Jealousy without love, -_i.e_ without sexual love; for that passion is often aroused in -connection with other kinds of affection—parental, filial, etc. Stories -are told of dogs practically committing suicide by disappearing or -pining away if displaced by a younger pet in the affection of a family; -and those who have seen specimens of canine jealousy find nothing -improbable in these stories. Yet as a rule all these general forms of -jealousy—as when a husband is jealous of his wife if the children show -her special favour, or as when a mother is jealous of a visitor loved by -her children—are mere trifles compared with sexual Jealousy, romantic -and conjugal. It is in painting this form of Jealousy that poets have -exhausted the strength of language. “Of all the passions in the mind -thou vilest art,” says Spenser of this “king of torments,” “the injured -lover’s hell.” With this, when once the lover’s mind is affected— - - “’Tis then delightful misery no more, - But agony unmixt, incessant gall.” - - “But, O, what damnéd minutes tells he o’er - Who dotes, yet doubts, suspects, yet strongly loves.” - -In the animal kingdom sexual Jealousy and rivalry play so important a -part that Darwin attributes to their agency the superior size and -strength (in most classes) of the male over the female. Among savages, -as has been pointed out, we see sometimes a curious absence of Jealousy, -both as regards brides and wives; whereas in other cases, the passion -manifests itself with brutal ferocity. Thus among the American Indians -infidelity is sometimes punished by cutting off the nose, sometimes by -the shearing of the hair, which is considered a great disgrace. On the -Fiji Islands, Waitz tells us, the wives of a polygamist “lead a life of -bitter strife and commit ... the most atrocious cruelties against one -another from hate and Jealousy; biting or cutting off the nose is quite -a common occurrence.” Stanley, in his work on the Congo, remarks that -the Langa-Langa women scar their faces and busts in a hideous manner, -probably because compelled to do so by the Jealousy of the men. In -Hebrew literature the case of Jacob’s two wives urging him of their own -accord to become still further polygamous, presents a strange example of -this passion being neutralised by other motives. What prompted the -ancient Greeks, and what prompts Oriental nations to this day, to keep -their women under lock and key, was, and is, of course, simply a -perverse and ignorant feeling of Jealousy. In this feeling also, no -doubt, originated the Chinese custom compelling women to mutilate their -feet to prevent them from going about; as well as the custom indulged in -until recently by Japanese ladies of shaving off their eyebrows and -blackening their teeth after marriage—a custom which shows how much -stronger Jealousy must be than Admiration of Personal Beauty in the -affection of these nations. No doubt, however, all these excesses and -cruelties of Jealousy are counter-balanced by the good it has done in -enforcing the laws of morality. - -Civilisation does not weaken sexual Jealousy, but only gives it a less -brutal form of manifesting itself. Conjugal Jealousy still produces the -greatest number of domestic tragedies, of which _Othello_ is the -immortal type. It is already typified in Hera, for, as Zeus says in -Homer, “She is always meddling, whatever I may be about.” But then she -had good cause to meddle in the affairs of this Olympian Don Juan. - -_Lovers’ Jealousy._—As for Lovers’ Jealousy proper, there is reason to -believe that it will grow stronger and more common as general culture -advances. For the men who are most ahead of our century emotionally, the -men of genius, are usually very jealous. Heine’s Jealousy went so far -that he even poisoned a poor parrot of whom his Mathilde was -extravagantly fond; and it is probable that Byron’s savage attack on the -Waltz was dictated by a sort of wholesale Jealousy in regard to all -pretty girls. For in Love Byron was omnivorous. - -The lover’s and the husband’s Jealousy are alike in their extreme -sensitiveness— - - “Trifles light as air - Are to the jealous confirmations strong - As proofs of holy writ;” - -nor is there probably any difference in the intenseness of their agony. - -To the lover Jealousy is not only his greatest torture, but also his -deadliest enemy. With this fever in his blood even the man of the world -who knows his “Ars Amoris” by heart, is apt to ruin his cause by excess -of blind rivalry and clumsy passion: which perhaps explains why so many -great men have been refused by their best loves. To endure and ignore a -rival is, as Ovid already declared, the highest and most difficult -achievement in the Art of Love; as for himself, he frankly admits, he -was unequal to it. - -There are several ways in which lovers ruin their chances by awkward -excess of passion. It makes them appear selfish and unamiable; and the -pallor which Jealousy inspires is not that which makes a girl consider a -man “interesting,” and leads her through pity to Love. If the lover is -not yet accepted, his Jealousy arouses her opposition, because he seems -to take it for granted that he has a right to be jealous, and that she -will necessarily accept him. Again, his attitude repels her by -suggesting that he would indulge in impertinent supervision and -tyrannical dictation after marriage. Even if he has successfully -proposed, she does not like to have him make his victory and prospective -ownership so conspicuous by his jealous glances and manœuvres. -Besides, a fascinating girl likes to preserve her apparent freedom as -long as possible, and let others admire her beauty while it lasts. - -Most fatal is it for a man to assume a jealous attitude towards a woman -before he has been able to inspire her with interest in him. Her -indifference will thus be inevitably changed into positive dislike. For, -as Madame de Coulanges says, “L’on ne veut de la jalousie que de ceux -dont on pourrait être jalouse”—We do not desire any jealousy except from -those for whom we could ourselves feel jealousy. Stendhal, who quotes -this aphorism, adds a reason why women may be gratified by a display of -Jealousy: “Jealousy may please proud women, as a new way of showing them -their power.” And to a woman in love and in doubt, the man’s Jealousy, -which is so easily detected, is of course a most welcome symptom of -conquest. - -For Jealousy is the first sign of Love, as it is also the last. If a man -is in doubt whether he is really in Love with a girl or only admires her -beauty, let him observe her when talking or dancing with another man: if -he then feels “queer”—from a mere uneasiness to a desire to pulverise -the other fellow—he may be assured that his emotion has passed the -borderline which separates disinterested æsthetic admiration from the -desire for exclusive possession which is popularly known as Love. - -Conversely, if a man who has been repeatedly refused, or who for some -other reason endeavours to suppress his passion, feels in doubt whether -the cure is complete, he need only imagine his former love in the arms -of another man, or before the altar with him: if that does not make him -turn pale and frown and bite his lips, he is cured. This test, however, -is not so certain as the other, for sometimes Jealousy outlives Love; -and Longfellow believed that every true passion leaves an eternal scar. - -Like Coyness, Jealousy is a discord in the harmony of Love. A little of -it is piquant and rouses desire. “Jealousy,” says Hume, “is a painful -passion, yet without some share of it the agreeable affection of love -has difficulty to subsist in all its force and violence.... Jealousy and -absence in love compose the _dolce piccante_ of the Italians, which they -suppose so essential to all pleasure.” - -Unfortunately, Jealousy is rarely content to remain “agreeably piquant,” -but is apt to grow into a tornado of passion which devastates body and -soul, and makes it the keenest agony known to mankind. It is often said -that the agony inspired by a refusal is the only thing that excuses -tears in a man. This agony is a mixed emotion, including wounded Pride -and the sense of having lost all that makes life worth living. But its -keenest sting comes from the green-eyed monster, who hisses into the -lover’s ears that now a rival will enjoy her sweetness and beauty. Dante -did not correctly describe the lowest depth of hell: it is this thought -in the lover’s mind that “now another will marry her.” It is _that_ -thought which drives lovers to lunatic asylums and suicide. - -“Some lines I read the other day,” Keats wrote to Fanny Brawne, "are -continually ringing a peal in my ears— - - “To see those eyes I prize above mine own - Dart Favours on another— - And those sweet lips (yielding immortal nectar) - Be gently press’d by any but myself— - Think, think, Francesca, what a cursed thing - It were beyond expression.” - -“Get thee to a nunnery,” would be every lover’s advice to the girl who -rejected him. If she obeyed, his agony would be diminished one-half. - -But why, if he cannot have her, should she not make some one else happy? -Because Jealousy is the one absolutely selfish trait of Love. The lover -who in other respects is the very model of altruism and Self-Sacrifice -is in point of jealous rivalry for possession an absolute egotist to -whom even _her_ happiness is torture if he cannot share it. Is this an -aberration of Lovers’ Sympathy, or does it mark its climax? The answer -will be found in the chapter on Sympathy. - -_Retrospective and Prospective Jealousy._—There are three kinds of -modern Jealousy—Retrospective, Present, and Prospective. The rejected -lover’s Jealousy is of the third kind; it refers not to what is, but to -what will or may be. Another variety of Prospective Jealousy is -illustrated by a story told in a Moscow journal of an old peasant who -married a young girl of whom he was very jealous. On his deathbed he -expressed a desire to give her a last kiss. But hardly had she touched -him, when he seized her under lip and fastened his teeth so tightly in -it that a knife had to be used to pry them open. With his dying breath -he confessed that his object had been to mutilate her, so that no one -else might marry her. - -Is it not possible that the custom of burning widows in India was at -first an outcome of the Jealousy of some influential ruler who set the -fashion? - -Present Jealousy does not call for any special remarks, but -Retrospective Jealousy has some curious features. It is entirely -non-existent not only among those savage tribes who scorn virgin brides, -but among some semi-civilised peoples in Africa and Asia where the men -prefer to marry women with a dowry, no matter how they may have earned -it. - -In modern love Retrospective Jealousy is often very strong, especially -in men who, though they do not hesitate to marry a girl who has been -engaged before, would not care to dwell on the details of the previous -engagement. Women, too, have been known to indulge in this futile form -of Jealousy. Thus Heine relates in one of his letters that at the -special request of his Mathilde, he got her a copy of the French edition -of his _Pictures of Travel_. “But hardly had she read a few pages, when -she turned deadly pale, trembled in all her limbs, and begged me for -heaven’s sake to close the book. She had come upon a love-scene in it, -and jealous as she is, she does not even want me to have adored another -_before_ her _régime_; indeed, I had to promise her that in future I -would not address any language of love even to the imaginary ideal -personages in my books.” - -The trouble with Heine is that one never knows exactly when he is -relating facts and when indulging in fun and fiction. As a rule, -certainly women are not much troubled by Jealousy regarding the past. If -the lover promises to be a good boy in future and give them a monopoly -of his adoration, they are rarely disquieted by the question, “Has he -been in love before?” Indeed, there is a current notion that women -admire a man all the more for being a Don Juan or professional -lady-killer. Perhaps, however, this is putting the cart before the -horse: for, instead of admiring him because he is a lady-killer, is it -not possible that he is a lady-killer because they all admire him? - -Yet some truth there seems to be in that old notion regarding gay -Lotharios; for the average woman’s ideal man still wears a certain -mediæval military cast: he is conceived as a muscular dare-devil, -reckless, irresistible, a universal conqueror of female hearts as well -as of other fortresses. - -_Jealousy and Beauty._—As Love becomes more and more idealised, _i.e._ -transferred to the imagination, its overtones combine and produce -various new emotional clang-tints—sometimes agreeable, sometimes harsh -and dissonant. Among the Japanese and Chinese, as just stated, Jealousy -neutralises the Admiration of Personal Beauty to such an extent as to -breed indifference to shaved eyebrows, black teeth, deformed feet, and a -consequent utter absence of grace in gait. But there is a more subtle -way in which Jealousy may cast a cloud on Personal Admiration, even in a -refined Western imagination. Once in a while it happens to a sensitive -man, a worshipper of Beauty, that he beholds a vision of grace and -loveliness—perhaps in a ballroom, perhaps in a theatre or the street. -But this sight instead of delighting him, gives him a painful sting in -the heart. Partly, this paradoxical sadness of a discoverer may be due -to the sudden fancy that this fairylike being perhaps will never again -cross his field of vision. Yet it seems more likely that the tinge of -pain which o’ercasts the rosy feelings of Admiration is due to Jealousy, -especially if she is seen in company with a man. For a moment the -Beauty-worshipper fancies himself in that man’s place; the next moment -the consciousness of isolation flashes on his mind, and the reaction -brings out the painful contrast between what is and what might be. For -man, as Mr. Howells has remarked, is still imperfectly monogamous. He -has occasional visions of a Mahometan heaven peopled with black-eyed -Houris; or envies the knight in Heine’s poem, who lies on the beach and -enjoys the caresses of the mermaids, who come and kiss him because they -know not that he only pretends to be asleep. - -That the Beauty-worshipper’s sadness is due to a vague Jealousy seems -the more probable from the fact that the same feeling never tinges his -admiration of a living Apollo of masculine perfection. Whether women -ever have the same emotions remains for them to tell. - - - MONOPOLY OR EXCLUSIVENESS - -In the case of this trait of Love, Priority of discovery obviously -belongs to the author of these lines— - - “Love, well thou knowest, no partnership allows, - Cupid averse rejects divided vows.” - -Monopoly, the imperious desire for exclusive devotion and possession, is -the mother of Jealousy. Though less grim and melancholy than her son, -she is equally presumptuous and meddlesome, and woe to the man who will -so much as breathe or smile upon what she claims as hers. Monopoly, like -Jealousy, is one of the selfish elements of Love. All lovers join hands -and declaim in unison the words of Jean Paul: “What pleases us is to see -her shrink from everybody else, growing hard and frozen to them on our -account, handing _them_ nothing but ices and cold pudding, but serving -_us_ with the glowing goblet of love.” - -Historically, Monopoly is of the utmost significance, since in it is -rooted monogamy, which, as previously explained, probably originated in -exogamous Capture giving a man the right to exclusive possession of one -woman in communities where, as one writer puts it, every man might claim -“a thousand miles of wives.” - -The desire for exclusiveness, for undivided worship, sometimes enters -into non-sexual affections; and an anonymous writer has suggested that -the main reason why Byron was so devoted to his dog was because the dog -was “a creature exclusively devoted to himself, and hostile to every one -else.” - -Yet all this is child’s play compared with the imperious form Monopoly -assumes in Modern Romantic Love. In the fever-heat of his passion the -lover’s chief desire is to be cast on a desert island, and remain there -all alone with her. “On ne se soucie plus de ce que dit le monde,” says -Pascal; public opinion is scorned; all social feelings annihilated. -Relatives and friends exist no longer—what are they to him? his pet -occupations bore him; and there is only one thought which fascinates—the -picture of a small and cosy house, all his own, a small parlour with one -sofa, barely large enough for two, a book of poems in very fine print, -compelling two heads to touch in reading from it, and a breakfast-table -with only two chairs; all visitors excluded from the unsocial -atmosphere, because “three are a crowd.” ’Tis a “double selfishness,” -doubly as strong as single selfishness. - -Surely Emerson—as the German professor did with the camel—evolved his -idea of a lover from his inner consciousness. “All mankind love a -lover,” he exclaims. Obviously he had never seen a lover. The fact is -that all the world thinks a lover a tremendous and ridiculous bore—a man -whose whole mind is monopolised by one unvarying topic—_her_ perfections -and _his_ chances of winning her; and who stubbornly insists on -monopolising _your_ attention, too, with that everlasting exclusive -topic. Like every other lunatic he has one fixed idea; and it’s no -wonder the poets always paint him blind, like Cupid; for on the wide, -wide ocean of humanity, he sees nothing with his two big eyes but one -little solitary transient bubble. - -In this matter, it must be admitted, woman’s Love is superior to man’s. -“Oh, Arthur,” says Ella, in the _Fliegende Blätter_, “how happy I would -be alone with you on a quiet island in the distant ocean!” “Have you any -other desire, dearest Ella?” “Oh yes, do get me a season ticket for the -opera.” - -_True Love is transient._—Boswell tells us that Johnson “laughed at the -notion that a man can never be really in love but once, and considered -it a mere romantic fancy.” And though this romantic fancy is as current -as ever in society and literature, Johnson was right in his verdict, as -usual. - -True Love, indeed, is absolutely exclusive of every other Love _while it -lasts_; but it rarely lasts more than two or three years; and then the -heart, freed from one monopoly, is ready for another, perhaps even more -tyrannical, _while it lasts_. - -That Love is transient is most fortunate, for it is, in its truest and -most ardent form, such a consuming fever, that the strongest man would -not be able to endure its mingled ecstasies and anguish more than a few -years. The lover’s fancies are his only food; coarser nourishment he -scorns; he loses his appetite, and becomes “pale and interesting”—to -women, who like to see a powerful man thus wincing under their superior -might, and melting away before their radiant beauty. - -Yet its transitoriness detracts not in the least from the magic and the -charm of Love. It is in the life of man what the flowering period is in -the life of a plant. As, for the sake of its fragrant blossoms, a plant -is tenderly nursed and watered weeks and months though it flowers but a -week; so, even if brief Love were the only flower of life, yet would -life be worth living for its sake alone. - -How long Love may last depends on individuals and circumstances. -Sainte-Beuve, I believe, has said that it never can outlive five years. -Favouring circumstances are slight obstacles, rivalries and jealousies, -short absences, etc.; while long absences, the distractions of travel, -professional occupations, etc., tend to shorten it. In uninterrupted -absence, without epistolary encouragement, the most ardent Love would -hardly survive a year, unless the lover lived on a desert island, with -no other woman to engross his attention. Return, however, is apt to -bring on a relapse, as with Henry Esmond, who “went away from his -mistress, and was cured a half-dozen times; he came back to her side, -and instantly fell ill again of the fever.” - -Thus it is the fate of all unrequited Love to die for want of food; or, -if successful, to leave the stormy ocean of passion and sail into the -more tranquil haven of conjugal affection. - -Woman’s Love is less transient than man’s, because there are fewer -ambitions to neutralise it. - -_Is First Love best?_—If Love’s Monopoly lasted for life, if passion -were not transient, it would follow that most men would marry, or -endeavour to marry, the schoolgirls who were the first object of their -amorous attentions. But is there one man in a hundred, is there one in -three hundred, who marries his first Love? Cases are known of men of -genius who fell in love at an age varying from six to nine years; and -there are few lads, in America at any rate, and if they have an artistic -temperament, who do not have their cases of “calf-love,” beginning with -their tenth or twelfth year. - -A boy’s first Love is a girl of about his own age, towards whom he shyly -makes his way by offering her an apple, a bunch of wild strawberries, or -a large hailstone picked up during a storm before her eyes, to impress -her with his reckless Gallantry and courage. The second and third -loves—for schoolboys are fickle, and schoolgirls more so—are probably -not different in character from the first. At fifteen and sixteen, boys -scorn girls of their own age, and fall in love with young married women, -Troubadour-like. Perhaps the Dulcinea is a Spanish beauty, with large -thrilling black eyes, who, seeing the poor cub’s infatuation, teases and -tortures him to distraction with her unfathomable wealth of fascination. - -And let no one imagine that these cases of early passion are anything -short of true Romantic Love. For follow that poor boy enamoured of the -Spanish brunette; see him hiding himself in a lonely forest, gazing with -rapture on her photograph—perhaps only with his mind’s eye—throwing -himself on the ground in an anguish of tears, wishing that either _he_ -was dead ... or her husband ... and behaving altogether like a premature -Werther. - -Such is calf—beg pardon—first Love. And is this first Love best of all? -Perhaps, in one respect, and in one only: it believes in its own -unchangeableness. Goethe remarks in his autobiography that nothing is so -calculated to make us disgusted with life “as a return of Love.... The -notion of the eternal and infinite, which forms its basis and support, -is destroyed; it appears to us transitory, like everything that recurs.” - -_Heine on First Love._—Heinrich Heine, whose poetry is next to -Shakspere’s the most valuable depository of Modern Love, enlarges on -this question in his fragmentary but admirable Analysis of Shakspere’s -Female Characters: "Love is a flickering flame between two darknesses -... [the dots are in the original]. Whence comes it?... From sparks -incredibly small.... How does it end?... In nothingness equally -incredible.... The more raging the flame, the sooner it is burnt out.... -Yet that does not prevent it from abandoning itself entirely to its -fiery impulses, as if this flame were to burn eternally.... - -"Alas, when we are seized a second time in life by the grand passion, we -lack this faith in its immortality, and painful memories tell us that in -the end it will consume itself. Hence the melancholy by which second -differs from first love.... In first love we fancy our passion can only -end with death; and indeed, if the threatening difficulties in our way -cannot be removed in any other manner, we readily make up our mind to -accompany our beloved to the grave.... But in second love the thought -occurs to us that time will change our wildest and most ecstatic -feelings to a tame, apathetic state; that these eyes, these lips, these -contours, which now throw us into transports of rapture, will some day -be regarded with indifference. This thought, alas! is more melancholy -than a presentiment of death.... It is a disconsolate feeling, in the -midst of intoxication, to think of the sober, frigid moments that will -follow, and to know from experience that these ultra-poetic, heroic -passions will have such a lamentably prosaic ending.... - -“I do not, in the least, presume to find fault with Shakspere, yet -cannot but express my surprise that he makes Romeo enamoured of Rosaline -before he brings him face to face with Juliet. Though absolutely devoted -to his second love, there yet dwells in his soul a certain scepticism, -which finds utterance in ironic expressions, and not rarely reminds one -of Hamlet. Or is second love the stronger in a man for the very reason -that it is paired with lucid self-consciousness? A woman cannot love -twice, her nature is too tender to endure a second time the terrific -emotional earthquake. Look at Juliet! Would she be able a second time to -endure those ecstatic delights and horrors, a second time suppress her -fear and empty the dreadful cup? In my opinion once is enough for this -poor, blessed creature, this pure martyr to a great passion.” - -_First Love is not best._—Thus even Heine, while lamenting the -transitoriness of Love, cannot help suggesting that in man, at any rate, -second Love may be stronger than first. On this point it is curious to -note the difference of opinion among thoughtful writers. La Bruyère -declares that “we can love well once only—the first time; the loves -which follow are less involuntary.” Another French author, Letourneau, -on the contrary, thinks that one love-affair only whets the appetite for -more: “on a besoin de vivre fort;” and hence “an expiring passion -ordinarily leaves the ground admirably prepared for the germination of -another passion.” Stendhal held that a young girl of eighteen, “owing to -her inadequate experience of life, is not comprehensive enough in her -desires to be able to love with as much passion as a woman of -twenty-eight;” and a lady-friend having objected to this on the ground -that in her first love a girl must love more ardently because her -feelings are not distracted by doubt and distrust, as they are -subsequently, he replied that this very _méfiance_, in its struggle with -love, will make it come out a thousand times more brilliant and -substantial than the gay and thoughtless first love.” Mr. P. G. Hamerton -seems to cast his vote in the same urn, for he thinks, “it is, indeed, -one of the signs of a healthy nature to retain for many years the -freshness of the heart which makes one liable to fall in love, as a -healthy palate retains the natural early taste for delicious fruits.” -And, finally, George Eliot asks: “How is it that the poets have said so -many fine things about our first love, so few about our later love? Are -their first poems their best? or are not those the best which come from -their fuller thought, their larger experience, their deeper-rooted -affections? The boy’s flute-like voice has its own spring charm; but the -man should yield a richer, deeper music.” - -So doctors evidently disagree. But the facts that Heine is in doubt, -that the greatest authority makes Romeo’s unparalleled passion his -second love, and that even Werther’s famous love, notwithstanding -Goethe’s theory, is not his first, certainly make the scale incline in -favour of a second or later passion. - - “Now old desire doth in his deathbed lie, - And young affection gapes to be his heir; - That fair for which love groaned for, and would die, - With tender Juliet matched, is now not fair.” - -These last two lines suggest the whole psychology of First Love. Romeo’s -first Love was not his best Love. When his soul had reached manly -maturity, and looked about for a proper object of affection, he did not -at once have the good luck to encounter his Juliet. Rosaline was the -_nearest approach_ to his ideal; so he worked himself into a -semi-fictitious passion and groaned for her, and would die, until -suddenly he saw his real ideal, and found that his first passion was a -fragile soap-bubble in comparison to his true Love for Juliet, which no -rival could have altered one speck. - -In his first Love, in a word, he had _fallen in love with the species_, -rather than with an individual. Sexual Selection, or Individual -Preference, had come in more as a matter of chance than of decisive, -final choice. And so it is with most cases of first love. Man falls in -Love with woman, woman with man, not with a particular man or woman. -Thus it is that at an early age thousands of impatient youths marry -their Rosalines before they have had time or opportunity to meet their -Juliets. Doubtless there is a Juliet for every man in the world; but it -generally happens that she does not attend the same school, work in the -same manufactory, or live in the same village, or belong to the same -city-clique as he does; so, being less adventurous than Romeo, who went -outside of his clique for a sort of exogamous marriage by Capture, he -weds his first Love, _i.e._ his Rosaline; and this is one of the reasons -why so few cases of true Romantic Love are encountered even to-day, -outside of novels. - -Most marriages, in truth, are brought about through accidental -acquaintance or companionship, not through Love. Suppose that a score of -young men who have never loved were cast on a desert island with one -pretty girl. Though she were as unamiable as Juno, cold and coy as -Diana, in less than a month nineteen of the twenty youths would be in -love with her and bitter personal enemies. Here the man would fall in -love with the woman; the fundamental tone of passion would prevail; -whereas if there had been a choice, eighteen of those men perhaps would -never have dreamed of proposing to that girl. Now second Love is much -more apt to be thus influenced by Individual Preference than first; and -the more Love is individualised the deeper it is. Failure to find -lasting satisfaction in the first choice makes a man more slow and -cautious in his second choice. - -At the same time the mind expands and grows, and age strengthens not -only the intellect but the emotions as well. _For his size_, a boy may -love as ardently as a man; but the man is bigger. - -The history of the race agrees with that of the individual in showing -that Love at first is a general passion, only slightly discriminative, -but becomes more and more so as time goes on. - -Even the objection urged against second Love by Goethe and Heine appears -of no special significance when brought face to face with facts. Very -few men, if any, who are in Love a second or third time, sit in a corner -to muse over the transitoriness of passion till they become “disgusted -with life.” On the contrary, they feel convinced that the preceding -infatuation was, after all, not real indomitable Love, such as they now -experience towards Daisy No. 2; which second infatuation they absolutely -_know_ is the genuine article; just as they _know_ that no one ever -before loved so deeply and devotedly. This naïve self-confidence of the -lover in the unprecedented ardour and uniqueness of his passion is one -of the most sublime _and_ ridiculous aspects of Love. - -And here it may be said, for the benefit of timid souls who may possibly -fear that harm may result to the cause of Love from exposing its -perishableness, that the only persons who could be injured by the -destruction of this illusion—those who happen to be in Love—will -positively and absolutely refuse to believe that _their_ particular -passion is fugitive. They will simply laugh in the face of any one who -questions the immortality of their Love; and a year or two later, -perhaps, they will laugh again—for a different reason. - -Indeed, the notion that true Love never dies and will for ever -monopolise the soul, may actually do harm, and sometimes does so. The -disappointed lover commits suicide not because his torments seem -intolerable for the moment, but because he is convinced they will last -for ever, and thus make life not worth living. - -A review of the situation brings out the truth that the only apparent -advantage which First Love has over later passions is Novelty. Yet even -this advantage proves to be illusory; for though the Second Love may not -be a novelty, the Girl is; and does not Moore, the modern Anakreon, -sing— - - “Enough for me that she’s a new one”? - -One more consideration. There is an adage, not entirely unknown, that -practice makes perfect; and psychology teaches that feelings tend to -become deeper by repetition. Why should Love be an exception? The -channels worn in the brain by the first emotions will be reopened and -widened by the new flood of passion; and thus _remembered emotion_ will -add its force to that of the present moment. - -Has the reader ever heard Wagner’s _Nibelung Tetralogy_? If so, he will -remember with what a thrill of delight he recognised in the later dramas -some of the motives and melodies he had heard in the preceding ones. In -the later dramas these melodies are appreciated not only for their own -intrinsic beauty, but because they come laden with the sad and joyous -associations and memories of the preceding scenes which they -illustrated. - -Wagner was not only a great musician and dramatist, he was also a most -subtle psychologist. He _doubled_ the power of music by adding to the -enjoyment of the moment the strong current of _remembered emotion_. And -this is precisely what a later passion of manhood adds to the naïve -delights of First Love. - -It is remarkable how many analogies there are between Music and Love—the -youngest art and the youngest sentiment; and how the love of the divine -art enables one to understand and feel more deeply the music of the -divine passion. - - - PRIDE AND VANITY - -Jealousy and Monopoly are the two selfish features of Love which urge an -enamoured couple to flee society and friends, and take refuge on a -desert island. Fortunately there is in the chemistry of Love a third -selfish element—the Pride of successful wooing, which commonly is strong -enough to neutralise the antisocial tendencies of the other two. If a -lover’s passion has not yet risen to fever-heat, nothing (except -Jealousy) will so suddenly raise it as the Pride and conceit inspired by -noticing that people in general admire his chosen girl; the more of the -admirers, the greater his Pride. And if, in addition, sympathising -friends directly approve his choice and laud her merits in detail, then -his transports of ecstasy become celestial. - -Inasmuch as in moments of elation over success of any kind a man feels -as if nothing were beyond his power, an accepted lover is as proud (I -suppose) as if he had conquered not only one girl, but the whole -feminine kingdom—or queendom: for surely the one chosen by him is the -cleverest and most beautiful of all; whence it follows that all the -inferior ones would of course have been only too proud if he had -condescended to pay his addresses to them. - -Why do great men so often marry women who are not especially attractive -as to personal appearance, when often they might have had their choice -among a group of beauties? Because the spoiled beauties did not -understand the art of flattery, sincere or otherwise. Every man wishes -to be considered either a creative genius or a hero. The woman who knows -how to touch the sympathetic chord, to make each one’s particular kind -of Pride vibrate, has him at her feet in an instant. - -In conjugal life the most ludicrous of all sights is the royal -self-complacency with which a man accepts the eager worship of his wife. - -Conversely, a rejected lover’s heart bleeds from so many wounds that it -is difficult to count them; but of all these wounds the one inflicted by -the jealous thought that she will now marry another is alone deep as -that of his offended Pride. The sense of superiority which every man -feels over every other man is crushed, and cannot be laid as a -flattering unction to the soul. Hence a girl who refuses a proposal and -does not at least keep it a secret, is not only quite as mean, but a -thousand times more cruel than a man who will “kiss and tell.” - -_Coquetry._—Yet of all secrets the compliment of an offer is the hardest -for a woman to keep; so, in strictest confidence, she tells it to only -one solitary person, who ditto, who ditto, who ditto, etc. etc. etc. -etc. and so on. - -There is a class of women whose sole pleasure in life appears to be -derived from vanity gratified by offers of Love and Marriage. Of all the -elements of Love—and there are at least eleven—her soul is affected by -one alone—the overtone of Pride. The Coquette has already been -superficially examined, and distinguished from the Flirt. But this is -the place where she must be placed under the microscope and more closely -examined. A great many distinguished observers have dissected her, and -here are a few of their discoveries. - -Congreve lets her off easily— - - “’Tis not to wound a wanton boy, - Or amorous youth, that gives the joy; - But ’tis the glory to have pierced the swain - For whom inferior beauties sighed in vain.” - -Fielding is less lenient: “The life of a coquette is one constant lie.” -“The coquette,” says Mr. T. B. Aldrich—"all’s one to her; above her fan -she’d make sweet eyes at Caliban." According to Victor Hugo, “God -created the coquette as soon as He had made the fool;” and Byron asks, -“What careth she for hearts when once possessed?” When Moore wrote— - - “More joy it gives to woman’s breast - To make ten frigid coxcombs vain, - Than one true manly lover blest;” - -he had evidently just left the chill atmosphere of a coquette. “A -coquette,” says A. Duprey, “is more occupied with the homage we withhold -than with that which we bestow upon her.” “Coquettes are the quacks of -love,” says Rochefoucauld. “Heartlessness and fascination, in about -equal proportions, constitute,” according to Mme. Deluzy, “the receipt -for forming the character of a coquette.” And Poincelot caps the climax: -“An asp would render its sting more venomous by dipping it into the -heart of a coquette.” - -There are masculine as well as feminine Coquettes; but there is one -striking difference between them. To the female Coquette all is game -that gets into her net; she will turn away from a man of genius, an -Apollo, already at her feet, to fascinate a rough and freckled country -lad at first sight; whereas a male Coquette rarely wastes his powder on -a girl who isn’t pretty. And even herein is seen the superiority of -man’s Love to woman’s. The male Coquette is actuated by Admiration of -Beauty as well as by Pride; the female Coquette by Pride alone. - -Cannibals have a quaint old custom of eating certain parts of a -formidable enemy’s body, in the belief that they will thus inherit his -qualities,—as by eating his tongue, his eloquence; his heart, his -courage. What a delicious gastronomic morsel a Coquette’s heart would be -to these savages, whose principal amusement is cruelty! - -Perhaps the best description ever given of a Coquette is Thackeray’s -portraiture of Beatrix—"A woman who has listened to" her admirers, “and -played with them and laughed with them,—who, beckoning them with lures -and caresses, and with Yes smiling from her eyes, has tricked them on to -their knees, and turned her back and left them.” - -_Love and Rank._—Not so many years ago the newspapers of a certain -European country made a great deal of ado about a forthcoming marriage -between a blue-blooded youth and a ditto maiden, for the reason that it -was “a real Love-match.” Poor princes! so rarely are they allowed to -choose their own Juliet, they who are supposed to be the rulers of the -land. Until quite recently, it is true, public opinion on the Continent -sanctioned a Love-marriage between an aristocrat and a non-aristocrat -_provided it was unlawful_, _i.e._ morganatic, a special royal euphemy -for bigamy; but now even this privilege is abolished, and princes can -marry one of equal rank only, in pursuance of a custom more tyrannical, -more restrictive than the parental command on which marriage-unions -depended in ancient and mediæval times. - -German novelists have made considerable progress in their art in recent -years, but in one respect it seems to be very difficult for them to -substitute realism for romance. In every love story, almost, one of the -leading characters must be either a prince or a princess. As if it were -not the very essence of a prince and a princess that they shall not be -allowed to love and marry for Love—unless they are clever enough to fall -in Love with the partner singled out for them, which happens once in a -hundred times, perhaps. - -But it is not only in the highest circles that aristocratic Pride is -opposed to free Sexual Selection. It extends through a hundred scales of -the social ladder. Germany presents a remarkable example. The -metaphysician Eduard von Hartmann credits the government of that country -with great astuteness. Not having much money to pay its officials, it -has established a legion of distinctions of rank and titles, for the -sake of which the officials are quite willing to forego a larger salary. -Of the ludicrous conceit inspired by this distinction of having even the -slightest kind of a “handle” to their name, I can give an amusing -instance from my own experience. Some years ago, desiring to see the -Intendant, or Manager, of the Munich Opera-house, I entered a little -room, marked Portier, and found that gentleman comfortably seated, _with -his cap on_. He took my card, on which there was no “handle” of any -sort, and replied sternly, “The Intendant is in; I will send up your -card;” adding, more severely still, “And, young man, let me tell you, -that when you come into the presence of _a royal official_, it behoves -you to remove your hat!” - -Harmless as such childish vanity may seem, it is yet one of the reasons -why there are fewer good-looking women in Germany than in most European -countries—France always excepted. For a girl, whose father wears on his -coat the order of the black eagle, to marry a young man whose father -only has the order of the green eagle, would be considered an -unpardonable _mésalliance_, and would scandalise the whole -neighbourhood. Of course it does not make much difference in a woman’s -own looks whether she marries a man she loves or one whom she can barely -tolerate, and who is forced on her by parental desire and public -opinion, but it does make a difference with her children; and even in -her own case, is it not self-evident that the smile of pleasure at being -happily married is a better preservative of youthful beauty than the -constant frown of disappointment, perhaps of disgust? - -The highest treason against Cupid, however, is committed by those -American women, who, without the excuse of inherited custom, come to -Europe with their money to marry a baron. Fortunately such marriages -have almost always ended so wretchedly that the fashion has somewhat -lost its popularity. What is a baron? Perhaps a man whose -great-great-great-grandfather “lent” some duke or king a few thousand -gold pieces, in return for which he was allowed to place “von” or “de” -before his name. And on the strength of this little word the family -Pride has gone on steadily increasing through various generations—or -rather, degenerations. - -Physiology is not usually considered an ironic science, but it cannot -help writing a satire when it teaches that “blue” blood is venous blood, -charged with the waste products of the bodily tissues. How much better -than this irony would iron be, _i.e._ some fresh, _red_, arterial blood -infused in the bodies of the Continental aristocracy. The English -aristocracy, on the other hand, presents one of the finest types of -manhood and womanhood; and the reason is suggested by Darwin: “Many -persons are convinced, as appears to me with justice, that our -aristocracy, including under this term all wealthy families in which -primogeniture has long prevailed, from having chosen during many -generations _from all classes_ the more beautiful women as their wives, -have become handsomer, according to the European standard, than the -middle classes.” - -Vivid as the feeling of pride must be in a man of humble origin who has -succeeded in winning the Love of a woman of a higher social grade; and -greatly as a Coquette must be tickled in counting off the number of -hearts offered to her, on her fingers if she has enough to go round: yet -the climax of Lover’s Pride, it seems to me, must be reached by a man of -noble birth who, scorning mediæval puerilities, marries the girl who has -won his heart, and were she but a plump, rosy-cheeked peasant girl. This -vivid feeling was doubtless realised by the Grand Duke of Austria when -he married Philippine Welser, by the Duke of Bavaria when he married -Maria Pettenbeck. - - - SPECIAL SYMPATHY - -Thanks to the social instinct, our pains are halved, our pleasures -doubled, if we can share them with others. The proverb that misery loves -company expresses only half the truth; happiness, too, loves company. -The late King of Bavaria used to enjoy an opera most if he was the sole -spectator in the house; but most persons would lose half their pleasure -in this way. Nor is this a purely imaginary feeling; for in a successful -performance there are moments when the intensely-silent and universal -absorption seems to raise a magnetic wave, which crosses the house and -makes all nerves vibrate and thrill in unison. Again, if a man whom -constant attendance at places of amusement has rendered _blasé_, happens -to sit next to a young girl who visits the theatre for the first time, -the emotional play of her features, by reviving the memory of his first -experiences, enables him to share her feelings sympathetically, and thus -to enjoy the performance doubly. And is it not a universal experience -that if we witness sublime or beautiful scenes—if we approach the -Niagara Falls in a small boat from below, or if, standing on the top of -the Breithorn near Zermatt, we see almost the whole of Switzerland and -the Tyrol, parts of France and Italy, down to Lago Maggiore, at the same -moment—almost our first thought is, “Oh, if So-and-so could only see me -now and share this wondrous sight with me!” - -Nor is this instinctive craving for Sympathy absent in the mind of the -poet who _prefers_ to be alone with Nature; on the contrary, it is even -deeper in his case. For to him Nature is personal; he - - “Finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks, - Sermons in stones;” - -nor does Nature refuse her sympathy; for does she not harmonise with all -his moods, looking gloomy if he is sad, bright if he is cheerful? - -From these general manifestations of emotional partnership Lover’s -Sympathy differs in being omnipresent and more exclusively concentrated -on one person. There is an association of emotions as well as of ideas: -and as every idea of excellence recalls _her_ Perfection, so every -emotion inspired by a beautiful object calls up the image of _the_ -Beauty _par excellence_. Thus Love gets the benefit of all these -associated emotions—waggon-loads of kindling wood. - -_How Love intensifies Emotions._—But is it literally true that in Love, -as Mr. Spencer puts it, “purely personal pleasures are doubled by being -shared with another?” It is true; though the way in which this is done -is difficult to explain. No psychologist, so far as I am aware, has -cracked the nut. I have given considerable thought to the subject, and -venture to offer the following three suggestions as to the method by -which Love doubles our pleasures:— - -(1) The lover’s pleasures are increased by the simple process of -_emotional addition_. That is, supposing him to be reading a poem or -story to his beloved, he will experience at one and the same moment not -only the emotions inspired by the poem or novel he is reading, but those -due to the sense of her presence. As the mind does not stop to analyse -its feelings at such moments, all these various pleasurable emotions -will coalesce into one seemingly homogeneous feeling of happiness; just -as two complementary colours, or all the colours of the rainbow, if -mixed, will produce the simple sensation called white. - -(2) The second way in which sympathetic companionship intensifies a -lover’s feelings is through what may be called _emotional resonance_. If -you take a violin-string in your hands, stretch it tightly, and then get -some one to pluck it, a very faint sound only will be heard. But put it -in its proper place, over the resonant surface of the instrument, and it -will produce a full, loud, mellow tone. A human countenance is such an -instrument—a sort of emotional sounding-board. Every man feels more or -less pleased with himself if he gets off at table what he considers a -wise or witty remark. If the sounding-boards of his neighbours vibrate -responsively to his jokes, he feels proud and is doubly pleased; but if -they only grin politely, the tone of his self-satisfaction is -immediately lowered an octave and dies away pianissimo. Now between -lovers such a fiasco is absolutely impossible. _They_ never grin at one -another’s sayings for the sake of politeness merely. His most -platitudinous remarks are sure to start a symphony of smiles on her -countenance, where another man’s wittiest epigrams would be barely -rewarded with a slight curl of the lips; and as for him, she may say -anything she pleases, he never knows what she says but hears only the -music of her voice—as if her words were the text, the rising and falling -of her voice the melody, of an Italian opera. No wonder lovers are so -exclusively interesting to each other, and such unmitigated bores to -other people. - -Unfortunately lovers’ sympathy is rarely complete or durable. Sooner or -later some difference of taste or opinion is discovered which has the -same effect as a crack in the sounding-board—the resonance is destroyed. -Yet it can be restored by using glue; and violin-builders will tell you -that a glued instrument is often better than one which has never had a -crack. - -(3) Thirdly, Love intensifies human feelings by producing a state of -_emotional hyperæsthesia_, or supersensitiveness, which has the effect -of a microphone in multiplying the loudness of every impression. Music -teachers whose acoustic nerves are rendered excessively irritable by -overwork; students whose eyes, from reading late at night, are in the -same condition, are annoyed by sights and sounds which ordinary mortals -barely notice. But Love with its sleepless night daily fevers, and -prolonged fastings is more potent than any other cause in producing such -a state of extreme sensitiveness to every impression. Lovers’ souls may -therefore be aptly compared to Æolian harps. If you leave the strings of -such an instrument in a state of very loose tension, they resemble the -souls of ordinary mortals not in Love: for it takes a very strong breeze -to elicit any sound from them. But raise them to a higher state of -tension, like the souls of lovers, and the faintest breath of air will -cause them to sound in sympathetic unison all their harmonics—which is -another name for _overtones_. - -_Development of Sympathy._—Not only does Love thus owe much of its -unique intenseness to Sympathy, but there are weighty reasons for -believing that Love has already played an important _rôle_, and is -destined to play a still more important one, in modifying the meaning of -Sympathy and in extending its influence to society in general. - -When the absence of true Romantic Love among savages was being pointed -out more emphasis should have been placed on the fact that they seem to -be utter strangers to sympathy. Far from sharing another’s delights and -sorrows, a savage takes an intense delight in witnessing a man enduring -the agonies of deliberate torture. Cruelty seems to give him the same -thrill of joy that sympathetic assistance gives to a refined person. - -How are we to account for this strange delight in another’s sufferings? -By noting the extreme coarseness and callousness of the primitive man’s -nerves. Just as some savages are known to have such hardened hides and -lungs that they can sleep naked in a snowstorm with impunity, where a -white man would be sure to perish of cold or subsequent pneumonia; so -the savage requires the coarsest of stimulants to make any impression on -his sluggish emotions. The sight of an enemy tied to a tree and being -flayed alive tickles his nerves by suggesting his own comfortable -freedom in comparison, and by showing him an enemy absolutely in his -power; while his imagination is not sufficiently vivid to enable him to -put himself in the other’s place to feel his contortions and suppressed -moans re-echoing in his own soul. - -And have we not in our very midst thousands of so-called civilised -beings who require stimulants almost as coarse as the savage to amuse -their dull imaginations?—people who would hesitate to pay silver for a -book, a concert, or an art exhibition, but gladly give gold to witness -the execution of a criminal or an exhibition of animals torturing one -another to death. To suppose that such people can ever fall in -Love—Romantic Love—is more than absurd. - -Children represent this savage stage of the evolution of sympathy; as -their imagination, like all their mental powers, is still in embryo. -Nothing delights the average boy so much as a chance to torture a -beetle, a cat, or a dog. And Mr. Galton somewhere refers to the sense of -blood-curdling produced on him and other sensitive persons in the London -Zoological Gardens at the sight of snakes devouring living animals. -“Yet,” he adds, “I have often seen people—nurses, for instance, and -children of all ages—looking unconcernedly and amusedly at the scene.” - -To substitute Sympathy for this delight in torture—to arouse the -sluggish imagination from its thousand years’ sleep, and quicken its -sense of suffering in man and animals—is one of the greatest problems of -moral culture, and—so far as man is concerned—forms one of the keynotes -of Christianity. St. Paul bids us both to bear one another’s burdens and -to rejoice with one another. The second part of his injunction, however, -has been comparatively neglected, as is best shown by the circumstance -that we have several terms to express the sharing of sorrow (compassion, -pity, sympathy), whereas for the sharing of joy there is no special noun -in the English language. The Germans have a word for it—_Mitfreude_—yet -it rarely occurs out of philosophical treatises. The word Sympathy, -which literally means “suffering with,” has also been most commonly used -in that sense. But it is now frequently being used in the sense of -sharing joy too, and perhaps, despite its etymology, it will, for lack -of another word, be chiefly used in this sense in future. Even at -present, when persons are spoken of as sympathetic or antipathetic, much -less regard is paid to their willingness to bear our burdens or share -our sorrows than to the chances of their sharing in our pleasures by -having similar tastes and opinions. - -For this change in the meaning of Sympathy, Romantic Love must, I -believe, be held chiefly responsible. To some extent, no doubt, friends -and relatives shared one another’s joys before the advent of Love. Yet -even the mother—taking the most favourable case—cannot enter into all -her child’s feelings, while to the child most of her mature emotions are -utterly incomprehensible; so that we miss here that reciprocation which -is the very essence of Sympathy; whereas a lover cannot even conceive a -pleasure unless the other shares it—another point in the psychology of -Modern Love to which Shakspere has given the most poetic expression— - - “Except I be by Sylvia in the night, - There is no music in the nightingale.” - -Thus we see that there are three stages in the evolution of Sympathy: -the first, in which cruelty neutralises it; the second, in which this -universal enjoyment of cruelty, with its attendant lack of imagination -and altruistic feeling, compelled moralists to lay more stress on the -virtue of compassion than on the refining pleasures of mutual enjoyment; -the third, the epoch of Romantic Love, in which the positive side of the -emotional partnership is specially emphasised, so that a lover cannot -pour forth a song of happiness except in the form of a duo. - -And this brings us back again to a question left unanswered in the -section on Jealousy. A rejected lover’s deepest anguish is the thought -that “She will now be happy in another’s arms.” To hear that she has -entered a convent and will never enjoy the pleasures of Love denied him -would be his only consolation. Is this an aberration of Sympathy, or -does it mark its climax—its remorseless logical consistency? The answer -lies in the second suggestion. Were Love an altruistic passion, it would -be otherwise. _He_ would delight in _her_ happiness under all -circumstances. But Love is selfish—a double selfishness; and its sense -of justice demands that each side be considered. “If I cannot be happy -without her, how can she without me?” The lover does not consider that -the passion is one-sided—he cannot fathom that mystery—cannot understand -why his flame, which reduces him to ashes, is not strong enough to set -her on fire, and were she a stone image. - -_Pity and Love._—According to Darwin, one of the chief mental -differences between man and woman is woman’s greater tenderness. Of this -feminine tenderness the world has been able to judge on a vast scale -during the last two or three years. - -According to a statement in _Nature_, 30,000 ruby and topaz -humming-birds were sold in London some years ago in the course of one -afternoon, “and the number of West Indian and Brazilian birds sold by -one auction-room in London during the four months ending April 1885, was -404,464, besides 356,389 Indian birds, without counting thousands of -Impeyan pheasants, birds of paradise,” etc. A writer in _Forest and -Stream_ mentioned a dealer in South Carolina who handled 30,000 -bird-skins per annum. “During four months 70,000 birds were supplied to -New York dealers from a single village on Long Island, and an -enterprising woman from New York contracted with a Paris millinery firm -to deliver during this summer 40,000 or more skins of birds at 40 cents -a piece. From Cape Cod, one of the haunts of terns and gulls, 40,000 of -the former birds were killed in a single season, so that at points where -a few years since these beautiful birds filled the air with their -graceful forms and snowy plumage, only a few pairs now remain.” “It is -estimated that not less than 5,000,000 birds of all sorts were killed -last year for purposes of ornamentation,” wrote Mr. E. P. Powell in the -New York _Independent_. A correspondent of the New York _Evening Post_ -saw at an art exhibition a young lady, with “nothing in her face to -denote excessive cruelty,” who wore a hat trimmed with “the heads of -_over twenty little birds_”; and the same paper remarked editorially: -“No one can tell how large a bird can be worn on a woman’s head, by -walking in Fifth Avenue. It is necessary to take a ride in a Second -Avenue car to get the full effect of the prevailing fashion. There one -may see on the head-gear of poorer classes, and especially of coloured -women, every species of the feathered kingdom smaller than a prairie -chicken or a canvas-back duck and every colour of the rainbow.” - -“Think of women!” exclaims Diderot; “they are miles beyond us in -sensibility.” - -It was _Science_, edited by men, that started the agitation against -woman’s cruel and tasteless fashion—a fashion which not one woman in a -hundred apparently refused to conform to. It was Messrs. J. A. Allen, W. -Dutcher, G. B. Sennett, and other ornithologists, who raised their -voices in behalf of the murdered birds, for whom no woman seemed to have -a thought except Mrs. Celia Thaxter—all honour to her—and a small circle -of ladies in England. It was Oliver Wendell Holmes who wrote how he felt -“the shame of the wanton destruction of our singing-birds to feed the -demands of a barbaric vanity;” another man, Charles Dudley Warner, who -pertinently suggested that “a dead bird does not help the appearance of -an ugly woman, and a pretty woman needs no such adornment.” - -That the average woman’s imagination is not sufficiently refined and -quick to feel for these winged poems of the air is historically proven -by this fashion, which, characteristically enough, was first introduced -by a member of the Paris _demi-monde_. - -It has disappeared for the moment, but is almost absolutely certain to -reappear within five years. - -But who, after all, is responsible for this sluggish condition of the -feminine imagination, this lack of sympathy for the fate of harmless -happy birds, who in their domestic affections and love-affairs so -closely resemble man? Is it not the men who, till within a few years, -have refused to give their daughters a rational education? It must be -so, for in that sphere where woman has been able to educate herself, and -where she is queen—in the domestic circle, she _does_ possess that -tender sympathy which she withholds from lower beings. - -Within the range of human affections woman manifests more pity, is -stirred to nobler needs of self-sacrifice, than man. Is Love included in -this category? Dryden tells us that “pity melts the heart to love,” and -novelists delight to make their heroines first refuse their suitors and -subsequently accept them from real Love born of pity. For my part, I -doubt this assumed relationship between Pity and Love; and I do not -believe that a girl who has refused a lover ordinarily feels any more -pity for him than a cat does for a mouse, or a person who is all right -on a steamer does for another who is sea-sick—though he be his best -friend. There is an instinctive belief in the human mind that -love-sickness and sea-sickness are never fatal. - -It does, indeed, very often happen—perhaps in half the cases; it would -be interesting to have approximate statistics on the subject—that a girl -first refuses the man whose second or third offer she accepts; for, as -an anonymous writer remarks, “women are so made (happily for men) that -gratitude, pity, the exquisite pleasure of pleasing, the sweet surprise -at finding themselves necessary to another’s happiness ... altogether -obscure and confuse the judgment.” But in such cases there are other -factors which probably influence the girl much more than Pity does. She -is, in the first place, largely influenced by this “exquisite pleasure -of pleasing”—another name for Pride. Then there is a certain advantage -to a man in having proposed, even unsuccessfully; for whenever -subsequently the girl reads about Love she will involuntarily think of -him; and thus his image will become associated with all the pleasure she -derives from Love stories—which may prove the first step for her—and a -long one—into the romantic passion. Besides, to propose to a girl is the -greatest compliment a man can pay a girl; and this cannot be without -influence. - -Thus it is possible that Pity, allied with Pride, association, and -flattery, may work a change of feeling in a feminine mind; but Pity -alone will rarely lead her into the realms of Cupid. A man certainly -would never dream of marrying from Pity, on seeing that she loves him -deeply, a woman for whom he does not otherwise care. Nor should either -man or woman ever marry from Pity, any more than for money or rank. Love -should ever be the sole guide to matrimony. - -_Love at First Sight._—La Bruyère gives his opinion that “the love which -arises suddenly takes longest to cure;” and that “love which grows -slowly and by degrees resembles friendship too much to be an ardent -passion.” Schopenhauer, too, asserts that “great passions, as a rule, -arise at first sight.” He refers to Shakspere’s - - “Who ever lov’d that lov’d not at first sight?” - -and then cites Mateo Aleman’s old Spanish romance, _Guzman de -Alfarache_, in which, three centuries ago, the following observation was -made: “To fall in love one does not require much time or reflection and -choice; all that is needed is that in that first and only sight there -should be a mutual suitability and harmony, or what in common life we -call a sympathy of the blood, and which is due to a special influence of -the stars.” - -As it is not permissible, in these degenerate days of positive science, -to explain a thing by a vague reference to poetic astrology, an attempt -must be made to account for the possibility of Love at first sight on -more prosaic grounds. - -Physiognomy furnishes a simple solution of the problem. In every man’s -face is painted his personal history, as well as his favourite and -customary sphere of thoughts and feelings. As Sir Charles Bell remarks, -“Expression is to passion what language is to thought.” The gift of -reading correctly this facial language of passion is given to different -persons in different degrees, though all have some share of it: and on -their more or less accurate and subtle interpretation of the “lines and -frowns and wrinkles strange” in another’s features depends the art of -reading character and being sympathetically attracted or repulsed, as -the case may be. A young man who has unconsciously associated certain -peculiarities of facial expression in his sisters or female friends with -habitual cheerfulness, amiability, and brightness will, on recognising -similar features in a new acquaintance, take for granted similar charms -of character: this, which is the work of a second, may result in -sympathy at first sight, which very often is the beginning of Romantic -Love. - -Love at First Sight may be inspired by this instinctive perception of -beauty of character, _i.e._ amiability; or by the sight of mere physical -beauty; or, thirdly, by Personal Beauty in the highest sense of the -word, uniting intellectual fascination with bodily charms. - -Inasmuch as there are not a few men whose æsthetic taste is so weak that -they would rather marry a useful, companionable girl and imagine her -beautiful, than take a beauty and imagine her useful; and inasmuch as -there are a great many more amiable and vivacious girls in the world -than pretty ones, it happens that in a large number of cases Love is -inspired by the physiognomic interpretation of sympathetic traits of -character just referred to. Hence plain girls need never despair of -finding husbands. There is even a current notion that the deepest -passions are commonly inspired by plain women who are otherwise -attractive. But what inspires the Love in these cases is not so much the -woman’s amiability—and certainly not her plainness—as the fact that the -style of her homeliness is of an opposite kind from the faults of the -lover, and promises to neutralise them in the offspring. - -Plain and homely, moreover, are terms often applied to women whose faces -only are so, while their figures are sometimes superb. But a fine figure -is quite as essential a part of Personal Beauty as a fine face, and is, -in the opinion of Schopenhauer, even more potent as a love-inspirer. If -the figure is disregarded in favour of the face, Romantic Love is apt to -become hyper-romantic, as in the days of Dante. - -Perhaps the largest number of cases of Love at First Sight, so called, -are inspired by mere _beauté du diable_—a female “bud” whose sole charm -apparent is sparkling health and fragrant, dew-bejewelled freshness. -That this kind of Love at sight, which consists in being dazzled for the -moment by a set of regular features and a pair of bright eyes, is often -of brief duration, does not militate against the statement that the -deepest Love is also born of such a flash of æsthetic admiration. An -incipient passion may be crushed by the discovery of some disagreeable -trait in the person who inspired it; but when, owing to want of early -opportunity to discover unsympathetic traits, Love has been allowed to -make some progress, the subsequent discovery of a flaw is not nearly so -serious a matter, for then Master Cupid simply puts a daub of whitewash -on it and calls it a beauty-spot. - -_Intellect and Love._—But, after all, the deepest Love at Sight, and -that which gives promise of greatest permanence, is that inspired by a -handsome woman in whose face Intellect has written its autograph. -Goethe, indeed, has remarked that “intellect cannot warm us, or inspire -us with passion;” but the view he takes here of the relations between -intellect and passion is obviously very crude and superficial. No man, -of course, would ever fall in Love with a woman who showed her -intellectuality—as not a few do—by a parrotlike repetition of -encyclopædic reading or magazine epitomes of knowledge. This gives -evidence of only one form of intellect, the lowest, namely, Memory. It -is the higher forms—imagination, wit, clever reasoning, that constitute -the essence of intellectual culture; and though woman may never quite -equal man in this sphere, such cases as Mme. de Staël, George Sand, and -George Eliot show how much she _can_ accomplish by means of application. - -Now this higher kind of intellectual culture is able to influence the -amorous feelings in two ways: first, by refining and vivifying the -features; secondly, by enabling a woman to appreciate her lover’s -ambitions and afford him sympathetic assistance, thereby awakening a -responsive echo in his grateful mind. - -Look at Miss Marbleface in yonder corner, surrounded by a group of -admirers. Everybody wonders why she, whose features might inspire a -sculptor, remains unmarried at twenty-six. Her friends, indeed, whisper -that she never even got an offer. Yet all the men to whom she is -introduced admire her immensely—the first evening; but strange to say, -after they have seen her a few times, they are not a bit jealous to -leave her to a new group of admirers; who, in turn, cede her to another. -Her beauty, in truth, is but skin-deep, _literally_; the muscles under -the skin are never vivified by an electric flash of wit from the brain; -there is nothing but marble features and a stereotyped smile; no -animation, no change of expression, no Intellect. Were her intellect as -carefully cultivated as her features are chiselled, she would inspire -_Love_, not mere momentary admiration; and she would have been married -six years ago to a man chosen at will from the whole circle of her -acquaintances. - -It is easy to explain how the absurd and fatal notion that intellectual -application mars women’s peculiar beauty and lessens the feminine graces -in general must have arisen. The inference seems to follow logically -from the two undeniable premises that pretty girls very often _are_ -insipid, and intellectual women commonly _are_ plain. But this is only -another case of putting the cart before the horse. Pretty girls, on the -one hand, are so rare that they are almost sure to be spoiled by -flattery. They receive so much attention that they have no time for -study; and ambitious mothers take them into society prematurely, where -they get married before their intellectual capacities—which sometimes -are excellent—have had time to unfold. Ugly girls, on the other hand, -being neglected by the men, have to while away their time with books, -music, art, etc., and thus they become bright and entertaining. -Therefore it is not the intellect that makes them ugly, but the ugliness -that makes them intellectual. - -The culture that can be compressed into a single lifetime unfortunately -does not suffice to modify the bony and cartilaginous parts of the human -face sufficiently to change homeliness into beauty; but the muscles can -be mobilised, the expression quickened and beautified by an individual’s -efforts at culture; hence some of these reputed plain intellectual -women, in moments when they are excited, become more truly fascinating, -with all their badly-chiselled features, than any number of cold marble -faces. If men only knew it!—but they are afraid of them—the average men -are—because they do not constantly wish to be reminded of their own -mental shortcomings in a tournament of wit, pleasantry, or erudition. - -Even Schopenhauer, who was convinced that women are too stupid to -appreciate a man’s intellect, if abnormal, held that women, on the -contrary, gain an advantage in Love by cultivating their minds; adding -that it is owing to the appreciation of this fact that mothers teach -their daughters music, languages, etc.; thus artificially padding out -their minds, as on occasion they do parts of the body. - -No doubt, as a rule, women are more influenced in love-affairs by a man -who excels in athletic qualities of manly energy than by one of -intellectual supereminence. But the adoration of women for a Liszt, a -Rubinstein, and other men of genius, whose eminence lies in a department -that has been made accessible to women for centuries, shows what might -be if women were trained in other spheres of human activity and -knowledge. - -Regarding the mental padding, however, we might continue in the old -pessimist’s vein by saying that it is a trick which has had its day. Men -do not marry girls quite so blindly as in the days when Romantic Love -was a novelty. They keep their eyes open; and when they find that their -girl’s musical “culture” consists in the mechanical drumming of three -pieces, and that her other “accomplishments” are similar shams, they are -apt to take their throbbing hearts and put them into a refrigerator -until the young lady has become a faded, harmless old maid, still -drumming her three pieces on the piano. The fact that so many mothers -persist in thus “padding” their daughters’ minds, instead of educating -them properly, is largely responsible for the ever-increasing number of -self-conscious and disgusted bachelors in the world. - -The example of Aspasia illustrates both the physical advantages beauty -derives from intellectual culture—through the refinement of -expression—and the emotional advantages a woman secures by being able to -sympathise intelligently with her lover’s or husband’s enterprises. -Nothing more irresistibly fascinates a man than genuine questioning -interest shown by a woman in his life-work. Or, as Mr. Hamerton puts it, -“the most exquisite pleasure the masculine mind can ever know, is that -of being looked upon by a feminine intelligence with clear sight and -affection at the same time.” But on this topic Mr. Mill has discoursed -so enthusiastically in his _Subjection of Women_ that anything that -might be added here could be little more than a faint echo of his -persuasive eloquence, tinged though it be with true lovers’ -exaggeration. - -Goethe illustrated his maxim that “intellect cannot warm us or inspire -us with passion” by marrying a pretty, brainless doll of whom he soon -got heartily tired. Heine followed his example by marrying a Parisian -labouring girl who, like Madame Racine, probably never read her -husband’s writings. And in his _Unterwelt_ he laments his “verfehlte -Liebe, verfehltes Leben”—his mistaken love and wasted life. - -Why did the ancient Greeks neglect their women? Why did they remain -strangers to Love and seek refuge in Friendship? Their women were -modest, domestic, good mothers and wives; but they lacked one thing, and -that was Intellect. - - - GALLANTRY AND SELF-SACRIFICE - -Primitive tribes have a delightfully simple way of arranging their -division of labour. The men do the hunting and carry on wars, the women -do everything else. If a warrior on “moving day” should say to his wife -and daughters: “See here, this will never do for me to have nothing but -my weapons and my pipe, while you carry the babies, the cooking -utensils, the remnants of the game, and the tent: let me help you!”—if -he should say this, his comrades would consider him crazy, or rather, -possessed of a demon, and would burn two or three persons at the stake -for having bewitched him. - -Gallantry, in other words, is unknown to savages either between lovers, -or, in a general sense, towards all women. Nor is it known to -semi-civilised peoples. Among the nomadic Arab tribes of the Sahara the -wife has to do all the work unless her husband is rich enough to own a -slave; and among the poorer Bedouins the husband traverses the desert -comfortably seated on his camel, while his wife plods along behind on -foot, loaded with her bed, her kitchen utensils, and her child on top. - -The ancient Greeks were not so ungallant as these peoples towards their -women, as they had slaves to do their hard work; but the constant -devoted attention and desire to please which constitute modern Gallantry -did not, as we have seen, exist among them. Among the Romans we find -traces—but traces only—of this virtue. Mediæval Gallantry reached its -extremes in the witches’ fires on the one side, and the grotesque -performances of the knight-errants on the other. The intermediate ground -apparently remained uncultivated, except during the brief period of -chivalrous poetry, and then only in the highest classes. Wherever, in -short, Romantic Love was absent, Gallantry, as one of its ingredients, -was unknown. - -Coming to modern times, we see the same parallelism between general -Gallantry and the freedom granted to the young to form Love-matches. - -In France, Germany, Italy, the women still have to do the hardest field -work, though the men assist. The French, indeed, who systematically -suppress Romantic Love, are apparently the most gallant nation in the -world. But there is a general agreement among tourists that in _real_ -Gallantry, which calls for self-sacrificing actions and not mere polite -words and bows, the French are inferior to all other European nations. -It is in England and America that true general Gallantry, like true -Romantic Love, flourishes most. In America, indeed, owing to the former -scarcity of women, Gallantry was for a time carried to a ludicrous -excess, almost reminding one of the days of Don Quixote; as in that -story of the Western miners who surrounded an emigrant’s waggon and -insisted on his “trotting out” his wife; which being done by the -trembling man, who feared the worst, the “roughs” passed round the hat -and collected a large sum of gold for the woman. Perhaps American women -still are, as we read in _Daisy Miller_, “the most exacting in the world -and the least endowed with a sense of indebtedness.” But the constant -sight in New York and elsewhere of street-cars in which every man has a -seat while every woman is standing, seems to indicate that there is a -reaction which may go to the opposite extreme. But after a while the -pendulum will doubtless swing back to the middle and remain stationary; -and this will be in the new golden age when men will always give up -their seats to old and infirm women, to pretty girls, and to all the -others who display truly refined instincts and good taste by abjuring -crinolines, bustles, high heels, stuffed birds on their hats, and other -“ornaments” fatal to Personal Beauty. - -From the facts thus hastily sketched we may safely infer that, as we saw -in the case of Sympathy with another’s joys, so again with Gallantry, -what was born as a trait of Romantic Love was subsequently transferred -to the social and domestic relations of men and women in general. Had -Romantic Love done nothing more than this, it would deserve to rank -among the most refining influences in modern civilisation. - -Perhaps the most remarkable existing illustration of the way in which -Lovers’ Gallantry may assume a general form, is to be found in Mr. -Ruskin’s recent confession regarding girls: “My primary thought is how -to serve _them_ and make them happy; or if they could use me for a -plank-bridge over a stream, or set me up for a post to tie a swing to, -or anything of the sort not requiring me to talk, I should be always -quite happy in such a promotion.” - -This reads precisely like Heine’s poem in which the lover wishes he were -his mistress’s footstool, or again her needle-cushion, that he might -experience the delights of pain inflicted by her foot or hand. - -Such excess of amorous Gallantry is a favourite theme for poetic -hyperbole, and it hardly can be exaggerated; for the lover really _does_ -entertain such wishes. With him, _romance is realism_. - -No slave could be so meek and humble, no well-trained dog so obedient as -the amorous swain. Again and again will he, without a moment’s -hesitation, plunge into a wintry stream and triumphantly snap up and -bring back to her the chip she has thrown in to amuse herself. - -_Active and Passive Desire to Please._—"Love, studious how to please" -(Dryden), has two ways of accomplishing its purpose—one passive, one -active. Women, owing to their prescribed Coyness, are not allowed to -indulge in actions that would imply a desire to please a suitor, except -in the later stages of Courtship, when all is settled or understood. -Hence their desire to please can only show itself passively in their -efforts to make their personal appearance attractive to the lover. Nor -are men indifferent to this passive phase of Gallantry. As nothing so -fills a man with Pride as the thought that She, a paragon of beauty, -adorns herself so carefully all for his delight; so in turn he feels it -incumbent on him to follow her example. Even the habitually slovenly -become dandies for the moment, brush their hair, buy a new hat and -clothes; the lazy become industrious, the cowards assume heroic airs and -strut about like tragedians— - - “I was the laziest creature, - The most unprofitable sign of nothing, - The veriest drone, and slept away my life - Beyond the dormouse, till I was in love! - And now I can outwake the nightingale, - Outwatch an usurer, and out-walk him too, - Stalk like a ghost that haunted ’bout a treasure, - And all that fancied treasure, it is love.”—BEN JONSON. - -Active Gallantry has been sufficiently characterised in the foregoing -pages. It is that form of the Desire to Please which readily merges into -Self-Sacrifice. A man who would never dream of exposing himself to the -slightest danger in his own behalf will, if his sweetheart expresses -admiration of a flower growing near a dangerous precipice, rush to pluck -it with an audacity which may cost him his life. A fatal case of this -sort occurred not long ago on the Hudson River near New York. A man’s -life thrown away for the slight æsthetic gratification to be derived by -his love from the sight and fragrance of a flower! - -How frequently, again, do lovers sacrifice their family bonds, the love -of parents and relatives, as well as rank and fortune, for the sake of -the romantic passion! - -A mother willingly dies in defence of her offspring’s life. But will -she, like Romeo, drink the apothecary’s poisonous draught over the -corpse of her dead darling? No, herein again Romantic Love is the -deepest of the passions. - -_Feminine Devotion._—Self-Sacrifice is one of the traits of Romantic -Love which may remain unaltered and unweakened in conjugal affection. -“Those who have traced the course of the wives of the poor,” says Mr. -Lecky, “and of many who, though in narrowed circumstances, can hardly be -called poor, will probably admit that in no other class do we so often -find entire lives spent in daily persistent self-denial, in the patient -endurance of countless trials, in the ceaseless and deliberate sacrifice -of their own enjoyments to the wellbeing or the prospects of others.” - -It is in Wagner’s music-dramas that the modern ideal of feminine -devotion unto death has found its most stirring embodiment. Elizabeth, -having lost her Tannhäuser, thanks to the allurements of Venus, dies of -a broken heart; Senta, realising that only by her self-sacrifice can the -unhappy Dutchman be released from his terrible doom of eternally sailing -the stormy seas until he should find a woman faithful to him unto death, -tears herself away from her family and plunges into the ocean. Isolde -sings her death-song over the body of Tristan; and Brünnhilde immolates -herself on Siegfried’s funeral pyre. Wagner’s theory of the music-drama -was a theory of Love in which each lover sacrifices selfish -idiosyncrasies in order to produce a happy union in marriage. - -Mr. Mill, forgetting the difference between masculine maltreatment of -women, and voluntary female self-denial, thought it expedient to sneer -at the exaggerated self-abnegation which is the present artificial ideal -of feminine character; and those unsexed viragoes who wish to “reform” -women by robbing them of all womanly attributes and converting them into -caricatures of masculinity, re-echo Mill’s sneer in shrill chorus. -Women, they shout, must no longer waste their best years in staying at -home, educating their children and taking care of their husbands. These -brutes have been caressed and fondled long enough; the time has come for -women to be manly and independent. Let them take away from men the -employments, of which even now there are not enough for three-fourths of -the men; let them thus drive another 20 per cent of men and women into -celibacy because the men cannot afford any longer to marry. Let the -women strip off their artificial air of domestic refinement by mingling -with the foul-mouthed, tobacco-reeking crowds and making political stump -speeches; or by visiting the loathsome criminals in prisons, treating -them to cakes and flowers and other methods of feminine reform, so that -when set free they may be eager to do something which will bring them -back to their cakes and flowers! The children meanwhile being left at -home in charge of coarse, ignorant, careless servants, copying their -manners, and the husband compelled to seek companionship at the club, or -much worse. - -How the selfish husband will wince under this cold neglect and -retaliation—he who never does anything but amuse himself while his wife -toils at home; who never risks his life in war for his wife and -children; who never toils at his desk from morn to night, to earn the -daily bread of all by the sweat of his brow; who never goes to lunatic -asylums from overwork and worry! How sly in man to set up his -“artificial ideal of woman’s self-abnegation,” while he is having such a -good time! But why try to paint in weak prose the hideousness of man’s -selfish conduct, when Shakspere has done it in immortal verse? - - “Thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper, - Thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee, - And for thy maintenance commits his body - To painful labour both by sea and land, - To watch the night in storms, the day in cold, - Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe; - And craves no other tribute at thy hands - But love, fair looks and true obedience; - Too little payment for so great a debt.” - -There is another very curious aspect of Self-Sacrifice which will be -fully discussed in the chapter on Schopenhauer’s Theory of Love, but -which may be stated here, without comment, that the reader may reflect -on the pessimist’s paradox. Schopenhauer held that Love is based on the -possession by the lovers of traits which mutually complement each other. -In the children these incongruous traits will so neutralise each other -as to produce a harmonious result; but in the life of the parents they -will produce only discords. True love, therefore, as he claims, rarely -results in a happy conjugal life: Love causes the parents to sacrifice -their mutual happiness to the welfare of their offspring. - -Meanwhile it may be stated that France offers a curious confirmation of -Schopenhauer’s theory, not noted by himself. Romantic Love, it is well -known, hardly exists in France _as a motive to marriage_, being -systematically suppressed and craftily annihilated. Nevertheless, as -many observers attest, the French commonly lead a happy family life. But -look at the offspring, at the birth-rate, the lowest in Europe; look at -the puny men, at the women, among whom there is hardly a single beauty -in all the land. In a word, whereas Love sacrifices, according to -Schopenhauer, the parents to the children, the French sacrifice the -offspring, and Love itself, to the happiness of the individuals, married -according to motives of personal expediency. - - - EMOTIONAL HYPERBOLE - - “I loved Ophelia: forty thousand brothers - Could not, with all their quantity of love, - Make up my sum.” - -“It is a strange thing,” says Bacon, “to note the excess of this -passion, and how it braves the nature and value of things by this, that -the _speaking in a perpetual hyperbole_ is comely in nothing but in -love.” - -It is the nature of all passions to exaggerate: and Love, being of all -passions the most violent, exaggerates the most—more even than Hate, -which alone competes with Love in the power to tinge every object with -the colour of its own spectacles. The lover’s constant sigh is for -something stronger than a superlative; and to the limit between the -sublime and the ridiculous he is absolutely blind. Like Schumann, every -lover calls his Clara “Clarissima,” and of two superlative facts he is -quite certain: That _she_ is the most wonderful being ever created; and -that _his_ passion is the deepest ever felt by mortal. - - “Transparent heretics, be burnt for liars! - One fairer than my love! The all-seeing sun - Ne’er saw her match since first the world begun.” - SHAKSPERE. - -If you try to convince him that others have loved as ardently—and ceased -to love, he will smile a cynical smile and then close his eyes and -declaim melodramatically— - - “And I will luve thee still, my dear, - Till a’ the seas gang dry— - Till a’ the seas gang dry, my dear, - And the rocks melt wi’ the sun.”—BURNS. - -In such hyperbolic effusions a lover sees no exaggeration, for they -describe his feelings and convictions precisely as they are. - - “What we mortals call romantic, - And always envy though we deem it frantic” (BYRON) - -is to him bare reality, nothing more. Romeo expresses his real wish for -the moment when he says— - - “O that I were a glove upon that hand - That I might touch that cheek;” - -Byron really feels that - - “O, if the streets were paved with thine eyes - Her feet were much too dainty for such tread.” - -And every lover would agree with Coleridge that - - “Her very frowns are fairer far - Than smiles of other maidens are.” - -“The air I breathe in a room empty of you is unhealthy,” wrote Keats to -his sweetheart; and Burns, in the sketch of his first love, thus -describes the emotional hyperæsthesia produced by Love: “I didn’t know -myself why the tones of her voice made my heart-strings thrill like an -Æolian harp, and particularly why my pulse beat such a furious rattan -when I looked and fingered over her little hand to pick out the cruel -nettle-stings and thistles.” - -This is the true ecstasy of Love—the most delicious and thrilling -emotion of which the human soul is capable. Nor is it necessary to be a -poet to feel it. While in Love even a coarser-grained man “feels the -blood of the violet, the clover, and the lily in his veins” (Emerson). -But if Jealousy rouses him, it is flower-blood no longer that courses in -his veins, nor human blood, but vengeful Spanish wine. It is then that -Love’s intoxication reaches its climax: delirious ecstasy followed by -angry waves of dire despair, rocking and tossing the unhappy victim till -he is pale and sick as death. - -Like other drunkards, the Love-intoxicated youth sees and feels -everything double. His darling seems doubly beautiful, and all his joys -and sorrows are doubled in intensity. And, like other drunkards, he -imagines that all the world is drunk and reeling; whereas the rapid -oscillation of surrounding objects between the rosy hue of hope and the -gray cloud of doubt, is all in his own mind. - -How this erotic intoxication multiplies the lover’s courage and -confidence in his success! The most insignificant smile raises him over -all obstacles to the summit of his hopes, as easily as a cloud-shadow -climbs a mountain side o’er treetops, rocks, and snowy walls. - -How, on her part, it magnifies his heroism, his genius, converting the -most insipid commonplace into an immortal epigram, full of wit and -wisdom! - -That Lovers’ Hyperbole is nothing but Love-intoxication shows itself -also in the ludicrous tasks they undertake when under the spell. Who but -a lover would ever attempt to gild refined gold, to paint the lily -white, the sky blue? Who mix up physiology, astronomy, gastronomy, in -such an absurd way as in “sweet-heart,” “honey-moon,” etc.? - -And when, during the “honey-moon,” the lover recovers from his -intoxication, how surprised he looks, how he rubs his eyes and wonders -where the deuce he has been! He remembers Ovid’s caution that after wine -every woman seems beautiful; he remembers something about seeing -“Helen’s beauty in a brow of Egypt.” And the girl by his side—he thought -she _was_ Helen; but now, “really—this is most extraordinary: just look -at that large mouth, and that snub-nose—well, I knew she had it, and -thought I loved her all the more for this imperfection, which proved her -human and not a goddess: yet, by Jove, I almost wish ... in fact, I -_quite_ wish, her mouth was smaller and her nose larger.” - -Poor deluded youth! He was taken in by Cupid’s favourite trick of -dazzling a lover with a pair of brown or blue orbs, till he can see -nothing else. For this girl, beyond question, has a pair of eyes which -Venus might envy—mid-ocean-blue, with a dewdrop sparkle, and a -mischievous expression that is more commonly found in brown eyes; and -these deep-blue eyes are framed in with black brows and long black -lashes, without which no eyes are ever perfect, whatever their colour. -It was these expressive orbs, this visible music of the spheres, that -ravished all his senses and made him blind to every other feature of her -countenance. - -Thus we see how Love comes to be blind. One feature—most commonly the -eyes—dazes the victim so completely that all the other features are seen -but vaguely as in a dream; while the imagination is ever busy in -chiselling them into harmony with the fine eyes. And it is only after -marriage, or assured possession, that the other features emerge from -their blurred vagueness, and are found less perfect than the fond -imagination had painted them. - -In this eagerness of Love to see only superlative excellence, and its -disposition to imagine a thing perfect if it is not, we get a deep -insight into the mission and _raison d’être_ of this passion. If women -and men would only try to live up to Love’s exalted ideal of personal -perfection—and most persons _could_ be 50 per cent more beautiful, if -they attended to the laws of hygiene and cultivated their minds—what a -lovely planet this would be! - -Why have so many of the greatest men of genius been unhappy in their -Love and Marriage? Because they had in their minds the loveliest visions -of possible feminine perfection, but did not find them realised in life. -For a while their pre-eminently strong imaginations helped them to keep -up the illusion; but the truth would out at last; and in the pangs of -disappointment they threw themselves upon the poetic device of -Hyperbole, and tried to console themselves by painting the images of -perfection which did not exist in life. - -Love, it is true, is not the only theme which they have embellished with -the ornaments of Hyperbole. A wonderful example of non-erotic Hyperbole -occurs in Macbeth— - - “Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood - Clean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather - The multitudinous seas incarnadine, - Making the green one red.” - -But as a rule the finest specimens of poetic imagery are to be found in -erotic Hyperbole; and it seems most strange that Goldsmith, who had so -deep an insight into Love, does not mention this variety at all in his -essay on Hyperbole. - -Love, says Emerson, is “the deification of persons”; and though the -poet, like every other lover, “beholding his maiden, half-knows that she -is not verily that which he worships,” this does not prevent him from -idealising her portrait, and sketching her as he would like to have her. -A few additional specimens of such poetic Hyperbole may fitly close this -chapter— - -SHAKSPERE— - - “She is mine own, - And I as rich in having such a jewel - As twenty seas, if all their sand were pearl, - The water nectar, and the rocks pure gold.” - -SOUTHWELL— - - “A honey shower rains from her lips.” - -MARLOWE— - - “O, thou art fairer than the evening air - Clad in the beauty of a thousand stars.” - -And again— - - “Many would praise the sweet smell as she past, - When ’twas the odour which her breath forth cast; - And there for honey bees have sought in vain, - And, beat from thence, have lighted there again.” - -Or, as Lamb puts it, lovers sometimes - - “borrow language of dislike; - And instead of ‘dearest Miss,’ - Jewel, honey, sweetheart, bliss, - And those forms of old admiring. - Call her cockatrice and siren, - Basilisk and all that’s evil, - Witch, hyena, mermaid, devil, - Ethiop, wench, and blackamoor, - Monkey, ape, and twenty more; - Friendly traitress, loving foe,— - Not that she is truly so, - But no other way they know - A contentment to express, - _Borders so upon excess_, - That they do not rightly wot, - _Whether it be pain or not_.” - - - MIXED MOODS AND PARADOXES - -“That they do not rightly wot, whether it be pain or not.” That is the -keynote of Modern Love. - -To a superficial Anakreon, who knows but its rapturous phase, Love is -all honey and moonshine. The celibate Spinoza, too, ignorant of the -agonies of Love, defined it as _lætitia concomitante idea causæ -externæ_—a pleasure accompanied by the idea of its external cause. -Burton, on the other hand, claims Love as “a species of melancholy”; and -Cowley sings— - - “A mighty pain to love it is, - And ’tis a pain that pain to miss; - But of all pains the greatest pain - It is to love, but love in vain.” - -The poets generally have taken a less one-sided view of the matter by -depicting Love under a thousand images, as a mysterious _mixture_ of joy -and sadness, of agony and delight. - -So Bailey— - - “The sweetest joy, the wildest woe is love.” - -DRYDEN— - - “Pains of love be sweeter far - Than all other pleasures are.” - -FLETCHER— - - “Thou bitter sweet, easing disease - How dost thou by displeasing please?” - -MIDDLETON— - - “Love is ever sick, and yet is never dying; - Love is ever true, and yet is ever lying; - Love does doat in liking, and is mad in loathing, - Love, indeed, is anything, yet indeed is nothing.” - -DRAYTON— - - “Amidst an ocean of delight - For pleasure to be starved.” - - “’Tis nothing to be plagued in hell - But thus in heaven tormented.” - -CONSTABLE— - - “To live in hell, and heaven to behold, - To welcome life, and die a living death, - To sweat with heat, and yet be freezing cold, - To grasp at stars, and lie the earth beneath.” - -SOUTHWELL— - - “She offereth joy, but bringeth grief; - A kiss——where she doth kill.” - - “Tears kindle sparks.” - - “Her loving looks are murdering darts.” - - “Like winter rose and summer ice.” - - “May never was the month of love, - For May is full of flowers; - But rather April, wet by kind, - For love is full of showers.” - -SHAKSPERE— - - “Good-night, good-night, parting is such sweet sorrow, - That I shall say good-night till it be morrow.” - - “Love is a smoke raised with the fume of sighs; - Being purged, a fire sparkling in lovers’ eyes; - Being vex’d, a sea nourished with lovers’ tears; - What is it else? a madness most discreet, - A choking gall and a preserving sweet.” - -Petrarch’s poems, says Shelley, “are as spells which unseal the inmost -enchanted fountains of the delight which is the grief of love.” In that -part of the _Romance of the Rose_ which was written by Jean de Meung, -and translated by Chaucer, occur many similar phrases depicting Love as -an _emotional paradox_: “Also a sweet hell it is, and a sorrowful -paradise;” “delight right full of heaviness, and drearihood full of -gladness;” “a heavy burden light to bear;” “wise madness,” “despairing -hope,” etc. Mr. Ruskin, who quotes the whole passage in his _Fors -Clavigera_, declares: “I know of no such lovely love-poem as his since -Dante.” - -As for Dante, he fully realised the “sweet pain” of Love, as he called -it. As far back as Plato’s _Timæus_ we find that love, as then -understood, was regarded as “a mixture of pleasure and pain.” - -“’Tis the pest of love,” sings Keats, “that fairest joys bring most -unrest.” Thackeray speaks of “the delights and tortures, the jealousy -and wakefulness, the longing and raptures, the frantic despair and -elation, attendant upon the passion of love.” But it is superfluous to -cite modern authors, for volumes might be filled with quotations -attesting that Love is neither a simple “lætitia,” as Spinoza defined -it, nor “a species of melancholy,” but a mixture of joy and sadness, of -rapture and woe. - -Shakspere’s “_violent sorrow seems a modern ecstasy_” might be adopted -as a general motto for a book on the psychology and history of Love. - -Love, it is true, is not the only passion characterised by such a -paradoxical mixture of moods. Thus in _Macbeth_ the sentence, “on the -torture of the mind to lie in restless ecstasy,” does not refer to Love; -and John Fletcher, too, sings in a general way— - - “There’s naught in this life sweet - If man were wise to see’t, - But only melancholy, - O sweetest Melancholy!” - -A German author, Oswald Zimmermann, has even written a volume of almost -two hundred pages, wherein he endeavours to analyse various emotions and -historic phenomena, in which pleasure and pain are intimately -associated. He has chapters on the Beautiful in Art and in Nature, on -Death, on Mysticism, on the ancient festivals of Dionysus and Aphrodite, -on the mediæval flagellants, on lust and cruelty, on various epochs of -modern literature, etc. His book bears the curious title _Die Wonne des -Leids_, because he holds that there is in these phenomena an “Ecstasy of -Woe,” distinct from pleasure and pain, pure and simple, and superior to -them. - -Hartmann, the pessimist philosopher, goes a step farther, and claims -that “there is _no_ pleasure which does not contain an element of grief; -and no pain without a tinge of pleasure.” This is obviously an -exaggeration; for what is the element of anguish that enters into the -feelings of a successful lover when he imprints the first kiss on the -lips of the girl who has just promised to be his wife? or what the -element of pleasure in the feelings of a jealous lover the moment he -hears that his rival has won the prize? - -Yet, if we except a pleasurable or painful climax, like these, -Hartmann’s maxim may be accepted as approximating the truth, especially -in the case of Love, which, more than any other passion, constantly -changes its moods, so that, from their close proximity, each one cannot -fail to rub off some of its colour on the others. Who but a lover can -experience in one brief second both the thrill of heavenly delight and -the sting of deadly anguish—“Himmelhoch jauchzend zum Tode betrübt,” as -Schiller puts it? A whole lifetime of emotion is crowded into the one -night preceding a lover’s proposal: hope and fear chasing one another -across his weary brain like a Witches’ Sabbath on the Brocken. - -One would imagine that the moment when an admirer calls on his girl, to -be fascinated by her smiles and graceful manners, and to be thrilled by -her melodious voice, must be one of unmixed delight and ecstasy. But if -the slightest doubt as to her feelings lurks in his mind, he is much -more apt to be harassed by a peculiar bitter-sweet feeling. Will he make -a good impression on her this time? he will ask himself; has she perhaps -changed, or found another more acceptable admirer, and is she going to -hint as much by her altered manner? These and a hundred other -apprehensions will torture and depress him; so that he will more than -probably lose that “easy manner and gay address” which are such mighty -weapons in winning a woman’s heart. - -Nor is the girl, on her part, free from the anguish of doubt. Though her -admirer seems to be truly devoted to her, she has read in the song that -“all men are not gay deceivers,” which somehow seems to imply logically -that most men _are_ gay deceivers. Perhaps, she will muse, he will only -worship me as long as I leave him in absolute doubt as to my feelings; -and subsequently, having gratified his vanity and secured my photograph, -he will place it in his album to show to all his friends as his latest -conquest, and then flit to another flower. - -After all, Schopenhauer was right in saying that when we have no great -sorrows the imagination invents small ones which torment us quite as -much as the others. When one sees the peculiar delight lovers take in -teasing and torturing each other, one feels tempted to believe with -Zimmermann that there _is_ “eine Lust am Schmerze”—that pain in itself -contains a gratification, an “ecstasy of woe,” distinct from positive -pleasure itself. - -Yet it is hardly necessary to take refuge in such an emotional paradox -in order to account for the value and luxury of Lovers’ Quarrels and all -the various mixed moods of Love. A sufficient explanation is afforded by -the principles of _Contrast_ and emotional _Persistence_. - -Owing to the fact that feeling seems to have a regular pulsation or -rhythm, our hours of anguish are always interrupted by intervals of hope -and happy retrospection—as in Chopin’s funeral march, where the gloomy -dirge is interrupted for a time by a delicious melody of happy -reminiscence, like a heavenly voice of consolation. When the nervous -tension has become too great the string breaks and the bow resumes its -straightness and elasticity. Hence it is that an uncertain lover -actually gloats over the anguish of doubt and jealousy: for he has an -instinctive fore-feeling that when the reaction of hope and confidence -will come, he will enjoy an ecstasy of the imagination of which an -always confident love has no conception. - -Uninterrupted enjoyment of lovers’ bliss would soon dull the edge of -pleasure, as an unbroken succession of sweet concords in music would -cloy the æsthetic sense. The introduction of discords raises a longing -for their resolution which, if gratified, restores to the concords their -original charm and freshness, and thus prolongs the pleasures of music. -A tourist after spending a month on the top of a Swiss mountain becomes -comparatively indifferent to the scene of which he knows every detail by -heart; but let his peak be hidden in dense clouds for a few days, and he -cannot fail, on emerging again into sunlight, to greet the view with the -same thrill of delight as on the day of his arrival. - -It is their constant and unexpected changes from joy to sadness, from -tears to smiles, that constitute the greatest charm of Heine and Chopin -and make them the lyric poet and musician _par excellence_ for lovers. -Either a gladsome rainbow suddenly appears to illumine their lurid -landscape; or, again, “their plenteous joys, wanton in fulness, seek to -hide themselves in drops of sorrow.” - -Even the famous - - “For ought that I could ever read, - Could ever hear by tale or history, - The course of true love never did run smooth”— - -what is it but another way of stating that that Love which has met with -no impediments, in which anguish and delight have not warmed one another -by mutual friction, has never broken out into a conflagration -sufficiently brilliant to be recorded “by tale or history” as a -remarkable specimen of “true love.” It is the plot-interest that -fascinates the reader as well as the lover himself; it is the -impediments and emotional conflicts, the _coyness of fate_, that -constitute the principal charm in a tale of love; and it would take a -very clever novelist to attract readers by an account of a courtship of -which the happy result was a foregone conclusion at every stage. - -Thus the magic effect of contrasted emotions suggests why pleasure -alternating with woe in Love is more intense than pleasure -uninterrupted. A mountaineer who has been wading through snowfields all -day up to his knees enjoys the comforts of his slippers, a bright fire, -and a cup of tea in the evening, twice as much as a man who has been all -day at home. - -On reflection, however, it seems as if Contrast, far from reducing -things to their first principles, itself needed an explanation. _Why_ is -it that by contrasting two emotions we heighten their colour? A partial -explanation was, indeed, suggested in speaking of discords: anguish -begets desire, and the more intense desire has been, the more lively is -its gratification. A more profound solution of the problem, however, is -found in the fact that feelings have their _echoes_, which continue -sometimes long after the original tone has ceased; and if meantime a new -tone is sounded, it blends with the echo and produces a mixed feeling. - -The sense of Temperature affords a simple illustration of this “echo.” -Place two basins before you, one filled with tepid, the other with -ice-cold, water. Put your right hand in the ice-water one minute, -leaving the left in your pocket. Then put both hands into the tepid -water. It will seem still tepid to the left, but quite warm to the right -hand. - -Some psychologists, however, deny that pleasures and pains ever coalesce -into one feeling—that there is such a thing as a mixed feeling. They -contend that the attention can be fixed on only one feeling at a time, -that the stronger crowds out the weaker, and that it is only their rapid -succession that makes two feelings appear simultaneous, just as a -firebrand swung around rapidly _seems_ to form a fiery circle. - -Now it is quite true that the _attention_ can be fixed on only one -feeling at any given moment, and that the stronger crowds out the weaker -so far as the attention is concerned: yet this does not prevent the -prevailing feeling from being affected by the echo of the one which -preceded it. If a man, buried in the labyrinths of a big hotel, is waked -up in the night by cries of fire; though it may prove a false alarm, yet -the effect of the fright will remain with him and cast a gloom over his -whole day’s doings, however pleasant in themselves. And a doubtful -lover’s enjoyment of his sweetheart’s sweetest smiles is often galled by -the remembrance that on the preceding day she smiled just as sweetly on -his odious rival. “For sorrow ends not when it seemeth done,” says -Shakspere. - -In his admirable _Dissertation on the Passions_, Hume cleverly makes use -of a musical analogy to explain how different emotions may be mixed: “If -we consider the human mind, we shall observe that, with regard to the -passions, it is not like a wind-instrument of music, which, in running -over all the notes, immediately loses the sound when the breath ceases; -but rather resembles a string-instrument, where, after each stroke, the -vibrations still retain some sound which gradually and insensibly -decays. The imagination is extremely quick and agile, but the passions -in comparison are slow and restive; for which reason, when any object is -presented which affords a variety of views to the one and emotions to -the other, though the fancy may change its views with great celerity, -each stroke will not produce a clear and distinct note of passion, but -the one passion will always be mixt and confounded with the other.” - -_Lunatic, Lover, and Poet._—A still better analogy of the manner in -which one feeling may be modified by another is furnished by the optical -phenomenon of after-images. If we gaze very steadily for half a minute -at a green wafer and then at a sheet of white paper, we see on it a -_purple_ image of the wafer; purple being the complementary colour of -green, _i.e._ the colour which, if mixed with green, produces white. The -reason of this phenomenon is that, after looking at the green wafer, the -nervous fibres in the eye which perceive that colour have become so -fatigued that the fainter green waves in the white paper fail to make -any perceptible impression on them; so that purple alone prevails for -the moment. So to the infatuated swain who has been tortured by the -green-eyed monster, Jealousy, the moment of remission, which would else -be one of neutral indifference, assumes the hue of rosy hope and -positive delight. Hours which to sober mortals would seem perfect blanks -are thus to him full of intense feeling, simply because they are -rebounds from a state of extreme tension in the opposite direction. He -might be likened to a schoolboy whose sleigh is carried across the -frozen river by its downward impetus and even ascends the hill on the -other side some distance before it stops. Hence, like the madman and the -man of genius, the amorous swain is always either down in a fit of -melancholy, or in an exalted ecstasy of joy, rapidly alternating and -weirdly intermingled— - - “The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, - Are of imagination all compact.” - -Now poets are proverbially melancholy; and madmen, as Professor -Krafft-Ebing tells us, are also more commonly tortured by depressing -delusions than elated by pleasant ones. Hence, if the poet’s maxim, just -quoted, be true, we should expect the lover’s prevailing cast of mind to -be melancholy too; and so it is. Though he enjoys moments of delirious -rapture, to which sober mortals are utter strangers, yet his misgivings -are incessant, even when he is almost certain of success: and it takes -but little to poison his cup; for, as Professor Volkmann remarks, “one -drop of anguish suffices to gall a whole ocean of joy.” So the lover -becomes “pale and interesting,” loses weight and appetite, and sighs -away his soul. Were this emotional fermenting process allowed to last -too long, his health would suffer seriously: but fortunately it -ordinarily ceases in a year or so, yielding a wine which, though less -sparkling and ebullient, is more mellow and less intoxicating. Romantic -Love, in other words, is metamorphosed into conjugal affection which, -among other attributes of Love, strips off its characteristic trait of -melancholy, whereby it is easily distinguished from all other forms of -affection. Before, however, we can pass on to consider in detail the -differences between Romantic and Conjugal Love, the two remaining -ingredients of Romantic Love—Individual Preference and Personal -Beauty—must be briefly considered. - - - INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE - -It happens occasionally, in the Western regions of the United States, -that an Indian brave casts his eyes on a buxom pale-face girl and -desires her in marriage. He offers her parents two ponies for her; he -offers three, five, and even seven ponies; and when still refused he is -the most mystified man in the world: cannot understand how any man can -be so egregiously stupid or avaricious as to refuse his daughter for -_seven_ ponies! Ugh!! - -It is needless to recapitulate the numerous instances cited in preceding -pages, showing that throughout the world, until within a few centuries, -Romantic Love could not exist because the girl’s choice, on the one -hand, was utterly ignored, while the man, on the other, was equally -prevented, by the lack of opportunities for courtship, from basing his -choice on a real knowledge of the selected bride. The parents who did -the selecting, always for the bride, and sometimes even for the -bridegroom, were guided in their choice by money and rank and not by -Health and Beauty, which inspire Love and follow as its fruits. The -history of Love, till within three or four centuries ago, might, in -short, be summed up in six words: No Choice, no Love, no Beauty—except -in those rare cases where special hygienic advantages prevailed, or -where lucky chance brought together a youth and a maiden who in the -ordinary course of events would have fallen in Love with one another. - -There is reason to believe, however, that even if in the early ages of -the world the young had been allowed greater freedom in choosing a -lover, Romantic Love, in its more ardent phases, would not have -flourished to any great extent among primitive, ancient, and mediæval -nations: for the reason that Love depends on Individualisation, and our -remote ancestors were not so diversely individualised as we are. - -_Sexual Divergence._—Comparative ethnology, psychology, and biology show -that specialisation is a product of higher evolution, _i.e._ that -individual traits are developed in proportion as we proceed higher in -the scale of life, physical and intellectual. It is true there are no -two flowers in the fields, no two leaves in a forest, exactly alike in -every detail: but the differences are infinitesimal, and almost require -a microscope to see them. It is also true that the sheep in a flock, -which appear almost alike to a casual observer, are individually known -to the shepherd. _Possibly_ a sharp-sighted and patient naturalist might -live to distinguish himself by distinguishing the individuals in a swarm -of bees, or a caravan of ants: but this would be counted little short of -a miracle. - -Furthermore, ordinary observers find it almost as difficult to -distinguish individuals in a crowd of Chinese, Negroes, or Indians, as -in a bee-hive. Closer acquaintance does reveal differences: but they are -rarely so great as those between individuals in civilised communities. -And in these civilised communities themselves we find greater -differences, sexual differences pre-eminently, the higher we ascend. -Between a peasant and his wife the difference, both physical and mental, -is surely not half so great as that between a lawyer and his wife, a -physician or professor and his wife. “The lower the state of culture,” -says Professor Carl Vogt, “the more similar are the occupations of the -two sexes;” and similarity of occupation entails similarity of attitude, -expression, and mental habits. Mr. Higginson’s notion that civilisation -tends to make the sexes more and more alike is true only as regards -legal rights and social privileges; regarding their mental traits and -physical appearance exactly the reverse is true. The peasant’s wife may -have a tender heart for him and her children, but her domestic drudgery -and hard labour in the fields make her features, her voice, and manners -harsh and masculine. And who has not read a hundred times that the -Indian squaws look quite as stern, stolid, unemotional, and masculine as -their husbands? - -That the ancient Greeks, though they may have possessed it, had but -little regard for Individuality is shown especially in their sculpture, -and in the fact that with them even marriage was considered less a -private than a social matter. Lycurgus, Solon, and Plato agreed in -viewing marriage as “a matter in which the state had a right to -interfere;” and for the purpose of providing the state with legitimate -citizens, it was therefore regarded as obligatory. The absence of -emotional expression in Greek statues equally shows their indifference -to Individualisation and their ignorance of Love: for Love is inspired -not so much by regularity of features as by fascinating variety of -emotional expression. - -Thus the absence or disregard of individual traits among ancient nations -helps, like the absence of individual Choice, to account for the absence -of Romantic Love, the very essence of which—as distinguished from mere -sexual passion—is the insistance on individual traits and the mutual -adaptation of the lovers. - -What sublime—or ridiculous—extremes, this absorption in individual -traits reaches in Modern Love, no one need be told. Not only does the -lover consider his maiden’s frowns more beautiful than other maidens’ -smiles, but he longs to kiss the floor on which she has walked; and -every ribbon that has clasped her waist, every jewel that has touched -her ear or neck, becomes charged with a subtle and mysterious electric -current that would shock him with a thrill of recognition should his -fingers come in contact with them on a table, even in a dark room. - -_Making Women Masculine._—Nothing proves so irrefutably the hopelessness -of the task undertaken by a few “strong-minded” women—namely, to -equalise the sexes by making women more masculine—than the fact thus -revealed by anthropology and history: that the tendency of civilisation -has been to make men and women more and more unlike, physically and -emotionally. Whatever approximation there may have been has been -entirely on the part of the men, who have become less coarse or “manly,” -in the old acceptation of that term, and more femininely refined; while -women have endeavoured to maintain the old distance by a corresponding -increase of refinement on their part. Should the Woman’s Rights viragoes -ever succeed in establishing their social ideal, when women will share -all the men’s privileges, make stump speeches, and—of course—go back to -the harvest fields and to war with them—then good-bye, Romantic Love! -But there is no danger that these Amazons will ever carry their point. -They might as well try to convince women to wear beards; or men, -crinolines. - -Were any further proof needed that the sexes have been continually -diverging instead of converging, it would be found in the fact that the -young of both sexes are more alike than adults: in accordance with the -law that the individual goes through the same stages of development as -the race. And there are embryological facts which indicate even that -there is some truth in the Platonic myth that the sexes at first were -not separated; but that such separation took place probably for three -reasons: to secure a division of labour; to prevent the full hereditary -transmission of injurious qualities; and, thirdly, to secure the -benefits of cross-fertilisation,—a result which in the higher spheres of -human life is attained through Love, which is based on opposite or -complementary qualities, and scorns near relationship. - -_Love and Culture._—The dependence of Love on Individualisation, and the -dependence of Individualisation, in turn, on Culture, help us also to -explain an apparent difficulty regarding the non-existence of Love among -the lower classes in ancient Greece and elsewhere. For these classes -were not subjected to the same chaperonage as the higher circles: and it -might be inferred therefore that the possibility of free Choice must -have led to real love-matches. Perhaps it did in those rare cases where -culture had sent a rootlet down into a lower social stratum. But as a -rule one would have looked in vain among the lower classes—as one does -to-day, despite poetic fiction—for minds sufficiently refined to -comprehend and feel the highly-complex and idealised group of emotions -which constitute Romantic Love. Of course it would be absurd to include -in this statement people of refinement who through misfortune have been -plunged into abject poverty. They do not belong to the “Great -Unwashed”—ὁἱ πολλοί. - -When Stendhal asserts that in France Love exists only in the lower -classes, while Max Nordau states that in Germany it is to be found in -the higher classes only, they are probably both right—allowance being -made for rare exceptions. What Love _does_ exist in France—and it is -preciously scarce—cannot possibly prevail except among the working -people; and in Germany among the corresponding class it must be equally -scarce, whereas in the middle and higher classes, where chaperonage is -not nearly so strict and idiotic as in France, Cupid does contrive to -find an occasional target for his arrows. - - - PERSONAL BEAUTY - -Fanny Brawne having complained to Keats that he seemed to ignore all her -other qualities and have eyes for her beauty alone, Keats thus justified -himself: “Why may I not speak of your beauty, since without that I could -never have loved you? I cannot conceive any beginning of such love as I -have for you but beauty. There may be a sort of love for which, without -the least sneer at it, I have the highest respect, and can admire it in -others: but it has not the richness, the bloom, the full form, the -enchantment of love after my own heart.” - -Fanny Brawne is not the only girl who has thus complained to her lover -about his exclusive emphasising of her Personal Beauty. But all such -complaints are useless. In Modern Love the Admiration of Personal Beauty -is by far the strongest of all ingredients, and is becoming more so -every year: fortunately, for thereby Romantic Love is becoming more and -more idealised and converted into a pure æsthetic sentiment. Goldsmith, -indeed, laid stress on the virtue of choosing a wife on the same -principle that guided her in choosing a wedding-ring—for qualities that -will wear. But Personal Beauty _does_ wear, with proper hygienic care. - -_Feminine Beauty in Masculine Eyes._—In masculine Love, regard for -youthful feminine Beauty has always played a _rôle_ more or less -important. But the effects of this kind of sexual selection in the lower -races in increasing the amount of physical beauty in the world, have -been commonly neutralised by the crude æsthetic notions prevailing among -men as to what constituted feminine beauty. The weakness of the æsthetic -overtone in Love, moreover, has hitherto prevented it from competing -successfully with other marriage-motives. On the continent of Europe, to -this day, the ugliest girl with a dowry of a few thousands is sure to -find a husband and transmit her bodily and his mental ugliness to her -offspring; while girls who could transmit a considerable amount of -beauty, physical and mental, to their children, are left to fade away as -old maids, because they have no money. - -In this respect America sets a noble example to most parts of Europe. -Thousands of young Americans marry penniless beauties every year, -although they might have rich ugly girls for the asking. This is one of -the things Frenchmen and Germans cannot understand, and class as -“Americanisms.” And then they wonder why it is that there are so many -pretty girls in Canada and the United States. Another “Americanism,” -gentlemen. These pretty girls are the issue of Love-matches. Their -mothers were selected for their Beauty, not for money or rank. - -Not but that there are numerous exceptions to this golden rule of Love. -Were there not, ugly women would be scarcer than they are, even in -America. - -_Masculine Beauty in Feminine Eyes._—In woman’s Love the admiration of -Personal Beauty has played a much less significant _rôle_ than in man’s -Love. If, nevertheless, the average man in most countries is perhaps a -better specimen of masculine Beauty than the average woman of feminine -Beauty, this is owing to the facts that sons as well as daughters may -inherit their mother’s beauty, and that men, leading a more active and -athletic life, are more beautiful than women in proportion as they are -more healthy. - -In the past barbarous times the constant wars and the unsettled state of -social affairs made it important for women to select men not for their -beauty, but for their energy, courage, and manly prowess. Desdemona -falls in Love with the Moor despite his colour and ugliness; and why? -Othello himself tells us— - - “She loved me for the dangers I had passed, - And I loved her that she did pity them.” - -And it is on beholding Orlando vanquishing the Duke’s wrestler that -Rosalind falls in Love with him. As Celia remarks: “Young Orlando, that -tripped up the wrestler’s heels and your heart, both in an instant.” - -Women are conservative; and in the ludicrous feminine eagerness to make -immortal heroes of the ephemeral victors in a boat-race or baseball -match, we see an echo, in these peaceful days, of a feminine trait -imprinted on them in warlike times. - -Intellectual supereminence, in the meantime, was ignored by women. -Petrarch’s verses made no impression on Laura, and Dante could not even -win Beatrice with such poetic beauties as these lines— - - “Whatever her sweet eyes are turned upon, - Spirits of Love do issue thence in flame, - Which through their eyes who then may look on them - Pierce to the heart’s deep chamber every one. - And in her smile Love’s image you may see - Whence none can gaze upon her steadfastly.” - -There is, however, already a large class of superior women who have -discovered that brains have displaced muscle in the successful struggle -for existence, and that strong nerves are the true storage-batteries of -courage and vigour in modern life. Hence the homage paid to men of -genius. - -In regard to masculine Beauty a change likewise has come over the -feminine mind. Fashionable young ladies appear, indeed, to be as -exacting in the matter of what they consider Personal Beauty as their -beaux are. A barber’s pet is their pet, even as the fashionable man’s -ideal of femininity is a milliner’s model. There can be hardly any doubt -that this is an improvement on the taste of those savages who prefer -their women black, with thick lips, flat noses, and tattooed, or smeared -with a half-inch coat of paint. - -Says a writer in the _London Magazine_ (1823): “The pale poet, whose -works enchant us all, is nobody in the park: with his shrunk cheeks and -spindle legs, he sneaks along as little noticed as a fly; while a -thousand fond eyes are fixed on the gay and handsome apprentice there, -with just enough intellect to make the clothes which make him.” - -Serves the pale poet quite right. His genius does not give him any right -to neglect his health, or to allow the tailor’s apprentice to surpass -him in attention to his personal appearance. _Génie oblige._ And whether -geniuses or not, men should pay just as much attention to their dress -and personal attractiveness as women. - -A convincing illustration of my thesis that Personal Beauty is to-day a -more important factor in woman’s Love than formerly, is afforded by the -circumstance that formerly Love had the effect of making a man neglect -his beard, and hands, and clothes, and indulge in general slovenliness, -as we see in Rosalind’s summary of the symptoms of masculine Love, as -well as in various passages in Cervantes and other authors; whereas -to-day it is just the reverse, as noted under the head of Gallantry. It -is most amusing to watch a man smitten with sudden passion: how -carefully he adjusts his cravat, curls his moustache, brushes his hat -and boots, polishes his finger-nails, removes spots from his coat, -regards himself in the mirror, and—wishes he were a millionaire. - -So much for the general relations between Love and Beauty. It now -remains to consider in detail what peculiarities of personal appearance -are and have been specially favoured by Love. This involves an -æsthetico-anatomical analysis of every part of the human body from toe -to top. To this analysis almost one half of this work will be -devoted—showing the preponderating importance of Personal Beauty over -the other factors in Modern Love. But before proceeding to this pleasant -task it will be well, for the sake of continuity, to discuss the -remaining aspects of Modern Love: how it differs from conjugal -affection; how men of genius behave when in Love; what are the -peculiarities of the physical expression of Love in features and -actions; how Love maybe won and cured; and how the leading modern -nations differ in their amorous peculiarities. A consideration of -Schopenhauer’s theory of Love will then naturally lead us to the second -part of this treatise, in which Personal Beauty alone will form our -theme. - - - - - CONJUGAL AFFECTION AND ROMANTIC LOVE - - -Perhaps the main reason why no one has anticipated me in writing a book -showing that Love is an exclusively modern sentiment, and tracing its -gradual development, is because no distinction has been commonly made -between Romantic Love and Conjugal Affection, though they differ as -widely as maternal love and friendship. The occurrence of noble examples -of conjugal attachment as far back as Homer has obscured the fact that -pre-nuptial or Romantic Love is almost as modern as the telegraph, the -railway, and the electric light. - -Two thousand and four hundred years ago the Greek philosopher Empedokles -taught that there are four elements—fire, air, water, earth—which remain -unchanged amid all combinations. Chemistry has long since shown that -these supposed elements are compounds, and that the number of real -elements is much larger. - -In a similar way the tender or family emotions have been gradually -distinguished from one another. Among the ancient Greeks φιλότης meant -both friendship and sexual love, which, as we have seen, they strangely -confounded, both in theory and in practice. To-day we distinguish not -only between friendship and sexual love, but between the two phases of -sexual love—Romantic and Conjugal Affection—the former of which was -unknown to the Greeks. We do this not only because, as in the case of -the chemical elements, our knowledge has become more precise and subtle, -but because these emotions have been gradually developed, and have -assumed different characteristics, so that it would be difficult at -present to mistake one for the other. - -As regards the difference between Conjugal and Romantic Love, however, -the current conceptions are not yet so clear and definite; many good -folks being, in fact, inclined to frown upon the suggestion that there -is any such difference. Yet it is useless for them to endeavour, with -well-meant hypocrisy, to impress upon the young the notion that Love is -unchangeable, since no one who keeps his eyes open can help noticing how -differently married couples behave from lovers. In marriage the dazzling -blue flame of Romantic Love gradually grows smaller and dies away. But -the coals may retain their glow and perchance keep the heart warmer than -the former flickering flames of Love. - -There is, indeed, a great moral advantage to be gained by frankly -acknowledging that Love undergoes a metamorphosis in wedlock. It _breaks -the sting of cynicism_. For if we are told that “marriage is the sunset -of love,” or that “the only sure cure for love is marriage,” we may -calmly retort, “What of it?” When the romantic passion subsides, its -place is taken by another group of emotions, equally noble and conducive -to the welfare of society. It is not an annihilation of anything, but -simply a change: losing some pleasures, but gaining others in their -place; getting rid of some pains to be burdened with others. Love’s -metamorphosis into conjugal affection is like that of a wild rose into -its red berry. Though less fragrant and lovely than the rose, the berry -is almost as warm in colour, endures longer, and brings forth fresh -plants to adorn future seasons. - -Similes, however, are not arguments; and it behoves us therefore, for -the benefit of bachelors and old maids, and of married folks who never -were in love, to point out definitely wherein conjugal differs from -Romantic Love; which at the same time will explain why conjugal -affection was able to exist so many centuries before Romantic Love. - -In preceding pages a fragmentary attempt has been made to characterise -Love, and to show how its growth was impeded through the inferior social -and intellectual status of women and the absolute chaperonage of the -young. Maidens and youths had no opportunity to meet and become -acquainted. Barter, and considerations of rank and expediency, took the -place of affection, and parental authority that of individual choice. -There was no prolonged courtship, hence no jealousy of rivals, no female -coyness and coquetry, no alternating hopes and doubts, no monopoly of -mutual admiration, no ecstatic adoration, sympathetic sharing of lovers’ -joys and griefs, or pride of conquest and possession. - -Conjugal affection, on the other hand, was much less retarded in its -growth by such artificial arrangements, the outcome of strong man’s -brutal selfishness. Polygamy was the chief impediment; but as soon as -woman became sufficiently “emancipated” to claim a husband of her own, -the soil was ready for the growth of conjugal affection. In its early -stages this form of affection must have been much more crude and simple -than it is in modern society. In most instances it was probably little -more than a mere superficial attachment, growing out of the habit of -living together for some time; the husband being attached to his wife on -account of the domestic comforts and ease she provided for him, and the -wife to the husband very much as a dog is to his master, who, though -cruel, yet takes care of and feeds him. - -How crudely utilitarian the conjugal bond is among primitive men may be -inferred from Mr. Wallace’s remarks already quoted as to the motives -which guide the maidens of certain Amazon-valley tribes in choosing -their husbands. There is, he says, “a trial of skill at shooting with -the bow and arrow, and if the young man does not show himself a good -marksman, the girl refuses him, on the ground that he will not be able -to shoot fish and game enough for the family.” - -With the ancient “classical” nations there were, unless the poets have -strongly idealised their characters, examples of conjugal affection -hardly differing from the most refined modern instances. Owing to the -then prevalent contempt for the female mind, however, such cases cannot -be accepted as fair samples of the “general article”; and they only -allow us to infer that, as with Love and with genius, so with conjugal -affection, there were some early perfect instances anticipating by many -centuries the general course of emotional evolution. - -In the dark and warlike mediæval ages Conjugal Love, on the woman’s -side, was apparently little more, as a rule, than a sense of devotion to -her husband based on her need of protection against barbarous enemies; -and what it was on the husband’s side may be inferred from his stern and -often tyrannic rule in his own house, which was calculated to breed in -his wife and children fear but neither conjugal nor filial affection. - -In modern Conjugal Affection the elements are as diverse and as -variously intermingled as in Love, if not more so; and it would be as -difficult to find two cases of conjugal love exactly alike as two human -faces, or two leaves in a forest. One man cherishes his wife chiefly on -account of the home comfort she provides—the neat and tasteful domestic -interior, the well-cooked dinners, the economic attention to household -affairs, etc. Another man’s pride in his spouse is based on her -conversational skill, her diplomatic art of asserting her place among -the upper ten in society, and of adorning her drawing-rooms with the -presence of prominent people of the day. A third husband loves his wife -for her artistic accomplishments or her personal charms. Still another, -an author, is devoted to his spouse because she cleverly assists his -labours by criticism and suggestion, and still more because she takes -such a sympathetic interest in his creations, and _really_ thinks that -no one since Shakspere has written like her own dear Adolphus. - -These and a thousand like circumstances, with their attendant feelings, -enter into the highly complex group of emotions subsumed under the name -of Conjugal Love. Yet, since any one of these feelings may be absent -without extinguishing Conjugal Affection, they cannot be regarded as its -essentials or framework, but only as colouring material. - -Nor is that which is commonly regarded as the strongest of all cements -between husband and wife—the common love of their children—to be -accepted as the essence of conjugal love. For childless couples present -many of the most remarkable cases of devotion, while in many other cases -the children not only fail to rekindle the torch of love, but even -arouse jealousies and ill-feeling between their parents by showing a -special preference for one or the other. Nevertheless, though not -absolutely essential to conjugal love, the common parental feeling is -one of its most important and constant ingredients; and there is none of -its tributaries which adds more to the deep current of connubial bliss. -It enables the parents to enjoy once more the simple pleasures of life, -to which they had grown callous; it brings back the peculiarly delicious -memories of their own childhood and youth; enables the father to -discover his former sweetheart renewed in his daughter, and the mother -her former lover in her son; while their common pride in the beauty or -accomplishments of the children supplies them with a never-failing topic -of conversation and source of sympathy. - -And this suggests what must be regarded as the real kernel of conjugal -attachment—a perennial mutual sympathy regarding not only the affairs of -their children but every other domestic affair—in other words, a -complete and _necessary_ harmony of feelings and interests. The accent -rests on the word _necessary_; for it is this feeling of necessary -communion of interests that distinguishes conjugal affection from Love -and from friendship, in both of which there is a mutual sympathy, but -not so far-reaching and inevitable. A lover’s fame or disgrace may be -keenly felt by his sweetheart or his friend, yet society does not -associate them with the other’s reputation or disgrace; and if the -infamy is too great, they can easily sever their bond, without leaving a -spot on their own good name. Not so with husband and wife. His promotion -is her honour, and his fall her humiliation; for they are inseparably -associated in the public mind, and cannot be parted except through -divorce, which is equivalent to social suicide. Therefore theirs is “one -glory an’ one shame,” and their destiny to “share each other’s gladness -and weep each other’s tears.” - -To make this matrimonial harmony complete, it is necessary that there -should be a real sense of companionship, _i.e._ common tastes and topics -of conversation. “Unlikeness may attract,” says Mill, “but it is -likeness which retains; and in proportion to the likeness is the -suitability of the individuals to give each other a happy life.” The -opposite qualities by which lovers are often attracted are chiefly of a -physical nature. Where the mental differences are great—where he, for -instance, is fond of books and music, while she wishes his books and his -piano in Siberia; or she fond of parties, pictures, and theatres, and he -bored to death by them: in such cases genuine Romantic Love cannot -survive a few weeks of constant companionship, and hopes of nuptial -bliss must end in disappointment. - - - ROMANCE IN CONJUGAL LOVE - -Horwicz places the essence of Conjugal Love in the feeling of being -indissolubly united; and this agrees substantially with our conclusion -that it lies in a necessary mutual Sympathy concerning every affair of -vital interest. Now if this _obligato_ Sympathy is facilitated by a -communion of tastes, as just suggested, there is no reason why conjugal -life should not retain some of the other elements which constitute the -charm of Romantic Love. Novelists and dramatists will perhaps continue -to avoid wedded life as a theme because it lacks the plot-interest, the -uncertainty, and the consequent Mixed Moods of pre-nuptial Love. -Emotional Hyperbole, too, will rarely survive the honeymoon, for, as -Addison remarks, “When a man becomes familiar with his goddess, she -quickly sinks into a woman.” Yet a woman, too, is not such a bad thing -after all, if you know how to manage her. Jealousy is a trait of -Romantic Love that is only too apt to survive in marriage. By a -judicious use of its sting a neglected wife can bring her husband back -to her feet. But it is a double-edged tool, dangerous to toy with. The -Pride of Conquest becomes changed into Pride of Possession or a vain -feeling of Proprietorship, which will continue so long as the husband or -the wife retains those self-sacrificing qualities which distinguished -them during Courtship—which, however, rarely happens. Where possession -is assured and sanctioned by law, Coyness is of course out of the -question; yet a clever woman can by a judicious adaptation of the arts -of Flirtation do much to keep alive the glowing coals of former romantic -passion. All she has to do is to devise some novel methods of -fascinating the husband, and then keep him at a distance till he resumes -the tricks of devoted Gallantry which had once made him such an -acceptable lover. - -It is the growing indifference to Gallantry, to the Desire to Please, -active and passive, that is responsible for the usual absence of romance -in conjugal life. And there seems to be a general ungallant consensus -among writers, masculine and feminine, that women are more responsible -for this state of affairs than men. “The reason,” says Swift, “why so -few marriages are happy, is because young ladies spend their time in -making nets, not in making cages.” Young ladies have, no doubt, greatly -improved since the days of Swift; but in the vast majority of cases -their device still is to learn a few superficial tricks of “culture,” -and to practise the art of personal adornment, until they have caught a -husband, and then to bid good-bye to all music, and art, and study, and -improvement of the mind, as well as to the “bother” of attending to -Personal Beauty while the husband _only_ is about. As if it were not a -thousand times more important to retain the husband’s romantic adoration -and Gallantry, originally based on that beauty, than to enjoy the -momentary admiration of a third person! - -On this topic the German poet Bodenstedt has some remarks which show -that, after all, the excessive Oriental Jealousy which forbids women to -appear unveiled in public rests on a basis of common sense:— - -“Just as it is possible to trace most absurdities to an originally quite -reasonable idea, so not a few things may be said in favour of the -Oriental custom which allows women to adorn themselves only for their -husband, and to unveil their face only before him, while outside of the -house it is their duty to appear veiled and in as unattractive a costume -as possible. With us, it is well known, the opposite is true: at home -the women devote little attention to their toilet, and only adorn -themselves when they have company or go out visiting; in one word, they -display their charms and their finery more to please others than their -own husband,” etc. - -Surely no one wishes our women to reserve their charms exclusively for -their husbands. On the contrary, such a proceeding would be considered -quite as unreasonable and selfish as to lock up a Titian or a Murillo in -a room accessible to a single person only; but certainly the husband -should not be entirely overlooked in his wife’s Desire to Please by her -Personal Beauty. His Pride on seeing others admire her does not alone -suffice to prolong his romantic adoration. Don’t be too sure, Amanda, -that your husband is yours because you are married. He is yours in Law, -but not in Love, unless you preserve your personal charms in his -presence. - -The fact that, whereas in Romantic Love men are superior to women; in -conjugal life, on the other hand, woman’s love is commonly much deeper -and more lasting than man’s, indicates in itself that marriages are made -or marred by women. (For the sake of the lovely alliteration some -writers would have said—against their conscience—that “marriages are -made or marred by men;” but alliteration will have to be ignored in this -place in favour of facts.) Before marriage, women are more beautiful and -fascinating than men, wherefore men love them more ardently than _they_ -love the men. After marriage, it is the men who grow more beautiful, -more manly, in body as well as in mind; hence it is but natural that -their wives should love them more and more. So would wives be loved more -and more if they did not so soon after thirty lose their physical -charms, without trying, by reading books or at least the newspapers, to -make themselves intellectual companions of their husbands, able to -converse interestingly on various topics. - -The old excuse that motherhood inevitably lessens woman’s charms is all -nonsense. Married women at thirty are almost always handsomer than old -maids of thirty. Women grow stout and clumsy, or thin and faded so soon, -not because they are mothers, but because they are indifferent to the -laws of health; because they refuse to go out to get fresh air and -exercise, which would preserve the freshness of their complexion, the -graceful contours of their bodies, and the elasticity of their gait. The -morbid fondness for a hot-house atmosphere, and the horror of fresh air, -draughts, and vigorous exercise, have done more to shorten man’s Love -and woman’s Beauty than all other causes combined. _The road to lasting -Love is paved with lasting Beauty._ - -Inasmuch as Conjugal Affection was not—as might be naturally -supposed—historically developed from Romantic Love, since it existed -long before Romantic Love, the peculiarities of this later passion are -not normally present in Conjugal Love. To what extent, however, they can -be smuggled in, has just been shown; and it is one of the great social -tasks of the future to make Conjugal and Romantic Love as much alike as -possible: not by making the poetry of romance more prosaic, but by -making the prose of conjugal life more poetic. But so long as Romantic -Love is discouraged, Conjugal Affection, too, will of course be unable -to borrow its unique charms. Hence an additional reason for facilitating -the opportunities for Courtship and prolonging its duration. - - - MARRIAGES OF REASON OR LOVE-MATCHES? - -The number of parents who believe that their infallible wisdom is a -better guide matrimonial than their daughters’ choice inspired by Love, -is still so large that it is worth while to add a few words in the hope -of removing this obstacle to the universal rule of Cupid. Let Mrs. -Lynn-Linton be their spokeswoman. “If it seems a horrible thing,” she -says, in _The Girl of the Period_, “to marry a young girl without her -consent, or without any more knowledge of the man with whom she is to -pass her life than can be got by seeing him once or twice in formal -family conclave, it seems quite as bad to let our women roam about the -world at the age when their instincts are strongest and their reason -weakest—open to the flatteries of fools and fops—the prey of professed -lady-killers—objects of loverlike attentions by men who mean absolutely -nothing but the amusement of making love—the subjects for erotic -anatomists to study at their pleasure. Who among our girls after twenty -carries an absolutely untouched heart to the man she marries?” - -No doubt there is force in these remarks: but they do not apply to the -Girl of the Period. They apply only to the girl brought up on the old -system of being left in complete ignorance regarding man and his wicked -ways of heartless and meaningless flattery. But modern girls are not -such fools as some people would think them. _Tell them_ that men are -only amusing themselves; a hint will suffice: and the man who imagines -himself a “lady-killer” will suddenly find himself a victim of -counter-flirtation and a butt of feminine sarcasm. - -Tell girls, furthermore, not that every man loves his wife, but that -many hate and maltreat their unfortunate spouse. This will make them -cautious. Tell them that Love is not an absolute but a _tentative_ -passion, and that they must not yield to the first apparent symptoms and -throw their hearts away frivolously. Tell them, above all, that men who -are extremely gallant and complimentary, _without being in the least -embarrassed_, are always insincere and sometimes dangerous: because a -man who is truly in Love is always embarrassed. Tell them a few more -such pessimistic truths about men, instead of allowing them to perish -through optimistic ignorance, and the objections against free choice -urged by Mrs. Lynn-Linton will vanish like vapour in sunlight. English -and American girls are quite able to take care of themselves, because -they are allowed to read all sorts of books, and therefore to know the -world as it is. And if any one says that such knowledge has rendered -English and American girls less delicate, less sweet and pure, than -French and German hothouse buds, he utters an unmitigated falsehood. - -Advocates of so-called “wisdom” marriages are fond of pointing out cases -of unhappy married life, based originally on free Choice. But free -Choice by no means always implies Love. Its motives are often pecuniary, -or social; and in these cases the marriage actually comes under the head -of “wisdom marriages,” whose champions are thus boxing their own ears. -Besides, we must remember Byron’s words, that “many a man thinks he -marries by choice who only marries by accident.” If a man marries his -Rosaline before he has met his Juliet, he has only himself or his bad -luck to blame, not Love. - -The frequency with which runaway “love-matches” end unhappily, is -adduced as another argument in favour of wisdom marriages. Two things -are here forgotten: that in nineteen runaway matches out of twenty, the -predominant passion is frivolity, not Love; and that quite a -considerable proportion of unions not preceded by an elopement end -unhappily; but being less romantic they are not so much talked about. - -“Wisdom” marriages based on parental choice are those which have -prevailed in the past: and we have seen how beautifully they coincided -with woman’s degradation, ignorance, and social debasement. - -Wisdom marriages are incompatible with Courtship, which becomes a -superfluous preliminary to marriage. Modern methods of Courtship and -engagement ordinarily prolong this period to about a year or two. This -is the honeymoon, not of marriage, but of life itself, the time when -earth is a paradise. During these two years the soul makes more progress -in refinement, maturity, and insight than during any other _decade_ of -life. Shall all this happiness, all this refining influence, be thrown -away with Love? - -Compatibility of temper is the most important of all prerequisites to a -happy marriage. Should Love be allowed to find out during Courtship if -there is such a compatibility, before it is too late, or shall the -inadequate judgment of parents unite two souls with as much mutual -affinity as oil and water? - -Self-sacrifice for their children is considered the noblest of parental -traits. Were Schopenhauer right in claiming that in Love-matches the -parents sacrifice their individual happiness to the wellbeing of their -children—would not this be an additional motive for abhorring wisdom -marriages, in which the interests of the parents alone are consulted? - - - MARRIAGE HINTS - -It would be foolish to deny, on the other hand, that Reason should be -consulted as much as possible as long as Love allows it to have the -floor for a moment. Thus men might, before it is too late, have an eye -to Benjamin Franklin’s advice in regard to large families and the age of -marriage. - -Mr. F. W. Holland of Boston has collected some statistics concerning -which Mr. Galton says, “One of his conclusions was that morality is more -often found among members of large families than among those of small -ones. It is reasonable to expect this would be the case, owing to the -internal discipline among members of large families, and to the -wholesome sustaining and restraining effects of family pride and family -criticism. Members of small families are apt to be selfish, and when the -smallness of the family is due to the deaths of many of its members at -early ages, it is some evidence either of weakness of the family -constitution, or of deficiency of common sense or of affection on the -part of the parents in not taking better care of them. Mr. Holland -quotes in his letter to me a piece of advice by Franklin to a young man -in search of a wife, ‘to take one out of a bunch of sisters,’ and a -popular saying that kittens brought up with others make the best pets, -because they have learned to play without scratching. Sir W. Gull has -remarked that those candidates for the Indian Civil Service who are -members of large families are on the whole the strongest.” - -A second bit of advice given by Franklin is perhaps less unquestionable: -“From the marriages that have fallen under my observation,” he says, "I -am rather inclined to think that early ones stand the best chances of -happiness. The temper and habits of the young are not become so stiff -and uncomplying as when more advanced in life: they form more easily to -each other, and hence many occasions of disgust are removed.... ‘Late -children,’ says the Spanish proverb, ‘are early orphans.’ With us in -America (1768) marriages are generally in the morning of life; our -children are therefore educated and settled in the world by noon; and -thus, our business being done, we have an afternoon and evening of -cheerful leisure to ourselves.... By these early marriages we are -blessed with more children; and from the mode among us founded by -nature, every mother suckling and nursing her own child [1768], more of -them are raised. Thence the swift progress of population among us, -unparalleled in Europe." - -“Marriages,” says Theodore Parker, “are best of dissimilar materials;” -and Coleridge remarks, similarly: “You may depend upon it that a slight -contrast of character is very material to happiness in marriage.” But -would it be possible to find two individuals who did not present “a -slight contrast of character”? Coleridge apparently did not think much -of the average conjugal union of his day: “To the many of both sexes I -am well aware,” he says, “this Eden of matrimony is but a -kitchen-garden, a thing of profit and convenience, in an even -temperature between indifference and liking.” What a married person -wants is “a soul-mate as well as a house or yoke-mate.” - -Young men are often warned not to marry for beauty, because it is but -skin-deep. But surely a millimetre of beauty is worth more than a yard -of ugliness, though whitewashed with rank, money, or general utility. “A -thing of beauty is a joy for ever.” - - - - - OLD MAIDS - - -One way in which Romantic Love fulfils its mission of increasing the -amount of Personal Beauty in the world, is by _eliminating ugly and -masculine women as Old Maids_, and thus preventing them from -transmitting their characteristics to the next generation. Were it not -for the fact that the average man is quite devoid of æsthetic taste and -incapable of ardent Romantic Love, and that therefore considerations of -wealth and social advantages guide him in his choice of a wife, _ugly_ -women would rarely be found outside the ranks of Old Maids. As it is, it -happens only too often that dowerless beautiful women are condemned to -live and die in single blessedness, while the ugly people fill the world -with photographic copies of themselves. - -Why is it that every refined man feels an instinctive aversion to -_masculine_ women? Because a masculine woman is an exception to the laws -of nature, a _lusus naturæ_, a monstrosity. We find even among the lower -animals that the females differ widely, as a rule, in traits and -appearance from the males—sometimes so much so that there are instances -on record of females and males having been for a time supposed to belong -to different species; and the differences grow greater the more the -sexual functions are developed and specialised. Yet Amazons occur even -among animals. “Characters common to the male,” says Darwin, “are -occasionally developed in the female _when she grows old or becomes -diseased_, as, for instance, when the common hen assumes the flowing -tail-feathers, hackles, combs, spurs, voice, and even _pugnacity_ of the -cock.” - -Among the warlike Greeks, who knew only masculine or mono-sexual love, -Amazons were naturally esteemed, as they did not clash with their -feminine ideal. “How popular a subject the Amazons were for sculptors,” -says Grote, “we learn from the statement of Pliny that the most -distinguished sculptors executed Amazons, and that this subject was the -only one upon which a direct comparison could be made between them.” But -the progress of time, as we have seen, has more and more differentiated -men and women, in appearance and traits of character; and the modern -ideal of woman is exclusively feminine, _i.e._ devoid of hackles, spurs, -cock-a-doodle-doo, and pugnacity. Hence the political Virago movement is -an evil which will never make any progress, thanks to the constant -elimination of masculine women through that adorable process of Sexual -Selection known as Modern Love. - -Masculine women are always condemned to bury their unwomanly -proclivities with their spinster-selves, unless they are very rich, or -unless they can find a correspondingly effeminate man who wishes to -neutralise his abnormalities in his children by marrying a spouse whose -faults are an excess in the opposite direction. In such a case a virago -may possibly even inspire Romantic Love, _mirabile dictu!_ - -An ugly woman, on the other hand, need never despair of finding a -husband; she has at least eight chances of getting married. In the first -place, she may, like a masculine woman, inspire true Love in a man whose -faults are the opposite of hers; secondly, she may fall in love with a -man of faultless proportions, and while in Love her features will be so -transfigured and beautified that he cannot help returning her Love; -thirdly, she may meet a man who, from want of æsthetic taste, prefers a -chromo to a Titian; or a fourth, who would rather marry an amiable and -useful ugly girl than a spoiled beauty. Wealth and social position -supply two more resources. Accident may favour her, through the absence -of prettier rivals, giving no opportunities for odious comparisons; and, -finally, she may meet an elderly bachelor who has wearied of his single -blessedness and longs for double strife. - -As for those Old Maids who are neither ugly nor masculine, some of them -are quondam coquettes who practised their arts just one season too long -and “got left” in consequence; others are girls whom silly methods of -chaperonage or ill-luck have prevented from making the acquaintance of -men whom they could have respected and loved; so that it is often the -most refined and intelligent women who are thus doomed to remain single -because they are unwilling to marry beneath their station, socially or -intellectually. They form that class of whom De Quincey says, that they -“combine more intelligence, cultivation, and thoughtfulness than any -other in Europe—the class of unmarried women above twenty-five—an -increasing class, women who, from mere dignity of character, have -renounced all prospects of conjugal and parental life rather than -descend into habits unsuitable to their birth.” - -Women who are too ugly to inspire Love may nevertheless feel proud of -being a class of Vestal Virgins who serve the cause of Love by -abstaining from adding to the number of unattractive people in the world -by hereditary transmission. On the other hand, Old Maids who are blessed -with beauty, owe it to the cause of Love to make every effort, -consistent with feminine modesty, to get married. Not only because their -children will be beautiful, but because a woman who never marries can -never experience the two emotions which do more than any others to -ennoble and mature the feminine mind—conjugal and maternal love. - -Those Old Maids, however, who have not yet passed their thirtieth year, -may even claim that they represent the most perfect and advanced type of -maidenhood, and look down on girls who marry before twenty-five as -little better than savages. For it is well known that the age of -marriage advances with civilisation. Among Australians and other savages -girls marry at eleven, ten, or even nine years; among semi-civilised -Egyptians, Hindoos, etc., the age is from twelve to fourteen; southern -European peoples marry their girls between the ages of fifteen and -eighteen; while with those nations who lead modern civilisation, the -average age of marriage for a woman is now twenty-one, with a tendency -to rise. Does it not follow from this, by inexorable logic, that girls -who remain single at twenty-five or twenty-nine are forerunners of a -still higher type of civilisation? and that the only trouble with them -is that they are so far in advance of their age and civilisation? True, -ungrateful man does not look upon them in that light; but herein they -share the fate of all true greatness. There is one difference, however, -between undervalued men of genius and Old Maids: the men of genius admit -they are in advance of their age, and are proud of it; the Old Maids -never, at least, hardly ever. - -In one of his most fascinating essays on _The Main Currents of Modern -Literature_, the Danish critic, Dr. Georg Brandes, discusses the proper -age of feminine Love in a manner which Old Maids will especially -appreciate. He points out that Eleonore, the heroine of Benjamin -Constant’s novel _Adolphe_, is the first specimen of a modern type -subsequently made fashionable by Balzac and George Sand, namely, _the -woman of thirty in Love_. Formerly, as Jules Janin remarks, the woman -between thirty and forty years of age was lost for passion, for romance, -and the drama; now she rules alone. The girl of sixteen, as adored by -Racine, Shakspere, Molière, Voltaire, Ariosto, Byron, Lesage, Scott, is -no more to be found. And Mme. Emile de Girardin thus attempts to defend -Balzac: “Is it Balzac’s fault that the age of thirty to-day is the age -of love? Balzac is compelled to depict passion where he finds it, and at -this day it is not to be found in the heart of a girl of sixteen.” - -So far as these remarks are true they afford a new confirmation of my -assertions that true Romantic Love is dependent on a certain amount of -intellectual power and maturity, and that in consequence man loves more -deeply than woman at the age preceding marriage. In England and America -novelists still persist in making women love at any age from eighteen, -and they have a right to do so, because in these two countries women are -well enough educated and experienced in life at eighteen to be able to -love. In France girls receive such a superficial education that they are -ordinarily quite impervious to any deep emotions before they are either -Old Maids or married. But in most cases they are married before twenty -without regard to their own wishes. And then happens what is indicated -in Fuller’s aphorism: “It is to be feared that they who marry where they -do not love, will love where they do not marry.” And hence it is that -the only love depicted by French novelists and playwrights is the -adulterous love of a faithless wife. Could anything more vividly -illustrate the criminal absurdities of French education and the French -system of chaperonage? - -In France a girl is not even allowed to cross the street alone until she -is willing to assume the name and with it the comparative freedom of an -Old Maid. In Spain, the author of _Cosas de España_ tells us, Old Maids -are rare because a girl generally accepts her first offer; and there are -probably not many girls who do not receive at least one offer in their -life—masculine women always excepted. In Russia, where women, according -to Schweiger-Lerchenfeld, enjoy almost as much liberty as in America, a -curious custom prevails by which a girl of uncertain age may escape the -appellation of Old Maid. She may leave home and become lost for two or -three years in Paris, London, or some other howling wilderness of -humanity. Then she may return to her friends neither as maid nor wife, -but as a widow. And it is “good form” in Russian society to accept this -myth without asking for details. - -Finally the important question remains: “What is an Old Maid?” That -depends very much on individuals and the care they take of their Health -and Beauty. Some women are Old Maids at twenty, the majority at thirty, -and some not before forty; while those girls who will read the chapters -on Personal Beauty in the last part of this treatise, and follow all the -advice there given, will never become Old Maids at all, but will be -gobbled up before twenty-three by eager bachelors previously considered -hopeless cases of celibacy. - -Even if it were possible to name a definite age as that when a girl -begins to be an Old Maid, it would be a bit of useless information, -because nobody ever knows how old a woman is. Often it is easier to tell -a woman’s age by her conversation than by her looks: some incipient Old -Maids constantly hint at their former numerous flirtations, which they -never did while they really had them. - - - - - BACHELORS - - - “Pirates of Love who know no duty.” - -Of all the brutes enumerated in the human branch of zoology the -deliberate bachelor is the most unreasonable and selfish. Unreasonable, -because he voluntarily deprives himself of connubial bliss, domestic -comforts, and the prospect of being cheered and cared for in his old age -by a family of loving children. Selfish, because at present the -bread-winning arrangements are almost entirely framed for man’s -convenience alone, wherefore it is his duty to support a wife. - -Masculine selfishness, however, is not exclusively responsible for the -rapid increase of bachelordom. The women themselves are largely at -fault—in two ways. The modern tendency of concentrating population in -large cities makes domestic life a much more expensive affair than it is -in smaller towns or in rural districts; and at the same time women are -gradually invading every sphere of masculine employment, thus reducing -wages by competition and making it more and more difficult for a man to -earn an income which allows him to marry. This aspect of the question, -once before alluded to, is one which the advocates of Woman’s Rights are -too apt to ignore. For the benefit of poor young girls, and widows, and -old maids, it is, indeed, but just that various employments adapted to -female hands should be thrown open to them and properly remunerated; but -if the effect of this is simply and constantly to _increase_ the number -of single poor women, by making marriage impossible, what is gained by -the change? A certain amount of misery is inevitable in the world; and -it seems better that it should be distributed where it will not imperil -the popularity and possibility of marriage. - -After all, self-supporting women must always be the exception, not the -rule; for it is the destiny of the vast majority of women to be wives; -and regarding these even Mr. Mill admits “it is not ... a desirable -custom that the wife should contribute by her labour to the income of -the family.” Now surely it would be most absurd, as some “strong-minded” -women are trying to do, to arrange the educational scheme of all women -so as to benefit the exceptional women who are excluded from matrimony. -A thousand times more important is it to change woman’s education so as -to enable her to look after her household affairs. It is by neglecting -to do this that women supply the second cause for the increasing -prevalence of Bachelors. Every man is expected to learn his trade -properly before marriage; but woman’s proper occupation—the art of -taking care of home and making it a paradise, is commonly supposed to be -a thing that can be learned easily enough after marriage. Even when a -woman is so wealthy that she is not obliged to do any housework at all, -she should, like a ship’s captain, learn all about the duties of -subordinates, else she will be unable to command them properly. A -captain who displayed ignorance on any point before his sailors would -lose their respect and attitude of prompt obedience; and it has been -suggested that one reason why American women, especially, have so much -trouble with their servants, is because they know so little about -domestic economy that the servants, ignorant as they are, become -arrogant because of their superior knowledge. - -On the subject of woman’s sphere, Herbert Spencer has written words -which should be hung in golden letters in every schoolroom: “When we -remember that up from the lowest savagery civilisation has, among other -results, brought about an increasing exemption of women from -bread-winning labour, and in the highest societies they have become most -restricted to domestic duties and the rearing of children; we may be -struck by the anomaly that at the present time restriction to indoor -occupations has come to be regarded as a grievance, and a claim is made -to free competition with men in all outdoor occupations.... Any -extensive change in the education of women, made with the view of -fitting them for business and professions, would be mischievous. _If -women comprehended all that is contained in the domestic sphere, they -would ask no other._ If they could see all that is implied in the right -education of children, to a full conception of which no man has yet -risen, much less any woman, they would seek no higher function” -(_Principles of Sociology_, vol. i. § 340). - -When every woman has learned how to cultivate flowers and vegetables in -her domestic garden at the same time, the millennium will have arrived, -and the word Bachelor be found only in Dictionaries of Antiquities. - -Women are sometimes held responsible in still another way for the -continuance of Bachelors in single boredom, viz. by refusing their Love -and breaking their hearts. But surely, as the shepherdess in _Don -Quixote_ has so eloquently shown, it does not at all follow that if a -man falls in Love with a woman, she must necessarily fall in Love with -him; and if she does _not_ love him, it is her _duty_ not to marry him. - -Besides, a broken heart is a very rare article in this world, and every -nation has discovered a peculiar local remedy for it: the Spaniards by -stabbing the girl who broke it; the Italians by annihilating the rival; -the Germans by soaking the fragments in Rhine wine; the Englishmen by a -change of air; and ultimately they all follow the example of the -Frenchman who, on the day following the catastrophe, casts his eyes -about for a new charmer; or, if they do not, but like a snail withdraw -into their shell for the rest of their life, abusing all women as -heartless, they are bigger fools than they look. What would you say of a -fisherman who went out for a day’s sport and returned after an hour -because the first trout that nibbled at the bait escaped? - -It is the happy privilege of every Bachelor to have loved fully and -deeply once in his life; but if his passion is not appreciated, it is -his duty to try again; for, even as a stolen kiss is not a real kiss -because it lacks the thrill of mutuality, so Love is not Love - - “Till heart with heart in concord beats, - And the lover is beloved.”—WORDSWORTH. - -True, La Rochefoucauld says that “The pleasure of love is in loving;” -and Shelley echoes the same sentiment in his _Prometheus_— - - “All love is sweet, - Given or returned.... - They who inspire it most are fortunate - As I am now; but those who feel it most, are happier still.” - -Yet neither the English poet nor the French essayist appears to have -fathomed the full depth of the problem. It is as incorrect to say, “the -pleasure of love is in loving,” as to say, the pleasure of Love is in -being loved. To be loved by one I do not love is a matter of complete -indifference, except so far as my Pride or Pity may be involved. To love -where I am not loved, or am left in uncertainty, is more of anguish than -of delight. To attain the highest ecstacy of Love I must both be in Love -and able to say at the same time, “she loves me.” Reciprocity is not -only “that which alone gives stability to love,” as Coleridge remarks, -but that without which consummate Love is impossible. - -Apparent exceptions occur only when the illusion of being loved is so -vividly kept up by the imagination as to counterfeit reality; as in the -case of Eleonore, who “became so intoxicated with her Love that she saw -it double and mistook her own feeling for that of both” (Dr. Brandes). - -Therefore a Bachelor who has been unsuccessful in his first or second -Love has never enjoyed the highest bliss a human soul can attain, and is -bound to try again. Nor need he ever despair. There are a thousand -Juliets in the world for every man, and all he needs is the good luck to -_meet_ the one adapted to him: for she is his as soon as found; though -she may at first have the “cunning to be strange.” - - - - - GENIUS AND MARRIAGE - - -Though it is man’s duty and destiny to get married, yet the concurrent -testimony of several famous authors appears to indicate that there is -one thing which excuses celibacy, and may even make it a virtue—and that -thing is the possession of Genius. Bacon claims that “certainly the best -works, and of greatest merit for the public, have proceeded from the -unmarried or childless men.” A more modern philosopher, Schopenhauer, -expresses himself to the same effect: “For men of higher intellectual -avocation, for poets, philosophers, for all those, in general, who -devote themselves to science and art, celibacy is preferable to married -life, because the conjugal yoke prevents them from creating great -works.” - -The same counsel is indirectly given in Moore’s _Life of Byron_, where -he argues that “In looking back through the lives of the most -illustrious poets—the class of intellect in which the characteristic -features of genius are, perhaps, most strongly marked—we shall find that -with scarcely one exception, from Homer down to Lord Byron, they have -been, in their several degrees, restless and solitary spirits, with -minds wrapped up, like silkworms, in their own tasks, either strangers -or rebels to domestic ties, and bearing about with them a deposit for -posterity in their souls, to the jealous watching and enriching of which -almost all other thoughts and considerations have been sacrificed.” - -“Either strangers or rebels to domestic ties.” Among the strangers, -Moore names Newton, Gassendi, Galileo, Descartes, Bayle, Locke, -Leibnitz, and Hume, to whom may be added Kant, Schopenhauer, Handel, -Beethoven, Schubert, Plato, and many others. - -Quite as large is the list of “rebels to domestic ties” among men of -poetic genius. Says Moore: “The coincidence is no less striking than -saddening that, on the list of married poets who have been unhappy in -their homes, there should already be found four such illustrious names -as Dante, Milton, Shakspere, and Dryden.” “The poet Dante, a wanderer -away from wife and children, passed the whole of a restless life in -nursing his immortal dream of Beatrice.” “The dates of the birth of his -[Shakspere’s] children, compared with that of his removal from -Stratford, the total omission of his wife’s name in the first draft of -his will, and the bitter sarcasm of the bequest by which he remembers -her afterwards—all prove beyond a doubt his separation from the lady -early in life, and his unfriendly feeling towards her at the close.” -“Milton’s first wife, it is well known, ran away from him within a month -after their marriage, ‘disgusted,’ says Phillips, ‘with his spare diet -and hard study,’ and his later domestic misery is universally known.” -“The poet Young, with all his parade of domestic sorrows, was, it -appears, a neglectful husband and a harsh father.” - -Sir Walter Scott remarks, in his _Life of Dryden_: “The wife of one who -is to gain his livelihood by poetry, or by any labour (if any there be) -equally exhausting, must either have taste enough to relish her -husband’s performances, or good-nature sufficiently to pardon his -infirmities. It was Dryden’s misfortune that Lady Elizabeth had neither -the one nor the other; and I dismiss the disagreeable subject by -observing, that on no one occasion when a sarcasm against matrimony -could be introduced, has our author failed to season it with such -bitterness, as spoke of an inward consciousness of domestic misery.” - -Richard Wagner when a young man married an actress, “pretty as a -picture”; but she appears to have had little sympathy with his -ambitions, so he lived apart from her. Subsequently he was very happy -with Cosima, the daughter of Liszt, who _did_ appreciate his genius. -Liszt himself, after living some years with the Countess D’Agoult in -Italy, separated from her. The girl whom Haydn married soon turned out a -shrew, who had no sympathy whatever with his musical genius. Berlioz was -one of the most passionate of lovers: “Oh, that I could find her, the -Juliet, the Ophelia that my heart calls to. That I could drink in the -intoxication of that mingled joy and sadness that only true love knows! -Could I but rest in her arms one autumn evening, rocked by the north -wind on some wild heath, and sleeping my last, sad sleep.” A few years -after these rapturous effusions he arranged a _séparation à l’aimable_ -from his wife, his former flame, and left her to die in solitude and -misery. - -Handel, after all, was the wisest of the composers. He was never in -Love, and had an aversion to marriage. In 1707 he went to Lübeck to -compete for the place of successor to the famous organist Buxtehude; but -when he found that one of the conditions of obtaining the place was the -compulsory privilege of marrying the daughter of his predecessor, he got -alarmed and fled precipitately. - -Besides the disposition to wrap up their minds, like silkworms, in their -own tasks, Poverty and the extreme difficulty of finding congenial -companions appear to be the principal causes that have tended to make -men of genius strangers or rebels to domestic ties. - -There is an old saying that if Poverty comes in by one window, Love goes -out by another. But Poverty, unfortunately, seems to be an almost -necessary companion of Genius, at least in the early stages of its -career, till the inertia natural to the human brain has been overcome. -It is so much easier for the richest soils to grow a luxuriant crop of -weeds than a useful crop which needs constant care, that there can be no -doubt that wealth is responsible for the loss of much Genius to the -world. There have been men of genius in whom the creative impulse was so -strong, and the pleasure of creating so sweet—Goethe, Schopenhauer, -Byron, etc.—that they needed not the goad of hunger; but as a rule a -well-filled pocketbook does not encourage the habit of “infinite -painstaking,” which is essential to Genius. But if a genius marries -while he is poor, he will have to waste his time on rapid, ephemeral -work to support his family; which will leave him neither leisure nor -energy for work of enduring value. Hence he should either not marry at -all or wait till he has an assured income. If money-marriages are ever -justifiable, they are in such cases; and rich girls should make it the -one object of life to capture a man of Genius, so as to give him leisure -for immortal work. It appears, indeed, as if a sort of Conjugal Pride of -this description were becoming fashionable; for one hears every month of -some author or artist marrying an heiress. This is certainly the easiest -way for a woman to become immortal; and what is a coquette’s gratified -ephemeral vanity, compared with the proud consciousness of passing down -to posterity linked with an immortal name, and of having helped to make -that name immortal by removing the necessity for bread-winning drudgery! - -Furthermore, there can be no doubt that the number of persons able to -read a work of genius _at sight_, as it were, is growing larger every -year. Great men do not have to wait for recognition so long as formerly, -and this enables them to neglect ephemeral drudgery in favour of -creative work. - -As there has been an unparalleled unfolding and increase in feminine -charms, both of body and mind, within the last half-century, it is not -too optimistic to hope that the other source of domestic difficulties -among men of genius—the extreme difficulty of finding a congenial -companion—will also be removed, in course of time. Men of genius, as -Moore remarks, have such rich resources of thinking within themselves, -that “the society of those less gifted than themselves becomes often a -restraint and burden to which not all the charms of friendship or even -love can reconcile them.” To be completely happy a Genius should -accordingly have a wife as remarkable among women for the womanly -qualities of receptivity, grace, and sympathy, as he is among men for -the manly quality of creative energy. Yet if it is so difficult for an -ordinary man to meet his ordinary Juliet, how much more so will it ever -be for an extraordinary man to find an extraordinary Juliet! - -Thanks to their passion for Beauty, men of Genius are too prone to -follow the impulse of the moment and marry a pretty doll, in the hope of -being able to educate her into an attractive companion. Unluckily it -rarely happens that the minds of these beauties are “wax to receive and -marble to retain.” Pretty girls are commonly lazy—spoiled by the thought -that their beauty atones for everything, and regardless of the future -when this apology for indolence will have lost its persuasiveness. - -Among the objections to the celibacy of Genius, the strongest is -supplied by the laws of heredity—the desirability of having their -superior mental qualities—often associated with corresponding physical -beauty—transmitted to the next generation. Genius, it is true, depends -on so many fortuitous circumstances that cases of direct transmission -from father to son are rare enough; and Mr. Galton’s researches show -that “the ablest child of one gifted pair is not likely to be as gifted -as the ablest of all the children of very many mediocre pairs;” and that -“the more exceptional the gift, the more exceptional will be the good -fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a -son who overpasses him.” Nevertheless, it remains true that “the -children of a gifted pair are much more likely to be gifted than the -children of a mediocre pair.” Just as a professor’s son is born with a -brain naturally more plastic and receptive than that of a young savage -or peasant, so the children of a Genius who has not shattered his health -by overwork or dissipation are likely to be of a mental calibre superior -to that of an ordinary professor’s son. So that it is the duty of a man -of genius to get married even at a sacrifice of personal -happiness—provided that sacrifice is not so great as to interfere with -his intellectual duties. - - - - - GENIUS AND LOVE - - -If we take the word Genius in the Kantian, imaginative, or æsthetic -sense, it may be said that _all Geniuses are amorous_; and that the -degree of their greatness may as a rule be measured by their -susceptibility to feminine charms. The most poetic part of the -Scriptures is the Song of Solomon with its glowing pictures of feminine -charms. Homer, though he lived long before the age of Romantic Love, -spent his life in describing the mischief caused by Helen’s beauty. -Among the Roman poets the most original was also the most amorous. As -Professor Sellar remarks of Ovid, “In the most creative periods of -English literature he seems to have been more read than any other -ancient poet, not even excepting Virgil; and it was on the most creative -minds, such as those of Marlowe, Spenser, Shakspere, Milton, and Dryden, -that be acted most powerfully ... and although the spirit of antiquity -is better understood now than it was in the sixteenth and seventeenth -centuries, yet in the capacity of appreciating works of brilliant fancy -we can claim no superiority over the centuries which produced Spenser, -Shakspere, and Milton, nor over those which produced the great Italian, -French, and Flemish painters,” to whom Ovid supplied such abundant -material. - -Coming to more recent times, we have seen that Dante, the first modern -poet, was also the first modern lover, rarely if ever surpassed in -rapturous adoration. How the greatest of the Spanish bards was -influenced by feminine beauty may be inferred from the glowing -descriptions of it and its influence in _Don Quixote_; and as for -Shakspere, even had he not written _Romeo and Juliet_, his early poems -alone would prove him to have been in his youth every inch a lover; for -no one, not even with Shakspere’s imagination, could have painted such -unique feelings with his realistic and infallible touch, unless he had -felt them more than once and had them indelibly branded on his heart’s -memory. - -In the galaxy of German poets Goethe ranks first, owing to his -manysidedness. Yet he lacked the very highest of literary gifts—wit; and -in this respect as well as through his deeper insight into Modern Love, -Heine must be rated higher than Goethe. Heine’s personal loves are but -thinly covered over by the clear amber of his lyrics, in which they are -imbedded. Goethe’s loves have become proverbial for their -number—Kätchen, Friederike, Lili, Charlotte, Christiane, etc. Schiller, -Wieland, Bürger, Bodenstedt, and the lesser lights might all have -appended a D.L., or Doctor of Love, to their names. - -Shelley, Mr. Hamilton tells us, “had an irresistible natural tendency to -fall in love”; and Byron, speaking of one of his loves, says, “I had and -have been attached fifty times since, yet I recollect all we said to -each other, all our caresses, her features, my restlessness, -sleeplessness,” etc. And in the next chapter on “Genius in Love,” we -shall meet with numerous similar cases of English, German, and French -men of genius constantly in Love. - -To account for this amorous propensity of Genius is easy enough. Genius -means creative power allied with a taste for the Beautiful. This taste -may be gratified by the contemplation of the beauties of Nature—the -creative power by reproducing them on canvas or manuscript. But Nature’s -masterpiece is lovely woman, who not only yields the highest -gratification of artistic taste, but inspires Love: and what is Love but -a creative impulse—a desire to link one’s name and personality, in -future generations, with this embodiment of consummate human beauty? - -Shakspere’s - - “Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind, - And therefore is winged Cupid painted blind,” - -suggests another reason why men of Genius are eternally involved in -Love-affairs. The lover becomes infatuated not with the girl he sees but -with the girl he imagines, using her features as a mere sketch to be -filled up _ad libitum_— - - “Such tricks hath strong imagination, - That if it would but apprehend some joy, - It comprehends some bringer of that joy; - Or in the night, imagining some fear, - How easy is a bush supposed a bear!” - -To imagine a feeling is to entertain it; for an imagined impression -revives the same cerebral processes that were aroused by the original -sense impression. In ordinary minds the remembered image of a girl’s -lovely features, the echo of her sweet voice, are much fainter than the -original sight and sound; whereas the imagination of genius paints a -face and recalls a voice as vividly as if they were present: so that -here _to think of Love is to be in Love_—_pro tempore_. - -Besides his refined taste and vivid imagination—which retouches every -defective negative—it is the natural depth of his emotions that urges a -Genius to fall in Love with every lovely woman. Passions are like dogs: -the big ones need more food than the little ones. A peasant cannot -experience the subtle and multitudinous emotions that fill the heart of -an artist, a statesman, a scientific discoverer; much less the complex -group of ethereal emotions that make up Romantic Love. The higher we -rise in the intellectual scale, the more varied, complex, and deep are -the emotional groups which delight and torment the soul. As Genius -represents the climax of intellectual power, Love the climax of -emotional intensity, is it wonderful that there should be an affinity -between the two? The higher a mountain peak the more does it attract -every passing cloud and clasp it to its breast—hoping—vainly hoping—to -warm a heart chilled by its isolation above the rest of the world. - -As men of genius are more prone to love than common sluggish minds, it -is a lucky fact, for the future growth of Romantic Love, that Genius -grows more and more abundant—_pace_ the _laudatores temporis acti_ who -ignorantly compare the number of living geniuses with all those that -have ever been—as if they had all lived at one epoch. It may even be -granted that there have been epochs that had more geniuses than we have -at present; but of genius there is more to-day than ever in the world’s -history. We see almost daily in ephemeral periodicals lines and epigrams -worthy of the highest genius, written by men whose names perhaps will -never be known. Shaksperes, indeed, will always tower Mont Blanc-like -over all other peaks; but if summits of the second magnitude seem less -imposing to-day than formerly, it is because the general level of -creativeness has been raised a few thousand feet. The mountains that -enclose the Engadine valley, though 10,000 to 12,000 feet in height, -seem only half as high, because the valley from which you see them lies -at an altitude of 6000 feet. - - - - - GENIUS IN LOVE - - -Were there not a natural affinity between Genius and Love, authors and -artists would cultivate Love as the source of their deepest inspiration. -For if it makes a temporary poet of every peasant, what must be its -effect in exalting the poet’s inborn power! - - “When beauty fires the blood, how love exalts the mind;” - -Love - - “Which awakes the sleepy vigour of the soul;” - -and first - - “Softened the fierce, and made the coward bold.”—DRYDEN. - - “For indeed I knew - Of no more subtle master under heaven - Than is the maiden passion for a maid - Not only to keep down the base in man, - But teach high thought and amiable words, - And courtliness, and the desire of fame, - And love of truth, and all that makes a man.”—TENNYSON. - -The Love of men of Genius, as distinguished from that of ordinary -mortals, is characterised by five traits—Precocity, Extravagant Ardour, -Fickleness, Multiplicity, and Fictitiousness—which must be briefly -considered in succession. - - - I.—PRECOCITY - -Turgenieff makes the narrator of one of his novelettes speak of his -first Love as having been experienced at the age of six. That this is -not a poetic license is abundantly proved by historic facts. “Dante, we -know, was but nine years old,” says Moore, “when, at a May-day festival, -he saw and fell in love with Beatrice; and Alfieri, who was himself a -precocious lover, considers such early sensibility to be an unerring -sign of a soul formed for the fine arts.... Canova used to say that he -perfectly well remembered having been in love when but five years old.” - -Byron’s first Love was at the age of eight. Concerning this he wrote at -twenty-five: “How the deuce did all this occur so early? Where could it -originate? I certainly had no sexual ideas for years afterwards; and yet -my misery, my love for that girl [Mary Duff] were so violent that I -sometimes wonder if I have ever been really attached since.’” Of his -second Love-affair Byron says: “My first dash into poetry was as early -as 1800. It was the ebullition of a passion for my first cousin, -Margaret Parker, one of the most beautiful of evanescent beings. I have -long forgotten the verses, but it would be difficult for me to forget -her—her dark eyes [Byron had a passion for black eyes]—her long -eyelashes—her completely Greek cast of face and figure. I was then about -twelve—she rather older, perhaps a year. She died about a year or two -afterwards.” - -Burns was somewhat older when Love and poetry were born in his soul -simultaneously: “You know our country custom,” he writes, “of coupling a -man and woman together as partners in the labours of the harvest. In my -fifteenth summer my partner was a bewitching creature, a year younger -than myself. My scarcity of English denies me the power of doing her -justice in that language, but you know the Scottish idiom. She was a -bonnie, sweet, sonsie lass. In short, she, altogether unwittingly to -herself, initiated me in that delicious passion, which, in spite of acid -disappointment, gin-horse prudence, and bookworm philosophy, I hold to -be the first of human joys here below.” - -Heine’s first boyish love appears to have been a girl who died as a -child, and is alluded to in his _Pictures of Travel_ as the “little -Veronica.” His second love was a most extraordinary case of Love at -Sight. It was at a school examination, Robert Proelsz relates, “and -Harry was just declaiming Schiller’s _Taucher_, when the lovely girl -entered the room by the side of her father, who was one of the -inspectors. The boy stuttered, gazed with large eyes on the beautiful -figure, mechanically repeated the verse he had just recited—‘And the -King his lovely daughter beckoned’—and was unable to proceed. In vain -the teacher prompted him, the poor fellow’s senses failed him, and he -fell on the floor in a swoon.” - -Of another early visitation of sudden Love he gives an account in his -posthumous memoirs. The girl on this occasion was the red-haired -Sefchen, the sheriff’s daughter, who, when she was only eight years old, -had witnessed the mysterious burial of her grandfather’s sword, which -had done its duty a hundred times, and which some years later her aunt -had dug out and secreted in the garret. “One day, when we were alone, I -begged Sefchen to show me that curiosity. She willingly complied, went -into the room, and soon came out with an enormous sword, which she swung -vigorously despite her weak arms, while with a roguish, threatening tone -she sang— - - “‘Will you kiss the naked sword - Which the Lord has given us?’ - -I replied in the same tone, ‘I will not kiss the naked sword, I will -kiss the red-haired Sefchen;’ and as she could not defend herself, for -fear of hurting me with the fatal steel, she had to let me boldly put my -arms round her slender waist and kiss her defiant lips.” - -Berlioz had his first passion at twelve, Rousseau at eleven. “When I saw -Mlle. Goton,” writes Rousseau, “I could see nothing else, all my senses -were in confusion.... In her presence I was agitated, and trembled.... -If Mlle. Goton had ordered me to throw myself into the fire, I believe I -would have obeyed her instantly.” - -As old age is in many respects a second childhood, it seems natural that -men of genius should appear “precocious” in this belated sense too. The -case of Berlioz is one of the most extraordinary on record. The girl who -was his first love at twelve he saw again at sixty-one: “I recognised -the divine stateliness of her step; but, oh heavens! how changed she -was! her complexion faded, her hair gray. And yet at the sight of her my -heart did not feel one moment’s indecision; my whole soul went out to -its idol, as though she were still in her dazzling loveliness.... -Balzac, nay, Shakspere himself, the great painter of the passions, never -dreamt of such a thing.” And in a letter to her he writes, “I have loved -you, I still love you, I shall always love you. And yet I am sixty-one -years of age.... Oh, madame, madame, I have but one aim left in the -world—that of obtaining your affection.” - -Another composer who had a passion at sixty was “Papa” Haydn—poor Haydn, -whose wife led him such a terrible life, and used his manuscripts for -curl-papers. Concerning her he wrote, “She is always in a bad temper, -and does not care whether I am a shoemaker or an artist.” Indeed, she -had never been his true Love, but was only taken in lieu of her younger -sister, whom Haydn adored, but who refused him and became a nun. At -sixty, however, in London, he had the fortune, or misfortune, to fall in -Love again, with a widow named Schrolter, concerning whom he wrote, “She -was a very attractive woman, and still handsome, though over sixty; and -had I been free I should certainly have married her.” - -Goethe, in his old days, fell in Love with Minna Herzlieb, a -bookseller’s daughter. “In the sonnets addressed to her,” says Lewes, -“and in the novel of _Elective Affinities_, may be read the fervour of -his passion, and the strength with which he resisted.” - -Rousseau’s last Love forms one of the most romantic episodes in his -life, concerning which nothing was known until a few years ago when the -French historian, R. Chantslauze, discovered in a bookstall the MS. of a -letter by Rousseau to Lady Cecile Hobart, dated 1770, when Rousseau was -almost sixty years of age. He appears to have met this lady in England -at the time when he was writing his _Confessions_. She had first won his -affection by her admiration of his works; and in course of his long and -hyper-sentimental letter he remarks, “Why is it that I have never felt -any other true love but that for the products of my own fancy? Wherein -lies the reason, Cecile? In these fancied beings themselves; they made -me dissatisfied with everything else. For forty years I have carried in -my mind the image of her I adore. I love her with a constancy, an -ecstasy inexpressible.... I had no hope of ever meeting her, had given -up the eager search for her, when you appeared before me. It was folly, -infatuation, if you like, that made me surrender myself for a moment to -the magic of your sight; but I could not but say to myself: There she -is! No other woman ever inspired that thought in me. And stranger still -is it that I could hear you speak without changing my opinion. What the -ideal of my heart thought, you spoke it to my ears.” - - - II.—ARDOUR - -If Bacon did not write the plays of Shakspere, it was the biggest -mistake of his life. Second among his mistakes must rank the opinion -expressed in the following sentence: “You may observe that amongst all -the great and worthy persons (whereof the memory remaineth, either -ancient or modern), there is not one that hath been transported to the -mad degree of love.” - -If the advocates of the Baconian theory had as much sense of humour as -they stimulate in other people, they would see that such a sentence—and -there are others like it in Bacon—could not by any possibility have been -penned by the author of _As You Like It_, _Venus and Adonis_, or _Romeo -and Juliet_. - -Dante was by no means the only “great and worthy person” before Bacon’s -day who had been “transported to the mad degree of love”; and since -Bacon’s day the word Genius has become almost synonymous with the -capacity for lovers’ madness. - -Yet there is a grain of truth in Bacon’s sentence as it stands. He -evidently had in mind chiefly the _ancient_ “great and worthy persons”; -and of these, as we have seen, but one or two had even a vague -presentiment of what was to be some day the moral lever of the universe. -Bacon probably had a dim perception of the fact that the ancients knew -nothing of passionate Love, of the imaginative type; but he did not -quite succeed in grasping the idea. - -As regards Modern Genius, Bacon’s assertion is so far from the truth, -that it is quite safe to reverse it and say that it is doubtful whether -any one but a man of genius is capable of that intense ardour of feeling -which marks the climax of Love; doubtful whether even Romeo at his age -could have felt a passion such as Shakspere’s glowing imagination -painted. Love is based, not on what a man sees with his eyes, but on the -mental image retouched by the imagination; and a man of genius, being a -_virtuoso of the imagination_, can adorn his ideal of love with -ornaments unknown to ordinary mortals; whence it follows that the -passion inspired by his more vivid and beautiful image must be more -intense than the passion inspired by less perfect visions in common, -sluggish brains. And since artistic thought can no more crystallise into -verse or epigram without the warm glow of emotion than a flower can grow -into a thing of beauty without its daily bath of warm sunshine, it is -fortunate that Genius implies a natural susceptibility to the æsthetic -passion of Love. - -Fortunate also for the prospects of Romantic Love is the fact that -Genius is king in its realms. Had not the sacred mysteries of Love been -revealed to the world in the glowing language of poetry, it would -probably have remained a thing unknown to ordinary mortals for centuries -to come; even as the beauties of Nature, for which common minds have no -eyes, would have remained undetected, had not the poets and artists -disclosed the bonds that connect them with human sympathies. - -As all the quotations from poets given in this chapter (and in that on -Hyperbole) practically bear witness to the exceptional ardour of Love in -men of genius, only two cases need be cited as specimens—those of Burns -and Heine. Gilbert Burns, the brother of the poet, writes that the -latter “was constantly the victim of some fair enslaver. The symptoms of -his passion were often such as nearly to equal those of the celebrated -Sappho. I never, indeed, knew that he ‘fainted, sunk, and died away’; -but the agitations of his mind and body exceeded anything of the kind I -ever knew in real life.” - -Heine has given evidence in his letters as well as his poems that few -even of his equals have ever felt the power of love so profoundly. It is -well to emphasise this fact; for there are not a few who fancy that, -like Petrarch, Heine embodied in his songs not the real feelings of his -heart but fictitious emotions depicted to gratify poetic ambition. He -did no such thing. His Love-poetry is the echo of real passion, of his -first and only true Love, which cast a shadow over his whole life, and -goaded him into bitter reflections more than a decade after its sad -ending. He loved his cousin Molly, and writes to a friend, after an -absence from home: “Rejoice with me! rejoice with me! in four weeks I -shall see Molly. With her my muse will also return.” The muse did -return, but in a different way from that which he had anticipated; with -a smile in her face of cynicism, mockery, melancholy, which never again -left her. “She loves me _not_!” he writes, in 1816. “Softly, dear -Christian, pronounce that last word softly. In the first words lies the -eternal living heaven, but in the last lies eternal living hell. If you -could only see your friend’s countenance, how pale he looks, how -bewildered, how insane, your righteous indignation at my long silence -would vanish soon; better still were it if you could have one glance at -my soul—then would you really learn to love me.” “I have seen her again— - - “‘The devil take my soul, - My body be the sheriff’s, - Yet I for me alone - Select the loveliest woman.’ - -Hui! do you not shudder, Christian! Well may you shudder even as I do. -Burn the letter, the Lord have mercy on my soul. I did not write these -words. There on my chair sits a pale man; he wrote them. And this -because it is midnight. Oh heavens! Madness cannot sin!” - -“There, there, do not breathe so heavily, there I have just built a -lovely card-house, and on the top of it I stand and hold her in my -arms!... But indeed you can hardly fancy, dear Christian, how -delightful, how lovely my ruin appears. Far from her, to carry burning -desires in my heart for years, is torture infernal; but to be near her -and yet oft sigh in vain, whole endless weeks, for my only delight, the -sight of her and—and—O! O! O! Christian! that is enough to make the -purest, most pious soul flare up in wild, delirious ungodliness!” - -And the object of this passion, who might have saved a poet’s soul and -changed him from a negative ferment into a positive agent of culture? -She was the daughter of a millionaire, who, of course, in German -fashion, had to marry into another rich family. To marry a poor poet -would have been deemed a terrible _mésalliance_. Yet was he not a -millionaire too—of ideas, as she was in beauty, her father in money? But -that is reasoning _à la_ Millennium. - -What a comedy it will be to future generations, entirely emancipated -from mediæval puerilities, to read that two such _Kings_ in the realm of -Genius as Schubert and Beethoven, could not marry their true loves on -account of differences in social position—rank and money! - -We are accustomed to look down on China and Chinese culture. But China -anticipated Europe by several centuries in the discovery of gunpowder; -and there is another thing in which that country is centuries ahead of -Europe. “In China there is no aristocracy of birth or money. The -aristocracy which here ranks socially above the other classes is solely -and only that of the _Intellect_.” - - - III.—FICKLENESS - -Love is a tissue of paradoxes. The very ardour of their passion inclines -men of genius to fickleness. “Love me little love me long” is a short -way of saying that whereas a blazing, roaring fire consumes itself in an -hour, the quiet, glowing coals covered with ashes will outlast the -night. - -Lamartine’s “heureuse la beauté que le poète adore”—happy the beauty -whom the poet adores—may be endorsed by a maiden who is willing to -become the secondary wife of a poetic polygamist already wedded to a -muse, for the sake of having it said in his biography that she inspired -him with some of his prettiest conceits— - - “Cynthia, facundi carmen juvenile Properti, - Accepit famam nec minus ilia dedit,” - -as Martial says of a Roman beauty. Others will hesitate on reading the -following, from _London Society_:— - -“Lord Byron has said that nothing can inflict greater torture upon a -woman than the mere fact of loving a poet; and though Lamartine calls it -a glory to be the object of immortal songs, we half-suspect that the -English bard is right, and that it would be impossible to describe the -moral sufferings of those frail beings who seem to be the mere toys of -an hour. The world may be indebted to them for some great poem which -their love has had the power to inspire, but they themselves were -probably no more thought of by the poet than the daisy he might tread on -as he passed by.” - -Here is a case in point: “Swift,” says Byron, “when neither young nor -handsome, nor rich nor even amiable, inspired two of the most -extraordinary passions on record—Vanessa’s and Stella’s.... He requited -them bitterly, for he seems to have broken the heart of the one and worn -out that of the other; and he had his reward, for he died a solitary -idiot in the hands of servants.” - -It would be unjust, however, in all cases to trace poetic fickleness to -heartless or deliberate cruelty. May not the poet and the artist be -regarded as martyrs to art and science—students of beauty, obliged to -take a purely æsthetic, _disinterested interest_ in feminine charms—as -they do in a picture or a landscape—without any desire of exclusive -possession? They flirt, apparently, not to break hearts, but merely to -educate their sense of beauty. For is not a woman’s face the compendium -of all beauty in the world? and a woman’s eyes, expressing incipient -Love, are they not so exquisitely beautiful that an epicure of Love -could for ever be contented with that expression alone, feeling that -marriage, which might alter it, if ever so little, would be a _bétise_? -Perhaps some similar thought was in Heine’s mind when he wrote his -famous - - "Du bist wie eine Blume - So hold und schön und rein; - Ich schau’ dich an, und Wehmuth - Schleicht mir ins Herz hinein. - - “Mir ist, als ob ich die Hände - Aufs Haupt dir legen sollt‘, - Betend, dass Gott dich erhalte - So rein und schön und hold.” - -In quite a different kind of a poem Heine bluntly announces to his -“Queen Mary IV.” his declaration of independence, and informs her that -not a few who ruled before her have been unceremoniously deposed— - - “Manche die vor dir regierte - Wurde schmählich abgesetzt.” - -And in his narrative of the sheriff’s daughter he says, “I shall not -describe my love for Josepha in detail. This, however, I will confess, -that it was after all only a prelude to the great tragedies of my riper -years. Thus does Romeo become infatuated with Rosaline before he finds -his Juliet.” - -Byron’s confession, in speaking of an early love, that he had been -“attached fifty times since” has been referred to already; and although -Byron loved to exaggerate his foibles, his record in this case does not -belie his words. Of Burns, Principal Shairp writes that “There was not a -comely girl in Tarbolton on whom he did not compose a song, and then he -made one which included them all.” Burns himself confesses, “In my -conscience, I believe that my heart has been so often on fire that it -has been vitrified.” And Washington Irving remarks on Goldsmith’s first -love as “a passion of that transient kind which grows up in idleness and -exhales itself in poetry.” - -Of this kind were two passions of Lamb, concerning which a biographer -says, “A youthful passion, which lasted only a few months, and which he -afterwards attempted to regard lightly as a folly past, inspired a few -sonnets of very delicate feeling and exquisite music.” And of his second -flame, “His stay at Pentonville is remarkable for the fugitive passion -conceived by Lamb for a young Quakeress named Hester Savory, which he -has enshrined and immortalised in the little poem of _Hester_.” - -Goethe has the reputation of having been of all famous lovers the most -fickle. Like Byron, Goethe appears to have endeavoured to make himself -appear more frivolous than he was. His amorous Roman _Elegies_, which -have given so much offence, were in reality written in Thuringia, after -his return from Italy; and their heroine was no one but the girl who -subsequently became his wife. - -It remained for a Scotchman to write the best apology for Goethe’s -love-affairs. “To Goethe,” says Professor Blackie, “the sight of any -beautiful object was like delicate music to the ear of a cunning -musician; he was carried away by it, and floated in its element -joyously, as a swallow in the summer air, or a sea-mew on the buoyant -wave. Hence the rich story of Goethe’s loves, with which scandal, of -course, and prudery have made their market, but which, when looked into -carefully, were just as much part of his genius as _Faust_ or -_Iphigenia_—a part, indeed, without which neither _Faust_ nor -_Iphigenia_ could have been written.... Let no one, therefore, take -offence when I say that Goethe was always falling in love, and that I -consider this a great virtue in his character.” - -One more case: “Beethoven constantly had his love-affairs,” says -Wegeler. His first love was a Cologne beauty, who coquetted with him and -another man till both discovered she was engaged to a _third_! Several -times Beethoven made up his mind to marry; he made two definite -proposals, both of which were refused. One fatal objection was his habit -of falling in love with women above him in “rank.” “It is a frightful -thing,” he once wrote, “to make the acquaintance of such a sweet -creature and to lose her immediately; and nothing is more insupportable -than thus to have to confess one’s own foolishness.” One of his flames, -an opera singer, gave as a reason why she refused him that he was “so -ugly and half-cracked!” - - - IV.—MULTIPLICITY - -Perhaps the most unique trait in the love of men of genius is the -apparent occasional absence of the element of Monopoly. It was Ovid who -first discussed the question whether a man could love two women at once. -His friend Græcinus denied the possibility of such a thing; but in one -of his _Elegies_ Ovid refutes him by citing his own case of a double -simultaneous infatuation. He hesitates which of the two to choose, -chides Venus for torturing him with double love—for adding leaves to the -trees, stars to the heavens, water to the ocean. - -Of modern authors not a few appear to have followed in Ovid’s footsteps. -We have seen how madly Heine was in love for a long time with his cousin -Amalie. Yet, as one of his biographers, Robert Proelsz, remarks, this -ardent though hopeless infatuation saved him neither at Hamburg nor at -Bonn, nor at Hanover or Berlin, from a number of love-affairs, some of -which are vaguely commemorated in his writings. Another German poet, -Wieland, after various romantic adventures, fell in love with Julia -Bondeli, a pupil of Rousseau’s, and asked for her heart and hand; but -she mistrusted him, and asked the pertinent question, “Tell me, will you -never be able to love another besides me?” “Never!” he replied, “that is -impossible.... Yet it might be possible for a moment, if I should chance -to see a more beautiful woman than you who is at the same time very -unhappy and very virtuous.” “Poor Wieland,” Scherr continues, “who -subsequently understood the anatomy of the female heart so well, appears -not to have known then that _no_ woman pardons in her lover the thought -that he might find another more beautiful than her. Julia knew what she -had to do, and with deeply-wounded heart allowed the poet to depart.” - -Of Burns his brother Gilbert says, “When he selected any one out of the -sovereignty of his good pleasure, to whom he should pay his particular -attention, she was instantly invested with a sufficient stock of charms -out of the plentiful stores of his own imagination; and there was often -a great disparity between his fair captivator and her attributes. One -generally reigned paramount in his affections; but as Yorick’s -affections flowed out toward Madame de L—— at the remise door, while the -eternal vows of Eliza were upon him, so Robert was frequently -encountering other attractions, which formed _so many under-plots in the -drama of his love_.” - -In Goethe’s life these “under-plots” played a like prominent part. “He -always needed a number of feminine hearts of more or less personal -interest, in which to mirror himself,” we read; and he himself told his -Charlotte (in 1777) that her love was “the thread by which all his other -little passions, pastimes, and flirtations hung.” - -So that, after all, it seems possible to love two at a time; but it -_takes genius to do it_! - -Yet even with men of genius it is only possible in ordinary -love-affairs. A supreme love-affair allows but one goddess under any -circumstances. - -Schumann was one of the most multitudinous lovers on record. Apparently -his first love was Nanni, his “guardian angel,” who saved him from the -perils of the world, and hovered before his vision like a saint. “I feel -that I could kneel before her and adore her like a Madonna,” he says in -a letter. But Nanni had a dangerous rival in Liddy. Not long, however, -for he found Liddy silly, cold as marble, and—fatal defect! she could -not sympathise with him regarding Jean Paul. “The exalted image of my -ideal disappears when I think of the remarks she made about Jean Paul. -Let the dead rest in peace.” Curiously enough, there are references to -both these girls at various dates, showing that, like Ovid, he -vacillated between the two. He had a number of other flames, and after -his engagement to Clara Wieck gave her warning that he had the “very -mischievous habit” of being a great admirer of lovely women. “They make -me positively smirk, and I swim in panegyrics on your sex. Consequently, -if at some future time we walk along the streets of Vienna and meet a -beauty, and I exclaim, ‘Oh Clara! see this heavenly vision!’ or -something of the sort, you must not be alarmed nor scold me.” - -But the most enterprising lover ever known to the world was Alfieri; for -his first Love seems to have _embraced a whole female seminary_! In his -_Mémoires_, at any rate, he uses the plural in speaking of the object of -his first passion. He was indeed only nine years old, which may excuse -this amorous anomaly. He had seen in church a number of young novices, -and thus describes his feelings (the italics are mine): “My innocent -attraction towards _these_ novices became so strong that I thought of -them and their doings incessantly. At one moment my imagination painted -_them_ holding their candles in their hands, serving mass with an air of -angelic submission, and again raising the smoke of incense at the foot -of the altar; and, entirely absorbed in these images, I neglected my -studies; every occupation and all companionship bored me.” - - - V.—FICTITIOUSNESS - -If Shakspere could identify woman with frailty, one might with equal -propriety exclaim, Vanity, thy name is man! Clever men have a habit of -paying pretty girls neat compliments, less to please the girls than to -show off their wit. And clever women, though they may not accept these -remarks literally, still have cause to be gratified with them, in -proportion to the excellence of the wit; for ugliness or inferior beauty -never inspires a happy thought in a clever man. - -Poets represent the climax of masculine vanity. Though their first -Love-poems may be the embodiment of real passion, in subsequent efforts -the purely literary origin is too often apparent. Since poetic -composition is in itself a mingled agony and delight, very like Love -itself, nothing so facilitates its progress as exciting Love-memories. -Hence poets are for ever urged on to compose Love ditties in which they -endeavour to out-Romeo Romeo, to out-hyperbolise one another, as women -try to out-dress one another. This is one aspect of their vanity; the -other lies in their desire for sympathetic admiration. So, whenever a -poet meets a damsel who comes within half a mile of his ideal, he -forthwith unfolds before her eyes his gaudy dithyrambs and sonnets, and -indulges in various Love-antics, very much like an infatuated peacock. - -Even the great Dante is not free from the reproach of having used his -true love for mere literary purposes. Beatrice became to him gradually -an abstraction, an allegory, a name for woman in general. But it is in -his countryman Petrarch that the tendency to use a sweetheart for purely -ornamental purposes, as if she were a feather to be stuck in one’s hat, -is most vividly illustrated. Petrarch is a conspicuous illustration of -the fact that a poetic reputation once established will live on for -ever, for the simple reason that very few people ever take the trouble -to read and judge for themselves; so that an undeserved reputation, like -a disease, is inherited by generation after generation. - -No one, of course, can question Petrarch’s learning and his influence on -the progress of modern culture. I speak of him only as a love-poet; and -as such he occupies a wofully low rank. I have read and reread his -sonnets, and have found them one of the dreariest deserts the quest for -information has ever driven me into. To say with Mr. Symonds, in the -_Encyclopædia Britannica_, that “he was far from approaching the -analysis of emotion with the directness of a Heine or De Musset,” is -putting it very mildly indeed. Professor Scherr points out his lack of -poetic imagination in these words: “Though he took so much trouble to -hand down the beauty of his Laura to posterity, yet (he) never gets -beyond a tedious enumeration of her charms. Petrarch never gives us a -clear portrait of his lady.” “The poems of her lover,” says Mr. Symonds, -“demonstrate that she was a _married woman_, with whom he enjoyed a -respectful and not very intimate friendship.” Moore refers to Petrarch -as one “who would not suffer his only daughter to reside beneath his -roof, [but] expended thirty-two years of poetry and passion on an -idealised love.” Schopenhauer naïvely accepted the reality of Petrarch’s -passion, which the poor fellow had to drag through life “like a -prisoner’s chain,” because the case suited his argument; but Mr. -Macaulay more justly remarks that “to readers of our time, the love of -Petrarch seems to have been of that kind which breaks no hearts.” -Finally Professor Scherr’s opinion may be cited, which agrees with the -view here taken. - -In 1327 Petrarch “made the acquaintance of Laura, the wife of Hugo de -Sade, who has become famous through him, and whom during twenty-one -years he continued to love, or at least to celebrate in song; for one -feels somewhat uncertain regarding this love, and is very much tempted -to regard it more as a matter of the head than of the heart and the -senses—more as a welcome theme for his troubadour art and Provençal -amorous subtlety than as a genuine, true passion. Petrarch’s qualities -in general, both as a man and as a poet, are tainted by an appearance of -hollowness, a want of substance and character. He lacked genuine -originality, the power of spontaneous creation.” - -Petrarch, it is true, was an extreme case of the poet’s inclination to -give Love a fictitious permanence and depth; and he lived, moreover, at -a time when the novelty of the spiritual aspect of Love naturally -inclined the mind to exaggeration in that direction. In the case of -modern poets, much less allowance has to be commonly made for motives of -purely poetic or literary origin. - -Such being the leading characteristics of Love in men of genius, and -such men being emotionally a few centuries ahead of others, the -questions arise, “Is it likely that the Love of ordinary mortals will -gradually assume those traits? and is it desirable that it should?” - -There seems no immediate danger that the world will be peopled largely -by geniuses, though there is a rapid and steady advance in culture, -which in a thousand years may greatly lessen the difference between men -of genius and average men of the future as compared with those of -to-day. When that millennium arrives the man of genius may have advanced -another step, but not so great, perhaps, as that which now raises him -above the common herd. He will not then be so great an anomaly, and will -find society less willing than in the past to make allowance for his -irregularities, such as his fickleness and multiplicity of Love-affairs. - -Yet, after all, these great men are only partly to blame for their -fickleness. Beethoven once boasted of having loved one woman for _seven -months_ as something unusual. But had Beethoven been so fortunate as to -meet and marry a woman having those qualities which Sir Walter Scott -says the wife of a genius should have—either “taste enough to relish her -husband’s performances, or good nature enough to pardon his -infirmities,”—he might have been blessed with a love not of seven -months, but of seven times seven years. Of Shelley, Mr. Symonds tells us -that, “In his own words, he had loved Antigone before he visited this -earth: and no one woman could probably have made him happy, because he -was for ever demanding more from love than it can give in the mixed -circumstances of mortal life.” - -Mr. Galton, who has made such a careful study of the phenomena of genius -and marriage (_Hereditary Genius_), remarks on the “great fact ... that -able men take pleasure in the society of intelligent women, and, if they -can find such as would in other respects be suitable, they will marry -them in preference to mediocrities.” Unfortunately, as before dwelt on, -great beauty and great intellect, or amiability, do not always coincide, -owing to the fact that pretty girls do not feel the necessity of -cultivating their minds. But in men of genius their own store of -intellect is so great, and their admiration for Beauty so intense, that -they are constantly liable to marry silly girls; or before marriage to -flirt with one beauty after another without finding satisfaction. In a -few generations, however, there will doubtless be many more women than -now or in the past who will be intelligent, amiable, and beautiful at -the same time; and such women will be able to fetter even the erratic -love of geniuses with adamantine chains, impervious to rust and -alteration, and thus cure them of their Fickleness and their constant -effort to love more than one at a time. - -Poetic Fictitiousness, of course, is a trait which does no one any harm, -and often enriches literature with charming fancies. And as for the two -remaining characters of genius-Love—Ardour and Precocity—it is evident -that there cannot be too much of them in the world. The dawn of Love is -always the dawn of so much refinement of the soul, the awakening of so -much ambition, that it cannot be too precocious; and the more ardent it -is the more thoroughgoing will be its results. Nor need a big fire go -out sooner than a small one, provided there is a constant supply of -fresh fuel—a point which Balzac has discussed with much eloquence in his -_Physiologie du Mariage_. - -Coleridge says “It is the business of virtue to give a feeling and a -passion to our purer intellect, and to intellectualise our feelings and -passions.” Now this is precisely what is done by Romantic Love, which -first originated in the minds of men of genius. - - “The might of one fair face sublimes my love, - For it hath weaned my heart from low desires.” - -“Sublimes my love.” These three words of Michael Angelo contain the -whole philosophy of our subject. And what is it that sublimes Love -chiefly? “The might of one fair face”—the magic effect of Personal -Beauty. Perhaps, after all, the greatest difference between the Love of -a genius and an ordinary mortal is that in the former the æsthetic -element—the Admiration of Beauty—is so much stronger, making up -two-thirds of the whole passion. And as a taste for the beautiful in art -and nature becomes more common, the Love of common mortals, in -approaching that of genius, will more and more partake of this æsthetic -refinement—this worship of Personal Beauty for the sake of the higher -gratifications it yields to the imagination. - - - - - INSANITY AND LOVE - - - ANALOGIES - -The poets, who have in all ages insisted on the analogies between genius -and insanity, have also long since discovered a general resemblance -between Love and Insanity. Indeed, the notion that Love is a sort of -madness is as old as Plato. Love, as understood by him—that is, man’s -“worship of youthful masculine beauty”—is, he says, mad, irrational, -superseding reason and prudence in the individual mind. And the Stoics, -who regarded all affections as maladies, looked upon the severest of the -passions as a grave mental disease. - -Modern poetry is full of allusions to the fatuous folly of Love. Thus -Thomson— - - “A lover is the very fool of nature.” - -Shakspere— - - “The lunatic, the lover, and the poet - Are of imagination all compact.” - - “Thou blind fool, Love, what dost thou to mine eyes, - That they behold and see not what they see?” - -And the mischievous Rosalind informs us that “Love is merely a madness, -and, I tell you, deserves as well a dark house and a whip as madmen do; -and the reason why they are not so punished and cured is, that the -lunacy is so ordinary that the whippers are in love too.” - -All this is mere poetic banter; but there is a substratum of truth which -the poets must have dimly felt. Modern alienists do not treat their -patients to dark rooms and whips, as their predecessors did. They regard -the maladies of their patients as brain diseases, which have been -studied and classified, and are treated on general hygienic and -therapeutic principles. A comparison of the classifications adopted in -psychiatry with the symptoms of Love shows that Insanity and Love -resemble each other especially in three common traits,—the presence of -Illusions, a sort of Delirium of Persecution, and the Desire for -Solitude. - -There are two ways in which madmen people the outside world with -phantoms of their own imaginations—by means of illusions and of -hallucinations. - -Hallucinations are pure figments of the imagination, without any object -corresponding to them or suggesting them in the outer world. A patient -suffering from them will stare into vacancy and see a friend, or perhaps -the devil with horns, tail, and hoofs; and he sees him as vividly as if -he were really there to be touched; the reason being that in that part -of the brain where impressions of sight are localised a diseased action -is set up which suggests a picture that is forthwith projected into -outward space—as usual with all sense-impressions. In a word, the -patient paints the devil in his mind’s eye, and there he is. - -Illusions, on the other hand, have real external objects for their -cause; but the diseased imagination so falsifies the objects that there -is little or no resemblance between the mental vision and the outside -reality. A patient suffering from illusions sees a candle and thinks it -is the sun, hears a footstep and thinks it thunder. - -Is not this precisely what Shakspere chides Cupid for—that he makes our -eyes “behold and see not what they see?” or makes them “see Helen’s -beauty in a brow of Egypt?” Concerning Burns we have just read that -“there was often a great disparity between his fair captivator and her -attributes”—that is, the attributes with which she was invested by her -lover. - -The lover, like the lunatic, has had moments when, “beholding his -maiden, he half-knows she is not that which he worships”; but such -intervals are rare. Take a madman who believes his body is made of -glass, and throw him downstairs: none the less will he believe in his -vitreous constitution. Show a lover the most beautiful woman in the -world, still will he believe his own Dulcinea a hundred times more -charming. - -There is, in the second place, a very common form of insanity, called -the Delirium of Persecution. The sufferer imagines that everybody he -passes notices him, suspects him of something, or even intends him some -harm. Dr. Hammond speaks of a patient of this class “who was sure that -all the clergymen had entered into a conspiracy to ‘pray him into hell’! -He went to the churches to hear what they had to say, and discovered -adroit allusions to himself, and hidden invocations to God for his -eternal damnation, in the most harmless and platitudinous expressions. -He wrote letters to various pastors of churches, denouncing them for -their uncharitable conduct toward him, and threatening them with bodily -damage if they persisted in their efforts to secure the destruction of -his soul.” - -“Quand nous aimons,” says Pascal, “nous nous imaginons que tout le monde -s’en aperçoit”—when we are in love we imagine that everybody perceives -it. The lover feels so awkward and embarrassed that he thinks every one -about him must discover his secret; and this constant apprehension -doubles his awkwardness, and in most cases does lead to his detection. -And the jealous lover to whom “trifles light as air” are confirmations -of infidelity, who sees dangerous rivalry in the most superficial -attentions, and inconstancy in the most harmless smile she bestows on -another—how does he differ from the man who thought the clergy were -trying to pray him into hell, except that in the one case the disordered -imagination is more easily restored to its normal functions than in the -other? - -Thirdly, the lunatic and the lover, in their melancholy stages, have a -common fondness for Solitude. For days and weeks a patient will sit -motionless, indifferent to everybody and everything in the world except -the one idea that has fixed on his brain like a leech, and is sucking -its life-blood. Nothing, says an observer, is so noticeable on visiting -an asylum where the patients are allowed some liberty, as the way in -which each one seeks a solitary place regardless of his fellows. - -Are not, in the same way— - - “Fountain-heads and pathless groves - Places which pale passion loves?”—FLETCHER. - -But what madman in his wildest flights ever conceived anything quite so -sublimely solitary as the flight which Burns projected for himself and -Clarinda (in lovers’ arithmetic twice one are one) in the following -epistle: "Imagine ... that we were set free from the laws of gravitation -which bind us to this globe, and could at pleasure fly, without -inconvenience, through all the yet unconjectured bounds of creation, -what a life of bliss would we lead, in our mutual pursuit of virtue and -knowledge, and our mutual enjoyment of love and friendship! - -“I see you laughing at my fairy fancies, and calling me a voluptuous -Mahometan; but I am certain I would be a happy creature beyond anything -we call bliss here below; nay, it would be a paradise congenial to you -too. Don’t you see us, hand in hand, or rather, my arm about your lovely -waist, making our remarks on Sirius, the nearest of the fixed stars; or, -surveying a comet flaming innoxious by us, as we just now would mark the -passing pomp of a travelling monarch; or, in a shady bower of Mercury or -Venus, dedicating the hour to love, in mutual converse, relying honour, -and revelling endearment, while the most exalted strains of poesy and -harmony would be the ready, spontaneous language of our souls.” - -Thus we have in the madman’s Illusions an analogy with Love’s -Hyperbolising tendency; in the Delirium of Persecution a suggestion of -Jealousy; in the Desire for Solitude a reminder of Love’s Exclusiveness, -and desire to be cast on a desert island. - -Gallantry, again, has in the past frequently assumed an extravagant form -bordering on madness. Thus, with reference to a Greek girl to whom Byron -made love in Athens, Moore says, “It was, if I recollect right, in -making love to one of these girls that he had recourse to an act of -courtship often practised in that country—namely, giving himself a wound -across the breast with his dagger. The young Athenian, by his own -account, looked on very coolly during the operation, considering it a -fit tribute to her beauty, but in no wise moved to gratitude.” - -In Spain, toward the beginning of the last century, Gallantry appears to -have assumed a form of mad extravagance. As Mme. d’Aunoy relates in her -_Mémoires sur l’Espagne_, no man who accompanied a lady was so rude as -to give her his hand or to take her arm under his. He only wrapped his -cloak around his arm, and then allowed her to rest her arm on the elbow. -Nor was even a lover permitted to kiss his love or caress her otherwise -than by tenderly grasping her arm with his hands. - -Of mediæval lovers’ madness cases have been cited elsewhere, showing to -what crazy excess the Knight-errants and Troubadours sometimes carried -their gallant devotion. One more amusing illustration may here be added: -the oft-cited cases of Peire Vidal, a Troubadour of the twelfth century, -who, to please his beloved, whose name was Loba (wolf), had himself -sewed up in a wolf’s hide and went about the mountains howling until his -manœuvres were brought to a sad end by some shepherd dogs, who, -having no sense of humour, gave him such a shaking that he was only too -glad to resume his normal attitude. - -There is, in fact, hardly a feature of Love which, in its exalted -manifestations, does not occasionally suggest a madhouse. The -extravagant Pride shown by a commonplace man in his more commonplace -bride, is quite as ludicrous as a lunatic’s delusion that he is a -millionaire or emperor of the five continents. The sham capture of a -bride still practised among many nations when all parties are willing, -illustrates a form of Coyness which would appear as pure lunacy to one -unfamiliar with the origin of that custom. - - - EROTOMANIA, OR REAL LOVE-SICKNESS - -Besides these general analogies there is a form of mental disease which -is genuine love-sickness, the outcome of brain disease, and which often -seems, for all the world, like a deliberate caricature of Coquetry. - -“It often happens,” says Dr. Hammond, “that the subjects of emotional -monomania of the variety under consideration do not restrict their love -to any one person. They adore the whole male sex, and will make advances -to any man with whom they are brought into even the slightest -association. If confined in an asylum they simper and clasp their hands, -and roll their eyes to the attendants, especially the physicians, and -even the male patients are not below their affections. There is very -little constancy in their love. They change from one man to another with -the utmost facility and upon the slightest pretext. ‘I am very much in -love with Dr. ——,’ said a woman to me in an asylum that I was visiting, -‘but he was late yesterday in coming to the ward, and now I love you. -You will come often to see me, won’t you?’ While she was speaking the -superintendent entered the ward. ‘Oh, here comes my first and only -love!’ she exclaimed. ’Why have you stayed away so long from your -Eliza?‘” - -Professor von Krafft-Ebing, in his admirable _Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie_, -thus characterises Erotomania in general: "The kernel of the whole -matter is the delusion of being singled out and loved by a person of the -other sex, who regularly belongs to a higher social sphere. And it -deserves to be noted that the love felt by the patient towards this -person is a romantic, ecstatic, but entirely ‘Platonic’ affection. In -this respect these patients remind one of the knight-errants and -minstrels of bygone times, whom Cervantes has so incisively lashed in -his _Don Quixote_.... - -"From the looks and gestures of the beloved individual they draw the -inference that they in return are not regarded with indifference. With -astonishing rapidity they lose their self-possession. The most harmless -incidents are regarded by them as signs of love, and an encouragement to -draw near. Even newspaper advertisements relating to others are supposed -to come from the person in question. Finally, hallucinations make their -appearance, by the aid of which the patients begin to be conversant with -the object of their love. Illusions also supervene; in the conversations -of others the patient fancies he hears references to his love-affairs. -He feels happy, exalted in his estimate of himself.... - -“At last the patient compromises himself by acting in consonance with -his delusion, thus making himself ridiculous and impossible in society, -and necessitating his confinement in an asylum.” - - - - - THE LANGUAGE OF LOVE - - -The insane freaks of erotomaniacs, and the analogous, ludicrous -exaggerations in the expression and conduct of lovers, may be regarded -as the pathologic and the comic sides of Love’s Language. - -Normally, Romantic Love has no fewer than three languages:—Words, Facial -Expression, and Caresses, including Kisses. It will at once be seen that -this classification involves a crescendo <, from the weakest form of -expression to its climax in kissing. Kissing, indeed, though it comes -under the head of Caresses, is of so much significance that it may be -regarded, if not as a separate language of Love, at least as a special -dialect—perhaps the long-sought world-language intelligible to all? - - - I.—WORDS - -Though the greatest poets have striven to become virtuosi in the art of -expressing Love in written language, yet words are the weakest and least -trustworthy mode of expressing the amorous emotions. Least trustworthy, -because the male flatterer, as well as the female coquette, constantly -use language to conceal their thoughts and real emotions. Weakest, -because words are less eloquent even than silence. For— - - “They that are rich in words must needs discover - They are but poor in that which makes a lover;” - -And - - “Silence in Love bewrays more woe - Than words though ne’er so witty.”—RALEIGH. - -Cordelia’s love was deeper than that of her sisters—too deep to be -expressed in formal words. And King Lear scorned her and favoured her -sisters; even as shallow maidens constantly look down on silent, awkward -adorers of deep affections, and throw themselves away on shallow, -fickle, loquacious Lotharios, because they do not understand the real -Language of Love, which, according to a stupid old myth, every woman is -supposed to know by intuition or instinct. - - - II.-FACIAL EXPRESSION, - -although more trustworthy than written or spoken words, may sometimes -prove deceptive too; for the cunning coquette who daily feigns Love to -attract poor moths by her brilliant fascinations, becomes in time so -perfect an actress that the coldest of cynics may be deceived by her -wiles. - -In his great work on the _Expression of the Emotions_, Darwin remarks -that although, “when lovers meet, we know that their hearts beat -quickly, their breathing is hurried, and their faces flush;” yet “love -can hardly be said to have any proper or peculiar means of expression; -and this is intelligible, as it has not habitually led to any special -line of action. No doubt, as affection is a pleasurable sensation, it -generally causes a gentle smile and some brightening of the eyes.” - -Inasmuch as a flushed face and transient blushes, a gentle smile and -brightening of the eyes, are characteristic of other emotions besides -Love, Darwin is right; yet he ignores two peculiarities of expression by -which a person in Love may be instantaneously recognised. - -“A lover,” says Chamfort, “is a man who endeavours to be more amiable -than it is possible for him to be; and this is the reason that almost -all lovers appear ridiculous.” Who has not seen this unmistakable, -ludicrous expression of masculine Love—head slightly inclined to the -left; face as near her face as possible, echoing every expression of -hers; a saccharine, beseeching smile on the kiss-hungry lips, producing -on the spectator an uneasy sense of unstable equilibrium—as if in one -more moment the force of amorous gravitation would draw down his face to -hers? - -Add to this his embarrassed gestures, the over-sweet falsetto of his -voice—an octave higher than when he speaks to others,—and the peculiar -lover’s pallor, and the picture is complete— - - “Why so pale and wan, fond lover? - Prithee, why so pale? - Will, when looking well can’t move her, - Looking ill prevail?”—SUCKLING. - -To women Cupid is kinder. Instead of making them appear ludicrous, Love -has the power of transforming even a homely feminine face into a vision -of loveliness by throwing a halo of tender expression around it. This -wondrous transformation effected by Love is one of its greatest -miracles; and to one who has seen the girl previously it immediately -betrays her infatuation. It is a kind of _emotional calligraphy_ in -which the merest tyro can read, “I love him.” - -And this temporary transformation of homely into beautiful faces, this -fusing and moulding of the features into forms of voluptuous expression, -is of extreme psychologic interest; for it shows that, after all, the -exalted, extravagant image of Her perfections in the lover’s mind is not -purely imaginary. It is not so much owing to a difference of “taste” -that he loves her more than others do, as because she actually _does_ -look more beautiful when her eyes are fastened on him than when looking -at any other man. - - - III.—CARESSES - -“Tenderness,” says Professor Bain, “is a pleasurable emotion, variously -stimulated, whose effort is to draw human beings into mutual embrace.” -Darwin finds the peculiarity of love in the same desire for contact; -and, as usual, he seeks for the origin of this desire, and endeavours to -trace it to analogous peculiarities of the animals most closely related -to us. - -“With the lower animals,” he says, “we see the same principle of -pleasure derived from contact in association with love. Dogs and cats -manifestly take pleasure in rubbing against their masters and -mistresses, and in being rubbed or patted by them. Many kinds of -monkeys, as I am assured by the keepers in the Zoological Gardens, -delight in fondling and being fondled by each other, and by persons to -whom they are attached. Mr. Bartlett has described to me the behaviour -of two Chimpanzees, rather older animals than those generally imported -into this country, when they were first brought together. They sat -opposite, _touching each other with their much-protruded lips_, and the -one put his hand on the shoulder of the other. Then they mutually folded -each other in their arms. Afterwards they stood up, each with one arm on -the shoulder of the other, lifted up their heads, opened their mouths -and yelled with delight.” - -Concerning human beings Darwin remarks: “A strong desire to touch the -beloved person is commonly felt; and love is expressed by this means -more plainly than by any other. Hence we long to clasp in our arms those -we tenderly love. We probably owe this desire to _inherited habit_, in -association with the nursing and tending of our children, and with the -mutual caresses of lovers.” - -When love first dawns on the mind, the faintest superficial contact -flashes along the nerves as a thrill of delicious emotion. To walk along -the beach in a stiff breeze, and have her veil accidentally flutter in -his face, is a romantic incident on which a youthful lover’s memory -feasts for a month. If allowed to carry her shawl on his arm, he would -not feel the cold of a Siberian winter. And later, what a variety of -tell-tale caresses are there by which mutual Love may be revealed! It is -not the voice alone that can say “I love you”; nor the speaking eyes. -Confessions of Love, proposals and acceptance—complete dramas of -Love—have been enacted by the language of two pairs of feet that have -accidentally touched under the table. A slight pressure of the hand in -the ballroom has told thousands of lovers, before a word was spoken, -that now they may soon put their arms round that lovely waist without -the excuse of a waltz or polka. - -One form of hand-caress, dear alike to mothers and lovers, is thus -described by Professor Mantegazza: “In a caress we give and receive at -the same time. The hand which distributes love, as by a magnetic -effusion, receives it in return from the skin of the beloved person. -Hence it is that one of the most common and most thrilling of the -expressions of love consists in passing the hand through the hair. The -hand finds, in this labyrinth of supple, living threads, the means of -multiplying infinitely the points of amorous contact. It appears as if -each hair were an electric wire, putting us into direct connection with -the senses, with the heart, and even with the thoughts, of those we -love. It is not without reason that woman’s hair has long been given as -a token of love.” - -What a clumsy thing is language, what an awkward thing a formal proposal -stuttered out by a lover more embarrassed than if he were an amateur -actor appearing on the stage for the first time, as Romeo before an -international audience of actors and critics! How much less natural, -less poetic, it is to hear the confession of Love than to feel it— - - “When panting sighs the bosom fill, - And hands, by chance united, thrill - At once with one delicious pain.”—CLOUGH. - -What poet, and were he a genius in condensation, could compress into a -line, a page, a volume, such an ocean of emotion as is contained in a -momentary caress of the hand? Not even the moment when the lovers are -“imparadised in one another’s arms” surpasses this in ecstasy. - -Yet there is a more delicious rapture still in the drama of Courtship. -“Love’s sweetest language is,” as Herrick says, “a kiss.” All other -caresses are valueless without a kiss; for is not a kiss the very -autograph of Love? - -But labial contact is a subject of such supreme importance in the -philosophy and history of Love that it cannot be disposed of briefly as -one form of caressing, but demands a chapter by itself. - - - - - KISSING—PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE - - -“The lips,” says Sir Charles Bell, “are of all the features the most -susceptible of action, and the most direct index of the feelings.” No -wonder that Cupid selected them as his private seal, without which no -passion can be stamped as genuine. - -For the expression of all other emotions, by words or signs, one pair of -lips suffices. Love alone requires for its expression two pairs of lips. -Could anything more eloquently demonstrate the superiority of the -romantic passion over all others? - -Steele said of kissing that “Nature was its author, and it began with -the first courtship.” Steele evidently evolved this theory out of his -“inner consciousness,” for the facts do not agree with it. The art of -Kissing has, like Love itself, been gradually developed in connection -with the higher stages of culture. Traces of it are found among animals -and savages; the ancients often misunderstood its purport and object, as -did our mediæval ancestors; and it is only in recent times that Kissing -has tended to become what it should be—the special and exclusive -language of romantic and conjugal love. - - - AMONG ANIMALS - -Honour to whom honour is due. The Chimpanzee seems to have been the -first who discovered the charm of mutual labial contact. In the -description by Mr. Bartlett just referred to, the two Chimpanzees “sat -opposite, touching each other with their much-protruded lips.” And in -some notes on the Chimpanzee in Central Park, New York, by Dr. C. -Pitfield Mitchell, published in the _Journal of Comparative Medicine and -Surgery_, January 1885, we find the following: “That tender emotions are -experienced may be inferred from the fact that he pressed the kitten to -his breast and kissed it, holding it very gently in both hands. In -kissing, the lips are pouted and the tongue protruded, and both are -pressed upon the object of affection. The act is not accompanied by any -sound, thus differing from ordinary human osculation.” - -Dogs, especially when young, may be seen occasionally exchanging a sort -of tongue-kiss; and who has not seen dogs innumerable times make a -sudden sly dash at the lips of master or mistress and try to _steal_ a -kiss? The affectionate manner in which a cow and calf eagerly lick one -another in succession may be regarded as quite as genuine a kiss as a -human kiss on hand, forehead, or cheek; and it is probable that even in -the billing of doves the motive is a vague pleasure of contact. - - - AMONG SAVAGES - -we meet once more with the anomalous fact that they seem ignorant, on -the whole, of a clever invention known even to some animals. Sir John -Lubbock, after referring to Steele’s opinion that kissing is coeval with -courtship, remarks: “It was, on the contrary, entirely unknown to the -Tahitians, the New Zealanders, the Papuas, and the aborigines of -Australia, nor was it in use among the Somals or the Esquimaux.” Jemmy -Button, the Fuegian, told Darwin that kissing was unknown in his land; -and another writer gives an amusing account of an attempt he made to -kiss a young negro girl. She was greatly terrified, probably imagining -him a new species of cannibal who had made up his mind to eat her on the -spot, raw, and without salt and pepper. - -Monteiro, in a passage previously quoted, says that in all the long -years he has been in Africa he has “never seen a negro put his arm round -a woman’s waist, or give or receive any caress whatever that would -indicate the slightest loving regard or affection on either side.” - -Considering the general obtuseness of a savage’s nerves, it is no wonder -that the subtle thrill of a kiss should be unknown to him. In many -cases, moreover, Kissing is rendered physically impossible by the habit -indulged in of mutilating and enlarging the lips. For instance, -Schweinfurth, in his _Heart of Africa_, says that among the Bongo women -“the lower lip is extended horizontally till it projects far beyond the -upper, which is also bored and fitted with a copper plate or nail, and -now and then by a little ring, and sometimes by a bit of straw, about as -thick as a lucifer match.” Many other similar cases could be cited. - -Evidently, under these circumstances, kissing would prove a snare and a -delusion. - - - THE ORIGIN OF KISSING - -is a topic on which doctors disagree, the opinions of Darwin and Mr. -Spencer in particular differing as widely as their views regarding the -origin of music. Mr. Spencer traces the primitive delight in osculation -to the gustatory sense, Darwin to contact. - -“Obviously,” says Mr. Spencer, "the billing of doves or pigeons, and the -like action of love-birds, indicates an affection which is gratified by -the gustatory sensation. No act of this kind on the part of an inferior -creature, as of a cow licking a calf, can have any other origin than the -direct prompting of a desire which gains by the act satisfaction; and in -such a case the satisfaction is that which vivid perception of offspring -gives to the maternal yearning. In some animals like acts arise from -other forms of affection. Licking the hand, or, where it is accessible, -the face, is a common display of attachment on a dog’s part; and when we -remember how keen must be the olfactory sense by which a dog traces his -master, we cannot doubt that to his gustatory sense, too, there is -yielded some impression—an impression associated with those pleasures of -affection which his master’s presence gives. - -“The inference that kissing, as a mark of fondness in the human race, -has a kindred origin, is sufficiently probable. Though kissing is not -universal—though the negro races do not understand it, and though, as we -have seen, there are cases where sniffing replaces it—yet, being common -to unlikely and widely-dispersed peoples, we may conclude that it -originated in the same manner as the analogous action among lower -creatures.... From kissing as a natural sign of affection, there is -derived the kissing which, as a means of simulating affection, gratifies -those who are kissed; and, by gratifying them, propitiates them. Hence -an obvious root for the kissing of feet, hands, garments, as a part of -ceremonial.” - -Darwin, on the other hand, holds that kissing “is so far innate or -natural that it apparently depends on pleasure from close contact with a -beloved person; and it is replaced in various parts of the world, by the -rubbing of noses, as with the New Zealanders and Laplanders, by the -rubbing or patting of the arms, breasts, or stomachs, or by one man -striking his own face with the hands or feet of another. Perhaps the -practice of blowing, as a mark of affection, on various parts of the -body may depend on the same principle.” - -Has Mr. Spencer ever kissed a girl? Certainly, to one who has, his -theory of the gustatory origin of Kissing would seem like a joke were it -not stated with so much scientific pomp and circumstance. The billing of -doves and love-birds, in the first place, cannot be regarded as a matter -of taste, literally, because in birds the sense of taste is commonly -very rudimentary or quite absent, as their habit of swallowing seeds and -other food whole and dry would make a sense which can only judge of -things in a state of solution quite useless. The sense of touch, on the -other hand, is exceedingly delicate in the bill of birds, which is, as -it were, their feeler or hand. - -That the motive which prompts cows and calves to lick one another is -likewise tactile rather than gustatory, I had occasion to observe only a -few days ago in a place worthy of so romantic a subject as the -experimental study of kissing. Scene: a green mountain-meadow above -Mürren, Switzerland. Frame of the picture, a semicircle of snow-giants, -including Wetterhorn, Eiger, Mönch, Jungfrau, Breithorn, etc. Cows and -calves in the meadow, not in the least disturbed by the avalanches -thundering down the side of the Jungfrau every twenty minutes. Cow licks -calf, and calf retaliates by licking the cow’s neck. Cow enjoys it -immensely, holding her head up as high as possible, with an expression -of intense enjoyment, just like a dog when you rub and pat his neck. -Ergo, as cow was not licking but being licked, her enjoyment must have -been tactile, not gustatory. To the cow her tongue is what the bill is -to a bird—her most mobile organ, her feeler, and hand. - -Possibly Mr. Spencer was misled into his gustatory theory by a too -literal interpretation of a habit poets have always had of calling a -kiss sweet. Among the Romans a love-kiss was distinguished from other -kisses by being called a _suavium_ or sweet thing; and a modern German -poet boldly compares the flavour of kisses to wild strawberries (perhaps -she had just been eating some). Yet all this belongs to fancy’s -fairyland. Kisses are called sweet for the same reason that we speak of -the sweet concords of music, _i.e._ because the language of æsthetics is -so scantily developed that we are constantly compelled to borrow terms -from one sense and apply them to another, when their only resemblance is -that they are both agreeable or otherwise. - -There is a very prevalent impression that the senses of savages are more -delicate than ours. In one way they are. A savage can often see an -object at a greater distance, and hear a fainter sound, than a white -man. But in what may be called æsthetic as distinguished from physical -refinement, savages are vastly our inferiors. A savage can hardly tell -the difference between two adjacent notes in the musical scale, while a -musician can distinguish the sixtieth part of a semitone. And why would -the wondrous harmonies of a Chopin nocturne seem a mere chaos of sound -to a savage? Because his ears have not been trained through his -imagination and intellect to discriminate sounds and sound-combinations, -or to follow the plot or development of a musical narrative or “theme.” - -Just so with the sense of touch. A sweetheart’s veil fluttering in a -Hottentot’s face would only annoy him. A squeeze of the hand would leave -him cold; and would he refrain from putting his arm round her waist if -that gave him any pleasure? Obviously, then, the reason why the art of -kissing is unknown to him is because his senses are too callous, his -imagination too sluggish. - -Kissing, like every other fine art, has its sensuous and its imaginative -or intellectual side. Of all parts of the visible body the lips are the -most sensitive to contact. Here the layer in which the nerves and -blood-vessels are contained is not covered over, as elsewhere on the -skin, by a thick leathery epidermis, but only thinly veiled by a -transparent epithelium; so that when lips are applied to lips, the -blood-vessels which carry the vital fluid straight from the two loving -hearts, and the soul-fibres, called nerves, are brought into almost -immediate contact: whence that interchange of soul-magnetism—that -electric shock which makes the first mutual kiss of Love the sweetest -moment of life— - - “What words can ever speak affection - So thrilling and sincere as thine?”—BURNS. - -Yet herein the imagination plays a much more prominent _rôle_ than it -appears to do at first sight. The real reason why a savage cannot enjoy -a kiss is not so much because his lips are deficient in tactile -sensibility, as because he has no imagination to invest labial contact -with the romance of individualised passion. If a lover’s pleasure lay in -the mere labial contact, he would as soon exchange a kiss with any other -girl. But should a sweetheart, on being asked for a kiss, refer him, -say, to his sister or her sister; though the latter be a hundred times -more beautiful, he would chide his love for offering a stone where bread -was wanted. His imagination has so long painted to him the superior -ecstasy of a kiss from her that, when he finally gets it, the -long-deferred gratification ensures the unparalleled rapture -anticipated. - - - ANCIENT KISSES - -As the ancient civilised nations were much more addicted than we are to -gesture language, it seems natural that so expressive a sign as kissing -should have been used for a variety of purposes—for indicating not only -family affection, sexual passion and friendship, but general respect, -reverence, humility, condescension, etc. Among idolatrous nations, as -M‘Clintock and Strong remark, “it was the custom to throw kisses towards -the images of the gods, and towards the sun and moon.” Kissing the hand -appears to be a modern custom, but many other parts of the body were -thus saluted by the ancients: “Kissing the feet of princes was a token -of subjection and obedience, which was sometimes carried so far that the -print of the foot received the kiss, so as to give the impression that -the very dust had become sacred by the royal tread, or that the subject -was not worthy to salute even the prince’s foot, but was content to kiss -the earth itself near or on which he trod.” A similar observance is the -kissing of the Pope’s toe, or rather, the cross on his slipper—a custom -in vogue since the year 710. Among the Arabs the women and children kiss -the beards of their husbands or fathers. Among the ancient Hebrews, -“kissing the lips by way of affectionate salutation was not only -permitted, but customary among near relatives of both sexes, both in -patriarchal and in later times.” The kiss on the cheek “has at all times -been customary in the East, and can hardly be said to be extinct even in -Europe.” - -Among the ancient Greeks, Jealousy prompted the husbands to “make their -wives eat onions whenever they were going from home.” And in the Roman -Republic, “Among the safeguards of female purity,” says Mr. Lecky, “was -an enactment forbidding women even to taste wine.... Cato said that the -ancient Romans were accustomed to kiss their wives for the purpose of -discovering whether they had been drinking wine.” - -Breath-sweetening cloves and cachous were evidently unknown in the good -old times. - -The Romans had special names for three kinds of kisses—_basium_, a kiss -of politeness; _osculum_, between friends; _suavium_, between lovers. If -a man kissed his betrothed, she gained thereby the half of his effects -in the event of his dying before the celebration of the marriage; and if -the lady herself died, under the same circumstances, her heirs or -nearest of kin took the half due to her, a kiss among the ancients being -a sign of plighted faith. So seriously, indeed, was a kiss regarded by -the ancient Romans, that a husband would not even kiss his wife in -presence of his daughters. - -It was on account of this strict feeling regarding kisses exchanged by -man and woman that the early Christians subjected themselves to fierce -attacks and slander, because of the kisses that were exchanged as a -symbol of religious union at the Love-Feasts of the first disciples. -“But, in 397, the Council of Carthage thought fit to forbid all -religious kissing between the sexes, notwithstanding St. Paul’s -exhortation, ‘Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity.’” - - - MEDIÆVAL KISSES - -Among many other refinements of the ancients, the mediæval nations lost -the sense of the sacredness of kissing between the sexes. England was -apparently the greatest sinner in this respect; for it appears to have -been customary on visiting to kiss the host’s wife and daughters. -Indeed, up to a comparatively recent time, kissing on every occasion was -almost as prevalent and permissible as handshaking is at the present -day. In the sixteenth century it was customary in England for ladies to -reward their partners in the dance with a kiss; and for a long time the -minister who united a couple in the holy bonds of matrimony had the -privilege of kissing not only the bride but even the bridesmaids! No -wonder the ministry was the most popular profession in those days. - -“It is quite certain,” says a writer in the _St. James’s Magazine_ -(1871), “that the custom of kissing was brought into England from -Friesland, as St. Pierius Wensemius, historiographer to their High -Mightinesses, the states of Friesland, in his _Chronicle_, 1622, tells -us that the pleasant practice of kissing was utterly ‘unpractised and -unknown in England till the fair Princess Romix (Rowena), the daughter -of King Hengist of Friesland, pressed the beaker with her lippens, and -saluted the amorous Vortigern with a kusjen’ (little kiss).” - -Having recovered this lost art, however, the English lost no time in -making up for neglected opportunities. Erasmus writes in one of his -epistles: “If you go to any place (in Britain) you are received with a -_kiss_ by all; if you depart on a journey, you are dismissed with a -kiss; you return, kisses are exchanged ... wherever you move, nothing -but kisses. And if you, Faustus, had but once tasted them,—how soft they -are, how fragrant! on my honour, you would wish not to reside here for -ten years only, but for life!!!” - -Bunyan, however, frowned on this practice, and inquired most -pertinently—and impertinently—why the men only “salute the most handsome -and let the ill-favoured alone?” - -Pepys, in his _Diary_ for 1660, gives this account of some Portuguese -ladies in London: “I find nothing in them that is pleasing; and I see -they have _learnt to kiss_, and look freely up and down already, and I -do believe will soon forget the recluse practice of their own country.” - -One of the luckiest of mortals was Bulstrode Whitelock, who at the Court -of Christine of Sweden was asked to teach her ladies “the English mode -of salutation; which, after some pretty defences, their lips obeyed, and -_Whitelock most readily_!” - -The following extraordinary kissing story is told in _Chambers’s -Journal_ for 1861:— - -“When the gallant cardinal, Count of Lorraine, was presented to the -Duchess of Savoy, she gave him her hand to kiss, greatly to the -indignation of the irate churchman. ‘How, madame,’ exclaimed he, ‘am I -to be treated in this manner? I kiss the queen, my mistress, who is the -greatest queen in the world, and shall I not kiss you, a _dirty little -duchess_? I would have you know I have kissed as handsome ladies, and of -as great or greater family than you.’ Without more ado he made for the -lips of the proud Portuguese princess, and, despite her resistance, -kissed her thrice on her mouth before he released her with an exultant -laugh.” - -The fashion of universal kissing appears to have gone out about the time -of the Restoration. - - - MODERN KISSES - -The history of kissing, thus briefly sketched, shows that among -primitive men this art is unknown because they are incapable of -appreciating it. To the ancient civilised nations its charms were -revealed; but as usual in the intoxication of a new discovery, they -hardly knew what to do with it, and applied it to all sorts of stupid -ceremonial purposes. The tendency of civilisation, however, has been to -eliminate promiscuous kissing, and restrict it more and more to its -proper function as an expression of the affections. And even within this -sphere the circle becomes gradually smaller. Although in some parts of -Europe men still kiss one another as a token of relationship, -friendship, or esteem, yet the habit is slowly dying out, the example -having been set in England, where it was abandoned toward the close of -the seventeenth century. The senseless custom which women to-day indulge -in of kissing each other on the slightest provocation, often when they -would rather slap one another in the face, is also doomed to extinction. -The witticism that women kiss one another because they cannot find -anything better to kiss, differing herein from men, was not perpetrated -by a woman. The practice of kissing little children has been often -enough condemned on medical grounds, which also hold good in the case of -adults. That contagious diseases are thus often conveyed from one person -to another was already known to the ancient Romans, one of whose -emperors issued a special proclamation in consequence against -promiscuous kissing. - -From a sentimental point of view, the most objectionable of modern -kisses are those which are allowed between cousins. As long as a man may -become a suitor for the hand of his cousin he should, both for the sake -of his own love-drama and in justice to a possible rival, be debarred -from this privilege. Imagine the feelings of a lover who knows that his -rival has been permitted to steal the virgin kiss from the lips of his -adored one simply because his father happens to be her uncle! Family -kisses should, therefore, be allowed only within that degree of -relationship which precludes the idea of Love and marriage. Cousins will -have to be satisfied in future with a warmer grasp of the hand and an -extra lump of sugar in a maiden’s smile. - - - LOVE-KISSES - -The happiest moment in the life of the happiest man is that when he is -allowed for the first time to “steal immortal blessing” from the lips of -her who has just promised to be his for ever. No wonder the poets have -grown eloquent over this supreme moment of pre-heavenly rapture— - -TENNYSON— - - “O love, O fire! once he drew - With one long kiss my whole soul through - My lips, as sunlight drinketh dew.” - -MOORE— - - “Grow to my lips thou sacred kiss.” - -SHAKSPERE— - - “As if he plucked up kisses by the root - That grew upon my lips.” - -RÜCKERT— - - “Meine Liebste, mit den frommen treuen - Braunen Rehesaugen, sagt, sie habe - Blaue einst als Kind gehabt. Ich glaub’es. - Neulich da ich, seliges Vergessen - Trinkend hing an ihren Lippen, - Meine Augen unterm langen Kusse - Oeffnend, schaut’ ich in die nahen ihren, - Und sie kamen mir in solcher Nähe - Tiefblau wie ein Himmel vor. Was ist das - Wer gibt dir der Kindheit Augen wieder? - Deine Liebe, sprach sie, deine Liebe, - Die mich hat zum Kind gemacht, die alle - Liebesunschuldsträume meiner Kindheit - Hat gereift zu sel’ger Erfüllung. - Soll der Himmel nicht, der mir im Herzen - Steht durch dich, mir blau durch’s Auge blicken?” - -Love-kisses are silent like deep affection— - - “Passions are likened best to floods and streams: - The shallow murmur, but the deep are dumb.”—RALEIGH. - -True, Petruchio kissed Katrina “with such a clamorous smack, that at the -parting all the church did echo”; but his object was not to express his -Love, but to tease and tame the shrew. Loud kisses, moreover, might -betray the lovers to profane ears, and bring on a fatal attack of -Coyness on the girl’s part— - - “The greatest sin ’twixt heaven and hell - Is first to kiss and then to tell.” - -Love-kisses are passionate and long; for Love is Cupid’s lip-cement— - - “Oh, a kiss, long as my exile, - Sweet as my revenge.”—SHAKSPERE. - - “A long, long kiss, a kiss of youth and love.” - - “For a kiss’s strength - I think it must be measured by its length.”—BYRON. - - “A kiss now that will hang upon my lip - As sweet as morning dew upon a rose, - And full as long.”—THOMAS MIDDLETON. - -Perhaps the longest kiss on record is that which Siegfried gives -Brünnhilde in the drama of _Siegfried_. But this is not an ordinary -kiss, for the hero has to wake with it the Valkyrie from the twenty -years’ sleep into which old Wotan had plunged her for disobeying his -orders. Thanks to Wagner’s art, the thrill of this Love-kiss, magically -transmuted into tones, is felt by a thousand spectators simultaneously -with the lover. - -Love-kisses are innumerable. Thus sings the Italian poet, Cecco -Angiolieri, in the thirteenth century— - - “Because the stars are fewer in heaven’s span - Than all those kisses wherewith I kept time - All in an instant (I who now have none!) - Upon her mouth (I and no other man!) - So sweetly on the twentieth day of June - On the New Year twelve hundred ninety-one.” - ROSSETTI’S TRANSL. - -Novelists and poets have exhausted their ingenuity in finding adjectives -descriptive of Love-kisses and others. An anonymous essayist has -compiled the following list:— - -“Kisses are forced, unwilling, cold, comfortless, frigid, and frozen, -chaste, timid, rosy, balmy, humid, dewy, trembling, soft, gentle, -tender, tempting, fragrant, sacred, hallowed, divine, soothing, joyful, -affectionate, delicious, rapturous, deep-drawn, impressive, quick, and -nervous, warm, burning, impassioned, inebriating, ardent, flaming, and -akin to fire, ravishing, lingering, long. One also hears of parting, -tear-dewed, savoury, loathsome, poisonous, treacherous, false, rude, -stolen, and great fat, noisy kisses.” - - - HOW TO KISS - -Kissing comes by instinct, and yet it is an art which few understand -properly. A lover should not hold his bride by the ears in kissing her, -as appears to have been customary at Scotch weddings of the last -century. A more graceful way, and quite effective in preventing the -bride from “getting away,” is to put your right arm round her neck, your -fingers under her chin, raise the chin, and then gently but firmly press -your lips on hers. After a few repetitions she will find out it doesn’t -hurt, and become as gentle as a lamb. - -The word adoration is derived from kissing. It means literally to apply -to the mouth. Therefore girls should beware of philologists who may ask -them with seemingly harmless intent, “May I adore you?” - -In kissing, as in everything else, honesty is the best policy. Stolen -kisses are not the sweetest, as Leigh Hunt would have us believe. A kiss -to be a kiss must be mutual, voluntary, simultaneous. “The kiss snatched -hasty from the sidelong maid” is not worth having. A stolen kiss is only -half a kiss. - - “These poor half-kisses kill me quite; - Was ever man thus served? - Amidst an ocean of delight, - For pleasure to be starved?”—MARLOWE. - - - - - HOW TO WIN LOVE - - - BRASS BUTTONS - -Inasmuch as language is the least eloquent and effective mode of -expressing Love, and inasmuch as Love is commonly inspired in woman by -the possession of qualities which she lacks, it is obvious that -Shakspere did not show his usual insight into human nature when he -wrote— - - “That man that hath a tongue is, I say, no man, - If with his tongue he cannot win a woman.” - -It seems, indeed, quite probable that Bacon wrote those two lines; if -Shakspere had written them he would have said— - - “That man that hath a uniform is, I say, no man, - If with his uniform he cannot win a woman.” - -The extraordinary infatuation for military uniforms shown by women of -all times and countries is one of the most obscure problems in mental -and social philosophy. Whenever an officer, though ever so humble in -rank, is present at a ball or other social gathering, all other men, be -they merchants, politicians, lawyers, physicians, artists, students, -ministers, are simply “nowhere.” - -What is the cause of this singular infatuation? Is it the colour-harmony -formed by the complementary blue cloth and yellow buttons? No, for -various officials, as well as messenger boys, wear similar uniforms -without making any special impression on the feminine heart. Is it the -beauty or the wit of the soldier? No, for he may be as stupid as a log, -and red-nosed and smallpox-pitted, without losing a jot of his -popularity. Nor can it be his valour, for he has perhaps never yet been -opposite the “business end” of a rifle, as they say out West. Nor, -again, is it likely that women admire soldiers from an inherited sense -of gratitude for the services they rendered in former warlike times in -protecting their great-great-grandmothers from the enemy’s barbarity; -for woman’s gratitude is not apt to be so very retrospective, while -gratitude itself is less apt to inspire Love than aversion. - -Whatever may be the cause of this mysterious phenomenon, the fact -remains that officers are woman’s ideals. Hence the first and most -important hint to those who would win a woman’s Love is: Put brass -buttons on your coat, have it dyed blue, and wear epaulettes and a waxed -moustache. This love-charm has never been known to fail. - - - CONFIDENCE AND BOLDNESS - -Women secretly detest bashful men. It is their own duty, prescribed by -etiquette, to be passive, shy, and diffident; hence if men were shy and -diffident too, no advances would be made, and all progress in -Love-making would be retarded. - -Women love courage. He who robs lions of their hearts can easily win a -woman’s. - - “Our doubts are traitors, - And make us lose the good we oft might win - By fearing to attempt,” - -says Shakspere; and Chesterfield remarks _à propos_, that “that silly -sanguine notion which is firmly entertained here, that one Englishman -can beat three Frenchmen, encourages and has sometimes enabled one -Englishman in reality to beat two.” - -Ovid knew the value of boldness. And although his object was not to -teach how to win permanent Love, but how to get honey without taking -care of the bees, yet his psychology is correct, and agrees with -Goethe’s aphorism that “if thou approachest women with tenderness thou -winnest them with a word; but he who is bold and saucy comes off -better.” - -Perhaps this is one reason why officers are so successful in Love, for -several of them have been known to be bold and saucy. - -Another reason may be that their pursuit is more distinctively and -exclusively masculine than any other profession. - -What, for instance, could be more delightfully masculine, _i.e._ -mediæval, than the way in which, according to the _Chronicon Turonense_, -William the Conqueror wooed and won Mathilde, the daughter of Count -Baldwin, Prince of Flanders. At first he was unsuccessful, “for the -young girl,” says Professor Scherr, “declared proudly she would not -marry a bastard. Then William rode to Bruges, waylaid Mathilde, attacked -her when she came from church, pulled her long hair, and maltreated her -with his fists and with kicks, after which heroic performance he made -his escape. Strange to say, this peculiar mode of Love-making imposed so -greatly on the beauty that she declared with tears in her eyes that she -would marry no one but the Norman Duke, whom she actually did marry. A -parallel case may be found in the German _Nibelungenlied_ (str. 870 and -901).” - -Since, according to the old philosophy, human nature, including Love and -Love-making, is the same at all times and in all countries, it follows -that a modern lover, after donning his brass buttons, should administer -his sweetheart a sound thrashing. That will make her mellow and docile. - - - PLEASANT ASSOCIATIONS - -The Germans, it is well known, are deficient in Gallantry, at least in -conjugal life, and often treat their wives more as upper servants than -as companions. Perhaps it was the unconscious desire to justify this -conjugal attitude that induced one of the leading German psychologists, -Horwicz, to pen these lines:— - -“Love can only be excited by strong and vivid emotions, and it is almost -immaterial whether these emotions are agreeable or disagreeable. The Cid -wooed the proud heart of Donna Ximene, whose father he had slain, by -shooting one after another of her pet pigeons. Such persons as arouse in -us only weak emotions, or none at all, are obviously least likely to -incline us toward them.... Our aversion is most apt to be bestowed on -individuals who, as the phrase goes, are ‘neither warm nor cold’; -whereas impulsive, choleric people, though they may readily offend us, -are just as capable of making us warmly attached to them.” - -How that modern genius, who lived two thousand years ago and called -himself Ovid, would have opened his eyes in wonder at this -German-mediæval Art of Love! He, queer fellow, believed that a lover -should never be otherwise than pleasantly associated in his sweetheart’s -mind. If she is spoiled by over-indulgence, do not, he says in effect, -take away her dainties with your own hand. If she is unwell, do not hand -her the bitter medicine in person: “Let your rival mix the cup for her.” - -So long as the professional manslayer is the highest ideal of woman’s -tender heart, lovers will do well to follow mediæval methods of -Courtship and make themselves as disagreeable as possible. When the -millennium arrives, and wholesale duels to avenge offended national -“honour” will, like private duels to avenge individual “honour,” have -become obsolete, then the Ovidian psychology of Love will begin to -prevail. Then will the lover endeavour to avoid all harshness and to be -only agreeably associated in the mind of his goddess—through bright, -cheerful conversation, harmless and sincere compliments, mutual -enjoyment of excursions and artistic entertainments, the avoidance of -disagreeable topics, of jealous suspicions and reproaches, etc.; hoping -thus to become the nucleus around which her dreams of matrimonial -happiness will gradually crystallise. - - - PERSEVERANCE - -Persistence alone may win a woman where all other means fail. She may -dream of an ideal lover and vainly wait for his appearance for several -years; and in the meantime the image of her ever-present suitor will -become brighter and more inviting in her mind. For is not perseverance, -is not unflagging devotion to a single aim, one of the noblest of manly -attributes, a guarantee of success in life and the highest test of -genuine passion? - -Perseverance may neutralise more than one refusal. - - “Have you not heard it said full oft - A woman’s nay doth stand for naught?” - -asks Shakspere; and Byron teaches that she - - “Who listens once will listen twice; - Her heart, be sure, is not of ice, - And one refusal no rebuff.” - -The fact that a proposal is the sincerest compliment a man can pay a -woman, contributes not a little to make a second proposal more -acceptable. A third should rarely be attempted. The first proposal may -have been refused more from momentary embarrassment than from real -indifference. The second, being weighted by reflection, is generally -final, though numerous exceptions have occurred; yet in such cases it is -probable that the woman gives her hand without her heart, having at last -discovered that her heart is impervious to all Love. There are hundreds -of thousands of such women, and some of them are very sweet and pretty. -The fault lies in their shallow education. - - - FEIGNED INDIFFERENCE - -Of every ten disappointed lovers seven might say: Had I been a less -submissive slave, I might have been a more successful suitor. - -“It is a rule of manners,” says Emerson, “to avoid exaggeration.... In -man or woman the face and the person lose power when they are on the -strain to express admiration.” - -In other words, one of the ways of winning Love is through stolidity and -indifference, real or feigned. - -Were women the paragons of subtle insight they are painted, they would -favour those who are most visibly affected by their charms, as being -best able to appreciate and cherish them. There are such women—a few; -but the majority are partial coquettes, to whom Love is known only as a -form of Vanity, who neglect a man already won, and reserve their -sweetest smiles for those that seem less submissive. The artificial -dignity under which so many young society men hide their mental vacuity -has an irresistible fascination for the average society girl. And the -high collar, which helps to keep the head in a dignified position, -unswerved by emotion, is responsible for innumerable conquests. - -Ergo, to win a society girl’s heart, wear a high collar, appear awfully -dignified and stolid, and show not the slightest interest in anything. -Above all, if you are of superior intelligence, carefully conceal the -fact. Brains are not “good form” in society; for what’s the use of -having flint where there is no steel to strike a spark? “Stolidity,” -says Schopenhauer, “does not injure a man in a woman’s eye: rather will -mental superiority, and still more genius, as something abnormal, have -an unfavourable influence.” - -A passage from Diderot’s _Paradox of Acting_ (Pollock’s translation) may -be cited in illustration of Schopenhauer’s remark. - -“Take two lovers, both of whom have their declarations to make. Who will -come out of it best? Not I, I promise you. I remember that I approached -the beloved object with fear and trembling; my heart beat, my ideas grew -confused, my voice failed me, I mangled all I said; I cried _yes_ for -_no_; I made a thousand blunders; I was inimitably inept; I was absurd -from top to toe, and the more I saw it the more absurd I became. -Meanwhile, under my very eyes, a gay rival, light-hearted and agreeable, -master of himself, pleased with himself, losing no opportunity for the -finest flattery, made himself entertaining and agreeable, enjoyed -himself; he implored the touch of a hand which was at once given him, he -sometimes caught it without asking leave, he kissed it once and again. I -the while, alone in a corner, avoided a sight which irritated me, -stifling my sighs, cracking my fingers with grasping my wrists, plunged -in melancholy, covered with a cold sweat, I could neither show nor -conceal my vexation. People say of love that it robs witty men of their -wit, and gives it to those who had none before: in other words, makes -some people sensitive and stupid, others cold and adventurous.” - -Another specialist in Love-lore, Lord Byron, discourses on this text in -five pithy lines— - - “Not much he kens, I ween, of woman’s breast - Who thinks that wanton thing is won by sighs, - Do proper homage to thine idol’s eyes, - _But not too humbly or she will despise; - Disguise even tenderness, if thou art wise_.” - -And even the king of German metaphysicians, old Kant, understood this -feminine foible, which may have been the reason why he never found a -wife: “An actor,” he says, “who remains unmoved, but possesses a -powerful intellect and imagination, may succeed in producing a deeper -impression by his feigned emotion than he could by real emotion. One who -is truly in love is, in presence of his beloved, confused, awkward, and -anything but fascinating. But a clever man who merely plays the _rôle_ -of a lover may do it so naturally as to easily ensnare his poor victim; -simply because, his heart being unmoved, his head remains clear, and he -can, therefore, make the most of his wits and his cleverness in -presenting the counterfeit of a lover.” - -“The counterfeit of a lover.” It is he, then, whom women, according to -these French, English, and German witnesses, encourage, instead of the -true lover. So that women are not only less capable of deep Love than -men, but they do not even promote the growth and survival of Love by -favouring the men most deeply affected by it. And the fault, be it said -once more, lies in the superficial education not only of their intellect -but of their emotions, for the heart can only be reached and refined -through the brain. The average woman, being incapable of feeling Love, -is incapable of appreciating it when she finds it in a man. She sees -only its ridiculous side—and ridicule is fatal, even to Love. Ridicule -killed Love in France, which to-day is the most loveless country in the -civilised world, its women the most frivolous and heartless,—and its -population gradually diminishing. - -The ridiculous exaggerations of a lover are indeed harmless if the girl -is in love too, for then she does not see them; but to one who has yet -to win Love, as girls are now constituted, they are fatal. Perhaps this -is the reason why the list of men of genius who failed in their truest -Love is so extraordinarily large: for, their Love being more ardent than -that of others, they were unable to restrain its excesses and feign -indifference; while another way in which they “lost power” was through -their extravagant admiration of Beauty, which put their faces “on the -strain” to express it. - -However this may be, lovers should keep in mind this paradoxical rule, -which follows as a corollary from the foregoing discussion: - -In order to win a woman, first cure yourself of your passion, then, -having won her through feigned indifference (which is easy), fall in -love again and bag her before she has had time to discover your change -of feeling. - -The only difficulty herein lies in the cure. Should this be found -impossible, even with the aid of our next chapter, one last resource is -open to the lover. Says La Bruyère: “Quand l’on a assez fait auprès -d’une femme pour devoir l’engager, il y a encore une ressource, qui est -de ne plus rien faire; _c’est alors qu’elle vous rappelle_.” In other -words, if you have failed to win her love, with all your attentions, -change your policy: leave her alone, and she will be sure to recall you. - -This trait is not simply the outcome of feminine perverseness or -coquetry. The explanation lies deeper. Every sensible woman, be she ever -so vain and accustomed to flattery, is painfully conscious of certain -defects, physical or mental. “Has he discovered them?” she will -anxiously ask herself when the sly lover suddenly withdraws; “I must -recover his good opinion.” So she sets herself the task of fascinating -and pleasing him; and this desire to please (Gallantry) being one of the -constituent parts of Love, it is apt to be soon joined by the other -symptoms which make up the romantic passion. - - - COMPLIMENTS - - “O flatter me, for love delights in praises,” - -exclaims one of Shakspere’s characters; and again— - - “Flatter and praise, commend, extol their graces; - Tho’ ne’er so black, say they have angels’ faces.” - -There is one advantage in writing about the romantic passion. Love is -such a tissue of paradoxes, and exists in such an endless variety of -forms and shades that you may say almost anything about it you please, -and it is likely to be correct. So again here. It is true, no doubt, -that skill in the art of flattery helps a man to win a woman’s goodwill, -but how does this rhyme with the doctrine that Feigned Indifference is -the lover’s sharpest weapon? - -Answer: A compliment is not so much an expression of Love as of simple -æsthetic admiration; or else it may spring from the flatterer’s desire -to show off his wit. A man may compliment a woman for whom he does not -feel the slightest Love; and women know it. Therefore even a coquette -does not despise and ignore a man who flatters her, as she invariably -does one whose _actions_ brand him as her captive and slave. - -At the same time, since the desire to be considered beautiful is the -strongest passion in a woman’s heart, the avenue to that heart may often -be found by a man who can convince her honestly that she is considered -beautiful by himself and others. For, as every man of ability has -moments when he doubts his genius, so every woman has moments when she -doubts her beauty and longs to see it in the mirror of a masculine eye. - -The most common mistake of lovers is to compliment a woman on her most -conspicuous points of beauty. This has very much the same effect on her -as telling Rubinstein he is a wonderful pianist. He knows that better -than you do, and has been told so so many million times that he is sick -and tired of hearing it again. But show him that you have discovered -some special subtle detail of excellence in his performance or -compositions that had escaped general notice, and his heart is yours at -once and for ever. A lover can have no difficulty in discovering such -subtle charms in his sweetheart, for Cupid, while blinding him to her -defects, places her beauties under a microscope. - -A man who attends a social gathering comes home pleased, not at having -heard a number of bright things, but in proportion to his own success in -amusing the company. On the same principle, if you give a -girl—especially one who mistrusts her conversational ability—a chance to -say a single bright thing, she will love you more than if you said a -hundred clever things to her. - -Sincerity in compliments is essential; else all is lost. It is useless -to try to convince a woman with an ugly mouth or nose that those -features are not ugly. She knows they are ugly, as well as Rubinstein -knows when he strikes a wrong note. “Very ugly or very beautiful women,” -says Chesterfield, “should be flattered on their understanding, and -mediocre ones on their beauty.” - -A clever joke is never out of place. You may intimate to a comparatively -plain woman that she is good-looking, and if she retorts with a -sceptical answer, you may snub her and score ten points in Love by -telling her you pity her poor taste. - -Indeed, the art of successful flattery, especially with modern -self-conscious girls, consists in the ability of giving “a heartfelt -compliment in the disguise of playful raillery,” as Coleridge puts it. -Conundrums are very useful. For instance, Angelina is patting a dog. “Do -you know why all dogs are so fond of you?” asks Adolphus. Angelina gives -it up. “Because dogs are the most intelligent of all animals.” Angelina -goes to Paris, and Adolphus enjoys his last walk with her. They pass a -weeping willow. “Why are we two like this tree?” She gives it up again. -“A weeping willow is graceful and melancholy; you are graceful, I -melancholy.” - -“How old am I?” asks Angelina. “I don’t know. Judging by your -conversation thirty-five, by your looks nineteen.” - -Tell a woman—casually, as it were—of the effect of her charms on a third -party, and it will please her more than a bushel of your neatest -compliments. As Lessing remarks, Homer gives us a more vivid sense of -Helen’s beauty by noting its effect even on the Trojan elders, than he -could have done by the most minute enumeration of her charms. Put your -flatteries into actions rather than words—“mettre la flatterie dans les -actions et non en paroles”—is Balzac’s advice. But “flattery in actions” -is simply another name for Gallantry. - -There is no danger that the subtlest compliment will ever escape notice. -In the discovery of praise the commonest mind has the quickness of -genius. - - - LOVE-LETTERS - -The great trouble with compliments is that they have an annoying habit -of occurring to the mind about ten or twenty minutes after the natural -opportunity for getting them off has passed away. It is here that -Love-letters come to the rescue. They enable a man to excogitate the -most excruciatingly subtle and hyperbolic compliments, and then “lead up -to them” most naturally. - -There is an old superstition that Love-letters _must_ be incoherent -trash to be genuine evidences of passion. When Keats’s Love-letters to -Fanny Brawne were sold at auction, a spicy journalist commented as -follows on the occasion:— - -“It is open to question whether, like so many of the letter-writers of -the age of which Keats inherited the traditions, the singer of -_Endymion_ had not a shrewd eye to posterity when he wrote the laboured -compositions which the world regards as the record of his wooing. The -manuscript is painfully correct, the punctuation worthy of a printer’s -reader, the capitals much nicer than fiery lovers usually form, and the -periods rounded with painful care. Like so many cultivators of the art -of letter-writing, the sensitive poet, ‘who was snuffed out by a -review,’ seems to have copied the gush, which last week sold for ten -times more than _Endymion_ fetched, before he committed it to the -fourpenny post. Hence the veriest scrawl, the most illegible postcard of -these times is, as an index to the writer’s character, infinitely more -valuable than the ponderous pieces of rhetoric which last century passed -for love-making between Strephon, who quotes the elegant Tully, and -Chloe, who makes free use of the ‘Elegant Extracts.’ Duller fustian than -such priggish love-letters it is hard to conceive. They remind one of -nothing so much as the epistles copied out of _The Complete -Letter-Writer_, and must recall to some middle-aged men certain painful -experiences of those salad days when their young affections suffered a -sudden blight by missives of so severely correct an order that they -suggest the idea of having undergone maternal supervision.” - -Yet why, pray, should Keats _not_ have written his Love-letters so -carefully and copied them so neatly? Is it not a fact that when a man is -in love he cares more to make a pleasing impression on one particular -person than on all the rest of the world combined? and that even his -ambition and fame, for which he labours so hard, seem valuable in his -eyes solely as a means of winning Her Love? And if Love is a deeper -passion, even in a poet, than ambition, why should he not go to the -extent even of _taking notes_ and utilising his very best conceits in -his Love-letters? The truth is, in the writing of Love-letters -everything depends on the man’s habits. If he is accustomed to writing -carelessly, his Love-letters will probably be hasty and slovenly enough -to suit orthodox notions on this subject. But if he is a literary -artist, he will probably polish his _billets-doux_ more than anything -else _con amore_, considering the probable effect on her mind of every -sentence. And although the thought of future publication may enter his -mind, it will appear as the veriest trifle compared with the more -important object of winning a woman’s Love by a display of complimentary -wit and passionate protestations of undying affection. - -Sir Richard Steele evidently did not believe that Love-letters, to be -genuine, must be slovenly. In one of his letters to Miss Scurlock he -apologises for not having time to revise what he had written. In another -letter he exclaims: “How art thou, oh my soul, stolen from thyself! how -is all my attention broken! my books are blank paper, and my friends -intruders.” Again: “It is the hardest thing in the world to be in love, -and yet attend business. As for me, all that speak to find me out, and I -must lock myself up, or other people will do it for me. A gentleman -asked me this morning, ‘What news from Holland?’ and I answered, ‘She is -exquisitely handsome.’ Another desired to know when I had been last at -Windsor; I replied, ‘She designs to go with me.’” And once more: “It is -to my lovely charmer I owe that many noble ideas are continually affixed -to my words and actions: it is the natural effect of that generous -passion to create in the admirers some similitude of the object admired; -thus, my dear, am I every day to improve from so sweet a companion.” - -The first score or so of Keats’s Love-letters have the ring of true -gold. Here are a few specimens in which the thermometer of endearments -rises steadily from My Dearest Lady, through My Sweet Girl, My Dear -Girl, My Dearest Girl, My Sweet Fanny, to My Sweet Love, Dearest Love -and Sweetest Fanny. In the very first letter he writes:— - -“Ask yourself, my love, whether you are not very cruel to have so -entrammelled me, so destroyed my freedom. Will you confess this in the -letter you must write immediately? and do all you can to console me in -it—make it rich as a draught of poppies to intoxicate me—write the -softest words and kiss them, that I may at least touch my lips where -yours have been. For myself, if I do not know how to express my devotion -to so fair a form, I want a brighter word than bright, a fairer word -than fair. I almost wish we were butterflies, and lived but three summer -days—three such days with you I could fill with more delight than fifty -common years could ever contain.” - -“All I can bring you is a swooning admiration of your beauty.” - -“I have two luxuries to brood over in my walks—your loveliness and the -hour of my death. O that I could have possession of them both in the -same minute.” - -“I hate the world: it batters too much the wings of my self-will, and -would I could take a sweet poison from your lips to send me out of it. -From no others would I take it.” - -“At Winchester I shall get your letters more readily; and it being a -cathedral city, I shall have a pleasure, always a great one to me when -near a cathedral, of reading them during the service up and down the -aisle.” - -All this is in the true Shaksperian key of Romantic Love, as are the -Love-letters of Burns, Byron, Moore, Heine, Bürger, Lenau, and most -other poets. Room must be made here for a few extracts from Lenau’s -letters to his love, which, in some respects, resemble those of -Keats—equally polished, poetic, deep, and sincere:— - -“It makes me melancholy to see how incapable I am of sympathizing with -the pleasures of my friends. My Love goes out afar towards you; it -hearkens and listens and stares in the distance for you, and takes no -note of all the love by which it is surrounded here. I am truly ill. I -constantly think of you alone and death. It often seems to me as if my -time had expired. I cannot write poetry, I cannot rejoice in anything, -cannot hope, can only think of you and death. The other day I wrote to -you to take good care of your health—though I myself feel so little -desire to live.” - -“The whole evening I was unable to think of anything but of you and the -possibility of losing you. The large crowd of people seemed to have -assembled on purpose to show me most painfully what a mere nothing the -world would be to me if I had to part from you. I constantly saw but -your face, your lovely, divine eye.” - -“Alexander wishes me to go to the baths at Leuk with him. He is quite -ill. But I cannot go. If I have to see Switzerland without you, I prefer -not to see it at all.” - -“My poetic composition is in a bad way. Though a thought sprouts in me -here and there, it withers before it has reached maturity. When I go to -see you I shall bring along a dry wreath of prematurely-faded poetic -blossoms, and make them revive in your presence, as there are warm -fountains dipped into which faded flowers blossom again.” - -“I have lost all pleasure in other people when you are absent. If you -had only been at Weinsberg! Even the Æolian harps did not produce the -usual impression on me.” It is noticeable how the overtone of Monopoly -is accented in all these plaints. - -“I have found in your companionship more evidence of an eternal life -than in all my investigations and studies of nature. Whenever, in a -happy hour, I believed I had reached the climax of Love and the proper -moment for death, since a more delicious moment could never follow: it -was on each occasion an illusion, for another hour followed in which I -loved you still more deeply. These ever new, ever deeper abysses of life -convince me of its immortality. To-day I saw in your eyes the full -measure of the divine. Most distinctly did I perceive to-day that the -swelling and sinking of the eye is the breathing of the soul. In an eye -of such beauty as yours we can see, as in a prophetic hieroglyphic, the -essence of which some day our immortal body will consist. If I die, I -shall depart rich, for I have seen what is most beautiful in the world.” - -“The rose you gave me at parting has a most delicious fragrance, as if -it were a Good-Night from you! Sleep well, dearest heart! Preserve the -second rose as a memento. I love you immeasurably.” - -No doubt the average Love-letters read in courts of justice in breach of -promise cases, to the intense amusement of the audience, are very -different in character from these poetic effusions. But to say that, -because the average Love-letters are ludicrous, therefore all -Love-letters, to be genuine, must be ludicrous and incoherent, is the -very Bedlam of absurdity. What makes common Love-letters so laughable is -the fact that the writer, previously a paragon of prosiness, suddenly -gets some poetic fancies and tries to put them into language. But as the -writing of poetry—in verse or prose—is a more difficult art than -piano-playing, first attempts cannot be otherwise than harrowing or -amusing. On the other hand, just as a pianist can never improvise so -soulfully as when he is in love, so a poet will write his best prose in -the letters addressed to his love; the only ludicrous feature being that -extravagant and exclusive admiration of one person which is the very -essence of Love. - -Surely Hawthorne was neither “insincere” nor “thinking of posterity” -when he finished one of his Love-letters with this poetic conceit, -expressed in his best prose style:— - -“When we shall be endowed with spiritual bodies I think they will be so -constituted that we may send thoughts and feelings any distance, in no -time at all, and transfuse them warm and fresh into the consciousness of -those we love. Oh, what happiness it would be, at this moment, if I -could be conscious of some purer feeling, some more delicate sentiment, -some lovelier fantasy than could possibly have had its birth in my own -nature, and therefore be aware that you were thinking through my mind -and feeling through my heart! Perhaps you possess this power already.” - -This is true epistolary Love-making—the sublimated essence of -complimentary Gallantry. - - - LOVE-CHARMS FOR WOMEN - -As women are not allowed to make Love actively, they resort to various -cunning arts with which they indirectly reach the hard hearts of men. -Magic is the most potent of these arts, and always has been so -considered by women; for, curiously enough, one finds on looking over -the folklore of various nations, ancient and modern, that in nineteen -cases out of twenty where a Love-charm is spoken of, it is one used by -women to win the affection of men. - -Probably the real reason why the vast majority of women are so curiously -indifferent to the hygienic arts of increasing and preserving Personal -Beauty—as shown in their devotion to tight-lacing, their aversion to -fresh air, sunshine, and brisk exercise—is because they know they can -infallibly win a man’s Love by the use of some simple powder or potion. -It is well known that the Roman poet Lucretius took his life in an -amorous fit caused by a love-potion; and Lucullus lost his reason in the -same way. The grandest musical work in existence would never have been -written had not Brangäne given to Tristan and Isolde a love-potion which -was so powerful that it made not only both the victims die of the fever -of Love, but united them even after death: "For from the grave of -Tristan sprang a plant which descended into the grave of Yseult. Cut -down thrice by order of the Cornish king, the irrepressible vegetable -bloomed verdant as ever next morning, and even now casts its shadow over -the tombs of the lovers— - - “‘An ay it grew, an ay it threw, - As they would fain be one.’” - -In mediæval times Personal Beauty was such a rare thing, and created -such havoc among men, that the unhappy possessors of it were frequently -accused of using forbidden Love-charms, and burnt at the stake as -witches. - -To-day, thanks to our superior sanitary and educational arrangements, -Beauty is such a common affair that it has lost all its effect on the -masculine heart; hence girls should carefully note a few of the ways by -which a man may be irresistibly fascinated. - -Italian girls practise the following method: A lizard is caught, drowned -in wine, dried in the sun and reduced to powder, some of which is thrown -on the obdurate man, who thenceforth is theirs for evermore. - -A favourite Slavonic device is to cut the finger, let a few drops of her -blood run into a glass of beer, and make the adored man drink it -unknowingly. The same method is current in Hesse and Oldenburg, -according to Dr. Ploss. In Bohemia, the girl who is afraid to wound her -finger may substitute a few drops of bat’s blood. - -Cases are known where invocations to the moon were followed by the -bestowal of true Love. And if a girl will address the new moon as -follows— - - “All hail to thee, moon! All hail to thee! - Prithee, good moon, reveal to me, - This night who my husband shall be,” - -she will dream of him that very night. - -A four-leaved clover secretly placed in a man’s shoes will make him the -devoted lover of the woman who puts it in. - -“Inside a frog is a certain crooked bone, which, when cleaned and dried -over the fire on St. John’s Eve, and then ground fine and given in food -to the lover, will at once win his love for the administerer.” - -If a girl sees a man washing his hands—say at a picnic—and lends him her -apron or handkerchief to dry them, he will forthwith declare himself her -amorous slave to eternity. - -There _are_ men, however, who, owing to some constitutional defect or -inherited anomaly, remain unaffected by these and similar arts. Should -any woman be so foolish as to crave such a man’s Love, she will do well -to bear in mind that _Vanity is the backdoor by which every man’s heart -may be entered_. Thus Byron says of a Venetian flame of his: “But her -great merit is finding out mine—there is nothing so amiable as -discernment.” “Let her be,” says Thackeray, “if not a clever woman, an -appreciator of cleverness in others, which, perhaps, clever folks like -better.” “Ne’er,” says Scott, - - “‘Was flattery lost on poet’s ears: - A simple race! they waste their toil - For the vain tribute of a smile.’” - -Rousseau’s last love was inspired by a woman’s admiration of his -writings. Balzac, celibate for many years, was at last captured by a -woman who returned to a hotel room for a volume of his works she had -left there, informing him, without suspecting who he was, that she never -travelled without it and could not live without it. - -“The story of the marriage of Lamartine,” says the author of _Salad for -the Solitary_, “is also one of romantic interest. The lady, whose maiden -name was Birch, was possessed of considerable property, and when past -the bloom of youth she became passionately enamoured of the poet from -the perusal of his _Meditations_. For some time she nursed this -sentiment in secret, and, being apprised of the embarrassed state of his -affairs, she wrote him, tendering him the bulk of her fortune. Touched -with this remarkable proof of her generosity, and supposing it could -only be caused by a preference for himself, he at once made an offer of -his hand and heart. He judged rightly, and the poet was promptly -accepted.” - -Sympathy, beauty, wit, elegant manners, amiability—these are woman’s -arrows of Love, ever sure of their aim. “She loved me for the dangers I -had passed,” says Othello, “and I loved her that she did pity them.” Or, -as Professor Dowden comments on this passage, “the beautiful Italian -girl is fascinated by the regal strength and grandeur, and tender -protectiveness of the Moor. _He_ is charmed by the sweetness, the -sympathy, the gentle disposition the gracious womanliness of Desdemona.” - -“The _gracious womanliness_ of Desdemona.” There lies the secret—the -charm of charms. It is fortunate that the political viragoes of to-day, -who would remove woman from her domestic sphere, have opposed to them -the greatest force in the universe—_the power of man’s Love!_ When they -have overcome that, they will find it easy to dam the current of the -Niagara River, and curb the force of the ocean’s countless breakers. - - - PROPOSING - -Countless as the stars, and only too apposite, are the jokes about -lovers who evolve masterpieces of eloquence wherewith to lay their -hearts at their idol’s feet; but who, when the crucial moment of the -trial arrives, like Beckmesser in Wagner’s comic opera, stutter out the -veriest parody of their song of Love. And no wonder, considering what is -at stake; for the Yes or No decides whether the lover is to -be—literally—the happiest or the unhappiest of all men for weeks or -months to come. - -Ovid cautions a man not to select a sweetheart in the twilight or -lamplight, since “spots are invisible at night and every fault is -overlooked; at that time almost every woman is held to be beautiful.” - -But proposing is a different matter from selecting. When once the choice -is made, and her choice alone remains to be decided, twilight is the -only proper time to “pop the question.” For a maiden’s independence and -Coyness are inversely related to the degree of light. In the morning, in -broad daylight, she can boldly face even the terrible thought of being -left an old maid; but in the twilight she feels the need of a man’s -protection, and it is at that time that the imagination is least deaf to -the whispered and self-suggested fancies of Romantic Love and wedded -bliss. A man who proposes in the morning deserves, therefore, to be -disappointed. - -Nature herself has provided a safeguard against morning proposals. No -woman is so beautiful in the daytime as is in the evening; and the -moon’s romantic associations are largely due to its magic effect of -beautifying the complexion and features of women, and thus urging the -lover’s courage to the point of amorous confession. - -There is still another reason why a tender and considerate lover should -propose in the chiaroscuro of subdued light—to spare her blushes— - - “But ’neath yon crimson tree, - Lover to listening maid might breathe his flame, - Nor mark, within its roseate canopy, - Her blush of maiden shame.”—BRYANT. - -Not many years ago a plan was described in the newspapers by which a -number of Southern youths who had not the courage to propose were -happily mated and wedded. An elderly person was selected, vowed to -eternal secrecy, and to him each youth and maiden who was in love -confided in writing the name of the beloved. Those couples that had -chosen one another were informed of the fact, and went away rejoicing, -arm in arm. - -A fairy story, on the face of it. A woman would sooner cut off her hand -than write with it the secret of her Love before she knew it was -returned; and that man that hath a tongue is, I say, no man, if he is -afraid to ask for a woman’s hand—or to take it unasked, and let it -respond to the touching question. “Love sought is good, but given -unsought is better,” says Shakspere. The only true proposals are those -where spoken words are dispensed with; where the magnetic thrill of the -hands, the eloquence of the tell-tale eyes, draw the lovers into mutual -embrace, and lips become glued on lips in unpremeditated ecstasy. - - - DIAGNOSIS OR SIGNS OF LOVE - -Though women may often feel in doubt concerning the intentions of men -who pay them attentions, they cannot help recognizing deep Love in a man -instantly; for the symptoms, as described in a previous chapter, are -absolutely unmistakable. A woman, too, who loves deeply, can hardly help -betraying herself, by the sly opportunities she finds for meeting her -lover (purely accidental, of course), and by the special pains she takes -to make it clear to her friends that she does not care for _that_ man -certainly; often also by the fact, pointed out by Jean Paul, that “Love -increases man’s delicacy and lessens woman’s”; tempting her occasionally -to throw away all prudence and regard for public opinion, in the wild -intoxication of her passion and her confidence in her lover. - -But in cases of doubt—how is a lover to decide whether it is safe and -worth while to proceed? A woman’s Coyness, of course, means nothing, and -may have been brought on by an assumption of excessive confidence and -boldness on the man’s part. Girls are like wild colts. They may be -safely approached to a certain distance, whence one step more will cause -them to stampede; but stand still at that point, and before long they -will cast away fear and meet you half-way. - -Trifles are the only safe tests of Love. For they are not so apt as -weighty words and actions to be the outcome of a deliberate coquettish -desire to deceive. To ascertain if you are loved—and this holds true for -both sexes—allude (with a careless assumption of indifference) to some -trifling details of previous conversation or common experience. If she -(or he) remembers them all, especially if of remote occurrence, the -chances are you are loved. - -Shakspere evidently had this in mind when he wrote— - - “If thou rememberest not the slightest folly - That ever love did make thee run into, - Thou hast not loved.” - - - - - HOW TO CURE LOVE - - -All hope abandon ye who enter here. It is a terrible haunt of pessimism, -for disappointed lovers only. All others will please pass it by, for the -object of this book is to advocate the cause of Love, not to weaken it. -Only when all hope of reciprocation is abandoned, should the tender -plant ever be crushed underfoot. - -An exception must be made in favour of those hopeful lovers who merely -wish to cure themselves in order to improve their chances of winning, as -explained in the last chapter, under the head of Feigned Indifference. - -It is useless to quote to a rejected lover Rosalind’s philosophy: “Our -poor world is almost six thousand years old, and in all this time there -was not any man died in his own person, _videlicet_, in a love cause.... -Men have died from time to time, and worms have eaten them, but not for -love.” Useless to tell him, as Emerson does, that it is not a disgrace -to love unrequitedly: “It never troubles the sun that some of his rays -fall wide and vain into ungrateful space, and only a small part on the -reflecting planet.” - -To all such efforts at consolation the poor wretch may retort with -Shakspere: “Every one may master a grief but he who has it.” Yet he may, -at any rate, endeavour to “patch his grief” with the following -reflections, based on the experience of centuries. - - - ABSENCE - -Two thousand years ago Ovid advised the readers of his _Remedia Amoris_ -who wished to cure themselves of an unwelcome attachment to flee the -capital, to travel, hunt, or till the soil till all danger of a relapse -should he averted. “Out of sight, out of mind,” wrote Thomas à Kempis; -and this theme has been varied by a hundred writers in prose and verse. -“Love is a local anguish,” exclaims Coleridge; “I am fifty miles away -and am not half so miserable.” Carew puts it thus— - - “Then fly betimes, for only they - Conquer love, that run away.” - -Even the unspeakable Turk has a proverb advising a lover to fly to the -mountains. The Himalayas are probably meant, for no other chain would be -high enough to allay the anguish of a polygamist rejected by a whole -harem. - -On the other hand, “I find that absence still increases love,” wrote -Charles Hopkins in the seventeenth century; and Bayly gave this paradox -the familiar form of “absence makes the heart grow fonder”—to which a -modern realistic wag has added the coda “of the other man.” “La -Rochefoucauld has well remarked,” says Hume, “that absence destroys weak -passions, but increases strong ones; as the wind extinguishes a candle -but blows up a fire.” - -This simile is not very appropriate, nor is the statement -unquestionable. It is more correct to say that short absence increases -Love, while long absence cures it. - -There are two ways in which a short absence favours Love: - -Like the thirst of a man who would wean himself of strong liquor, the -lovers ardour is at first increased when he is placed where he can no -longer drink in the intoxicating sight of her beauty. Time is needed to -annihilate the maddening memory of that pleasure. - -Secondly, short absence favours the idealising process in the lover’s -mind. Removed from the corrective influence of her actual presence, his -imagination may abandon itself to the delightful task of painting a -gloriously unreal counterfeit of her charms—which is oil in the flames. - -This idealising process is facilitated by the strange difficulty which -most people—and lovers in particular—experience in recalling the -features of those specially dear to them. - -Given sufficient time to fix the idealised image of the beloved in the -memory, and a cure may be effected through the shock subsequently felt -on comparing this image with the greatly inferior reality. - - - TRAVEL - -It is safer, however, not to risk a return, but to avoid sight of her -altogether for several years. The advantages of travel are twofold, not -to mention the security from the danger of an accidental meeting. At -home the surrounding world is too familiar to afford distraction, -whereas in a strange place every object claims the attention and diverts -the mind from its amorous reveries. More important still is the fact -that in a foreign country the strangeness of national physiognomy -invests all women with a heightened charm, so that it is easier to find -an antidote by falling in love anew. - - - EMPLOYMENT - -“Great spirits and great business do keep out the weak passion of love,” -said Bacon; but long before him Ovid knew that Leisure is Cupid’s chief -ally. “If you desire to end your love, employ yourself and you will -conquer; for Amor flees business.” He advises military service, -agriculture, and hunting as excellent diversions. - -Poetry and music, however, as the same poet tells us, and all other -occupations tending to stir up the tender feelings, are to be carefully -avoided. Novel-reading is particularly bad, for to imagine another’s -Love is to revive your own. “Lotte Hartmann played some melodies of -Bellini on the piano this evening,” writes Lenau; “I ought to avoid -music when I am away from you, for it arouses in me a longing and an -anguish of consuming violence. I feel how my heart sadly shrinks within -itself, and unwillingly continues to beat.” - - - MARRIED MISERY - -Surely the thought that his romantic adoration will cease with marriage -ought to cure a rejected wooer. Unquestionably, marriage is the best -cure of Love. For though cynics are wrong in claiming that wedlock -changes Love to indifference, it does change it to conjugal affection, -which is an entirely different group of emotions. To the rejected lover, -unfortunately, matrimony is not available as a cure of his Love. But he -may give his overheated imagination an ice-bath by reflecting on the -dark side of conjugal life, the promised bliss of which has been -described as a mirage by so many great minds. - -Professor Jowett thus discourses on how a modern Sokrates in a cynical -mood might discourse on the seamy side of married life:— - -“How the inferior of the two drags the other down to his or her level; -how the cares of a family ‘breed meanness in their souls.’... They -cannot undertake any noble enterprise, such as makes the names of men -and women famous, from domestic considerations. Too late their eyes are -opened; they were taken unawares, and desire to part company. Better, he -would say, a ‘little love at the beginning,’ for heaven might have -increased it; but now their foolish fondness has changed into mutual -dislike.... How much nobler, in conclusion he will say, is friendship, -which does not receive unmeaning praises from novelists and poets, is -not exacting or exclusive, is not impaired by familiarity, is much less -expensive, is not so likely to take offence, seldom changes, and may be -dissolved from time to time without the assistance of the courts.” - -Dr. Johnson, in a letter to Baretti, points out the difference between -Love and Marriage: - -“In love, as in every other passion of which hope is the essence, we -ought always to remember the uncertainty of events. There is, indeed, -nothing that so much seduces reason from vigilance as the thought of -passing life with an amiable woman; and if all would happen that a lover -fancies, I know not what other terrestrial happiness would deserve -pursuit. But love and marriage are different states. Those who are to -suffer the evils together, and to suffer often for the sake of one -another, _soon lose that tenderness of look_ and that benevolence of -mind which arose from the participation of unmingled pleasure and -successive amusement.” - -“Lose that tenderness of look!” Have you reflected that it is that -exquisite tenderness of look which chiefly fascinated you, and have you -not noticed that, as Johnson implies, married people rarely regard one -another with that look which constantly intoxicated them during -Courtship? For “beauty soon grows familiar to the lover, fades in his -eye, and palls upon the sense,” says Addison; or, as Hazlitt puts it, -“though familiarity may not breed contempt, it takes off the edge of -admiration.” - -“With most marriages,” says Goethe, “it is not long till things assume a -very piteous look.” Raleigh: “If thou marry beauty, thou bindest thyself -all thy life for that which, perchance, will neither last nor please -thee one year.” Seneca: “Beauty is such a fleeting blossom, how can -wisdom rely upon its momentary delight?” Howells: “Marian Butler was at -that period full of those airs of self-abnegation with which women adorn -themselves in the last days of betrothal and the first of marriage, and -never afterwards.” Alexander Walker: “It looks as if woman were in -possession of most enjoyments, and as if man had only an illusion held -out to him to make him labour for her.” - -Montaigne: “As soon as women are ours we are no longer theirs.” “The -land of marriage has this peculiarity that strangers are desirous of -inhabiting it, while its natural inhabitants would willingly be banished -thence.” Boucicault: “I wish that Adam had died with all his ribs in his -body.” De Finod: “Marriage is the sunset of love.” Goldsmith: “Many of -the English marry in order to have one happy month in their lives.” -Hood: “You can’t wive and thrive both in the same year.” Southey: “There -are three things a wise man will not trust,—the wind, the sunshine of an -April day, and a woman’s plighted faith.” Byron: “I remarked in my -illness the complete inertion, inaction, and destruction of my chief -mental faculties. I tried to rouse them, and yet could not—and this is -the _Soul_!!! I should believe that it was married to the body if they -did not sympathise so much with each other.” Colley Cibber: “Oh, how -many torments lie in the small circle of a wedding-ring!” Alphonse Karr: -“Women for the most part do not love us. They do not choose a man -because they love him, but because it pleases them to be loved by him.” - -Lady Montagu: “It goes far toward reconciling me to being a woman, when -I reflect that I am thus in no immediate danger of ever marrying one.” -Schopenhauer: “It is well known that happy marriages are rare.” “The -lover, contrary to expectation, finds himself no happier than before.” -Byron— - - “Think you if Laura had been Petrarch’s wife - He would have written sonnets all his life?” - -Burton: “Paul commended marriage, yet he preferred a single life.” -Buxton: “Juliet was a fool to kill herself, for in three months she’d -have married again, and been glad to be quit of Romeo.” Heine: “The -music at a marriage procession always reminds me of the music which -leads soldiers to battle.” Lessing— - - “Ein einzig böses Weib gibt’s höchstens in der Welt, - Nur schade dass ein jeder es für das seine hält.” - - “Of shrewish women in the world there’s surely only one, - A pity, though, that every man says she’s the wife he won.” - -Selden: “Marriage is a desperate thing. The frogs in Æsop were extremely -wise; they had a great mind to some water, but they would not leap into -the well, because they could not get out again.” - -When the Pope heard of Father Hyacinthe’s marriage, says Cheales, he -exclaimed: “The saints be praised! the renegade has taken his punishment -into his own hands. Truly the ways of Providence are inscrutable!” - - - FEMININE INFERIORITY - -Why are women so mysterious, so inscrutable? Cynics say because you -cannot calculate what they will do, as they have no fixed compass by -which they steer, _i.e._ no character. But Heine takes up their defence. -Far from having no character, he says, they have a new one every day. - -The world’s opinion of women is best revealed in the crystallised -wisdom, based on experience, called proverbs. It will soothe the wounded -lover’s heart to note the unanimity with which woman’s foibles are dwelt -on in the proverbs of all nations from ancient Greece to modern China -and France. To give only three instances of a thousand that may be found -in any collection of proverbs: “Women,” says a French proverb, “have -quicksilver in the brain, wax in the heart.” The old Greek poet -Xenarchus sang, “Happy the cicadas live, since they all have voiceless -wives.” “There is no such poison in the green snake’s mouth or in the -hornet’s sting as in a woman’s heart,” says a Chinese maxim. - -But it is not necessary to rely on such anonymous collections of wisdom -as proverbs to convince a man of the folly of linking himself for life -with such a miserable inferior being as a woman. From Plato to Darwin -there is a consensus of opinion as to woman’s vast inferiority to man. - -According to Plato, says Mr. Grote, “men are superior to women in -everything; in one occupation as well as in another.” Cookery and -weaving having been named as two apparent exceptions, Plato denies -woman’s superiority even in these. - -“The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes,” -says Darwin, “is shown by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in -whatever he takes up, than can woman—whether requiring deep thought, -reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If -two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, -painting, sculpture, music (inclusive both of composition and -performance), history, science, and philosophy, with half a dozen names -under each subject, the two lists would not bear comparison.” - -“I found, as a rule,” says Mr. Galton, "that men have more delicate -powers of discrimination than women, and the business of life seems to -confirm this view. The tuners of pianofortes are men, and so, I -understand, are the tasters of tea and wine, the sorters of wool, and -the like. These latter occupations are well salaried, because it is of -the first moment to the merchant that he should be rightly advised on -the real value of what he is about to purchase or to sell. If the -sensitivity of women were superior to that of men, the self-interest of -merchants would lead to their being always employed; but as the reverse -is the case, the opposite supposition is likely to be the true one. - -“Ladies rarely distinguish the merits of wine at the dinner-table, and -though custom allows them to preside at the breakfast-table, men think -them, on the whole, to be far from successful makers of tea and coffee.” - -This disposes of the old myth that women are more sensitive than men. -And De Quincy, in his essay on _False Distinctions_, refutes the equally -absurd notion that “women have more imagination than men.” He comes to -the conclusion that, “as to poetry in its highest form, I never yet knew -a woman, nor yet will believe that any has existed, who could rise to an -entire sympathy with what is most excellent in that art.” - -One proof of this statement lies in the fact that as a rule men of -genius have been refused by the women they loved most deeply. - -Regarding the emotional sphere, we have seen that it is only in parental -and conjugal feeling that woman surpasses man. In Romantic Love, in all -the impersonal feelings for art and nature, she is vastly his inferior. -Her superficial education gives her no intellectual interests, and that -is the reason why so many married men prefer the club and friendship to -home and conjugal devotion—even as did the ancient Greeks. - -It is in the seventh book of the _Laws_, p. 806, that Plato remarks: -“The legislator ought not to let the female sex live softly and waste -money and have no order of life, while he takes the utmost care of the -male sex, and leaves half of life only blest with happiness, when he -might have made the whole state happy.” - -Is it not humiliating to man, who loves to call himself a “reasoning -animal,” to find that, after so many centuries, one of our greatest and -most liberal thinkers, Professor Huxley, is obliged to write in this -same Platonic tone that “the present system of female education stands -self-condemned, as inherently absurd,” because it fosters and -exaggerates instead of removing woman’s natural disadvantages? “With few -insignificant exceptions,” Professor Huxley continues, “girls have been -educated either to be drudges or toys beneath man, or a sort of angels -above him; the highest ideal aimed at oscillating between Clärchen and -Beatrice. The possibility that the ideal of womanhood lies neither in -the fair saint nor in the fair sinner; that women are meant neither to -be men’s guides nor their playthings, but their comrades, their fellows, -and their equals, so far as Nature puts no bar to their equality, does -not seem to have entered into the minds of those who have had the -conduct of the education of girls” (_Lay Sermons_, p. 25). - -Woman, in short, is a failure; and let any disappointed lover ask -himself, Is it businesslike to begin life with a failure? - - - FOCUSSING HER FAULTS - -Love being a magic emotional microscope which ignites passion by -magnifying the most beautiful features of the beloved, leaving -everything else indistinct and blurred, it follows that the simplest way -of arresting this flame is to _change the focus of this microscope_, to -fix the attention deliberately on her faults, while throwing her merits -and charms into an unfavourable light. - -This method is too self-evident and effective not to have occurred to -the ingenious Ovid. He advises the lover who wishes to be cured to study -the girl’s charms in a hypercritical spirit. Call her stout if she is -plump, black if she is dark, lean if slender. Ask her to sing if she has -no talent for music, to talk if unskilled in conversation, to dance if -awkward, and if her teeth are bad, tell her funny stories to make her -laugh. - -Her mental faults require no microscope to reveal them. Certainly her -taste is execrable, for does she not prefer that vulgar fellow Jones to -you, one of the cleverest fellows that ever condescended to be born on -this miserable planet? - -What folly, indeed, to love such a girl! What fascinates you is simply -the mysterious brilliancy of her coal-black eyes—of which you may find -ten thousand duplicates in Italy or Spain. Don’t you see that no flashes -of wit are ever mirrored in those eyes? that, though beautiful, they are -soulless, like a black pansy? that they look at one person as at -another, incapable of expressing shades and modulations of tender -emotion, because the soul of which they are the windows has never been, -and never will be, moved by Love? - -She never thinks of anything but her own pleasure; does nothing but -visit the dressmaker and the theatre and read novels; never thinks it -her duty to provide for her future husband’s comfort and happiness by -educating herself in domestic economy and æsthetic accomplishments of -real depth—as you have toiled and studied in anticipation of providing -for her comfort and happiness. She takes no sympathetic interest in your -affairs—how can you expect to be happy with her? If she loves you not, -you would be more than a fool to try to get her consent to marriage, for -is it not the ecstasy of Love to be loved and worshipped alone and -beyond any other mortal? - -The beauty of her eyes will not last,—it is nothing, anyway, but -sunlight mechanically reflected from a darkly-painted iris—and when its -youthful brilliancy vanishes there will be no soul-sparks to take its -place. And for this brief honeymoon mirage you are willing to give up -your bachelor comforts and pleasures, your freedom to do what you -please, go where you please, and travel whenever you please; to exchange -your refreshing sleep o’ nights for domestic cares and the pleasure of -trotting up and down the room with a bawling baby at two o’clock in the -morning? Bah! Are you in your senses? - -True, if you are rich some of these disadvantages may be avoided. But if -you are rich you will not be refused, for— - - “Mammon wins his way where seraphs might despair,” - -as Byron remarks; and again: “For my own part, I am of the opinion of -Pausanias, that success in love depends upon _Fortune_.” - -But of all her shortcomings the most galling and fatal is that she loves -you not. This thought alone, says Stendhal, may succeed in curing a man -of his passion. You will notice, he says, that she whom you love favours -others with little attentions which she withholds from you. They may be -mere trifles, such as not giving you a chance to help her into her -carriage, her box at the opera. The thought of this, by “associating a -sense of humiliation with every thought of her, poisons the source of -love and may destroy it.” - -Thus wounded Pride is the easiest way out of Love, as gratified Pride is -the straightest way in. - - - REASON _VERSUS_ PASSION - -According to Shakspere, though Love does not admit Reason as his -counsellor, he _does_ use him as his physician. The most effective way -of using Reason to cure Love is by way of comparison. By dwelling on the -miseries of married life as just detailed, the disappointed lover may -mitigate his pains somewhat, as did that Italian mentioned by -Schopenhauer, who resisted the agony of torture by constantly keeping in -his mind’s eye the picture of the gallows that would have been the -reward of confession. - -Again, he may compare his present Love with a former infatuation that -seemed at the time equally deep and eternal, though now he wonders how -he could have _ever_ loved that girl. History repeats itself. - -Compare, moreover, your present idol with her stout and faded mother. In -a few years she will perhaps resemble her mother more than her present -self. - -Compare her charms, feature by feature, with some recognised paragon of -beauty. Look at her in the glaring light of the sun, which reveals every -spot on the complexion. - - - LOVE _VERSUS_ LOVE - -Longfellow says it is folly to pretend that one ever wholly recovers -from a disappointed passion; and Mr. Hamerton believes that “a wrinkled -old maid may still preserve in the depths of her own heart, quite -unsuspected by the young and lively people about her, the unextinguished -embers of a passion that first made her wretched fifty years before.” - -Occasionally this may be true, in the sense in which psychology teaches -that no impression made on the mind is ever completely effaced, but may, -though forgotten for years, be revived in moments of great excitement, -or in the delirium of fever; as, for example, in the case mentioned by -Duval, of a Pole in Germany, who had not used his native language for -thirty years, but who, under the influence of anæsthetics, “spoke, -prayed, and sang, using only the Polish language.” The persistence of an -old passion is the more probable from the fact that in mental disease -and age, as Ribot points out, the emotional faculties are effaced much -more slowly than the intellectual. Feelings form the self; _amnesia_ of -feeling is the destruction of self. - -Ordinarily, however, and for the time being, it may be possible to -practically obliterate a passion. “All love may be expelled by love, as -poisons are by other poisons,” says Dryden. And if the allopathic -remedies described in the preceding paragraphs should fail to effect a -cure, the lover may find the homœopathic principle of _similia -similibus_ more successful. - -Heine, in his posthumous Memoirs, thus refers to this principle of -curing like with like:— - -“In love, as in the Roman Catholic religion, there is a provisional -purgatory in which mortals are allowed to get used gradually to being -roasted before they get into the real eternal hell.... In all honesty, -what a terrible thing is love for a woman. Inoculation is herein of no -use.... Very wise and experienced physicians counsel a change of -locality in the opinion that removal from the presence of the -enchantress will also break the charm. Perhaps the homœopathic -principle, by which woman cures us of woman, is the best of all.... It -was ordained that I should be visited more severely than other mortals -by this malady, the heart-pox.... The most effective antidote to women -are women; true, this implies an attempt to expel Satan with Beelzebub; -and in such a case the medicine is often more noxious still than the -malady. But it is at any rate a change, and in a disconsolate -love-affair a change of the inamorata is unquestionably the best -policy.” - - - PROGNOSIS OR CHANCES OF RECOVERY - -After carefully following all the foregoing rules regarding absence, -travel, employment, dwelling on the miseries of marriage, the weaknesses -of women in general and one woman in particular, the disappointed lover -may boldly return and face her again. The chances are ten to one he will -find himself—more in love than ever! - -Women are magicians. No wonder they were burned as witches in the Middle -Ages. - - - - - NATIONALITY AND LOVE - - -Romantic love—commonly considered immutable—not only displays countless -individual variations in regard to duration and degrees of intensity, -but has a sort of “local colour” in each country; or, to keep up our old -metaphor, a varying clangtint, depending on the greater or less -prominence of certain “overtones.” - -To describe all these varieties of Love would require a separate volume. -And since all the most interesting forms of the romantic passion are to -be met with in France, Italy, Spain, Germany, England, and America, it -will suffice to briefly characterise Love in those countries. - - - FRENCH LOVE - -As literary luck would have it, the subject of French Love follows -naturally upon the subject of the last chapter, the _Remedia Amoris_. - -The French are too clever a nation to leave to individual effort the -difficult task of curing the mind of such an obstinate thing as Love. -All the papas and mammas in the land have put their heads together and -devised two methods of _killing Love wholesale_, compared with which all -the remedies named in the last chapter are mere fly-bites. - -These two methods are Chaperonage and Parental Choice, as opposed to -Courtship and Individual Sexual Selection. - -Paradoxical as it may seem, there is in the midst of modern Europe a -nation which, in the treatment of women, Love, and marriage, stands on -the same low level of evolution as the ancient, mediæval, and Oriental -nations. - -This is not a theory, but a fact patent to all, and attested by the best -English, German, and French authors. - -One of the deepest of French thinkers, whose eyes were opened by travel -and comparison, De Stendhal, in 1842, says in his book _De l’Amour_: -“Pour comprendre cette passion, que depuis trente ans la peur du -ridicule cache avec tant de soin parmi nous, il faut en parler comme -d’une maladie”—"To understand this passion, which during the last thirty -years has been concealed among us with so much solicitude, from fear of -ridicule, it is necessary to speak of it as a malady." - -But Stendhal greatly understates the case. It was not only within thirty -years from the time when he wrote, and by means of ridicule, that the -French had tried hard to kill Love. They have never really emancipated -themselves from mediæval barbarism. Pure Romantic Love between two young -unmarried persons has never yet flourished in France—because it has -never been allowed to grow. To-day, as in the days of the Troubadours, -the only form of Love celebrated in French plays and romances is the -form which implies conjugal infidelity. - -“Marriage, as treated in the old French epics,” says Ploss, “is rarely -based on love;” the woman marries for protection, the man for her wealth -or social affiliations. In the eighteenth century girls were compelled -from their earliest years to live only for appearance sake: “The most -harmless natural enjoyment, every childish ebullition, is interdicted as -improper. Her mother denies her the expression of tender emotion as too -bourgeois, too common. The little one grows up in a dreary, heartless -vacuum; her deeper feelings remain undeveloped.... Real love would be -too ordinary a motive of marriage, and therefore extremely ridiculous. -It is not offered her, accordingly, nor does she feel any.” - -Heine wrote from Paris in 1837 that “girls never fall in love in this -country.” "With us in Germany, as also in England and other nations of -Germanic origin, young girls are allowed the utmost possible liberty, -whereas married women become subjected to the strict and anxious -supervision of their husbands. - -"Here in France, as already stated, the reverse is the case: young girls -remain in the seclusion of a convent until they either marry or are -introduced to the world under the strict eye of a relative. In the -world, _i.e._ in the French salon, they always remain silent and little -noticed, for it is neither good form here nor wise to make love to an -unmarried girl. - -“There lies the difference. We Germans, as well as our Germanic -neighbours, bestow our love always on unmarried girls, and these only -are celebrated by our poets; among the French, on the other hand, -married women only are the object of love, in life as well as in -literature.” - -The difficulty of becoming acquainted with a young lady, Mr. Hamerton -tells us, is greatest “in what may be called the ‘respectable’ classes -in country-towns and their vicinities. In Parisian society young ladies -go out into _le monde_, and may be seen and even spoken to at -evening-parties.” - -“And even spoken to” is good, is very good. What a privilege for the -young men! The iron bars which formerly separated them from the young -ladies have actually been removed, and they are allowed to speak to -them—in presence of a heart-chilling, conversation-killing dragon. No -wonder Parisian society is so corrupt! - -Mr. Hamerton has given in _Round My House_ the most realistic and -fascinating account of French courtship and marriage-customs ever -written. He is a great admirer of the French, always ready to excuse -their foibles, and his testimony is, therefore, doubly valuable as that -of an absolutely impartial witness. He had an opportunity for many years -of studying French provincial life with an artist’s trained faculties; -and here are a few sentences culled from his descriptions:— - -“It is not merely difficult, in our neighbourhood, for a young man in -the respectable classes to get acquainted with a young lady, but _every -conceivable arrangement is devised to make it absolutely impossible_. -Balls and evening-parties are hardly ever given, and when they are given -great care is taken to keep young men out of them, and young -marriageable girls either dance with each other or with mere children.” - -Whereas in England “a young girl may go where she likes, without much -risk to her good name,” a French girl “may not cross a street alone, nor -open a book which has not been examined, nor have an opinion about -anything.” “The French ideal of a well-brought-up young lady is that she -should not know anything whatever about love and marriage, that she -should be both innocent and ignorant, and both in the supreme -degree—both to a degree which no English person can imagine.” - -“The young men are not to blame; they would be ready enough, perhaps, to -fall in love if they had the chance, like any Englishman or German, but -the respectable parents of the young lady take care that they shall -_not_ have the chance of falling in love.” - -The only opportunity a young man has of seeing a girl is at a distance, -at church or in a religious procession. Here he may see her face; her -character he can only ascertain through gossip, a lady friend, or the -parish priest. It is much more respectable, however, to show no such -curiosity, for its absence implies the absence of such a ridiculous -thing as Love. “_There is nothing which good society in France -disapproves of so much as the passion of Love_, or anything resembling -it.” “When Cœlebs asks for the hand of a girl he has seen for a -minute, he may just possibly be in love with her, which is a degrading -supposition; but if he has never seen her, you cannot even suspect him -of a sentiment so unbecoming.” - -There is but one way for the young man to gain admission to a house -where there is a marriageable young lady: “He must first, through a -third party, ask to marry the young lady, and, if her _parents_ consent, -he will then be admitted to see her and speak to her, but not otherwise. -_The respectable order of affairs is that the offer and acceptance -should precede and not follow courtship._” - -Would it be possible to conceive a more diabolically ingenious social -machinery for massacring Romantic Love _en gros_? - -“Marriages in France are generally arranged by the exercise of reason -and prudence, rather than by either passion or affection.” Mr. Hamerton -gives an amusing account of how he was asked to be matrimonial -ambassador by a young man who had never seen the girl he wanted to -marry. Mr. Hamerton obliged the young man, but was told by the mother -that if the young man would wait two years he might have a fair chance, -provided a _richer_ or _nobler_ suitor did not turn up in the meantime. - -Money and Rank _versus_ Love. French mammas have at least one virtue. -They are not hypocrites. - -The Countess von Bothmer, who lived in France a quarter of a century, -says in her _French Home Life_: “Where we so ordinarily listen to what -we understand by love—to the temptations of the young heart in all their -forms (however transitory), to our individual impressions and our own -opinions—the French consult fitness of relative situation, reciprocities -of fortune and position, and harmonies of family intercourse.” - -To annihilate the last resource of Love—elopement—the _Code Napoléon_ -forbids all marriages without either the consent of the father and -mother, or proof that they are both dead. “It is very troublesome to get -married in France; the operation is surrounded by difficulties and -formalities which would make an Englishman stamp with rage.” - -Social life, of course, suffers as much from this idiotic system as -Romantic Love. French hospitality “does not extend beyond the family -circle,” we are informed by M. Max O’Rell, who also gives this amusing -instance of the imbecility or mental slavery (he does not use these -words) produced by the French system of education and chaperonage:— - -“I remember I was one day sitting in the Champs Elysées with two English -ladies. Beside us was a young French girl with her father and mother. -The person on the right of papa rose and went away, and we heard the -young innocent say to her mother: ‘Mamma, may I go and sit by papa?’ It -was a baby of about eighteen or twenty. Those English ladies laugh over -the affair to this day.” - -Boys suffer as well as girls. As the author of an article on “Parisian -Psychology” remarks: “There are no mothers in France; it is a nation of -‘mammas,’ who, in the most unlimited sense of the word, spoil their -boys, weaken them in body and soul, dwarf their thought, dry their -hearts, and lower them to below even their own level, hoping thereby to -rule over them through life, as they too often do. Frenchwomen having -been at best but half-wives, regard their children as a sort of -compensation for what they have themselves not had; and after the -mischievous fashion of weak ‘mammas’ prolong babyhood till far into -mature life.” - -The French, in fact, are a nation of babies. Their puerile conceit, -which prevents them from learning to read any language but their own, -and thus finding out what other nations think of them, is responsible in -part for the mediæval barbarism of their matrimonial arrangements. The -Parisian is the most provincial animal in the world. In any other -metropolis—be it London, New York, Vienna, or Berlin—people understand -and relish whatever is good in literature, art, and life, be it English, -American, French, German, or Italian. But the Parisian understands only -what is narrowly and exclusively French. And this is the dictionary -definition of Provincialism. - -The consequences of this mediævalism and provincialism in modern France -are thus eloquently summed up by a writer in the _Westminster Review_ -(1877):— - -“Such education as girls receive is not only not a preparation for the -wedded state, it is a positive disqualification for it. They are not -taught to read, they are not taught to reason; they are _launched into -life without a single intellectual interest_. The whole effort of their -early training goes to fill their mind with puerilities and -superstitions. As regards God, they are instructed to believe in relics -and old bones; as regards man, they are instructed to believe in dress, -in mannerisms, and coquetry. Their love of appreciation, after being -enormously developed, is bottled up and tied down until a husband is -found to draw the cork. What else, then, can we look for but an -explosion of frivolity? Can we expect that such a provision of -coquettishness will be reserved for the husband’s exclusive use? He will -be tired of it in three months—unless it is tired of him before; and -then the pent-up waters will forsake their narrow bed and overflow the -country far and wide.” - -No wonder Napoléon remarked that “Love does more harm than good.” And -right he was, most emphatically, for the only kind of Love _possible_ in -France does infinite harm. It poisons life and literature alike. - -We can now understand the fierceness of Dumas’s attacks on _mariages de -convenance_: “The manifest deterioration of the race touches him; it -does not touch us. Nor do we at all realise the next to impossibility of -a man ever marrying for love in France. There are those who have tried -to do it, but they can never get on in life; they are reputed of ‘bad -example’” (_St. James’s Gazette_). - -And now we come upon a paradox which has puzzled a great many thinkers. -The Countess von Bothmer, while deploring the absence of Love in French -courtship, endeavours to show that domestic happiness and conjugal -affection are, nevertheless, not rare in France. French husbands “are -ordinarily with their wives, accompany them wherever they can, and share -their friendships and distractions.” Mr. Hamerton likewise bears witness -that French girls “become excellent wives, faithful, orderly, dutiful, -contented, and economical. They all either love their husbands, _or -conduct themselves as if they did so_.” He says the notion fostered by -novels “that Frenchmen are always occupied in making love to their -neighbours’ wives” is nonsense; that there is no more adultery than -elsewhere. “There exists in foreign countries, and especially in -England, a belief that Frenchwomen are very generally adulteresses. The -origin of the belief is this,— the manner in which marriages are -generally managed in France leaves no room for interesting love-stories. -Novelists and dramatists _must_ find love-stories somewhere, and so they -have to seek for them in illicit intrigues.” - -This is all very ingenious, but the argument is not conclusive. Even -granted for a moment that Mr. Hamerton is right in his defence of French -conjugal life, is it not a more than sufficient condemnation of the -French system of “courtship” that one-half of the nation are prevented -from reading its literature because it is so foul and filthy—because -Love has been made synonymous with adultery? - -But Mr. Hamerton’s assertion loses its probability when viewed in the -light of the following considerations. He himself admits that the French -are anxious to read about Love, that the novelists and dramatists _must_ -find stories of Love somewhere—mind you, not of conjugal but of Romantic -Love—and the Paris _Figaro_ not long ago denounced the French novelists -of the period for devoting their stories to Love almost exclusively, -whereas Balzac, Dumas, Thackeray, and Scott, at least introduced various -other matters of interest. Now French novels have the largest editions -of any books published; and if so vast an interest is displayed by the -French in reading about Love, is it likely that their interest is purely -literary? Certainly not. They will seek it in real life. And in real -life it can only be found in one sphere, which elsewhere is protected -against such invasions, by the young being allowed to meet one another. -“It is to be feared that they who marry where they do not love, will -love where they do not marry.’” In _this_ respect human nature is the -same the world over. The testimony of scores of unprejudiced authors on -this head cannot be ignored. - -This, however, is only one of the evils following from the French -suppression of pre-matrimonial Love. The parents may or may not suffer -through conjugal jealousy and infidelity, one thing is certain,—that the -children suffer from it, in body and mind. It is leading to the -depopulation of France. It was M. Jules Rochard who called attention to -the fact that “France, which two centuries ago included one-third of the -total population of Europe, now contains but one-tenth”; although the -death-rate is smaller in France than in most European countries, and -although there has been a gradual increase of wealth throughout the -country. - -That the suppression of Romantic Love and of all opportunities for -courtship is the principal cause of the decline of France, is apparent -from the fact that the countries in which population increases most -rapidly—as America and Great Britain—are those in which Romantic Love is -the chief motive to marriage. - -Romantic Love goes by complementary qualities, the defects of the -parents neutralising one another in the offspring; so that the children -who are the issue of a love-match are commonly more beautiful than their -parents. In France there is no selection whatever, except with reference -to money and rank. Not even Health is considered, the _sine qua non_ of -Love as well as Beauty. Hence the absence of Love in France has led to -the almost absolute absence of beauty. And it would be nothing short of -a miracle if the offspring of a young maiden, still in her teens, and an -old broken-down sinner, chosen by her parents for his wealth or social -position, were any different from the puny, hairy men and -coarse-featured, vulgar women that make up the bulk of the French -nation. - -In Paris one does occasionally see a fine figure and a rather pretty -face, but they almost always belong to the lower classes. As the lower -classes allow the young considerable freedom, it would seem as if beauty -in this class ought to be as common an article as in England or the -United States. But the incapacity of the young women for feeling and -reciprocating Love neutralises these opportunities. For of what use is -it for a man to feel Love if the woman invariably bases her choice on -money? This matter is most clearly brought out by Mr. Hamerton:— - -“Amongst the lower classes, the peasantry and workmen ... girls have as -much freedom as they have in England. The great institution of the -_parlement_ gives them ample opportunities for becoming acquainted with -their lovers; indeed the acquaintance, in many cases, goes further than -is altogether desirable. A peasant girl requires no parental help in -looking after her own interests. She admits a lover to the happy state -of _parlement_, which means that he has a right to talk with her when -they meet, and to call upon her, dance with her, etc. The lover is -always eager to fix the wedding-day, the girl is not so eager. She keeps -him on indefinitely until a richer one appears, on which No. 1 has the -mortification of seeing himself excluded from _parlement_, whilst -another takes his place. In this way a clever girl will go on for -several years, amusing herself by torturing amorous swains, until at -length a sufficiently big fish nibbles at the bait, when she hooks him -at once, and takes good care that _he_ shall not escape. Nothing can be -more pathetically ludicrous than the condition of a young peasant who is -really in love, especially if he is able to write, for then he pours -forth his feelings in innumerable letters full of tenderness and -complaint. On her part the girl does not answer the letters, and has not -the slightest pity for the unhappy victim of her charms. After seeing a -good deal of such love-affairs I have come to the conclusion that in -humble life young men do really very often feel - - “‘The hope, the fear, the jealous care, - The exalted portion of the pain - And power of love.’” - -And they ‘wear the chain’ too. Young women, on the other hand, seem only -to amuse themselves with all this simple-hearted devotion— - - “‘And mammon wins his way where seraphs might despair.’” - -Schopenhauer pointed out that the French lack the _Gefühl für das -Innige_—the tenderness and emotional depth which characterise the -Germans and Italians. It is this that accounts for the inability of the -French to appreciate Love, and for the fact that even vice is coarser in -France than elsewhere, as remarked by Mr. Lecky, who, in his _History of -European Morals_, contrasts “the coarse, cynical, ostentatious -sensuality, which forms the most repulsive feature of the French -character,” with “the dreamy, languid, and æsthetical sensuality of the -Spaniard or Italian.” And it remained for the French to attempt to deify -vice as in that over-rated and repulsive story of _Manon Lescaut_. - -Mme. de Staël, who suffered so much from the provincialism (_alias_ -patriotism) of her countrymen, saw clearly the immorality of the French -system of marrying girls without consulting their choice. Brandes -relates the following anecdote of her: “One day, speaking of the -unnaturalness of marriages arranged by the parents, as distinguished -from those in which the young girls choose for themselves, she -exclaimed, ‘I would _compel_ my daughter to marry the man of her -choice!’” - -An attempt is being made at present in Paris to introduce the -Anglo-American feminine spirit into society. The word _flirter_ has been -adopted, and the thing itself experimented with. But the French girl -does not know how to draw the line between coquetry and flirtation. She -needs a better education before she can flirt properly. This education -the Government is trying to give her at present; but it meets with -stubborn resistance from the priests, and from the old notion that -intellectual culture is fatal to feminine charms and the capacity for -affection. If this book should accomplish nothing else than prove that -without intellect there can be no deep Love, it will not have been -written in vain. - - - ITALIAN LOVE - -In Italy, in the sixteenth century, women were kept in as strict -seclusion as to-day in France; and with the same results,—conjugal -infidelity and a great lack of Personal Beauty, as noted by Montaigne, -who remarks at the same time that it was regarded as something quite -extraordinary if a young lady was seen in public. - -Byron wrote in 1817 that “Jealousy is not the order of the day in -Venice”; and that the Italians “marry for their parents, and love for -themselves.” - -In Crowe and Cavalcaselle’s _Life and Times of Titian_ we read that -“Though chroniclers have left us to guess what the state of society may -have been in Venice at the close of the fifteenth century, they give us -reason to believe that it was deeply influenced by Oriental habit. The -separation of men from women in churches, the long seclusion of -unmarried females in convents or in the privacy of palaces, were but the -precursors to marriages in which husbands were first allowed to see -their wives as they came in state to dance round the wedding -supper-table.” - -But even at this early period when women were still treated as babies -unable to take care of themselves, we find at least one trace of the -Gallantry which is so essential an element in modern love. It was -customary for the men, on festive occasions, to stand behind their -wives’ chairs at table and serve them. - -Extremely ungallant, on the other hand, are some of the Italian proverbs -about women of this and other periods. “A woman is like a -horse-chestnut—beautiful outside, worthless inside.” “Two women and a -goose make a market.” “Married man—bird in cage.” “In buying a horse and -taking a wife shut your eyes and commend your soul to heaven.” - -Her exuberant health makes an Italian woman naturally prone to Love; but -though she falls in love most readily, the passion is apt to be fugitive -and superficial. She rarely loves with the passionate ardour of a -Spanish woman. “What we notice especially in Italian women,” says -Schweiger-Lerchenfeld, “is the absence of that alternation between those -extremes of temperament which are so conspicuous in other Southern -women. Energy is almost as unknown to her as the moral power of -resignation and sacrifice. Hence it can hardly surprise us that Italian -history records so few heroic women or pious female martyrs. Italy has -produced neither a Jeanne d’Arc nor an Elizabeth of Thuringia; the -crowns were too oppressive to be borne by these beauties, and life too -enchanting for them to invite to tragic self-sacrifice.” - -Probably the most realistic, and certainly the most fascinating, account -of Italian love-making ever given is to be found in Mr. Howells’s -_Venetian Life_. As it is too long to quote, I will attempt to condense -it, though at some sacrifice of that literary “bouquet,” as an epicure -would say, which constitutes the unique charm of Mr. Howells’s style:— - -"The Venetians have had a practical and strictly businesslike way of -arranging marriages from the earliest times. The shrewdest provision has -always been made for the dower and for the good of the state; private -and public interest being consulted, the small matters of affection have -been left to the chances of association. - -"Herodotus relates that the Assyrian Veneti sold their daughters at -auction to the highest bidder; and the fair being thus comfortably -placed in life, the hard-favoured were given to whomsoever would take -them, with such dower as might be considered a reasonable compensation. -The auction was discontinued in Christian times, but marriage contracts -still partook of the form of a public and half-mercantile transaction. - -“These passionate, headlong Italians look well to the main chance before -they leap into matrimony, and you may be sure Todaro knows, in black and -white, what the Biondina has to her fortune before he weds her.” - -“With the nobility and with the richest commoners marriage is still -greatly a matter of contract, and is arranged without much reference to -the principals, though it is now scarcely probable in any case that they -have not seen each other. But with all other classes, except the -poorest, who cannot or will not seclude the youth of either sex from -each other, and with whom, consequently, romantic contrivance and -subterfuge would be superfluous, love is made to-day in Venice as in the -_Capa y espada_ comedies of the Spaniards, and the business is carried -on with all the cumbrous machinery of confidants, _billets-doux_, and -stolen interviews.” - -The “operatic method of courtship” thence resulting commonly assumes -this form:— - -“They follow that beautiful blonde, who, marching demurely in front of -the gray-moustached papa and the fat mamma, after the fashion in Venice, -is electrically conscious of pursuit. They follow during the whole -evening, and, at a distance, softly follow her home, where the burning -Todaro photographs the number of the house upon the sensitised tablets -of his soul. This is the first step in love: he has seen his adored one, -and she knows that he loves her with an inextinguishable ardour.” - -The next step consists in his frequenting the _caffé_, where she goes -with her parents, and feasting his eyes on her beauty. After some time -he may possibly get a chance to speak a few words to her under her -balcony; or, what is more likely, he will bribe her servant-maid to -bring her a love-letter. Or else he goes to church to admire her at a -convenient distance. - -“It must be confessed that if the Biondina is not pleased with his -looks, his devotion must assume the character of an intolerable bore to -her; and that to see him everywhere at her heels—to behold him leaning -against the pillar near which she kneels at church, the head of his -stick in his mouth, and his attitude carefully taken with a view to -captivation—to be always in deadly fear lest she shall meet him in -promenade, or turning round at the _caffé_ encounter his pleading -gaze—that all this must drive the Biondina to a state bordering upon -blasphemy and finger-nails. _Ma, come si fa? Ci vuol pazienza?_ This is -the sole course open to ingenuous youth in Venice, where confessed and -unashamed acquaintance between young people is extremely difficult; and -so this blind pursuit must go on till the Biondina’s inclinations are at -last laboriously ascertained.” Then follow the inquiries as to her -dowry, after which nothing remains but “to demand her in marriage of her -father, _and after that to make her acquaintance_.” - -Topsy-turvy as this last arrangement may seem to Anglo-American notions, -here at least Love has some chance to bring about real Sexual Selection, -for a Southerner’s passions are momentarily inflamed, and the Italian -Cupid needs but a moment to fix his choice. And what distinguishes Italy -still more favourably from France is that, whereas the French consider -Love ridiculous, and have made the most ingenious contrivances for -annihilating it, the Italians worship it, revel in it, and are inclined -rather to make too many concessions to it than to ignore it. - -The result is patent to all eyes. For every attractive Frenchwoman there -are to-day a hundred beautiful Italians. And were Anglo-American methods -of courtship introduced in Italy, beauty would again be doubled in -amount. It must not be forgotten, however, that Love, as a beautifier of -mankind, has in Italy very strong allies in the balmy air and sunshine, -tempting to constant outdoor life, which mellows the complexion, -brightens the eyes, and fills out the figure to those full yet elegant -proportions which instantaneously arouse the romantic passion. - - - SPANISH LOVE - -Spanish veins contain more Oriental blood than those of any other -European nation; and to the present day Eastern methods of treating -women cast their shadow on Spanish life. But the shadow is so light, and -so much mitigated by the rosy hue of romance, that the “local colour” of -Love in Spain presents an unusually fascinating spectacle, which -countless literary artists have attempted to depict. - -During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Oriental shadow was -much darker, and kept the women in extreme subjection and ignorance. -“Their life,” says Professor Scherr, speaking even of the queens, -“passed away in a luxurious tedium which dulled the sentiments to the -point of idiocy. They were only crowned slaves. As an instance of their -absolute deprivation of liberty may be cited the case of Elizabeth, wife -of Philip II., who, when in 1565 she went to Bayonne to meet her mother, -had to wait three days before the gates of Burgos before it was possible -to ascertain the king’s decision whether the queen should pass through -the city or around it.” - -“Women of rank,” he continues, "lived in a seclusion bordering on that -of a convent, if not surpassing it. For nuns were at least allowed to -speak to male visitors behind bars, whereas married women were strictly -forbidden to receive the visit of a man, except with the special -permission of the husband. And only during the first year of their -wedded life were they allowed to frequent public drives in open -carriages by the side of their husband; subsequently they were only -allowed to go out in closed carriages. Of cosy family life not a -trace.... Even the table did not unite the husband and wife; the master -took his meal alone, while his wife and children sat respectfully on the -floor on carpets, with their legs crossed in Oriental fashion. - -“The poor women, excluded from every refined social diversion, were -confined to manual work, gossip with their duennas, mechanical praying, -playing with their rosaries, and—intriguing. For the greater the -subjection of women, the more does their cunning grow, the more -passionate becomes their desire to avenge themselves on their tyrants. -The Spaniards found this out to their cost. The most inexorable spirit -of revenge, all the parade of ‘Spanish honour,’ bordering in its excess -on clownishness, could not prevent the Spanish dames from loving and -being loved.” - -In course of time this Oriental despotism, with its fatal consequences -to conjugal fidelity—as in France—has been greatly mitigated in Spain. -In Pepys’s _Diary_, 1667, we read of an informant who told the writer -“of their wooing [in Spain] by serenades at the window, and that their -friends do always make the match; but yet they have opportunities to -meet at masse at church, and there they make love.” - -In an interesting book on Spain, written almost two and a quarter -centuries after Pepys’s _Diary_—Mr. Lathrop’s _Spanish Vistas_—we still -read concerning this ecclesiastic Love-making, in the Seville Cathedral: -“Every door was guarded by a squad of the decrepit army, so that -entrance there became a horror. These sanctuary beggars serve a double -purpose, however. The black-garbed Sevillan ladies, who are perpetually -stealing in and out noiselessly under cover of their archly-draped lace -veils—losing themselves in the dark, incense-laden interior, or emerging -from confession into the daylight glare again—are careful to drop some -slight conscience-money into the palms that wait. Occasionally, by -pre-arrangement, one of these beggars will convey into the hand that -passes him a silver piece, a tightly-folded note from some clandestine -lover. It is a convenient underground mail, and I am afraid the -venerable church innocently shelters a good many little transactions of -this kind.” - -How greatly the facilities for falling in love and for making love have -been increased in modern Spain is vividly brought out in the following -citation from Schweiger-Lerchenfeld regarding the scenes to be witnessed -every evening on the crowded promenade or Rambla at Barcelona:— - -“Are these elegantly-attired ramblers one and all suitors, since they -put no limit nor restraint on their whispered flatteries? No, that is -simply the custom in Barcelona. The women and girls are beautiful, and -though they are well aware of it, they nevertheless allow their charms -to be whispered in their ears hundreds of times every evening—a freedom -of intercourse which is only possible on Spanish soil.... And thus one -of these adored beauties walks up and down in the glare of the lamps, -and sweet music is wafted to her ears: ‘Your beauty dazzles me,’ -whispers one voice; and another, ‘Happiness and anguish your eyes are -burning into my soul.’ One compliments the chosen one on her hair, -another on her figure, a third on her graceful gait. Young adorers feel -a thrill running down their whole body if her mantilla only touches -them; while mature lovers are contented with nothing less than a -pressure of the hand. It is a picture that is possible, conceivable only -in Spain.” - -The same writer quotes some specimens of Spanish Love-songs, one of -which may be transferred to this page— - - “Échame, niña bonita, - Lágrimas en tu pañuelo, - Y los llevaré a Madrid - Que los engarce un platero.” - -“Show me, my little charmer, the tear in your handkerchief; to Madrid -will I take it and have it set by a jeweller.” - -What a contrast between this modern complimentary and poetic form of -Gallantry and the form prevalent in the good old times when lovers -endeavoured to win a maiden’s favour by flagellating themselves under -her window until the blood ran down their backs; and when, as Scherr -adds, “it was regarded as the surest sign of supreme gallantry if some -of the blood bespattered the clothes of the beauty to whom this crazy -act of devotion was addressed!” - -Nevertheless, the Spanish still have much to learn from England and -America regarding the proper methods of Courtship; for, according to a -writer in _Macmillan’s Magazine_ (1874), the unmarried maiden of the -higher classes, “like her humbler sister, can never have the privilege -of seeing her lover in private, and very rarely, indeed, if ever, is he -admitted into the _sala_ where she is sitting. He may contrive to get a -few minutes’ chat with her through the barred windows of her _sala_; but -when a Spaniard leads his wife from the altar, he knows no more of her -character, attainments, and disposition than does the parish priest who -married them, and perhaps not so much.” - -In one respect Spanish lovers have a great advantage over their -unfortunate colleagues in France. There marriage is impossible without -parental consent, whereas in Spain a law exists concerning which the -writer just quoted says:— - -“Should a Spanish lad and lassie become attached to one another, and the -parents absolutely forbid the match, and refuse their daughter liberty -and permission to marry, the lover has his remedy at law. He has but to -make a statement of the facts on paper, and deposit it, signed and -attested, with the alcalde or mayor of the township in which the lady’s -parents dwell. The alcalde then makes an order, giving the young man the -right of free entry into the house in question, within a certain number -of days, for the purpose of wooing and carrying off his idol. The -parents dare not interfere with the office of the alcalde, and the lady -is taken to her lover’s arms. From that moment he, and he alone, is -bound to provide for her: by his own act and deed she has become his -property.” Should he prove false “the law comes upon him with all its -force, and he is bound to maintain her, in every way, as a wife, under -pain of punishment.” - -Thus a Spanish girl is protected against perfidious lovers as well as is -an English and American girl through the possibility of suing for breach -of promise. If the short stories told in _Don Quixote_ may be taken as -examples, faithless lovers were very common in Spain at that time; -which, doubtless, accounts for the origin of this law. The girls on -their part erred by yielding too easily to the promises of the men; -though they are partially excused by the great strength of their -passions. - -In his work on Suicide, Professor Morselli has statistics showing that -more women take their life in Spain than in any other country; and he -attributes this to the force of their passions, which is greater than in -Italy, where the number of female suicides is considerably lower. - -Thus Love has a more favourable ground in Spain than either in Italy or -in France, notwithstanding certain restrictions. And the result shows -itself in this, that all tourists unite in singing the praises of -Spanish Beauty. Spain, indeed, unites in itself all the conditions -favourable to Beauty: a climate tempting to outdoor life; a considerable -amount of intellectual culture and æsthetic refinement; a mixture of -nationalities, fusing _ethnic_ peculiarities into a harmonious whole; -and Love, which fuses _individual_ complementary qualities into a -harmonious ensemble of beautiful features, graceful figure, amiable -disposition, and refined manners. - - - GERMAN LOVE - -When Tacitus penned his famous certificate of good moral character for -the Germans of his time, he little suspected how many thousand times it -would be quoted by the grateful and proud descendants of those early -Teutons, and pinned to the lapels of their coats as a sort of prize -medal in the competition for ancestral virtue. The more candid -historians, however, admit that the Roman historian somewhat overdrew -his picture in order to teach his own profligate countrymen a sort of -Sunday school lesson, by the vivid contrast presented by these -inhabitants of the northern virgin forests. - -There is no question that women were held in considerable honour among -these early Germans. Many of them served as priestesses, and adultery -was punished with death. Polygamy existed only among the chiefs, and -even among them it was not common. Yet the men did not treat the women -as their equals. “They had more duties than privileges,” says -Schweiger-Lerchenfeld. Their husbands were addicted to excessive -drinking or gambling when not engaged in war or the chase, leaving the -hard domestic and field labour to the women: and all this cannot have -tended to refine the women. - -“Marriage in the old Germanic times,” says Ploss, “was mostly an affair -of expediency.... In the choice of a wife beauty was of less moment than -property and good social antecedents. Love _before_ the betrothal rarely -occurs.” - -Gustav Freytag, in his _Pictures of German Life_, during the fifteenth, -sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries, remarks: “Marriage was considered -by our ancestors less as a union of two lovers than as an institution -replete with duties and rights, not only of married people towards one -another, but also towards their relatives, as a bond uniting two -corporate bodies.... Therefore in the olden time the choice of husband -and wife was always an affair of importance to the relatives on both -sides, so that a German wooing from the oldest times, _even until the -last century_, had the appearance of a business transaction, which was -carried out with great regard to suitability.” - -And a business transaction it is, unfortunately, to the present day, in -the vast majority of cases. A certain amount of dower or property on the -bride’s part is the first and most essential requisite. Second in -importance is the desirability of not descending even a step in the -social ladder, though an extra lump of gold commonly suffices to pull -down social Pride to a lower level. Health, temper, Personal Beauty, and -mutual suitability—these are the trifles which, other things being -equal, come in as a third consideration. And thus is the order of Sexual -Selection, as ordained by Love, commonly reversed. - -What would an English or American youth of twenty-two say to his father -if the latter should undertake to write to all his relatives, asking -them to look about for an eligible partner for his son, and capping the -climax by starting himself on a trip in search of a bride for his son? -Would he accept without a murmur the girl thus found, and would an -English or American girl thus allow herself to be given away like a cat -in a bag, not knowing whither she was going? I have seen several such -cases with my own eyes. One of them was most pathetic. For when the -blooming bride, a sweet and refined girl, was introduced to the -bridegroom selected for her by her parents—a repulsive-looking brute, -twice her age—she conceived a perfect loathing for him, and almost wept -out her eyes before the wedding-day. But the man was rich, and that -settled the matter. - -What aggravated this outrage was the fact that the bride’s father also -was rich. And herein, in fact, lies the canker of the German system. -Money is such a comfortable thing to have that it is useless to preach -against it. There are money-marriages enough in England and America. But -in these countries it is generally considered sufficient if one party -has the money. Not so in Germany. It is not so much the comfort ensured -by a certain amount of money that is aimed at as the superior social -influence ensured by a large amount of wealth. Hence the rich marry the -rich, regardless of other consequences, and poor Cupid is left shivering -in the cold. So that, after all, the silly pride of social position is a -greater enemy of Romantic Love than money. - -And the consequences of such a matrimonial system? They have been most -eloquently set forth by the blind old philosopher, Dr. Dühring:— - -“The amalgamation of fortunes, and the resulting enervating luxury of -living, are the ruling matrimonial motives; and the want of mutual -adaptation of the individuals becomes the cause of the degenerate -appearance of the offspring. The loathsome products of such marriages -then walk about as ugly embodiments and witnesses of such a degraded -system of legalised prostitution (_Kuppelwirthschaft_). They bear the -stamp of incongruity on body and mind; for their appearance shows them -to be the offspring of disharmonious parents, blindly associated, or -even, in many cases, of parents who themselves are already products of -this new matrimonial method. This degeneracy necessarily continues from -one generation to another, and in this manner maltreated Nature avenges -herself by leading to personal decrepitude and the formation of a new -sort of idiocy.” - -“It is true,” he adds, “that love is not an infallible sign of mutual -suitability; but when it is absent, or even replaced by aversion, it is -certain that it is useless to expect a specially harmonious composition -of the offspring.” - -Is this one of the reasons why Personal Beauty is so rare, -comparatively, in Germany? - -But Individual Preference is not the only element of Love which thus -suffers in Germany through false Pride and parental tyranny. Gallantry -is another factor which needs mending. German women are sweet and -amiable. In fact, they are _too_ sweet and good-natured. They have -spoiled the men, who in consequence are excessively selfish in their -relations to women—the most selfish men in the world, outside of Turkey -or China. True, the German officer in a ballroom seems to be the very -essence of officious Gallantry. But his motives are too transparently -Ovidian: it is not true Anglo-American politeness of the heart that -inspires his conduct. He is either after forbidden sweets or parading -his uniform and his vanity. Take the same man and watch him at home. His -wife has to get him his chair, move it up to the fire, bring him his -slippers, put the coffee in his hand, and do errands for him. When he -goes out she puts on his overcoat and buttons it up carefully for him as -if he were a helpless big baby. This would be all very well—for why -should not women be gallant too?—if he would only retaliate. But he -never dreams of it. Even if it comes to a task which calls for masculine -muscular power—the carrying of bundles, etc.—he makes the wife do it. He -is, in fact, matrimonially considered, not only a big baby but also a -big brute, the very incarnation of masculine selfishness. - -In former centuries it was customary in Germany, as it is now with us, -for women to bow first to men. The modern German has reversed this. -Woman has no right to bow until her lord and superior has invited her to -do so by doffing his hat. - -The German girl, says the Countess von Bothmer in _German Home Life_, -“is taught that to be womanly she must be helpless, to be feminine she -must be feeble, to endear herself she must be dependent, to charm she -must cling.” “To keep carefully to the sheep-walk, to applaud in concert -and condemn in chorus, is the only behaviour that can be tolerated.” -“They have one bugbear and one object of idolatry, these monotonous -ladies,—a fetish which they worship under the name of Mode; a monster -between public opinion and Mrs. Grundy. To say a thing is not ‘Mode’ -here, is to condemn it as if by all the laws of Media and Persia. It is -not her centre [_sic_], but the system of her social education, that -renders the German woman so hopelessly provincial.” - -Of course it is the men who are responsible for this social education -and this feminine ideal of absolute dependence. It suits their selfish -pleasure to be worshipped and obeyed by the women without any efforts at -gallant retaliation on their part. - -A native writer tells us that “a true German philosophises occasionally -while he embraces his sweetheart; while kissing even, theories will -sprout in his mind.” - -No wonder, therefore, that one of the German metaphysicians, Fichte, -should have made a sophistic attempt to reduce masculine selfishness to -a system. He proves to his own satisfaction that it is woman’s duty to -sacrifice herself in man’s behalf; while man, on his part, has no such -obligations. His reasoning is too elaborate to quote in full; but is too -amusingly naïve to be omitted, so I will translate the summary of it -given by Kuno Fischer in his _History of Philosophy_:— - -“What woman’s natural instincts demand is self-abandonment to a man; she -desires this abandonment not for her own sake, but for the man’s sake; -she gives herself to him, for him. Now abandoning oneself for another is -self-sacrifice, and self-sacrifice from an instinctive impulse is LOVE. -Therefore love is a kind of instinctive impulse which the sexual -instinct in woman necessarily and involuntarily assumes. She feels the -necessity of loving.... This impulse is peculiar to woman alone; woman -alone loves [!!!]; only through woman does love appear among mankind.... -The woman’s life should disappear in the man’s without a remnant, and it -is this relation that is so beautifully and correctly indicated in the -fact that the wife no longer uses her own name, but that of her husband -[!].” - -The latest (and it is to be hoped the last) of the German -metaphysicians, the pessimist Hartmann, goes even a step beyond -Fichte in arrogating for man special privileges in Love. If Fichte -makes Love synonymous with Self-Sacrifice—feminine, mind you, not -masculine—Hartmann tries to prove that man may love as often as he -pleases, but woman only once. And what aggravates the offence, he -does it in such a poetic manner. “Though it may be doubtful,” he -says, “whether a man can truly love two women at the same time, it -is beyond all doubt that he can love several in succession with all -the depth of his heart; and the assertion that there is only one -true love is an unwarranted generalisation to all mankind of a maxim -which is true of woman alone.... Woman can learn but once by -experience what love is, and it is painful for the lover not to be -the one who teaches her first. True it is that a tree nipped by a -spring frost brings forth a second crown of leaves, but so rich and -luxuriant as the first it will not be; thus does a maiden-heart -produce a second bloom, if the first had to wither before maturity, -but its full and complete floral glory is unfolded only where love, -aroused for the first time, passes in full vigour through all its -phases.” - -Yet it is not ungallant selfishness alone that prompts German men to -bring up their women so that they shall be mere playthings at first and -drudges after marriage, never real soul-mates. They have the same old -stupid continental fear that culture of the intellect weakens the -feelings. This fear is based on slovenly reasoning—on the inference that -because a few blue-stockings have at all ages made themselves ridiculous -by assuming masculine attributes and parading their lack of tenderness -and feminine delicacy, therefore intellectual training must be fatal to -feminine charms. As if there were not plenty of masculine -blue-stockings, or pedants, without disproving the fact that the men of -the greatest intellectual power—men of genius—are also the most -emotional and refined of all men; or the fact proved by this whole -monograph, that Love and general emotional refinement grow with the -general intellectual culture of women. - -A typical illustration of German feeling on the subject of female -education is to be found in Schweiger-Lerchenfeld’s _Frauenleben der -Erde_, p. 530. Referring to the attempts now being made in France to -give young girls a rational education, he quotes the opinion of a French -legislator that a girl thus brought up would not love less deeply than -heretofore, while she would love more intelligently; and then comments -as follows: “How far this anticipation may be realised cannot be decided -now or in the near future. At any rate we must leave to the French -themselves the task of getting along with this classical female -generation of the future. Certain it is that their experiment will -hardly be imitated, and that the old Romans and Greeks may eventually -become more dangerous to masculine supremacy (Autorität) than the -pilgrimage stories of Lourdes.” - -It is time for German woman to rise in revolt against this mediæval -masculine selfishness. Not in active revolt, for a warlike woman is an -abomination. But in passive revolt. Let them cease to spoil the men, and -these bears will become more gallant. Germany is later in almost every -phase of literary and social culture than England. It was not an -accident that Shakspere came before Heine, the English before the German -poet of Love; for Love is much less advanced in Germany than in England. -It has not even passed the stage where a harsh sort of Coyness is still -in place. German women want to learn the cunning to be strange, They are -too deferential to the men, too easily won. They want to learn to -indulge in harmless flirtation, and they want the education which will -give them wit enough to flirt cleverly and make the men mellow. - -It must be admitted, however, notwithstanding all these strictures, that -there is much genuine Romantic Love in Germany, often differing in no -wise from Anglo-American Love. At first sight it seems, indeed, as if -chaperonage were as strict as in France; and no doubt many German girls -are brought up on the spring-chicken-coyness system which regards every -man as a hawk, and a signal for hiding away in a corner. But in general -German girls have much more freedom than French girls. They may walk -alone in the street in the daytime, go alone to the conservatory to -attend a music-lesson. They meet the young men freely at evening -parties, dances, musical entertainments, etc.; and the chaperons are not -nearly so obtrusive and offensive as in France. The mothers appear to -have taken to heart Jean Paul’s saying that “in the mother’s presence it -is impossible to carry on an edifying conversation with the daughter.” -So that there is plenty of opportunity for falling in love; and were it -not for parental dictation, Love-matches would perhaps be as common as -in England. But the girls lack independence of spirit to defy parental -tyranny, which it is their _moral duty_ to defy where money or rank are -pitted against Love. For the health and happiness of the next generation -are at stake. - -German girls also enjoy an advantage over the French in having a -literature which is pure and wholesome; and by reading about Romantic -Love they train and deepen their feelings. It is often said that Heine’s -influence has been chiefly negative. The truth is, _Heine is the -greatest emotional educator Germany has ever had_. More young men and -girls have wept over his pathetic lyrics than over any other poetry. His -_Buch der Lieder_ has done more to foster the growth of Romantic Love in -Germany than all other collections of verse combined; not only by their -own unadorned beauty, but through the soulful music wedded to these -poems by Schubert, Schumann, and other magicians of the heart. The fact -that the copyright on Heine’s works was soon to expire, and the country -to be flooded with cheap editions, has long caused Master Cupid to rub -his hands in gleeful anticipation of brisk business; and he has just -given orders in his arsenal for one hundred thousand new golden arrows. - -Heine indeed fathomed the secrets of Love much more deeply than Goethe. -Whereas Heine sang of Love in every major and minor key, Goethe appears -to have emphasised chiefly its transitoriness. “Love, as Goethe knows -it,” says Professor Seeley, “is very tender, and has a lyric note as -fresh as that of a song-bird. In his _Autobiography_ one love-passage -succeeds another, but each comes speedily to an end. How far in each -case he was to blame is a matter of controversy. But he seems to betray -a way of thinking about women such as might be natural to an Oriental -sultan. ‘I was in that agreeable phase,’ he writes, ‘when a new passion -had begun to spring up in me before the old one had quite disappeared.’ -About Frederika he blames himself without reserve, and uses strong -expressions of contrition; but he forgets the matter strangely soon. In -his distress of mind he says he found riding, and especially skating, -bring much relief. This reminds us of the famous letter to the Frau von -Stein about coffee. He is always ready in a moment to shake off the -deepest impressions and receive new ones; and he never looks back.... -Goethe was a man of the old _régime_.... Had he entered into the -reforming movement of his age, he might have striven to elevate -women.... He certainly felt at times that all was not right in the -status of women (‘woman’s fate is pitiable’), and how narrowly confined -was their happiness (wie enggebunden ist des Weibes Glück) ... but he -was not a reformer of institutions.” - -A reformer of institutions, however, has apparently just arisen in -Berlin. For we read that at a private female seminary the girls received -the following subject for an essay: “There is from the Ideas of Plato, -the atoms of Democritus, the Substance of Spinoza, the monads of -Leibnitz, and from the subjective mental forms of Kant, the proof to -bring, that the philosophy it never neglected has the to-be-calculated -results of their hypotheses with their into-perception-falling effects -to compare.” - -Such subjects, so elegantly expressed, are no doubt eminently calculated -to bring out the latent possibilities of feminine feeling and culture. - -To close this chapter with a sweet, soothing concord—major triad, horns -and ’cellos, _smorzando_—it must be admitted that the Germans have one -ingredient of Romantic Love which all other nations must envy them. They -have one more thrill in the drama of Love, in the ascending scale of -familiarities, than we have, namely, the word _Du_, which is something -very different from the stilted _Thou_, because still a part of everyday -language. The second person singular is used in Germany towards pet -animals and children, between students, intimate friends, relatives, and -lovers. French “lovers” do not say _tu_ to each other till after -marriage, and even then they do not use it in public. But the German -lover has the privilege, as soon as he is engaged, of exchanging the -formal _Sie_ for the affectionate _Du_; and the first _Du_ that comes -from her lips can hardly be less sweet than the first kiss. - -There is a game of cards, popular among young folks in Germany, during -which you have to address every one with _Du_ whom you otherwise would -have to call _Sie_, and _vice versâ_; cards have to be called spoons, -white black, etc. If there is a young man in the company secretly in -love with a young lady, you can always “spot” him by the eagerness he -shows to speak to her, and the fact that he always gets the _Du_ right -and everything else wrong; while she, strange to say, appears to have -never heard of such a thing at all as a personal pronoun. - - - ENGLISH LOVE - -Concerning Romantic Love in England and America, there is less to be -said under the head of National Peculiarities than in case of the -continental nations of Europe, for the simple reason that almost -everything said in the pages on Modern Love refers especially to these -two countries. Anglo-American Love is Romantic Love, pure and simple, as -first depicted by Shakspere, and after him, with more or less accuracy, -by a hundred other poets and novelists. There is no lack of colour in -this Love—colour warm and glowing—but it is no longer a mere local -colour, a national or provincial peculiarity, but Love in its essence, -its cosmopolitan aspect; Love such as will in course of time prevail -throughout the world, when the Anglisation of this planet—which is only -a question of time—shall have been completed. - -England has many a bright jewel in the crown of her achievements in -behalf of civilisation, but the brightest of all is this, that she was -the first country in the world—ancient, mediæval, or modern—that removed -the bars from woman’s prison-windows, opened every door to Cupid, and -made him thoroughly welcome and comfortable. And grateful Cupid has -retaliated by setting up English manners and customs as a model which -all other nations are slowly but surely copying. Eighteen million souls -in the United States, or almost two persons in every five, are not of -English origin; yet of these there are not one million who have not -given up their old country methods of courtship as antiquated, and -adopted the Anglo-American style. The Germans in America make love not -after the German but after the English fashion. So do the French, though -somewhat more reluctantly and tardily. In San Francisco and Chicago it -is said that but one name in ten is of English origin; yet who ever -heard of a San Franciscan or Chicagoan making love in foreign style? -During the last hundred years the majority of the immigrants to America -have come from non-English countries; yet, though the parents enter the -country as adults with all their national traditions stamped on their -memories, they invariably allow their sons and daughters to court and be -courted in American style. And now that England is gradually extending -her influence to every one of the five continents, Romantic Love—to -whose sway, quite as much as to their outdoor active life, the English -owe the fact that they are to-day the handsomest and most energetic race -in the world—is also rapidly extending its sphere, and will finally oust -the last vestiges of Oriental despotism, feminine suppression, and -mediæval masculine barbarism. - -For some centuries woman has been more favoured by law, and especially -by national custom, in England than in any other European state. It is -true that the Englishman who beats his wife is the most brutal savage on -the face of the globe, but he is to be found only among the lowest -classes. Nor has wife-selling ever been quite such a universal custom in -England as foreigners imagine; although cases are on record as far back -as 1302 and as late as 1884. In an article in _All the Year Round_ (Dec. -20, 1884) more than twenty cases are enumerated with full details, the -price of a wife varying from twenty-five guineas to a pint or half a -pint of beer, or a penny and a dinner; and the _Times_ of July 22, 1797, -remarks sarcastically: “By some mistake or omission, in the report of -the Smithfield market, we have not learned the average price of wives -for the week. The increasing value of the fair sex is esteemed by -several eminent writers the certain criterion of increasing -civilisation. Smithfield has, on this ground, strong pretensions to -refined improvement, as the price of wives has risen in that market from -half a guinea to three guineas and a half.” - -That these cases occurred only among the lowest classes is self-evident; -yet even the lowest classes often resented the brutal transaction by -pelting the offenders with stones and mud; whereas, as far as the women -were concerned, the offence was mitigated by the fact that in all cases -on record they appear to have been only too glad to be sold, so as to -get rid of their tyrants. - -It cannot be said that English women are all exempt from the hardest -manual labour even to-day; but the tendency to relieve them of tasks -unsuited to feminine muscular development has existed longer in England -than elsewhere. The difference can be best observed with regard to -agricultural labour. Any one who travels through Italy, Switzerland, -France, or Germany in the autumn, gets the impression that most of the -harvesting is done by the women; whereas in England, as shown by -statistics, there are twenty-two men to every woman engaged as -field-labourers. Yet even at that rate there are still 64,840 women in -England engaged in agricultural labour unsuited to their sex. - -On the other hand, English women, like American women, are manifesting a -great disposition at present to try their hand or brain at almost every -employment heretofore considered exclusively masculine. The census -enumerates 349 different classes of work, and of these all but about 70 -have been invaded by women; including 5 horse-dealers, 14 bicycle makers -and dealers, 16 sculptors, 18 fence makers, 19 fossil diggers, etc.; -whereas there are as yet no female pilots, dentists, police officers, -shepherds, law students, architects, cab-drivers, commercial travellers, -barristers, etc. [Full list in _Pall Mall Gazette_, Oct. 3, 1884.] - -Inasmuch as there are almost a million more women than men in England, -it is not surprising that women should thus seek to extend their sphere -of usefulness. We live in an experimental epoch, when it is to be -ascertained what is and what is not becoming to woman regarded as a -labourer. It is therefore of the utmost importance that there should be -some standard by which each employment is to be judged. And this -standard, fortunately, is supplied by Romantic Love. - -We have seen that the tendency of civilisation has been to differentiate -the sexes more and more in appearance, character, and emotional -susceptibilities, and that on this differentiation depends the existence -and power of Love, because it _individualises_ man and woman, and Love -is the more intense the more it is individualised. - -Hence every employment which tends to make woman masculine in appearance -or habits is to be tabooed by her because antagonistic to Love. If she, -nevertheless, persists in it, Love will have its revenge by eliminating -her through Sexual Selection. No man will marry a masculine woman, or -fall in love with her, so that her unnatural temperament will not be -transmitted to the next generation and multiplied. - -But what is to be accepted as the standard of femininity? The answer is -given us by Nature. Throughout the animal world, with a few -insignificant exceptions, the sexes are differentiated distinctly; and -the female is the more tender and gentle of the two, the more devoted to -domestic affection and the care and education of the young, the more -amiable, and, above all, less aggressive, bold, and pugnacious than the -male. “Any education which women undergo,” says the _Spectator_, “should -be an education not for the militant life of war against evil but for -the spiritual life inspiring a persuasive or patient charity.... Even in -a field properly suited to them—the field of charitable institutions, of -poor-law work, of educational representation—women no sooner take up the -cudgels than they lose their appropriate influence, and are either -unsexed or paralysed.” - -According to Mr. Ruskin, “woman’s work is—(1) To please people. (2) To -feed them in dainty ways. (3) To clothe them. (4) To keep them orderly. -(5) To teach them.” - -Statistics concerning the employments instinctively sought by the -majority of women bear out Mr. Ruskin’s table quite well. Woman’s first -duty is to please people by being beautiful, amiable, and fascinating in -conversation and manners. No man would marry a woman unless she pleased -him in one way or another; hence matrimony is the most successful female -profession, which in England includes 4,437,962 women. But there are -other ways in which women seek to please and prosper; hence there are in -England 2368 actresses as against 2197 actors, and 11,376 women whose -profession is music, as against 14,170 men. - -Domestic service, which includes the “feeding in dainty ways” (though -too often the “dainty” must be omitted), employs 1,230,406 women in -England—about 30,000 fewer than industrial employments, which are -somewhat more popular owing to the greater individual liberty they allow -the employed. Yet domestic service is a much better preparation for -married life than labour in a manufactory; so that, other things being -equal, a labouring man looking for a wife would be apt to select one who -has learned how to take care of his home. This thought ought to help to -render domestic service more popular. - -“To clothe them.” Dressmaking, staymaking (alas!), and millinery, employ -357,995 women in England. - -“To keep them orderly.” Bathing and washing service employ 176,670 -women; medicine and nursing, almost 50,000; missions, 1660. - -“To teach them.” This, one of woman’s special vocations, eminently -suited to her capacity, employs 123,995 females. - -If I have failed in correctly interpreting Mr. Ruskin’s oracle, I stand -subject to correction from that earnest labourer in the task of finding -for woman her proper sphere—a work for which he has not yet received the -recognition and thanks he deserves. - -That marriage, and not miscellaneous employment, is woman’s true -destiny, is shown by the way in which Cupid influences statistics. Thus -there are in England about 29,000 school-mistresses aged 15-20, and -28,500 aged 25-45; but the time from 20-25, the period of courtship and -marriage, has only 21,000. In the case of dressmakers this fact is -brought out still more strikingly: 15-20—84,000; 20-25—76,000; -25-45—129,000, in round numbers. - -Although, therefore, as Emerson remarks, “the circumstances may be -easily imagined in which woman may speak, vote, argue cases, legislate, -and drive coaches, if only it comes by degrees,” facts show that there -is more philosophy of the future in Mrs. Hawthorne’s remark that “Home, -I think, is the great arena for women, and there, I am sure, she can -wield a power which no king or emperor can cope with.” - -A consideration of all the foregoing facts shows that Love may be safely -accepted as a guiding-star in making a proper division of the world’s -labour between men and women. And the reason why England and America -have made so much more progress than other nations in ascertaining -woman’s true capacity and sphere, is because she has been educated to a -point where she can assert her independence, and where she can inspire -as well as feel Love—thus making man humble, gallant, gentle, ready to -make concessions and remove restrictions. It is in England and America -alone that Love plays a more important _rôle_ in marriage than money and -social position; that the young are generally permitted to consult their -own heart instead of parental command; and that the opportunities for -courtship are so liberal and numerous that the young are enabled to fall -in love with one another not only for dazzling qualities of Personal -Beauty, viewed for a moment, but for traits of character, emotional -refinement, and a cultured intellect. - -These two nations alone have fully taken to heart and heeded Addison’s -maxim that “Those marriages generally abound most with love and -constancy that are _preceded by a long courtship_. The passion should -strike root and gather strength before marriage be grafted on it. A long -course of hopes and expectations fixes the idea in our minds, and -habituates us to a fondness of the person beloved.” - -There is, however, a difference between English and American Love which -shows that we have learned Addison’s lesson even better than his own -countrymen. As Mr. Robert Laird Collier remarks in _English Home Life_: -“The American custom, among the mass of the people, of leaving young men -and young women free to associate together and to keep company with each -other for an indefinite length of time, without declaring their -intentions, is almost unknown in any country of Europe. It is not long -after a young man begins to show the daughter attentions before the -father gives intimation that he wishes to know what it means, and either -the youth declares his intentions or is notified to ‘cut sticks.’” -“Courtships in England are short, and engagements are long.” - -The London _Standard_ doubtless exaggerates the difference between -English and American girls and their attitude toward men in the course -of an article, part of which may, nevertheless, be cited: “American -girls offer a bright example to their English sisters of a happy, -unclouded youth, and instances seem to be few of their abusing the -liberty which is accorded to them. Perhaps their immunity from -sentimental troubles arises from the fact that from earliest childhood -they have been comrades of the other sex, and are therefore not disposed -to turn a man into a demi-god because they only see one at rare -intervals under the eagle eye of a mother or aunt. A great revolution in -public opinion would be required ere English girls could be emancipated -to the extent which prevails on the other side of the Atlantic, and even -then it is doubtful whether the system would work well. The daughters of -Albion, with but few exceptions, are single-hearted, earnest, and prone -to look upon everything seriously. They often make the mistake of -imagining that a man is in love because he is decently civil.” - -Yet in _German Home Life_, written from an English point of view, we -read that “There is no such thing as country life, as we understand it, -in Germany; no cosy sociability, smiling snugness, pleasant bounties and -hospitalities; and, above all, for the young folk, no freedom, -flirtation, boatings, sketchings, high teas, scamperings, and merriments -generally.” And again: “The sort of frank ‘flirtation,’ beginning openly -in fun and ending in amusement, which is common amongst healthy, -high-spirited boys and girls in England, and has no latent element of -intrigue or vanity in it, but is born of exuberant animal spirits, -youthful frolics, and healthy pastimes shared together, is forbidden to -her” (the German girl). - -The _Standard_ itself apparently contradicts itself in another article -on “Flirtation,” concerning which it says: “It is usually so innocent -that it has become part of the education most of our young women pass -through in their training for society. The British matron smiles -contentedly when she sees that her daughter, just entered on her teens, -exhibits a partiality for long walks and soft-toned confabulations with -her cousin Fred or her brother’s favourite schoolmate. Three or four -such juvenile attachments will do the girl no harm, if they are gently -watched over by the parental eye. They serve to evolve the sexually -social instincts in a gradual way. Through them the bashful maiden -learns the nature of man in the same fashion as she takes lessons on the -piano. In a word, she is ‘getting her hand in’ for the real game of -matrimony that is to be played in a few years. Her youthful swains, of -course, derive their own instructions from these innocent amours.... -Chivalrous feeling is developed which it takes a deal of worldly wisdom -to smother in after years.... When we observe this sentimentality in a -boy, we derive great amusement from it, but it should raise the lad in -our estimation. He has something in him to which ideals appeal, and his -early-developed susceptibility will—to use a beautiful but forgotten -word—engentle his nature.” - -Perhaps the difference between English and American courtship and -flirtation is not so great as often painted, and is becoming less every -year, owing to the Americanisation of Europe. - - - AMERICAN LOVE - -It is in the United States of America that Plato’s ideal—so completely -ignored by his countrymen—that young men and women should have ample -opportunity to meet and get acquainted with one another before marriage, -is most perfectly realised; as well as Addison’s supplementary advice -that marriage should be preceded by a long courtship. - -As boys and girls in America are commonly educated in the same schools, -they are initiated at an early age into the sweets and sorrows of -Calf-love Courtship, which has such a refining influence on the boys, -and renders the girls more easy and natural in society when they get -older; destroying among other puerilities that spring-chicken Coyness -which makes many of their European sisters appear so silly. In the -Western country-schools each girl has her “beau”—a boy of fourteen to -seventeen—who brings her flowers, apples, or other presents, accompanies -her home, and performs various other gallant services; nor has any harm -ever been known to result from this juvenile Courtship—except an -occasional elopement, in case of a prematurely frivolous couple, whom it -was just as well to get rid of in that way as any other. - -When they get a little older, the young folks go to picnics without a -chaperon, or they enjoy a drive or sleigh-ride, or go a-skating -together; and after a party, dance, church fair, or other social -gathering, where the elders commonly keep out of the way considerately, -each young man accompanies a young lady home. Were you to insinuate to -him the advisability of having a chaperon for the young lady, he would -inform you pointedly that the young lady needed no protection inasmuch -as he was a _gentleman_ and not a tramp. It is this high sense of -gentlemanly honour that protects women in America—a hundred times better -than all the barred windows of the Orient and the dragons of Europe. -Thanks to this feeling of modern chivalry, a young lady may travel all -alone from New York to Chicago, or even to San Francisco, and, if her -manners are modest and refined, she will not once be insulted by word or -look, not even in passing through the roughest mining regions. - -It is the consciousness of this chivalrous code of honour among the men -that gives an American girl the frank and natural gaze which is one of -her greatest charms, and that allows her to talk to a man just -introduced as if they were old acquaintances. It is a knowledge of this -gentlemanly code that makes parents feel perfectly at ease in leaving -their daughter alone in the parlour all the evening with a visitor. In a -word, American customs prove that if you treat a man as a gentleman he -will behave like a gentleman. - -Unquestionably there are girls who abuse the liberty allowed them, and -encourage the men to encourage them in their freedom. Mr. Henry James -has done a most valuable service in holding up the mirror to one of -these girls, to serve as a warning to all Daisy Millers and semi-Daisy -Millers. There are not a few of the latter kind, and I have myself met -three full-fledged specimens of the real “Daisy” in Europe—girls who -would not have hesitated to go out rowing on a lake at eleven o’clock in -the evening with a man known to them only a few hours, or to go next day -with him to visit an old tower, or to say that mamma “always makes a -fuss if I introduce a gentleman. But I _do_ introduce them—almost -always. If I didn’t introduce my gentlemen friends to mother, I -shouldn’t think I was natural.” It is this class of American tourists -that have, unfortunately, given foreigners a caricatured notion of the -American girl’s deportment. - -Etiquette differs somewhat in various American cities and among the -different classes. For instance, a young lady of the “upper circles,” -who in Chicago is permitted to drive to the theatre in a carriage with a -young man, is not allowed the same privilege in New York. - -The New York _Sun_, an excellent authority in social matters, gives the -whole philosophy of American Courtship and Love in answering a young -man’s question as to whether, in asking a young lady of the highest -circles to accompany him to a place of amusement, it is necessary to -invite a chaperon at the same time. He is told that he must,—in those -circles:— - -"But these people are only a few among the many. What is called society -more exclusively in New York comprises, all told, no more than a hundred -or two hundred families. Outside of them, of course, there are larger -circles, to which they give the law to a greater or less extent, but the -whole number of men and women in this great town of a million and a half -of inhabitants who pay obedience to that law is not over a few thousand. - -"Nine girls out of ten in New York, with the full consent of their -parents and as a matter of course, accompany young men to amusements -without taking a chaperon along. They feel, and they are, entirely able -to look out for themselves, and they would regard the whole fun as -spoiled if a third person was on hand to watch over them. A large part -of the audience at every theatre is always made up of young men and -young women who have come out in pairs, and who have no thought of -violating any rule of propriety. Very many of these girls would never be -invited to the theatre by their male acquaintances if they were under -the dominion of such a usage, for the men want them to themselves, else -they would not ask their company, and besides do not feel able to pay -for an extra ticket for an obnoxious third person; or, if they have a -little more money to spare, they prefer to expend it at an ice-cream -saloon after the play. - -"Nor can it be said that the morals of these less formal young people -are any worse than those of the more exacting society. Probably they are -better on the average, and if the laws of Murray Hill prevailed -throughout this city, the marriage-rate of New York would be likely to -decline, for nothing discourages the passion of the average young man so -much as his inability to meet the charmer except in the presence of a -third person, who acts as a buffer between him and her. He feels that he -has no show, and cannot appear to good advantage under the eyes of a -cool critic, whereas if he could walk with the girl alone in the shades -of the balmy evening, the courage to declare his affection would come to -him. - -“Therefore it is that engagements, even in the most fashionable society, -are commonly made in the country during the summer, where the young -people come together more freely and more constantly than in the town.” - -The attempt made in certain corners of New York “Society” to introduce -the foreign system of chaperonage is one of the most absurd and -incongruous efforts at aping foreign fashions (which are on the decline -even in Europe) ever witnessed in our midst. In Europe Chaperonage is in -so far excusable, as it is a modified survival from barbarous times when -men were mostly brutes, being drunk half the time and on military -expeditions the other half. To treat American men, who are brought up as -gentlemen, and commonly behave as such, as mediæval ruffians, is a -gratuitous insult, which they ought to resent by avoiding those houses -where Oriental experiments are being tried with the daughters. That -would bring the “mammas” to reason very soon. - -Yet it would seem as if New York “Society” had already had enough of the -Oriental experiment; for the same high authority just quoted asserted -last autumn that “A regular stampede in favour of the liberty of the -young unmarried female is to be undertaken this winter by a number of -‘three-years-in-society’ veterans, supported and encouraged by nearly -all this seasons _débutantes_. The first step is to be the establishment -of a right on the part of young girls to form parties for theatre -_matinées_ and afternoon concerts, untrammelled by the presence of even -a matron of their own age, and to which all ‘reliable and well-behaved -young men are to be eligible.’... Rule No. 2 establishes beyond all -dispute the often-mooted question whether the presence of a brother and -sister in a party of young people going to any place of evening -amusement throws a shield of respectability over the others of the -party. Society long ago frowned upon this mongrel kind of chaperonage; -but upon the principle that no young man would permit indiscretions or -improprieties in a party of which his sister made one, the ‘veterans’ -have voted in favour of it. The young man with a sister is therefore to -enact the part of dragon on these occasions, and will be largely in -demand. Failing a convenient sister, he may get a cousin, perhaps, to -take her place.” - -When it comes to the cousin, the reversion to Americanism, pure and -simple, will be complete. - -The gentlemanliness and Gallantry of Americans have at all times been -acknowledged by observers of all nationalities; and it is indeed hardly -too much to say that the average American is disposed to treat the whole -female sex with a studied Gallantry, which in most European countries is -reserved by men for the one girl with whom they happen to be in love. -Even the irate and vituperative Anthony Trollope in his book on North -America was obliged to admit that “It must be borne in mind that in that -country material wellbeing and education are more extended than with us, -and that therefore men there have learned to be chivalrous who with us -have hardly progressed so far. The conduct of the men to the women -throughout the states is always gracious.... But it seems to me that the -women have not advanced as far as the men have done.... In America the -spirit of chivalry has sunk deeper among men than it has among women.” - -Anthony Trollope is by no means the only writer who has put his finger -on the greatest foible of American women. No doubt they have, as a -class, been spoiled by excessive masculine Gallantry. They do not, like -the women of the Troubadour period, who were similarly spoilt, go quite -so far as to send their knights on crusades and among lepers, but they -often shroud themselves in an atmosphere of selfishness which is very -unfeminine—to choose a complimentary adjective. - -In the East, where there is already a large excess of women over men, -this evil is less marked than in the West, where women are still in a -minority. Thus the Denver _Tribune_, in an article on “The Impoliteness -of Women,” remarks: “If there is any characteristic of Americans of -which they are more proud than any other, it is the courtesy which the -men who are natives of this country exhibit towards women, and the -respect which the gentler sex receives in public. This is a trait of the -American character of which Americans are justly proud, and in which -they doubtless excel the people of any other country. But while this is -true of the men, it is a matter to be deeply regretted that as much -cannot be said of the women of this country.” After praising American -women for their beauty, vivacity, high moral character, and other -charms, the _Tribune_ adds that they “seem very generally to be prompted -in their conduct in public by a spirit of selfishness which very often -finds expression in acts of positive rudeness.” They are ungrateful, it -continues, to the men who give up their seats in street-cars; they -compel men to step into a muddy street, instead of walking one behind -the other at a crossing; and at such places as the stamp-window of the -post-office they do not wait for their turn, but force the men to stand -aside. - -Another Western paper, the Chicago _Tribune_, complains that in that -city there are 10,000 homes in which the daughters are ignorant of the -simplest kind of household duties. It adds “That they do not desire to -learn; that, having been brought up to do nothing except appear -gracefully in society, their object in life is to marry husbands who can -support them in idle luxury; that this state of things has substituted -for marriages founded on love and respect a market in which the men have -quoted money-values, and where a young man, however great his talents, -has no chance of winning a wife from the charmed circle.” - -So that the pendulum has apparently swung to the other extreme. In -mediæval times the women were married for their money by the lazy, -selfish men; now the women are lazy and selfish, while the men toil and -are married for their money. - -Yet there is much exaggeration in this view, which applies to only a -small portion of the American people. We are far from the times when -Miss Martineau complained of the feeble health of American women, and -attributed it to the vacuity of their minds. Their health is still, on -the average, inferior to that of English and German damsels, from whom -they could also learn useful lessons in domestic matters; but -intellectually the American woman has no equal in the world; while her -sweetness, grace, and proverbial beauty combine into an ensemble which -makes Cupid chuckle whenever he looks at a susceptible young man. - -Goldsmith says somewhere that “the English love with violence, and -expect violent love in return.” Certainly this holds true no less of the -Americans. There are indeed several favourable circumstances which -combine to make Romantic Love more ardent and more prevalent in the -United States than in any other part of the world. - -(1) The first is the intellectual culture of women just referred to, -which they owe partly to the leisure they enjoy, partly to the fact that -America has the best elementary schools in the world, so that their -minds are aroused early from their dormant state. As Bishop Spalding -remarks: “Woman here in the United States is more religious, more moral, -and more intelligent than man; more intelligent in the sense of greater -openness to ideas, greater flexibility of mind, and a wider acquaintance -with literature.” Now the whole argument of this book tends to show that -the capacity for feeling Romantic Love is dependent on intellectual -culture, and increases with it; hence we might infer that there is more -Love among the women of America than among those of any other country, -even if this were not so patent from the greater number of Love-matches -and various subtle signs known to international observers. - -And as the sweetest pleasure and goad of Love lies in the conviction -that it is really returned, man’s Love is thus doubled in ardour through -woman’s responsive sympathy. - -(2) That Courtship proper is longer than in England, and engagement -shorter, is a circumstance in favour of America. For nothing adds so -much to the ardour of Love as the uncertainty which prevails during -Courtship; whereas, after engagement, all these alternate hopes and -doubts, confidences and jealousies, are quieted, and the ship approaches -the still waters of the harbour of matrimony, which may be quite as deep -but are less sublime and romantic than mid-ocean, with its possibilities -of storm and shipwreck. - -Moreover, the longer the time of tentative Courtship, the fewer are the -chances of a mistake being made in selecting a sympathetic spouse. - -In Germany an engagement is so conclusive an affair that it is announced -in the papers, and cards are sent out as at a wedding. In America we -meet with the other extreme, for it is not very unusual for a couple to -be engaged some time before even the parents know it. Though there is -such a thing as breach of promise suits against fickle young men, such -engagements, if unsatisfactory to either side, are commonly broken off -amicably. And, as one of Mr. Howells’s characters remarks in _Indian -Summer_: “A broken engagement _may_ be a bad thing in some cases, but I -am inclined to think it is the very best thing that could happen in most -cases where it happens. The evil is done long before; the broken -engagement is merely sanative, and so far beneficent.” - -Were engagements less readily dissolved, divorces would be more frequent -even than they are now. - -(3) Parental dictation is almost unknown in America; nowhere else have -young men and women such absolute freedom to choose their own soul-mate. -Hence Individual Preference, on which the ardour of Love depends in the -highest degree, has full sway. The comparative absence of barriers of -rank and social grade also makes it easier for a man to find and claim -his real _Juliet_. - -(4) This dependence of Love on Individualisation gives it another -advantage in America. For nowhere is there so great a mixture of -nationalities as here; and, _away from home_, a national peculiarity of -feature or manners has a sort of individualising effect. Till we get -used to such national peculiarities through their constant recurrence we -are apt to judge almost every woman in a new city attractive. From this -point of view Love may be defined as an instinctive longing to absorb -national traits, and blend them all in the one cosmopolitan type of -perfect Personal Beauty. - -(5) There are beautiful women in all countries of the world, but no -country has so many pretty girls as America. Money and rank find it hard -to compete with such loveliness, hence Love has its own way. Here alone -is it possible to find heiresses who have failed to get married through -lack of Beauty. Personal Beauty is the great matchmaker in America; and -thus it comes that Beauty is ever inherited and multiplied. For Love is -the cause of Beauty as Beauty is the cause of Love. - -One more characteristic of American Love remains to be noted—the most -unique of all. American women are of all women in the world the most -self-conscious, and have the keenest sense of humour. To these -quick-witted damsels the sentimental sublimities of amorous Hyperbole, -which may touch the heart of a naïve German or Italian girl, are apt to -appear dangerously near the ludicrous; hence an American lover, if he is -clever enough, deliberately covers the step which separates the sublime -from the ridiculous. He gilds the gold of his compliments by using the -form of playful exaggeration, which is the more easy to him because -exaggeration is a national form of American humour. Mr. Howells’s heroes -often make love in this fashion. The lover in _The Lady of the -Aroostook_ spices his flatteries with open burlesque, and succeeds -admirably with this new _Ars Amoris_; and Colville in _Indian Summer_ -says to Imogene: “Come, I’ll go, of course, Imogene. A fancy-ball to -please you is a very different thing from a fancy-ball in the abstract.” - -“Oh, what nice things you say! Do you know, I always admired your -compliments? I think they’re the most charming compliments in the -world.” - -“I don’t think they’re half so pretty as yours; but they’re more -sincere.” - -“No, honestly. They flatter, and at the same time they make fun of the -flattery a little; they make a person feel that you like them even while -you laugh at them.” - -Perfect success in this form of flattery requires a talent for epigram. -Not many, unfortunately, even in America, are poets and wits at the same -time, like Mr. Howells; but there is an abundance of clever compliments -nevertheless, and they are apt to assume the form of playful -exaggeration. - - - - - SCHOPENHAUER’S THEORY OF LOVE - - -A first hasty perusal of Schopenhauer’s brilliant essay on the -“Metaphysics of Sexual Love” (in the second volume of his _Welt als -Wille und Vorstellung_) will dispose most readers to agree with Dühring -that the great pessimist “makes war on love.” But a more careful -consideration of his profound thoughts shows that this is not the case, -notwithstanding his habitual cynical tone. - -In the first place, his theory can do no possible harm, because, as he -himself admits, no lover will ever believe in it. Secondly, the gist of -Schopenhauer’s theory is to show that a lover is the most noble and -unselfish martyr in the world, because his usual attitude and fate is -self-sacrifice. - - - LOVE IS AN ILLUSION - -The fundamental truth which Schopenhauer claims to have discovered is -that love is an illusion—an _instinctive_ belief on the lover’s part -that his life’s happiness absolutely depends on his union with his -beloved; whereas, in truth, a love-match commonly leads to lifelong -conjugal misery. The lover, on reaching the goal so eagerly striven for, -finds himself disappointed, and realises, to his consternation, that he -has been the dupe of a blind instinct. Quien se casa por amores, ha de -vivir con dolores, says a Spanish proverb (“to marry for love is to live -in misery”): and this doctrine Schopenhauer re-echoes in a dozen -different forms: “It is not only disappointed love-passion that -occasionally has a tragic end; successful love likewise leads more -commonly to misery than to happiness.” “Marriages based on love commonly -end unhappily,” etc. - - - INDIVIDUALS SACRIFICED TO THE SPECIES - -The reason of this curious fact is given in this sentence: -“Love-marriages are formed in the interest of the species, not of the -individuals. True, the parties concerned imagine that they are providing -for their own happiness; but their real [unconscious] aim is something -foreign to their own selves—namely, the procreation of an individual -whose existence becomes possible only through their marriage.” - -What urges a man on to this sacrifice of individual happiness to the -welfare of his offspring is, as already intimated, a blind instinct -known as Love. The universal _Will_ (Schopenhauer’s fetish, or name for -an impersonal deity underlying all phenomena) has implanted this blind -instinct in man, for the same reason that it implants so many other -instincts in various animals—to induce the parents to undergo any amount -of labour, and even danger to life, for the sake of benefiting the -offspring, and thus preserving the species. All these animals, like the -lovers, are urged on blindly to sacrifice themselves in the belief that -they are doing it for their own pleasure and benefit; whereas it is all -in the interest of their offspring. - -Why was the _Will_ compelled to implant this blind instinct in man? -Because man is so selfish wherever guided by reason, that it would have -been unwise to entrust so important a matter as the welfare of coming -generations to his intellect and prudence. Prudence would tell young -people to choose not the most attractive and healthy partners, who would -be able to transmit their excellence to the next generation, but the -ones who are most liberally supplied with money and useful friends. That -is, they would invariably look out first for “Number One,” indifferent -to the deluge that might come after them. It was to neutralise this -selfishness that the _Will_ created the instinct of Love, which impels a -man to marry not the woman who will make _him_ the most happy and -comfortable, but whose qualities, combined with his own, will be likely -to produce a harmonious, well-made group of children. - -Schopenhauer’s _Will_, it must be understood, is an æsthetic sort of a -chap. He has his hobbies, and one of these hobbies is the desire to -preserve the species in its typical purity and beauty. There are a -thousand accidents of climate, vice, disease, etc., that tend to vitiate -the type of each species; but Love strives for ever to restore a -harmonious balance, by producing a mutual infatuation in two beings -whose combined (and opposite) defects will neutralise one another in the -offspring. - - - SOURCES OF LOVE - -More definitely speaking, there are three ways in which the _Will_ -preserves the purity of its types—three ways in which it inspires the -Love whose duty it is to achieve this result. Physical Beauty is the -first thing desired by the lover, because that is the expression of -typical perfection. Secondly, he may be influenced by such Psychic -Traits as will blend well with his own; and thirdly, he will be -attracted by perfections (or imperfections) which are the opposite of -his own. These three sources must be considered briefly in detail. - -(1) _Physical Beauty._—The most important attribute of Beauty, in the -lover’s eye, is Youth. Men prefer the age from eighteen to twenty-eight -in a woman; while women give the preference to a man aged from thirty to -thirty-five, which represents the acme of his virility. Youth without -Beauty may still inspire Love; not so Beauty without Youth. - -Health ranks next in importance. Acute disease is only a temporary -disadvantage, whereas chronic disease repels the amorous affections, for -the reason that it is likely to be transmitted to the next generation. - -A fine framework or skeleton is the third desideratum. Besides age and -disease, nothing proves so fatal to the chances of inspiring Love as -deformity: “The most charming face does not atone for it; on the -contrary, even the ugliest face is preferred if allied with a straight -growth of the body.” - -A certain plumpness or fulness of flesh is the next thing considered in -sexual selection; for this is an indication of Health, and promises a -sound progeny. Excessive leanness is repulsive, and so is excessive -stoutness, which is often an indication of sterility. “A well-developed -bust has a magic effect on a man.” What attracts women to men is -especially muscular development, because that is a quality in which they -are commonly deficient, and for which the children will accordingly have -to rely on the father. Women may marry an ugly man, but never one who is -unmanly. - -Facial beauty ranks last in importance, according to Schopenhauer. Here -too the skeleton is first considered in sexual selection. The mouth must -be small, the chin projecting, “a slight curve of the nose, upwards or -downwards, has decided the fate of innumerable girls; and justly, for -the type of the species is at stake.” The eyes and the forehead, -finally, are closely associated with intellectual qualities. - -(2) _Psychic Traits._—What charms women in men is preeminently courage -and energy, besides frankness and amiability. “Stupidity is no -disadvantage with women: indeed, it is more likely that superior -intellectual power, and especially genius, as being an abnormal trait, -may make an unfavourable impression on them. Hence we so often see an -ugly, stupid, and coarse man preferred by women to a refined, clever, -and amiable man.” When women claim to have fallen in love with a man’s -intellect, it is either affectation or vanity. Wedlock is a union of -hearts, not of heads; and its object is not entertaining conversation, -but providing for the next generation. This part of Schopenhauer’s -theory is evidently an outcome of his doctrine that children inherit -their intellectual qualities from the mother, and their character from -the father. Hence the feeling that they are capable of supplying their -children with sufficient intellect is part of the feminine -Love-instinct, and makes women indifferent to the presence or absence of -those qualities in men. - -It does not follow from all this that a sensible man may not reflect on -his chosen one’s character, or she on his intellectual abilities, before -marriage. Such reflection leads to marriages of reason, but not to -Love-marriages, which alone are here under consideration. - -(3) _Complementary Qualities._—The physical and mental attributes -considered under (1) and (2) are those which commonly inspire Love. But -there are cases where perfect Beauty is less potent to inflame the -passions than deviations from the normal type. - -“Ordinarily it is not the regular perfect beauties that inspire the -great passions,” says Schopenhauer; and this seems to be borne out by -the experience of Byron, who says: “I believe there are few men who, in -the course of their observations on life, have not perceived that it is -not the greatest female beauty who forms [inspires] the longest and the -strongest passions.” - -How is this to be accounted for? By the anxiety of Nature (or the -_Will_) to neutralise imperfections in one individual by wedding them to -another’s excesses in the opposite direction; as an acid is neutralised -by combining it with an alkali. The greater the shortcoming the more -ardent will be the infatuation if a person is found exactly adapted for -its neutralisation. The weaker a woman is, for example, in her muscular -system, the more apt will she be to fall violently in love with an -athlete. Short men have a decided partiality for tall women, and _vice -versâ_. Blondes almost always desire brunettes; and if the reverse does -not hold true, this is owing to the fact, he says, that the original -colour of the human complexion was not light but dark. A light -complexion has indeed become second nature to us, but less so the other -features; and “in love nature strives to return to dark hair and brown -eyes, as the primitive type.” - -Again, persons afflicted with a pug-nose take a special delight in -falcon-noses and parrot-faces; and those who are excessively long and -slim admire those who are abnormally short and even stumpy. So with -temperaments; each one preferring the opposite to his or her own. True, -if a person is quite perfect in any one respect, he does not exactly -prefer the corresponding imperfection in another, but he is more readily -reconciled to it. - -Throughout his essay, Schopenhauer tacitly assumes that the parental -peculiarities are fused or blended equally in the offspring, and that -this blending is what the _Will_ aims at. But on this point Mr. Herbert -Spencer has some remarks, in his essay on “Personal Beauty,” which -directly contradict Schopenhauer, of whose theory, however, he does not -seem to have been cognisant:— - -“The fact,” he says, "that the forms and qualities of any offspring are -not a mean between the forms and qualities of its parents, but a mixture -of them, is illustrated in every family. The features and peculiarities -of a child are separately referred by observers to father and mother -respectively—nose and mouth to this side; colour of the hair and eyes to -that; this moral peculiarity to the first; this intellectual one to the -second—and so with contour and idiosyncrasies of body. Manifestly, if -each organ or faculty in a child was an average of the two developments -of such organ or faculty in the parents, it would follow that all -brothers and sisters should be alike; or should, at any rate, differ no -more than their parents differed from year to year. So far, however, -from finding that this is the case, we find not only that great -irregularities are produced by intermixture of traits, but that there is -no constancy in the mode of intermixture, or the extent of variations -produced by it. - -“This imperfect union of parental constitutions in the constitution of -offspring is yet more clearly illustrated by the reappearance of -peculiarities traceable to bygone generations. Forms, dispositions, and -diseases, possessed by distant progenitors, habitually come out from -time to time in descendants. Some single feature, or some solitary -tendency, will again and again show itself after being apparently lost. -It is notoriously thus with gout, scrofula, and insanity.” - -Again, unite a pure race “with another equally pure, but adapted to -different conditions and having a correspondingly different physique, -face, and morale, and there will occur in the descendants not a -homogeneous mean between the two constitutions, but a seemingly -irregular combination of characteristics of the one with characteristics -of the other—one feature traceable to this race, a second to that, and a -third uniting the attributes of both; while in disposition and intellect -there will be found a like medley of the two originals.” - -The fact that the more remote ancestry must be taken into account -besides the parents, in considering the traits of the offspring, is one -which Mr. Galton has done much to emphasise, and which Schopenhauer -completely ignores. It tells against the metaphysical part of his -theory; for all the efforts of the _Will_ to merge opposite characters -into homogeneous traits must prove futile if a blue-eyed man, for -instance, who marries a black-eyed girl, finds that their children have -neither the father’s blue nor the mother’s black, but the grandmother’s -gray eyes. - -Yet in the long run diverse traits of figure and physiognomy do tend to -a harmonious fusion. Though a man with a prominent nose, which he -inherited from his father, is likely to transmit it to his son, though -his wife may have a snub-nose, yet there will be a slight modification -even in the son’s organ; and if the son keeps up the tradition of -marrying a snub-nosed girl, and his children follow his example, the -chances are that in a few generations the nose of that family will be a -feature of moderate size and classic proportions. The very fact -emphasised by Mr. Galton that all the ancestral influences count, will -here aid the ultimate fusion. Conspicuous instances of the -long-continued prevalence of a particular nose—or other feature—may be -accounted for by the fact that other kinds of that organ were rare in -the vicinity, or that marriage was decided by so many other -considerations that the dimensions of one organ could not come into -consideration, much as the bride or groom might have preferred an -improvement in that respect. - -So far as Schopenhauer’s theory concerns only the fact that Love is apt -to be based on complementary qualities, he is doubtless correct; but it -needs no erratic metaphysical fetish, as a _deus ex machina_, to account -for that fact. A simple application of psychologic principles explains -the whole mystery. - -In the first place, nothing could be more remote from the truth than the -cynical notion that every woman considers herself a Venus. She may, on -the whole, consider herself equal to the average of Beauty; but if she -has any special fault—a mouth too large or too small, an upper lip too -high, a nose too flat or too prominent, too much or too little flesh, -excessive height or shortness—she is not only conscious of the defect, -but morbidly conscious of it, and uses every possible device to conceal -it. Thus constantly brooding over her misfortune her mind, by a natural -reaction, will conceive a special admiration for an organ that exceeds -the line of Beauty in the opposite direction. Every day one hears a -_petite_ girl admiring a specially tall woman; and this admiration will -prompt her, other things being equal, to fall in love with a tall man. - -Secondly, familiarity breeds indifference to one’s own charms, and a -disposition to admire what we lack ourselves. - -Novelty comes into play. A Northern blonde among a nation of brunettes -cannot fail to slay hearts by the hundred, while the mystic flashes of a -Spanish woman’s black eyes are fatal to every Northern visitor. - -Nations, like individuals, admire and desire what they lack. The Germans -and the English are deficient in grace—hence that quality is what -chiefly charms them in the French, who have much more of it than of -Beauty, and in the Spanish. Byron was so much smitten with the -sun-mellowed complexions and the graceful proportions and gait of the -Spanish maidens, that he became quite unjust to his own lovely -countrywomen— - - “Who round the North for paler dames would seek? - How poor their forms appear! How languid, wan, and weak!” - -Were savages susceptible to Love, it might be suggested that their -practice of exogamy, or marrying a woman from another tribe, had -something to do with their admiration of novelty and complementary -qualities; but we know that they do not admire such qualities, but only -such typical traits as prevail among their own women, and these, -moreover, in an exaggerated form. This is one reason why savages are so -ugly. They have no Romantic Love to improve their Personal Beauty by -fusing heterogeneous defects into homogeneous perfections. - -Thus we may freely endorse Schopenhauer’s doctrine regarding the -benefits derived by the offspring (ultimately, in several generations) -from marriages based on complementary Love, without bowing down before -his fetish—a fetish which appears doubly objectionable because it is -old-fashioned; _i.e._ it strives to “maintain the type of the species in -its primitive purity,” whereas modern science teaches that this -“primitive type” of human beauty had a very simian aspect. - -Nor need we at all accept the pessimistic aspect of his theory—the -notion that Love is an illusion, and that Love-marriages commonly end -unhappily, the lover sacrificing himself for his progeny. - -Mr. Herbert Spencer, in his _Sociology_, elaborates an idea which so -curiously leads up to this phase of Schopenhauer’s doctrine that it must -be briefly referred to for its evolutionary suggestiveness. - -Among the lowest animals—the microscopic protozoa—the individual, as he -remarks, is sacrificed after a few hours of life, by breaking up into -two new individuals, or into a number of germs which produce a new -generation. The parents are here entirely sacrificed to the interests of -the young and the species. As we ascend in the scale of life this -sacrifice of parents to the young and the species becomes less and less -prevalent. Among birds, for instance, “The lives of the parents are but -partially subordinated at times when the young are being reared. And -then there are long intervals between breeding-seasons, during which the -lives of parents are carried on for their own sakes.... In proportion as -organisms become higher in their structures and powers, they are -individually less sacrificed to the maintenance of the species; and the -implication is that in the highest type of man this sacrifice is reduced -to a minimum.” - -Here is the point where Schopenhauer, had he been an evolutionist, might -have dovetailed his theory with Spencer’s, by saying that in man it is -no longer the life of the individual, or most of his time, that is -sacrificed, but merely his conjugal happiness, which the Love-instinct -induces him unconsciously to barter for the superior physical and mental -beauty of his offspring. - -Unfortunately, Schopenhauer did not take any pains to verify his theory -by testing it by vulgar facts. There are plenty of unhappy marriages, -but no one who will search his memory can fail to come to the conclusion -that the vast majority of them are cases where money or rank and not -Love supplied the motive of an unsympathetic union. Though Conjugal -Affection consists of a different group of emotions from Romantic Love, -yet there is an affinity between them; and it is not likely that -Conjugal Love will ever supervene where before marriage there was an -entire absence of sympathy and adoration. Even an imprudent Love-match -which leads to poverty—is it not preferable to a _mariage de -convenance_, which leads to lifelong indifference and _ennui_? Is it not -better to have one month of ecstatic bliss in life than to live and die -without ever knowing life’s highest rapture? - -Again, the French marry for money and social convenience, and their -children are ugly; the Americans marry for Love, and have the most -beautiful children in the world. Is it not more conducive to conjugal -happiness to know that one has lovely children and that the race is -increasing, than to have ugly children and to know that the race is -dying out? - -Love-matches would never end unhappily if the lovers would take proper -care of their own happiness by transfusing the habits of Courtship into -conjugal life, as elsewhere explained in this book. - -Schopenhauer’s whole argument is vitiated by the fact that it is chiefly -the physical complementary qualities that inspire Love, not the -mental—the latter, in fact, being barely noticed by him. Mental -divergence might indeed occasionally lead to an unhappy marriage, but -physical divergence—the fact that he is large and blond, she small and a -brunette—cannot possibly lead to matrimonial discord. This knocks the -whole bottom out of Schopenhauer’s erotic pessimism. The only sense in -which Love is an illusion is in its Hyperbolic phase—the notion that the -beloved is superior to all other mortals; and that is a very harmless -illusion. - -Schopenhauer’s pessimism, it should be added, is greatly mitigated by -the poetic halo of martyrdom with which he invests the lover’s head. -Society and public opinion, he points out, applaud him for instinctively -preferring the welfare of the next generation to his own comfort. “For -is not the exact determination of the individualities of the next -generation a much higher and nobler object than those ecstatic feelings -of the lovers, and their super-sensual soap-bubbles?” It is this that -invests Love with its poetic character. There is one thing only that -justifies tears in a man, and that is the loss of his Love, for in that -he bewails not his own loss but the loss of the species. - -Apart from the suggestive details of his essay, Schopenhauer’s merit and -originality lies, first, in his having pointed out that Love becomes -more intense the more it is individualised; secondly, in emphasising the -fact that in match-making it is not the happiness of the to-be-married -couple that should be chiefly consulted, but the consequences of their -union to the offspring; thirdly, in dwelling on the important truth that -Love is a cause of Beauty, because its aim always is either to -perpetuate existing Beauty through hereditary transmission, or to create -new Beauty by fusing two imperfect individuals into a being in whom -their short-comings mutually neutralise one another. - -Love, however, is only one source of Personal Beauty. Personal Beauty -has four sources; and these must now be considered in succession, in the -order which roughly indicates their successive evolution—Health, -Crossing, Love, and Mental Refinement. - -The remainder of this work will be devoted exclusively to the subject of -Personal Beauty, as it influences and is influenced by Romantic Love. -And here, as in the preceding pages, I shall always cite the _ipsissima -verba_ of the greatest specialists who have written on any particular -branch of this subject. - - - - - FOUR SOURCES OF BEAUTY - - - I.—HEALTH - -_Plants, Animals, Savages._—In two of the most exquisite passages, not -only in his own works, but in all English literature, Mr. Ruskin has -emphasised the dependence of physical beauty in plants on their healthy -appearance, and the independence of this beauty on any idea of direct -utility to man. - -“It is a matter of easy demonstration,” he says, “that, setting the -characters of typical beauty aside, the pleasure afforded by every -organic form is in proportion to its appearance of healthy vital energy; -as in a rose-bush, setting aside all considerations of gradated flushing -of colour and fair folding of line, which it shares with the cloud or -the snow-wreath, we find in and through all this certain signs pleasant -and acceptable as signs of life and enjoyment in the particular -individual plant itself. Every leaf and stalk is seen to have a -function, to be constantly exercising that function, and, as it seems, -_solely_ for the good and enjoyment of the plant. It is true that -reflection will show us that the plant is not living for itself alone, -that its life is one of benefaction, that it gives as well as receives, -but no sense of this whatever mingles with our perception of physical -beauty in its forms. Those forms which appear to be necessary to its -health, the symmetry of its leaflets, the smoothness of its stalks, the -vivid green of its shoots, are looked upon by us as signs of the plant’s -own happiness and perfection; they are useless to us, except as they -give us pleasure in our sympathising with that of the plant, and if we -see a leaf withered or shrunk or worm-eaten, we say it is ugly, and feel -it to be most painful, not because it hurts _us_, but because it seems -to hurt the plant, and conveys to us an idea of pain and disease and -failure of life in _it_.” - -“The bending tree, waving to and fro in the wind above the waterfall, is -beautiful because it is happy, though it is perfectly useless to us. The -same trunk, hewn down and thrown across the stream, has lost its beauty. -It serves as a bridge,—it has become useful; it lives not for itself, -and its beauty is gone, or what it retains is purely typical, dependent -on its lines and colours, not its functions. Saw it into planks, and -though now adapted to become permanently useful, its whole beauty is -lost for ever, or to be regained only in part when decay and ruin shall -have withdrawn it again from use, and left it to receive from the hand -of Nature the velvet moss and varied lichen, which may again suggest -ideas of inherent happiness, and tint its mouldering sides with hues of -life.” - -In the animal world we find the same dependence of Beauty upon Health. -As Mr. Wallace has shown, “colour and ornament are strictly correlated -with health, vigour, and general fitness to survive.” It is the superior -vitality, vigour, and vivacity of certain male animals that leads the -choicest females to prefer them to others less favoured; and thus it -happens that, thanks to the dependence of Beauty on Health, animals have -become more and more beautiful. Moreover, it is Love in its primitive -form that urges animals to prefer those that are most healthy. And thus -we have the three great agents acting and reacting upon one another. -Health produces Beauty, and together they inspire Love; while Love -selects Health, and thus preserves and multiplies Beauty. But this whole -subject has been so fully discussed in the chapter on Love among Animals -that it is needless to recapitulate the facts here. - -Concerning savages, there is a prevalent notion that, owing to their -free and easy life in the forests, they are healthier on the average -than civilised mankind. As a matter of fact, however, they are as -inferior to us in Health as in Beauty. Their constant exposure and -irregular feeding habits, their neglect and ignorance of every hygienic -law, in conjunction with their vicious lives, their arbitrary -mutilations of various parts, and their selection of inferior forms, -prevent their bodies from assuming the regular and delicate proportions -which we regard as essential to Beauty. They arrive at maturity at an -earlier age, and lose their vitality sooner than we do. “Decrepitude,” -says Dr. Topinard, “shows itself sooner in some races than in others. -The Australians and Bosjesmans are old men at a period when the European -is in the full enjoyment of his faculties, both physical and -intellectual. The Japanese the same, according to Dr. Krishaber, -physician to the Japanese embassy.” - -Women everywhere pay less attention to the laws of Health than men. They -have less exercise, less fresh air and sunshine than men. Hence, -although the most beautiful women are more beautiful than the handsomest -men, yet in probably every country of the world the average man is a -more perfect specimen of masculine than the average woman of feminine -Beauty. Concerning savages, Mr. Spencer says: “Very generally among the -lower races the females are even more unattractive in aspect than the -males. It is remarked of the Puttooahs, whose men are diminutive and -whose women are still more so, that ‘the men are far from being -handsome, but the palm of ugliness must be awarded to the women.’ The -latter are _hard-worked_ and apparently _ill-fed_.” Again, of the -inhabitants of the Corea Gutzlaff says: “The females are very ugly, -whilst the male sex is one of the best formed of Asia.... Women are -_treated like beasts of burden_.” Many similar cases are cited by Dr. -Ploss in _Das Weib_. - -Concerning modern civilised nations a well-known art-critic has given -his testimony to the effect that “Possibly owing to the fact that men -are freer to follow their normal lives, I have found that in a majority -of the countries I have visited there are more handsome men than -beautiful women. This is peculiarly the case with the modern Greek, and -was, if antique sculpture could be accepted as witness, with the -ancient.” - -_Greek Beauty._—In the preceding chapters of this work an attempt has -been made to show that there is a general connection between the growth -of Love and the growth of Beauty throughout the world. To some readers, -no doubt, the thought has suggested itself, “How, if this be true, did -the loveless Greeks succeed in reaching such uncommon physical -beauty—beauty which artists of all times have admired?” - -It must be borne in mind, however, that we are very liable to exaggerate -in our notions of Greek Beauty, because we are apt to generalise from -the fine statues that have come down to us, and to imagine that they -represent the common type of Greek Beauty. But it is well known that the -Greeks idealised their statues according to certain physiognomic rules; -and, moreover, as Winckelmann remarks, “Beauty was not a general quality -even among the Greeks, and Cotta in _Cicero_ says that, among the great -numbers of young persons at Athens, there were only a few possessing -true beauty.” - -Besides, it has not been claimed that Love is the _only_ cause of -Beauty. Taking into consideration the other sources of Beauty, it is -easy enough to account for such physical attractiveness as the Greeks -did possess. The intellectual culture which the men enjoyed gave them a -great advantage over the women; and equally important, if not more so, -was the attention which the men (and in some cases the women too) paid -to Health. Their habitual life in the open air, while the women were -locked up at home, combined with their daily gymnastic exercises in -making their complexion healthy, their eyes sparkling, their limbs -supple, vigorous, and graceful. - -Other causes that tended to keep up an average of healthy bodily -development were the refusal to bring up sickly and deformed infants, -and the existence of numerous slaves, who did all the drudgery for the -Greeks. - -It is most characteristic that the author of a very old Greek ode -formulates his wishes in this order: First, health; then, beauty; -thirdly, wealth honestly got; fourth, the privilege of being gay and -merry with his friends. - -First, Health; then, Beauty. There lies the secret, for they always go -together; and in aiming at one the Greeks got the other too. - -There was every reason why Greek parents should have striven eagerly to -follow those laws of Health which ensure beautiful children. In ancient -Greece Beauty was a possession which led to national fame. Some persons, -Winckelmann informs us, were even characterised by a particular name, -borrowed from some specially fine feature. Thus Demetrius Poliorketes -was named, from the beauty of his eyelids, χαριτοβλέφαρος _i.e._ on -whose lids the graces dwell. - -“It appears, indeed,” the same writer continues, "to have been a belief -that the procreation of beautiful children might be promoted by the -distribution of prizes for beauty, as there is reason to infer from the -contests of beauty which were instituted in the remotest ages by -Cypselus, King of Arcadia, in the time of the Heraclidæ, on the banks of -the river Alpheus, in Elis; and also from the fact that at the festival -of the Philesian Apollo, a prize for the most exquisite kiss was -conferred on the youthful. Its assignment was subject to the decision of -a judge, as was probably also the case at Megara, at the tomb of -Diocles. - -“At Sparta, and at Lesbos, in the temple of Juno, and among the citizens -of Parrhasia, the women contended for the prize of beauty. The regard -for this quality was so strong that, as Oppian declares, the Spartan -women placed in their sleeping-rooms an Apollo, or Bacchus, or Nereus, -or Narcissus, or Hyacinthus, or Castor and Pollux, in order that they -might bear beautiful children.” - -Some hint as to what the Greeks regarded as beautiful is given by the -epithets Homer bestows on Helen—"the well-rounded" “the white-armed,” -“fair-haired,” “of the beautiful cheeks.” - -_Mediæval Ugliness._—This is a topic which might as well be introduced -under any of the other Sources of Beauty, for it is difficult to say -which of these sources was most completely and deliberately choked up -during the Dark Ages. - -It is a curious irony of language that makes asceticism almost identical -with æstheticism, of which it is the deadly enemy. As diseases are -transmitted from generation to generation, so it seems that the fear of -Beauty born of mediæval asceticism has not yet died out completely; for -it is related that some years ago a pious dame in Boston seriously -meditated the duty of having some of her daughter’s sound teeth pulled -out, so as to mitigate her sinful Beauty. - -If this worthy lady had followed St. Jerome’s injunction—"I entirely -forbid a young lady to bathe"; if she had taught her that it is -unladylike to have a healthy appetite; if she had locked her up in a -house rendered pestilential by defective drainage; allowed her mind to -rot in fallow idleness; taught her that to be really saintly and -virtuous she must be pale and hysterical; or imitated the lady who was -praised by a bishop in the fourth century for “having brought upon -herself a swarm of diseases which defied all medical skill to cure,”—if -the worthy Boston lady had but followed this mediæval system, she would -have succeeded in a short time in overcoming her daughter’s sinful -Beauty, and making her “ugly as a mud-fence,” as they say out West. - -That Personal Beauty cannot flourish where Health is regarded as a vice -and Disease as a virtue is self-evident. And one needs only to look at -mediæval pictures to note how coarse and void of refined expression are -the men, how hard and masculine the women. The faces of the numerous -mediæval women in Planché’s _Cyclopædia of Costume_ have almost all an -expression approaching imbecility, and features as if they had been -chiselled by a small boy trying his hand at sculpture for the first -time. Thackeray does not hesitate to speak even of “those simpering -Madonnas of Rafael.” Mr. G. A. Simcox remarks that in manuscripts of the -twelfth and thirteenth centuries (like the Harleian Gospels and -Maccabees) we meet with “short, thickset figures, mostly with the long, -square, horsey face, moving stiffly in small groups, in heavy dresses; -and even the daughter of Herodias dances upon her head [_sic_] in a gown -that might have stood alone. On the other hand, the faces are more set, -more articulate, less flabby, though they are all mean, or almost all, -and look askance out of the corners of their eyes” (_Art Journal_, 1874, -p. 58). - -There may be Oriental countries where woman is kept more closely under -lock and key than she was in Europe during the Dark Ages; but nowhere -else has man so well succeeded in reducing the pursuit of unhappiness to -a science, in snubbing, scorning, abusing, maltreating woman. How all -this must have tended to increase Personal Beauty is well brought out in -the following advice given by Mr. Ruskin: “Do not think you can make a -girl lovely if you do not make her happy. There is not one restraint you -put on a good girl’s nature—there is not one check you give to her -instincts of affection or of effort—which will not be indelibly written -on her features, with a hardness which is all the more painful because -it takes away the brightness from the eyes of innocence, and the charm -from the brow of virtue.” - -_Modern Hygiene._—Disease is Beauty’s deadliest enemy. Yet for the sake -of gratifying a silly vanity—for the sake of being distinguished from -ordinary mortals—a certain pallor and _blasé_ languor have long been -considered in certain influential circles as more _distingué_ than ruddy -cheeks and robust health. Yet even if pale cheeks were more beautiful -than rosy cheeks, would it be worth while to purchase them at the cost -of premature decay—of the certainty that a _few_ years of pale cheeks -will be followed by _many_ years of sallow cheeks and lack-lustre eyes, -deeply sunk into their orbits? - -Though beauty is still of lamentably rare occurrence in every country, -there is infinitely more of it than during the Middle Ages; and -certainly not the least cause of this is the increased attention paid to -Hygiene—public and personal. The difference in this respect between us -and our ancestors is well brought out by the statistics regarding the -average length of life. In ancient Rome, it is stated, "the average -longevity among the most favoured classes was but thirty years, whereas -to-day the average longevity among the corresponding class of people is -fifty years. In the sixteenth century the average longevity in Geneva -was 21·21 years. Between 1814 and 1833 it was 40·68, and as large a -proportion now live to seventy as lived to forty-three three hundred -years ago." Dr. Corfield, comparing the statistics of 1842 with those of -1884, states that the mean duration of life in London has increased from -twenty-nine to thirty-eight years. “In the reign of Queen Elizabeth the -death-rate of the metropolis as it then was amounted to 40 per thousand. -In the reign of Queen Victoria, almost entirely by the reduction of -mortality by means of improved drainage, ventilation, and water, it has -often touched 15 and 14, and even fallen as low as 13 in the thousand,” -while “in many of the suburban districts, and in the fashionable region -about Hyde Park it ranges from 11 to 12.” - -In France, according to M. Topinard, the mean duration of life, which -was twenty-nine at the close of the eighteenth century, and thirty-nine -from 1817 to 1831, increased to forty from 1840 to 1859, thanks to the -progress of sanitary science and civilisation. - -As Hygiene is receiving more and more attention every year, it is -possible that in course of time Dr. W. B. Richardson’s ideal will be -realised—a town ideally perfect in sanitary matters, having a death-rate -of 9 per 1000, and 105 years the duration of a man’s life. - -As decrepitude and premature old age means a premature loss of Beauty, -personal attractiveness would be correspondingly prolonged and increased -with life itself. - -Even at the present time not one house in a thousand is so constructed -that every room has good ventilation. Architects are, however, less to -blame than the people who will persist in their absurd old superstition -that draughts and night air are injurious. Professor Reclam, the -distinguished hygienist, not long ago opened a crusade against the -horror of night air and draughts which is especially prevalent among his -countrymen. “Sleeping with open windows,” he says, “is most unjustly -decried among the people, as well as night air in general. But night air -is injurious only in swampy regions, whereas on dry soil, in the -mountains, and everywhere in the upper stories of a house it is _more -salubrious than day air_.... Draughts are not injurious unless we are in -a glow. To healthy persons they _cannot possibly do so much harm as the -stagnant air in a close room_. The fear of draughts is entirely -groundless, though it affects most people in a manner which is simply -ludicrous.” - -Electricity, no doubt, will in less than a decade abolish horses from -our cities, and with them the dust, foul odours, and sleep-murdering -noise. The gain to Health, and through it to Beauty, from this alone, -will be enormous. Doubtless one of the reasons why there is so much -Beauty, so many fresh and sparkling eyes, in Venice, is because there -are no horses in that city, and the inhabitants are not roused and -half-roused from sleep every fifteen minutes during the night by a -waggon rattling down the street. - -It is not sufficiently known that street-noise may injure the Health -even of those whom it does not entirely wake up. The restorative value -of sleep lies in its depth and the absence of dreams. A noisy waggon -interferes with the depth of sleep and starts a current of dreams, thus -depriving it of half its potency. - -“_Beauty sleep_” is an expression which rests on a real physiological -truth. Sleep before midnight really is more health-giving and -beautifying than after midnight, for the reason that in all towns and -cities there is less noise in the early hours of the night than after -four in the morning, wherefore sleep is deeper between ten and twelve -than between six and eight o’clock. The reason why so many more -proposals (by city folks) are made in the country than in the city is -not only because there are more frequent opportunities of meeting at a -summer hotel, but because the young folks retire early, and appear in -the morning with an exuberance of Health, born of fresh air and sound -sleep, which cannot fail to inspire Love. - -Other matters of Hygiene will be discussed in connection with the organs -which they specially concern. - - - II.—CROSSING - -Darwin has proved experimentally that in the vegetable kingdom -“cross-fertilisation is generally beneficial, and self-fertilisation -injurious. This is shown by the difference in height, weight, -constitutional vigour, and fertility of the offspring from crossed -and self-fertilised flowers, and in the number of seeds produced by -the parent plants.” He also showed that “the benefit from -cross-fertilisation depends on the plants which are crossed having -been subjected during previous generations to somewhat different -conditions.” - -Similarly, concerning animals, we read in Topinard, that “breeders who -select their subjects with a definite object to breed _in and in_, that -is to say, between near relations, rapidly obtain excellent results. -They know, however, that fertility then diminishes, and that it will -cease altogether if they do not have recourse from time to time to -crossing, in order to _strengthen the race_.” - -But both in the vegetable and the animal kingdom, as we have seen, -superior Health also implies superior Beauty. - -The inference is natural that the human race also must be benefited by -marriages of individuals of different races, or of the same race, but -brought up under different conditions of life. And the facts are -entirely in favour of this supposition, as are the best authorities in -Anthropology. Dr. Topinard gives the following instances among many -others: “Immigration into the United States, which has taken so -considerable a flight during the last thirty years, has already been -enormous. Every variety of cross has been going on between English, -Irish, Germans, Italians, French, etc., with the greatest possible -success. We may also mention numberless Spaniards from the Peninsula, -among whom are found the features of the Saracen invaders of the ninth -century; then that population on the Barbary coast, called Moors, and -which is a medley of races of every description, the Arab and Berber -blood predominating. On tracing back the yellow races, we also discover -a perfect eugenesis.... De Mas speaks in the highest terms of mixed -breeds of Chinese and Mongolians, and MM. Mondières and Morice of those -of Chinese and Annamites under the name of Minuongs. Dr. Bowring -describes a race in the Philippine Islands, intermediate between the -Malays and Chinese, as the principal agent of civilisation in these -latitudes.” - -On the other hand, “it is undeniable that in Africa the Negro races do -not cross to any great extent.” Nor has any one ever accused the Negroes -of an excessive amount of Beauty. Whereas in Lima, which has the finest -women in South America, “there are twenty-three different names to -designate the varieties of mixed breeds of Spaniards, Peruvians, and -Negroes.” “The number of mongrels on the face of the globe has been -estimated at twelve millions, of whom no fewer than eleven millions are -in South America.” South American women are already famous for their -Beauty, and there is reason to believe that when the fusion of all these -elements is complete the race will be one of the finest in the world. -What Beauty it has now seems to be owing chiefly to the magic of -Crossing; for attention to Health there is little but what comes from -life in the open air; while Romantic Love is perhaps as rare as Mental -Refinement, inasmuch as Courtship is not so free and easy a matter as in -North America. All the more honour to the potency of Crossing. - -Take a few more cases. The African Negroes, as just stated, do not mix -much, and are an ugly type. Among the Polynesians, on the other hand, -there are many very fine types of human beauty; and it is therefore not -surprising to read that to-day in Polynesia, “mixed breeds are so -numerous that it would be difficult to find among them any individuals -of pure race.” - -Again, concerning the Magyars or Hungarians, Schweiger-Lerchenfeld -remarks that “they are a splendid race, physically and -intellectually.... The girls and young women are of most piquant charm, -models of health in mind and body.” But these Magyars, when they first -came to Europe, were, as Waitz states, “of a repulsive ugliness in the -eyes of all their neighbours.” That they have mixed with the -Indo-Germanic type is shown by their appearance, as well as by -peculiarities of their language. “Where they have probably remained less -mixed,” Waitz continues, “and at the same time less cultivated, in some -remote regions, especially in the mountains, the ugly primitive type may -be found to the present day; in the plains may be found every -transitional form from this to the nobler type; at Szegedin both are -found face to face.” - -The Magyars, in turn, have, like the Slavo-Italians, Czechs, etc., -assisted the Austrians in evolving a superior type of Beauty by fusing -with them. That there is very much more Beauty in Vienna than in any -purely German city is an almost proverbial commonplace; and the reason -why may be found in the statistics: in Germany 31·80 per cent are blond, -14·05 brunet, 54·15 mixed; in Austria 19·59 per cent are blond, 23·17 -brunet, and 68·04 mixed. - -The European Turks have much nobler forms of the head and features than -their Asiatic relatives; and the inference seems inevitable that they -owe these improvements to intermarriage with Circassian women. - -A negative instance, showing the disadvantages of abstaining from -Crossing, is given by the Jews. There are handsome Jews and, up to a -certain age, very beautiful Jewesses. But the typical Jew is certainly -not a thing of beauty. The disadvantages of Jewish separatism are shown -not only in the long, thick, crooked nose, the bloated lips, almost -suggesting a negro, and the heavy lower eyelid, but in the fact that the -Jews “have proportionately more insane, deaf mutes, blind, and -colour-blind” than other Europeans. From an intellectual and industrial -point of view, the Jews are one of the finest races in the world, and -their absorption by the natives of the countries in which they have -settled could not but benefit both parties concerned. From this point of -view there may be something said even in favour of the money-marriages, -which are now so frequent between extravagant German officers and Jewish -heiresses. Unfortunately, the Jews have kept apart so long from the rest -of the world that they do not readily mix with non-Jews. Contrary to the -general rule, mixed marriages of Jews and Christians are less fertile -than pure Jewish unions. - -The precise manner in which a mixture of races improves physical -appearance is a question still open to debate. Professor Kollmann -(_Plastische Anatomie_) thinks “the result of the crossing of two forms -is comparable, not to a chemical, but to a mechanical mixture”; and this -agrees with the view of Mr. Herbert Spencer, who endeavours to trace to -this fact the frequent want of correspondence between intellectual and -physical beauty. He believes, however, the time will come “when the -present causes of incongruity will have worked themselves out,” and -intellectual beauty emerge in harmony with physical, in all details, as -it no doubt exists in general. - -There is no lack of facts supporting the view that sexual fusion is a -mere mechanical mixture. The “Bourbon nose” seems to defy mitigating -circumstances for generations; and “M. de Quatrefages knew a -great-grandson of the bailiff of Suffren who was a striking likeness of -his ancestor after four generations, and who, nevertheless, bore no -resemblance either to his father or his mother.” A child may resemble -its father, mother, aunt, uncle, grand-parents, or several of them at -once; and the resemblance may vary at different ages. - -More extraordinary are the following cases cited by Topinard: “Sometimes -the child possesses altogether the character of one or other parent: for -example, the child of a European father and a Chinese mother, Dr. -Scherzer says, is altogether a European or altogether a Chinese. A -Berber with blue eyes and with the lobule of the ear absent, married to -a dark Arab woman with a well-formed ear, had two children, one like -himself, the other like his wife. An English officer, fair, with blue -eyes and florid complexion, had several children by an Indian negress. -Some were the image of the father, others exactly like the mother.... A -decided negro, having had a white among his ancestors, has unexpectedly -a child with a white skin by a negress.” - -Yet all these are exceptional cases, which, like the winning number in a -lottery, get a disproportionate amount of attention. Moreover, this -“mechanical” form of assimilation seems to occur chiefly where very -unrelated races are fused, and then especially in the first generation. -In subsequent generations the union doubtless tends to become more and -more chemical—no longer a negro character floating on a white one, like -oil on water, but a mixture, as of wine and water. - -Take the American quadroons, for instance, famous for their beauty of -form and features. They are mongrels of the third generation, having -one-eighth black, seven-eighths white blood in their veins. Surely these -characters are not “mechanically” mixed in such a woman, but -“chemically.” That is, you do not find her with the eyes and nose of a -negro, the lips and ears of a white, one part of her skin dark the other -light: but in everything there is a fusion of the ancestral elements. -Her nose is not flat like that of her ancestress, nor her lips swollen, -but both are intermediate between those of her white and black -ancestors. Her lip is still thicker than that of the whites, and that -gives her a sensuous aspect, kiss-inviting. Her eyes, again, have lost -the fierce glare and opaque blackness of the negro-grandmother, and -assumed a more crystalline, tender lustre; while their form and -surroundings have become more refined and expressive. All this is -homogeneous fusion, not “heterogeneous mixture.” - -Finally, it is hardly correct to state dogmatically that a certain -person resembles this or that ancestor. In nothing else do opinions vary -so constantly and so ludicrously. No one who has ever been “trotted -around” among his relatives in the “old country,” can have failed to be -amused at the countless resemblances to this and that uncle, aunt, or -grand-parent discovered in him, until he came to the conclusion that he -must be a veritable epitome of the whole genealogy. A man who at home is -supposed to be absolutely unlike his brother, is elsewhere mistaken for -him and addressed as such; while another man finds a friend who knew his -father in his youth, and declares he is exactly like him; though a -second friend who knew only the mother, claims a similar hereditary -influence for her. All of which tends to show that there is more of both -parents in each person than is commonly supposed; and that the reason -why opinions differ so, is because the fusion is chemical rather than -mechanical, which makes it difficult to put the finger on distinct -points of resemblance. - -It is in the more closely allied races, like the English and German, or -Italian and Spanish, that “chemical” fusion is most readily attained, -and Beauty most rapidly evolved. Such are the unions which take place on -such a large scale in the United States and Canada; and this may account -for the fact that there is more Beauty in North America than in South -America, where the races that intermingle are less related. There is a -golden mean here as in everything else. - - - III.—ROMANTIC LOVE - -What Crossing does on a national scale, Love continues with individuals, -by fusing dissonant, but complementary, parental qualities into a -harmonious progeny. How this is done is sufficiently shown in the -chapter on Schopenhauer. - -This, however, is only one of the ways in which Love increases the -amount of Beauty in the world. There are several others. - -The second is that—apart from complementary considerations—Romantic Love -always urges the choice of a mate who approaches nearest to the ideal -type of Beauty. As Beauty is hereditary, and as a beautiful father and -mother may have six or more beautiful children, this predilection for -Beauty shown by Love necessarily preserves and multiplies it— - - “From fairest creatures we desire increase, - That thereby Beauty’s rose might never die,” - -says Shakspere, anticipating the modern theory of heredity. - -On this particular topic nothing more need be said here, because all the -remainder of this book will be taken up with a consideration of those -features of Personal Beauty for which the æsthetic taste which forms -part of Romantic Love shows a decided preference. - -The third way in which Love promotes the cause of Beauty is by the great -attention it pays to Health in its choice. For though Health is not -always synonymous with Beauty, it is the soil on which alone Beauty can -germinate and flourish. - -The fourth way is through the elimination of ugliness. Love, says Plato, -is devotion to Beauty: “with the ugly Eros has no concern.” - -From the æsthetic point of view, ugliness is disease. Now there is a -cast-iron Lykurgean law prevailing throughout Nature which eliminates -the diseased and the ugly. It is a cruel agency, called Natural -Selection, and has not the slightest regard for individuals, but -provides only for the weal of the species, as Schopenhauer erroneously -says is the case with Love. In a bed of plants, if there are more than -can find sustenance, the stronger crowd out the weaker. Among animals, -wherever there is competition, the best-developed, handsomest lion -survives in combat, and the most fleet-footed, and consequently most -graceful, deer escapes, while the clumsy, the ugly, and diseased perish -miserably, inexorably. Savages leave the old and feeble to die, and weak -or deformed children are either deliberately put out of the way or -perish from want of proper care. Nor among the ancient civilised nations -were such methods unknown. Plato and Aristotle, says Mr. Grote, agree in -this point: “Both of them command that no child born crippled or -deformed shall be brought up—a practice actually adopted at Sparta under -the Lykurgean Institutions, and even carried further, since no child was -allowed to be brought up until it had been inspected and approved by the -public nurses.” The Romans, too, were legally permitted to expose -deformed children. - -Christianity, the religion of pity and charity, abhors such practices. -Christianity is antagonistic to Natural Selection. One of its chief -functions is the building of hospitals in which the cripples, the -insane, the incurably diseased, are gratuitously and tenderly cared for, -instead of being allowed to perish, as they would under the sway of -Natural Selection. - -This artificial preservation of disease and deformity, in and out of -hospitals, due to Christian charity, might in the long run prove -injurious to the welfare of the human race, were it not for the stepping -in of Modern Love as a preserver of Health and Beauty. What formerly was -left to the agency of Natural Selection is now done by Love, through -Sexual Selection, on a vast scale. - -From a moral point of view, the substitution of Sexual for Natural -Selection is a great gain, in harmony with the spirit of Christianity. -For Cupid does not _kill_ those who do not come up to his standard of -Health and Beauty, but simply ignores and condemns them to a life of -single-blessedness. - - - IV.—MENTAL REFINEMENT - -“After all,” says Washington Irving, speaking of Spanish women, “it is -the divinity _within_ which makes the divinity _without_; and I have -been more fascinated by a woman of talent and intelligence, though -deficient in personal charms, than I have been by the most regular -beauty.” - -It is one of the commonest commonplaces of conversation that in moments -of intellectual or emotional excitement the features of plain people -assume an aspect of exquisite beauty. Love transfuses a homely girl’s -countenance with a glow of angelic loveliness; and biographies are full -of statements concerning the countenances of men of genius, which, -ordinarily unattractive, assumed an expression of unearthly beauty while -their minds were active and electrified the facial muscles. - -“There is not any virtue the exercise of which, even momentarily, will -not impress a new fairness upon the features,” says Mr. Ruskin; and -again, he speaks of “the operation of the intellectual powers upon the -features, in the fine cutting and chiselling of them, and removal from -them of signs of sensuality and sloth, by which they are blunted and -deadened, and substitution of energy and intensity for vacancy and -insipidity (by which wants alone the faces of many fair women are -utterly spoiled and rendered valueless); and by the keenness given to -the eye and fine moulding and development to the brow, of which effects -Sir Charles Bell has well noted the desirableness and opposition to -brutal types.” - -An English clergyman, the Rev. F. P. Lawson, diocesan inspector for -Northamptonshire, issued a report not long ago concerning the results of -his observations in 325 urban and rural schools during several years, -regarding the effects of good education in improving the appearance of -the children. “A school, thoroughly well taught, seldom failed to -exhibit a considerable number of interesting little faces, and a -striking absence of such faces might invariably be associated with -poverty of tone and superficial instruction. Nothing struck him more -forcibly in a school that has been suddenly lifted out of the mire by a -firstrate teacher than the bright and thoughtful look which the children -soon acquire.” - -Negative evidence to the same effect might also be cited by the volume, -but one case may suffice. “It is unhappily a fact,” says Mr. Galton, -“that fairly distinct types of criminals _breeding true to their kind_ -have become established, and are one of the saddest disfigurements of -modern civilisation.” - -The connection between culture and a superior type of Beauty is -strikingly revealed in the following remarks on the far-famed Georgian -women of the Caucasus, made by a great connoisseur of feminine beauty, -the poet Bodenstedt: "In Europe the notion prevails that a Georgian -woman is a tall, graceful being, of luscious form, clothed in wide, rich -garments, with dense black hair, long enough to enchain all masculine -hearts, an open, noble forehead, and a pair of eyes which contain within -their dark, mysterious, magic circle all the secrets of human delight -that come through the soul or the senses. Her gait is rapture. Joy -precedes, and admiration follows her.... With such notions in their -heads, strangers generally arrive in Georgia, and find themselves -wofully disappointed. The tourists who come with such great expectations -to visit this country, invested with the atmosphere of a fairyland by -history and legend, either adhere stubbornly to their preconceived -notions, or else they instantly go over to the opposite extreme, and -find everything dirty, ugly, disgusting, dreadful. - -"The truth lies between these extremes. The Georgians are, all in all, -one of the handsomest nations on the earth. But although I am a great -admirer of women, I am compelled in this case to award the prize to the -men instead of the women. This opinion is endorsed by all educated -inhabitants of Georgia who have eyes, taste, and an impartial judgment. - -“I must add that of that higher beauty where heart and intellect and -soul are mirrored in the eye, I found few traces in the whole Caucasus, -either among men or women. I have seen the greater number of the -beauties which Georgia boasts, but not one face have I seen that -satisfied me completely, though the picturesque native costume does much -to heighten the charms of the women. The face entirely lacks that -refined mental expression which makes a beautiful European woman such a -unique enchantress. Such a woman may still inspire love and win hearts -long after the time of her bloom; whereas in a Georgian _everything_ -fades with youth. The eyes, which, notwithstanding their apparent fire, -never expressed anything but calm and voluptuous indolence, lose their -lustre; the nose, which even in its normal relations exceeds the limits -of beauty, assumes, in consequence of the premature hollowness of the -cheeks, such abnormal dimensions that many people imagine that it -actually continues to grow; and the bosom, which the national costume -makes no effort to conceal, prematurely loses its natural firmness—all -of which phenomena are observed in European women much less frequently, -and in a less exaggerated form. If you add to this the habit, so -prevalent among Georgians, young and old, of using white and red -cosmetics, you will understand that such rude and inartistic arts of the -toilet can only add to the observer’s sense of dissatisfaction.” - -America affords many illustrations of the manner in which refinement of -mind and manners increases Beauty in a single generation. There are in -every city thousands of parents who began life as ordinary labourers, -but soon got rich through industry or good luck. They bring up their -children in houses where every attention is paid to sanitary rules; they -send them to school and college; and when they come back you would -hardly believe that those coarse-featured, clumsy-limbed, ungraceful -persons could be their father and mother. The discrepancy is sometimes -so great that when the young folks invite people of “their set” to their -house, the old birds keep out of the way discreetly, either of their own -accord or by filial dictation, which in America appears to be displacing -parental authority. - -But if there is such an intimate connection between culture and Beauty, -how is it that we so often find plain features joined with a noble mind -and fine features with a mean mind? Mr. Spencer has endeavoured to -explain this apparent discrepancy by assuming that in such cases plain -features are inherited severally and separately from ancestors of -diverse physiognomies, which being merely mechanically mixed, not fused, -fail to harmonise. There may be something in this, but a simpler -explanation is at hand. - -Noble minds are often the result of individual effort, and persistence -in it. Many men of genius have had humble parents not specially gifted. -From these parents and their ancestors they inherited their plain faces. -Now individual effort, in the short period of a lifetime, is -insufficient to alter the _proportions_ of a face, which depend on its -bony parts; but it does suffice to alter the _expression_, which depends -on the movements of the soft, muscular parts. Hence every person, -however plain-featured, may acquire a beautiful expression by -cultivating his mind and refining his manners and temper. Whenever, -therefore, we meet a man or woman whose features are less attractive at -rest than when moved to expression of emotion, we may feel sure that -they owe their mental refinement more to individual effort than to -inherited capacity. - -The children of such persons will be more beautiful than they are -themselves, because they will inherit the parents’ habit of expressive -muscular action of the features. And owing to the fact that all the bony -parts of the body are modified in accordance with the action of the -muscles attached to them, the bony parts, the proportions, of the face -will also be gradually modified and moulded into nobler shapes, through -the continuance of refined emotional expression. - -It is in this manner that intellectual growth and emotional refinement -have gradually differentiated our features from those of our savage -ancestors. Our lips have become more delicate, our mouths smaller, our -jaws less gigantic, ponderous, and projecting, because civilisation has -taught us to use the hands in preparing food, and to cut it instead of -tearing it off the bone with the teeth, as savages and other wild -animals do. - -Use increases, disuse diminishes the size of an organ. Hence for the -same reason that our jaws have become less projecting and heavy, our -forehead has lost its backward slope and become straight and noble, -owing to the growth of the brain. And similarly with other peculiarities -of the face, indicating the connection between mental refinement and -physical beauty. “Thus is it,” says Mr. Spencer, “with depression of the -bridge of the nose, which is a characteristic both of barbarians and of -our babes, possessed by them in common with our higher quadrumana. Thus, -also, is it with that forward opening of the nostrils, which renders -them conspicuous in a front view of the face,—a trait alike of infants, -savages, and apes. And the same may be said of widespread alæ to the -nose, of great width between the eyes, of long mouth, of large -mouth—indeed of all those leading peculiarities of feature which are by -general consent called ugly.” - - - - - EVOLUTION OF TASTE - - - SAVAGE NOTIONS OF BEAUTY - -In all the preceding remarks concerning the connection between mental -and physical beauty, the assumption has been made tacitly that what _we_ -consider beautiful is so in reality; and that our taste is a safe guide -to follow. Yet this assumption may be challenged, and has, indeed, been -often challenged. Every nation, every savage tribe, has its own standard -of Beauty; what right, therefore, have _we_ to claim dogmatically that -we are infallible judges? - -Ask the devil, says Voltaire, what is the meaning of το καλὸν—the -Beautiful—and he will tell you “Le beau est une paire de comes, quatre -griffes, et une queue”—a couple of horns, four claws, and a tail. Ask a -North American Indian, says Hearne, what is Beauty, he will answer: “A -broad, flat face, small eyes, high cheek-bones, three or four broad -black lines across each cheek, a low forehead, a large, broad chin, a -clumsy hook-nose, a tawny hide, and breasts hanging down to the belt.” -In the Chinese empire “those women are preferred who have ... a broad -face, high cheek-bones, very broad noses, and enormous ears.” “One of -the titles of the Zulu king,” says Darwin (who gives many other -instances _à propos_ in chapter xix. of the _Descent of Man_), “is ‘You -who are black.’ Mr. Galton, in speaking to me about the natives of South -Africa, remarked that their ideas of beauty seem very different from -ours; for in one tribe two slim, slight, and pretty girls were not -admired by the natives.” - -Darwin himself appears to have been staggered and puzzled by this -diversity of taste, and to have partly inclined to the theory that -Beauty is relative to the human mind (though elsewhere he repudiates -it)—a theory which Jeffrey has so boldly formulated in the assertion -that “All tastes are equally just and true, in as far as concerns the -individual whose taste is in question; and what a man feels distinctly -to be beautiful _is beautiful_ to him, whatever other people may think -of it.” - -Fiddlesticks! The Alison-Jeffrey school of Scotch æstheticians, having -been among the first in the field, have done more to confuse the English -mind on the subject of Beauty than several generations of other clever -writers will be able to clear up again. - -There are about half a dozen sound, square, solid, scientific reasons -why we have a better right to our opinion concerning the nature of -Beauty than a Hottentot or a North American Indian. - - - NON-ÆSTHETIC ORNAMENTATION - -One of the things most commonly forgotten by those who wonder at the -strange “taste” of savages is that many of their customs have nothing -whatever to do with the sense of beauty. The habit of putting on -“war-paint” originated not in a desire for ornamentation, but in the -wish to make themselves frightful in appearance to the enemy. For the -same reason heads are mutilated. As Waitz notes in speaking of Tahiti: -“A very ugly mutilation is that to which most of the boys had to subject -themselves. Immediately after birth their mothers compressed their -forehead and the back of the head, so that the former became narrow and -high, the latter flat; this was done to make their aspect more terrible, -and thus turn them into more formidable warriors.” Tattooing, likewise, -was originally intended to be an easy sign of recognition, or of social -or religious distinction, rather than an ornament of the body. And when -we consider how prone the mind of our own fashionable ladies is to -violate every canon of good taste in their wild effort to surpass one -another in some novel extravagance just from Paris; when we note that if -a Fifth Avenue lady wears a gull on her hat, her coloured cook will -invest in a turkey or ostrich for hers, we understand at once that many -of the mutilations approved by savages are the outcome of vanity and -emulation, not of æsthetic taste. - - - PERSONAL BEAUTY AS A FINE ART - -Yet there are undoubtedly a number of physiognomic and other -peculiarities which savages admire while we consider them ugly; and -some, again, which we admire and they dislike. Have we a right to -consider them inferior to us in taste because they fail to admire what -we adore? - -Certainly; beyond the shadow of a doubt. It takes genius to fully -appreciate genius; it takes a refined taste to appreciate refined -beauty. This is what the savage lacks. - -Look at any one of the fine arts. Why does the savage prefer his -monotonous drumming and ear-piercing war-songs to a soft, beautiful, -dreamy Chopin nocturne? Because he _cannot understand_ the nocturne. - -Why does he prefer his painted, clumsy, coarse-featured squaw to a -civilised woman with delicate contours, refined features, graceful gait? -Because he _does not understand_ the beauty of the latter. It is too -subtle for his coarse nerves, his feeble imagination. The smiles and -manifold expressions that chase one another across her lovely features, -like the subtly-interwoven melodies in a symphonic poem, are the visible -signs of thoughts and emotions which he has never experienced, and -therefore cannot understand. It is like giving him a page of Sanskrit to -read. - -It is for this reason that a negro never falls in love with a white -woman, and that a peasant prefers his plump, crude country-girl to the -fair, delicate city visitor. He requires more vigorous arms, broader -features, than the city girl possesses, to make an impression on his -callous nerves of touch and sight. And it is fortunate for the peasant -girl that her lover does lack taste, else she would soon find him a -fickle deserter. - -The savage, in a word, prefers his style of “beauty” to ours for the -same reason that he prefers a piece of raw liver and a glass of oil to -the subtle flavours of French cookery and French wines. His senses are -too coarse, his mind too vulgar, to perceive the poetry of refined -features. Everything must be loud and exaggerated to make an impression -on him—loud music, loud and glaring red and yellow colours, loud and -coarse features. - -This doctrine that differences of taste are merely due to differences in -the degree of æsthetic culture, and that there is such a thing as an -absolute standard of human beauty, derives further support from the -facts (1) that the ideal of beauty set up by the æsthetic Greeks two -thousand years ago corresponds so remarkably with that of modern -artistic minds; (2) that _e.g._ a Japanese student in the United States -soon learns to prefer American female beauty to the Japanese variety; -(3) that an English, Italian, or American audience who at first admire -_Norma_ and find _Lohengrin_ tiresome, can in a few seasons be so -educated as to prefer _Lohengrin_ and actually scorn _Norma_; but not -_vice versâ_, in either case (2) or (3). - -Mr. Ruskin takes a similar view regarding differences of taste when he -says that “respecting what has been asserted of negro nations looking -with disgust on the white face, no importance whatever is to be attached -to the opinions of races who have never received any ideas of beauty -whatsoever (these ideas being only received by minds under some certain -degree of cultivation), and whose disgust arises naturally from what -they suppose to be a sign of weakness or ill-health.” - -That this consideration of health does affect the negro’s judgment -regarding the beauty of the white complexion, is also shown by what Mr. -Winwood Reade told Mr. Darwin, namely, that the negro’s “horror of -whiteness may be attributed ... partly to the belief held by most -negroes that demons and spirits are white, and partly to their thinking -it a sign of ill-health.” - -But of all the theoretical truths emphasised in the _Modern Painters_ -none is so important as this: “That not only changes of opinion take -place in consequence of experience, but that those changes are from -_variation_ of opinion to _unity_ of opinion,—that whatever may be the -difference of estimate among unpractised or uncultivated tastes, there -will be unity of taste among the experienced; and that, therefore, the -result of repeated trial and experience is to arrive at principles of -preference in some sort common to all, and which are part of our -nature.” - -Let us now see what are those principles of Beauty that may be -considered independent of a more or less crude and undeveloped taste. -Some are negative, some positive. - - - NEGATIVE TESTS OF BEAUTY - -(_a_) _Animals._—"It has been argued," says Darwin (by Schaffhausen), -“that ugliness consists in an approach to the structure of the lower -animals, and no doubt this is partly true with the more civilised -nations, in which intellect is highly appreciated; but this explanation -will hardly apply to all forms of ugliness.” - -Curiously enough, savages themselves use animals as a negative test of -beauty. Thus we read that “the Indians of Paraguay eradicate their -eyebrows and eyelashes, saying that they do not wish to be like horses.” -“On the Eastern coast, the negro boys, when they saw Burton, cried out, -‘Look at the white man; does he not look like a white ape?’” “A man of -Cochin China ‘spoke with contempt of the wife of the English -ambassador—that she had white teeth like a dog, and a rosy colour like -that of potato-flowers.’” - -A few centuries ago it was a favourite pastime of physiognomists to draw -elaborate parallels between men and animals. Thus, in 1593, there -appeared a work, _De Humana Physiognomia_, with numerous illustrations, -in which always a human face was matched with some animal’s head. -Professor Wundt thus sums up the essence of this book: “A broad -forehead, we are told, indicates fearfulness, because the ox with his -broad head lacks courage. A long forehead, on the other hand, indicates -erudition, as is shown by means of an intelligent dog who has the honour -of serving as a pendant to Plato’s profile. Persons with shaggy hair are -good-natured, as they resemble the lion. He whose eyebrows are turned -inwards, towards the nose, is uncleanly like the pig, which this -resembles. The narrow chin of the ape signifies malice and envy. Long -ears and thick lips, such as the donkey possesses, are signs of -stupidity. A person who has a nose crooked from the forehead inclines, -like the raven, to theft, etc. These animal-physiognomists appear to -have favoured a thoroughly pessimistic view of man’s capacities, -inasmuch as for every creditable resemblance they find at least ten -discreditable ones.” - -Apart from these puerilities, it is in most cases simply absurd to -compare man with animals. Except in the case of apes there are no proper -terms of comparison, because the types are so distinct; and, moreover, -from the point of view of its own type, the average animal of any -species is more beautiful than the average man or woman from the human -point of view. This assertion is indirectly corroborated by Mr. Galton’s -testimony, that “our human civilised stock is far more weakly through -congenital imperfection than that of any other species of animals, -whether wild or domestic.” - -Schopenhauer considered animals beautiful in every way, and suggested -that whenever we do find an animal ugly it is due to some irrelevant, -inevitable association of ideas, as when a monkey suggests a man, or a -toad mud. And Mr. Ruskin pertinently suggests that “That mind only is -fully disciplined in its theoretic power which, when it chooses, -throwing off the sympathies and repugnancies with which the ideas of -destructiveness or of innocence accustom us to regard the animal tribes, -as well as those meaner likes and dislikes which arise, I think, from -the greater or less resemblance of animal powers to our own, can pursue -the pleasures of typical beauty down to the scales of the alligator, the -coils of the serpent, and the joints of the beetle.” - -When Sir Charles Bell intimated that in Greek sculpture the guiding -principle was remoteness from the animal type, he stated only one side -of the truth, of which the other is thus noted by Winckelmann: among the -Greeks, he says, “The study of artists in producing ideal beauties was -directed to the nature of the nobler beasts, so that they not only -instituted comparisons between the forms of the human countenance and -the shape of the head of certain animals, but they even undertook to -adopt from animals the means of imparting greater majesty and elevation -to their statues ... especially in the heads of Hercules.” Jupiter’s -head “has the complete aspect of the lion, the king of beasts, not only -in the large, round eyes, in the fulness of the prominent, and, as it -were, swollen forehead, and in the nose, but also in the hair, which -hangs from his head like the mane of the lion, first rising upward from -the forehead, and then, parting on each side into a bow, again falling -downward.” - -So that we may safely reject the theory that ugliness consists in an -approach to the structure of the lower animals, whatever savages and -Chinamen may think on this subject. Coarse minds little suspect what -exquisite beauty is to be found in the head of a cow or a donkey, a -puppy or a lamb—beauty which, like a lovely melody, may bring tears to -the eyes of one who is sensitive to æsthetic impressions. Objectively -considered, even the destructive emotions do not appear ugly in an -animal. The ferocity of a lion does not make him appear vicious, because -ferocity is his nature. He knows no better; can only live by fighting. -But a man is disfigured by ferocity because he does know better; he -_can_ live without fighting; and it is _the consciousness of his selfish -meanness_ that puts the stamp of ugliness on his distorted features. - -In apes alone does fierceness seem ugly and brutal instead of sublime. -For apes bear so much resemblance to us, and have a brain so superior in -structure to that of other animals, that we feel justified in applying -the human standard. Hence apes alone afford us a negative test of -beauty. Their heads and faces are cast in our mould, and therefore -afford the means of direct comparison. In looking at their massive, -brutal jaws, their receding foreheads, their undifferentiated hands and -feet, their coarse, hairy skin, their clumsy, inexpressive, gigantic -mouths, their flat noses and nostrils open to the view, we are justified -in calling them ugly, compared with ourselves, and in feeling proud that -civilisation has gradually raised us so far above our country cousins, -in beauty as in everything else, except the art of climbing trees. - -(_b_) _Savages_ are valuable as negative tests of beauty for the same -reason: they enable us to see what progress we have made in refining our -features into harmonious proportions, and making them susceptible of -diverse emotional expression. It should be noted that Nature constantly -endeavours to make primitive mankind beautiful, as it does with all -other animals. Tourists constantly note the occurrence of remarkable -instances of Personal Beauty among the young in most tribes. But this -natural Beauty is not appreciated by the vulgar taste of savages, as we -saw a few pages back in a case mentioned by Mr. Galton. Beauty must be -distorted and exaggerated before it pleases the savage’s taste. Paint -must be laid on an inch thick, the nose perforated and “adorned” with a -ring, and ditto the abnormally lengthened lips. This corrects the notion -that savage hideousness is a product of Nature. Nature may blunder, but -never so sadly as in the appearance of a savage belle or warrior; and in -scorning these we do not therefore scorn Nature, but merely the -artificial products of the vulgar taste of primitive man. - -(_c_) _Degraded Classes._—Poverty, suffering, want of leisure for mental -culture, want of money for sanitary modes of living, have, -unfortunately, produced in all countries a large class in whom Personal -Beauty occurs only as an accident. That such unhappy mortals afford a -negative test of Beauty is seen by the fact that, just as savages are -intermediate between monkeys and them, so they stand between savages and -refined men in features and expression. - -Poverty alone does not produce this vulgar type of personal appearance; -it is intellectual indolence, moral vice, and hygienic indifference that -are responsible for it. Hence this third negative teat of Beauty is not -at all difficult to find in any sphere of society, from the hod-carrier -to the aristocrat with a pedigree of a hundred generations. In every -scale of the social ladder may be found “features seamed by sickness, -dimmed by sensuality, convulsed by passion, pinched by poverty, shadowed -by sorrow, branded with remorse; bodies consumed with sloth, broken down -by labour, tortured by disease, dishonoured in foul uses; intellects -without power, hearts without hope, minds earthly and devilish” -(Ruskin). - -(_d_) _Age and Decrepitude._—It is not true, as a famous Frenchwoman has -remarked, that age and beauty are incompatible terms. Even age and Love -are not incompatible, as we saw in the chapter on Genius in Love; and -Byron has remarked that Love, like the measles, is most dangerous when -it comes late in life. - -There is a special variety of Beauty for every period of life, and the -Beauty of old age certainly is not the least attractive of these -varieties. What could be more majestic, more admirable, than the head of -a Longfellow in his last days? Provided health of mind and body has been -maintained, even the folds in the cheeks, the wrinkles on the forehead -of old age, are not unbeautiful. But when senility means decrepitude, -brought on by a neglectful or otherwise vicious life, then it is -positively ugly. The loveliest thing in the world is a fair and amiable -maiden; the ugliest a vicious old hag—savages and apes _not_ excepted. - -(_e_) _Disease._—Temperance preachers and other hygienic reformers -commonly dwell too exclusively on the dangers to health, domestic peace, -moral progress, and refinement which the indulgence in various vices -entails. If they would insist with equal, or even greater, emphasis on -the havoc which diseases brought on by intemperance and neglect of the -laws of Health make on Personal Beauty, they would double their -influence on their audiences or readers. For in woman’s heart the desire -to be beautiful is and always will be the strongest motive to action or -nonaction; nor are men, as a rule, much less interested in the matter of -preserving a handsome appearance. It may make _some_ impression on a man -to tell him that if he takes ice-water before breakfast, or “cock-tails” -at various odd hours on an empty stomach, he will ruin his digestion; -but the impression will be six times as deep if you can convince him -that he will ere long look like that confirmed dyspeptic Jones, with -lack-lustre eyes, sallow complexion, and a general expression of -premature senility, which accounts for the fact that he has been twice -already refused by the girl he adores. - -Or take that girl over there who never takes a walk, always sleeps with -her windows hermetically closed, and never allows a ray of sunshine to -touch any part of her body. Tell her she is ruining her health and she -may be momentarily alarmed by this vague warning, and walk half a mile -for a week or so, until she has forgotten it. But make it clear to her -what is the exact consequence of such neglect of the primal laws of -health—namely, the premature loss of every trace of Personal Beauty and -youthful charm, with old-maidenhood inevitably staring her in the face, -owing to her apathetic appearance and gait, her sickly complexion, her -features distorted by frequent headaches, brought on by lack of fresh, -cool air—each of which leaves its permanent trace in the form of an -addition to a wrinkle or subtraction from the plumpness of her -cheeks,—tell her all this, and that her eyes will soon sink into their -sockets and have blue rings like those of an invalid, and a ghastly -stare—and she will, perhaps, be sufficiently roused to save her Health -for the sake of her Beauty. - -We are now confronted with the question, Why is it that disease is a -mark of ugliness, health a mark of Beauty? The old Scotch school of -æstheticians think it is all a matter of association. We consider -certain forms characteristic of health as beautiful simply because we -associate with them various emotions of affection, the pleasures of -love, etc., and conversely with disease and vice. According to Stendhal, -“La beauté n’est que la promesse du bonheur,” or, in American, Beauty is -simply the promise of a “good time.” But it is Lord Jeffrey who, to use -another appropriate American expression, “goes the whole hog” in this -matter, by practically denying the existence of such a thing as a pure, -disinterested, æsthetic sense. Suppose, he says, "that the smooth -forehead, the firm cheek, and the full lip, which are now so distinctly -expressive to us of the gay and vigorous periods of youth—and the clear -and blooming complexion, which indicates health and activity—had been, -in fact, the forms and colours by which old age and sickness were -characterised; and that, instead of being found united to those sources -and seasons of enjoyment, they had been the badges by which Nature -pointed out that state of suffering and decay which is now signified to -us by the livid and emaciated face of sickness, or the wrinkled front, -the quivering lip, and hollow cheek of age; if this were the familiar -law of our nature, can it be doubted that we should look upon these -appearances, not with rapture, but with aversion, and consider it as -absolutely ludicrous or disgusting to speak of the beauty of what was -interpreted by every one as the lamented sign of pain and decrepitude? - -“Mr. Knight himself, though a firm believer in the intrinsic beauty of -colours, is so much of this opinion that he thinks it entirely owing to -those associations that we prefer the tame smoothness and comparatively -poor colours of a youthful face to the richly fretted and variegated -countenance of a pimpled drunkard.” - -Bosh! and a hundred times bosh! One feels that these men lived at a time -when port was drunk by the bottle, like claret, and when variegated -noses were to a certain extent fashionable. - -Though every reader feels the sophistry and absurdity of the above -argumentation, it is not easy to refute it. Professor Blackie declaims -against it, Ruskin sneers at it, but nowhere have I been able to find a -definite direct refutation of the thesis. The following suggestions may, -therefore, be of some value. - -In the first place, Jeffrey’s supposition is equivalent to saying that -if black were white, white would be black. For if all the phenomena of -human nature were reversed, our taste, being also a “phenomenon,” would -be reversed too. If health meant emaciation, then a lover would not be -happy unless he could kiss a pair of leathery lips and embrace a -skeleton. Hence his sense of touch, like his sight, would have to be the -reverse of what they are now; and that being the case, æsthetic taste, -which is based on the senses, would of course be reversed too. But that -is simply saying that if you stand a man on his head his feet will be in -the air. - -Secondly, Lord Jeffrey’s argument involves the old fallacy that the -useful and the beautiful are identical—that we only consider those -things beautiful which afford us some utilitarian gratification. If this -theory were correct, a coal-boat would be more beautiful than a yacht; a -savage’s big jaw-bone more beautiful than our delicate ones; a clumsy, -dirty, coarse-featured labourer more beautiful than a society belle. - -No; we have, thank heaven, an æsthetic sense which enables us to see and -admire beauty quite independently of any “associations” which it may -have with our utilitarian cravings. It is possible, however, and even -probable, that the æsthetic sense was originally _developed_ from -utilitarian associations. On this subject Mr. Grant Allen has some -exceedingly valuable remarks in his interesting work on the -Colour-Sense. He there eloquently sets forth the view that it was the -bright tints of luscious fruits that first taught primitive man to -derive pleasure from the sight of coloured objects. This gradually led -to a “predilection for brilliant dyes and glistening pebbles; till at -last the whole series culminates in that intense and unselfish enjoyment -of rich and pure tints which make civilised man linger so lovingly over -the hues of sunset and the myriad shades of autumn.... The -_disinterested_ affection can only be reached by many previous steps of -utilitarian progress.” But—and here lies the kernel of the -argument—"fruit-eaters and flower-feeders derive pleasure from brilliant -colours ... not because those colours have mental associations with -their food, but because the structures which perceive them have been -continually exercised and strengthened by hereditary use," until at last -they formed a special nervous or cerebral apparatus which presides over -impressions of beauty, and takes a special pleasure in its own activity, -apart from all utilitarian considerations. - -Lord Jeffrey apparently lacked this special æsthetic sense, as shown by -his whole argument, and by his inability, which he shared with Alison, -of finding beauty in Nature, unless it was in some way associated with -man’s presence and man’s mean utilities. - -How different this from the feelings of the man who of all writers on -Beauty has the most highly developed æsthetic sense—Mr. Ruskin, who has -just told us in his _Autobiography_ that his love of Nature, ardent as -it is, depends entirely on the _wildness_ of the scenery, its remoteness -from human influences and associations. - -It is this specially-developed æsthetic taste that would prevent man -from calling flabby cheeks, sallow complexions, pimpled noses, and -sunken eyes beautiful, if by some miracle they should be changed into -signs of health. For this sense of beauty was first educated not by the -sight of human beauty, but of beauty in Nature—fruits, pebbles, shells, -lustrous metals, etc.; and the notions of beauty thus obtained have been -gradually transferred to human beings as standards of attractiveness. It -can be shown that what the best judges pronounce the highest human -beauty, is so because it partakes of certain characteristics which we -find beautiful throughout Nature. And conversely, what we consider ugly -in the human form and features would also be called ugly in external -objects; in both cases, be it distinctly understood, without any direct -reference to utilitarian considerations, and sometimes even in -opposition to them, as in our admiration of a beautiful poisonous plant -or snake, or a tiger. - -It is these universal characteristics of Beauty, found in man as in -animals, that we now have to consider. They are the _positive_ criteria -of Beauty, and may be regarded as a new set of “overtones” or leading -motives for the remainder of this volume, although the old ones will -occasionally reappear and combine with them. - - - POSITIVE TESTS OF BEAUTY - -Of these there are at least eight—Symmetry, Curvature, Gradation, -Smoothness, Delicacy, Colour, Lustre, Expression, including Variety and -Individuality. - -(_a_) _Symmetry._—"In all perfectly beautiful objects," says Mr. Ruskin, -“there is found the opposition of one part to another, and a reciprocal -balance obtained; in animals the balance being commonly between opposite -sides (note the disagreeableness occasioned by the exception in flat -fish, having the eyes on one side of the head); but in vegetables the -opposition is less distinct, as in the boughs on opposite sides of -trees, and the leaves and sprays on each side of the boughs, and in dead -matter less perfect still, often amounting only to a certain tendency -towards a balance, as in the opposite sides of valleys and alternate -windings of streams. In things in which perfect symmetry is, from their -nature, impossible or improper, a balance must be at least in some -measure expressed before they can be beheld with pleasure.... Symmetry -is the _opposition_ of _equal_ quantities to each other. Proportion the -_connection_ of _unequal_ quantities with each other. The property of a -tree in sending out equal boughs on opposite sides is symmetrical. Its -sending out shorter and smaller towards the top, proportional. In the -human face its balance of opposite sides is symmetry, its division -upwards, proportion.” - -Mr. Darwin thus gives his testimony as to the prevalence of symmetry in -Nature: “If beautiful objects had been created solely for man’s -gratification, it ought to be shown that before man appeared there was -less beauty on the face of the earth than since he came on the stage. -Were the beautiful volute and cone shells of the Eocene epoch, and the -gracefully sculptured ammonites of the Secondary period, created that -man might ages afterwards admire them in his cabinet? Few objects are -more beautiful than the minute silicious cases of the diatomaceæ: were -they created that they might be examined and admired under the higher -powers of the microscope? The beauty in this latter case, and in many -others, is apparently wholly due to symmetry of growth” (_Origin of -Species_, chap. vi.) - -In the floral world, again, the natural tendency is always towards -symmetry. Wind-fertilised flowers are symmetrical in form; and “as Mr. -Darwin has observed, there does not appeal to be a single instance of an -irregular flower which is not fertilised by insects or birds” (Lubbock), -and therefore modified in form in the effort to adapt itself to useful -insects and to exclude pirates. - -Throughout the animal kingdom, including man, this law of symmetry is -true. Hence it is not likely that we should ever admire a lame leg, a -crooked nose, bent on one side, eyes that are not mates, or a face -several inches longer on one side than the other, owing to paralysis—as -_beautiful_, even if, as Jeffrey would have it, Madame Nature should -suddenly take it into her head to associate such abnormalities with -health instead of with disease. - -(_b_) _Gradation._—On this law of Nature Mr. Ruskin again has spoken at -once more scientifically and poetically than any other writer on -æsthetics: "What curvature is to lines, gradation is to shades and -colours.... For instances of the complete _absence_ of gradation we must -look to man’s work, or to his _disease_ and _decrepitude_. Compare the -gradated colours of the rainbow with the stripes of a target, and the -gradual concentration of the youthful blood in the cheek with an abrupt -patch of rouge, or with the sharply-drawn veining of old age. - -“Gradation is so inseparable a quality of all natural shade and colour -that the eye refuses in art to understand anything as either which -appears without it; while, on the other hand, nearly all the gradations -of nature are so subtile, and between degrees of tint so slightly -separated, that no human hand can in any wise equal, or do anything more -than suggest the idea of them.” - -The following remarks which the same writer makes in another place -concerning Gradation show at the same time how asinine it is for a -savage or any other person of uncultivated taste to set himself up as a -judge of Personal Beauty, as good as any one else, on the plea that it -is all “a matter of taste” and _de gustibus non est disputandum_:— - -“When the eye is quite uncultivated, it sees that a man is a man, and a -face is a face, but has no idea what shadows or lights fall upon the -form or features. Cultivate it to some degree of artistic power, and it -will then see shadows distinctly, but only the more vigorous of them. -Cultivate it still further, and it will see light within light, and -shadow within shadow, and will continually refuse to rest in what it has -already discovered, that it may pursue what is more removed and more -subtle, until at last it comes to give its chief attention and display -its chief power on _gradations which to an untrained faculty are partly -matters of indifference and partly imperceptible_.” - -The words italicised enable us to appreciate what Sokrates must have had -in his mind when he distinguished between that which _is_ beautiful and -that which only _appears_ beautiful. Æsthetic training enables us to see -things as they are, instead of as they appear through inattention, -through ignorance, or through clouds of national prejudice, or -individual utilitarianism. - -The way in which æsthetic training enables us to see gradations of -beauty previously imperceptible can be most strikingly illustrated in -the case of music. There are thousands of intelligent folks who cannot -tell the difference between a superb Steinway Grand, just timed for a -concert, and a harsh, clangy, mountain-hotel piano that has not been -tuned for two years. But give these persons a thorough musical -education, and they will soon be able to smile at Jeffrey’s notion that -the tone of the hotel-piano was quite as beautiful as that of the -Steinway, because it _seemed_ so to them. It is not only the imagination -but the senses themselves that require training. A Hottentot or any -unmusical person cannot tell the difference between two consecutive -tones on the piano, whereas a skilled musician can detect all the -gradations from one tone to another, down to the sixty-fourth part of a -semitone! - -“It is all a matter of taste!” Precisely. Of good taste and bad taste. - -Examples of gradation in the human form are the gradual tapering of the -limbs and the fingers, the exquisite line from the female neck to the -shoulders and the bosom, the blushes on the cheeks, so long as they do -not assume the form of a hectic flush, and the delicate tints of the -complexion in general, varying with emotional states, according as the -veins and arteries are more or less filled with the vital fluid. - -Is it then “entirely owing to their associations” with health or disease -that we prefer the complexion of a youthful face to the hideous daubs of -red which Knight refers to as the “richly fretted and variegated -countenance of a pimpled drunkard”? Is it owing to such associations -that we prefer the delicately gradated blushes of coloured marble to the -richly bedaubed countenance of a pimpled brickbat? But it would be a -waste of time to refer again to the crude anti-æsthetic notions of -Messrs. Knight, Alison, and Jeffrey. - -One more exquisite illustration of subtle gradation in the human form -divine may be cited from Winckelmann:— - -“The soul, though a simple existence, brings forth at once, and in an -instant, many different ideas; so it is with the beautiful youthful -outline, which appears simple, and yet at the same time has infinitely -different variations, and that soft tapering which is difficult of -attainment in a column, is still more so in the diverse forms of the -youthful body. Among the innumerable kinds of columns in Rome some -appear pre-eminently elegant on account of this very tapering; of these -I have particularly noted two of granite, which I am always studying -anew: just so rare is a perfect form, even in the most beautiful youth, -which has a stationary point in our sex still less than in the female.” - -(_c_) _Curvature._—"That all forms of acknowledged beauty are composed -exclusively of curves will," Mr. Ruskin believes, “be at once allowed; -but that which there will be need more especially to prove, is the -subtility and constancy of curvature in all natural forms whatsoever. I -believe that, except in crystals, in certain mountain forms admitted for -the sake of sublimity or contrast (as in the slope of debris), in rays -of light, in the levels of calm water and alluvial land, and in some few -organic developments, there are no lines or surfaces of nature without -curvature, though, as we before saw in clouds, more especially in their -under lines towards the horizon, and in vast and extended plains, right -lines are often suggested which are not actual. Without these we should -not be sensible of the value of contrasting curves; and while, -therefore, for the most part, the eye is fed in natural forms with a -grace of curvature which no hand nor instrument can follow, other means -are provided to give beauty to those surfaces which are admitted for -contrast, _as in water by its reflection of the gradations which it -possesses not itself_.” - -In a footnote to the last edition of the _Modern Painters_ he adds -regarding the apparent exceptions named: “Crystals are indeed subject to -rectilinear limitations, but their real surfaces are continually curved; -the level of calm water is only right lined when it is shoreless.” - -On the other hand, “Generally in all ruin and disease, and interference -of one order of being with another (as in the cattle line of park -trees), the curves vanish, and violently opposed or broken and unmeaning -lines take their place.” I feel tempted to cite another most admirable -passage on curvature throughout Nature—even where it is least looked -for, and the untrained eye cannot see it—in the shattered walls and -crests of mountains which “seem to rise in a gloomy contrast with the -soft waves of bank and wood beneath.” But it is too long to quote, and I -can only advise the reader most earnestly to look it up in chapter xiv. -vol. iv. - -“Straight lines,” Professor Bain observes, “are rendered artistic only -by associations of power, regularity, fitness, etc.” “In some situations -straight lines are æsthetic.... In the human figure there underlies the -curved outline a certain element of rigidity and straightness, -indicating strength in the supporting limbs and spine. Whenever firmness -is required, there must be a solid structure, and straightness of form -is a frequent accompaniment of solidity. The straight nose and the flat -brow are subsidiary to the movement and the stability of the face.” - -Yet even our straight limbs follow in their motions the law of -curvature. And to this fact that they move more easily and naturally in -a curved than in a straight line, which requires laborious adjustment, -Bain traces part of our superior pleasure in rounded lines. - -What infinite subtlety and variety Curvature is capable of is vividly -brought before the eyes by Winckelmann: “The forms of a beautiful body -are determined by lines the centre of which is constantly changing, and -which, if continued, would never describe circles. They are, -consequently, more simple, but also more complex, than a circle, which, -however large or small it may be, always has the same centre, and either -includes others or is included in others. This diversity was sought -after by the Greeks in works of all kinds; and their discernment of its -beauty led them to introduce the same system even into the form of their -utensils and vases, whose easy and elegant outline is drawn after the -same rule, that is, by a line which must be found by means of several -circles, for all these works have an elliptical figure, and herein -consists their beauty. The greater unity there is in the junction of the -forms, and in the flowing of one out of another, so much the greater is -the beauty of the whole.” - -_Masculine and Feminine Beauty._—The universality of curvature as a form -of beautiful objects throughout nature and art is of importance in -helping us to determine the question which is the more beautiful form, a -perfect man or a perfect woman—an Apollo or a Venus? A Venus, no doubt. -In those qualities which are subsumed under the terms of the sublime or -the characteristic—in strength, manly dignity, intellectual power, -majesty—the masculine type, no doubt, is superior to the feminine. But -in Beauty proper—in the roundness and delicacy of contours, in the -smoothness of complexion and its subtle gradations of colour, in the -symmetrical roundness and lustrous expressiveness of the eyes—the -feminine type is pre-eminent. - -“Woman,” says Professor Kollmann, “is smaller, more delicate, but also -softer and more graceful (_schwungvoller_) in form, in her breasts, -hips, thighs, and calves. No line on her body is short and sharply -angular; they all swell, or vault themselves in a gentle curve.... The -neck and the rounded shoulders are connected by gracefully curved lines, -whereas a man’s neck is placed more at a right angle to the more -straight and angular shoulders.... The hair is softer, the skin more -tender and transparent. All the forms are more covered over with adipose -tissue, and connected by those gradual transitions which produce the -gently rounded outlines; whereas in a man everything—muscles, sinews, -blood-vessels, bones—is more conspicuous.” - -Schopenhauer, accordingly, was clearly in the wrong when he endeavoured -to make out that man is vastly superior to woman in physical beauty,—a -notion which Professor Huxley, too, does not appear to disapprove of -very violently. At the same time it is, no doubt, true that there are -more good specimens of masculine beauty in most countries than of -feminine beauty; true also that man’s beauty lasts much longer than -woman’s. A boy is more beautiful than a girl under sixteen, for the very -reason that his form is more like that of an adult woman than a girl’s -is. From eighteen to twenty-five woman is more beautiful than man; while -after thirty, owing to the almost universal neglect of the laws of -health—women are apt to become either too rotund, which ruins their -grace and delicacy, or too angular—more angular than a man under fifty. - -(_d_) _Delicacy and Grace._—The difference between masculine and -feminine beauty and the superiority of the latter is also indirectly -brought out in Burke’s remarks on Delicacy, which, though open to -criticism in one or two points, are on the whole admirable and -exhaustive:— - -"An air of robustness and strength is very prejudicial to beauty. An -appearance of delicacy, and even of fragility, is almost essential to -it. Whoever examines the vegetable or animal creation will find this -observation to be founded in nature. It is not the oak, the ash, or the -elm, or any of the robust trees of the forest which we consider as -beautiful; they are awful and majestic, they inspire a sort of -reverence. It is the delicate myrtle, it is the orange, it is the -almond, it is the jasmine, it is the vine, which we look on as vegetable -beauties. It is the flowery species, so remarkable for its weakness and -momentary duration, that gives us the liveliest idea of beauty and -elegance. Among animals the greyhound is more beautiful than the -mastiff, and the delicacy of a jennet, a barb, or an Arabian horse is -much more amiable than the strength and stability of some horses of war -or carriage. - -“I need here say little of the fair sex, where I believe the point will -be easily allowed me. The beauty of women is considerably owing to their -weakness or delicacy, and is even enhanced by their timidity, a quality -of mind analogous to it. I would not here be understood to say that -weakness betraying very bad health has any share in beauty; but the ill -effect of this is not because it is weakness, but because the ill state -of health, which produces such weakness, alters the other conditions of -beauty; the parts in such a case collapse, the bright colour, the _lumen -purpureum juventæ_ is gone, and the fine variation is lost in wrinkles, -sudden breaks, and right lines.” - -Delicacy is a quality closely related to grace, or beauty in motion and -attitude. “Grace,” says Dr. J. A. Symonds, “is a striking illustration -of the union of the two principles of similarity and variety. For the -secret of graceful action is that the symmetry is preserved through all -the varieties of position.” This is well put; but the _first_ condition -and essence of grace is that there must be an exact correspondence -between the work done and the limb which does it. The attitude of an -oak-trunk, with nothing on the top but a geranium bush, however -symmetrical, would always be ungraceful, owing to the ludicrous -disproportion between the support and the thing supported. Conversely, a -weak fern-stalk, trying to support a branch of heavy cactus leaves, -would be equally ungraceful; for there must be neither a waste of energy -nor a sense of effort. Part of this feeling may perhaps be traced to -sympathy—thus showing how various emotions enter into our æsthetic -judgments, sometimes weakening, sometimes strengthening them. As -Professor Bain remarks, _à propos_: “We love to have removed from our -sight every aspect of suffering, and none more so than the suffering of -toil.” - -Grace is almost as powerful to inspire Love as Beauty itself. Women know -this instinctively, and in order to acquire the Delicacy which leads to -grace, they deprive their bodies of air and sunshine and strengthening -sleep, hoping thereby to acquire artificially, through ill-health, what -Nature has denied them. Fortunately such violations of the laws of -health always frustrate their object. Delicacy conjoined with Health -inspires Love, but delicacy born of disease inspires only pity—a feeling -which may inspire in a woman what she imagines is Love, but in a man -_never_. - -(_e_) _Smoothness_ is another attribute of Beauty on which Burke was the -first to place proper emphasis: It is, he says, “a quality so essential -to beauty that I do not recollect anything beautiful that is not smooth. -In trees and flowers, smooth leaves are beautiful; smooth slopes of -earth in gardens; smooth streams in the landscape; smooth coats of birds -and beasts in animal beauties; in fine women, smooth skins; and in -several sorts of ornamental furniture, smooth and polished surfaces.... -Any ruggedness, any sudden projection, any sharp angle, is in the -highest degree contrary to the idea of beauty.” - -Though there are exceptions to this rule of smoothness—including such a -marvel of beauty as the moss-rose, as well as various leaves covered -with down, etc.—yet, on the whole, Burke is right. Certainly the smooth -white hand of a delicate lady is more beautiful than the rough, horny -“paws” of a bricklayer; and the inferior beauty of a man’s arm is owing -as much to its rough scattered hairs as to the prominence of the -muscles, in contrast to the smooth and rounded arm of woman. In animals, -however, hairs on the limbs are not unbeautiful, because they are dense -enough to overlap, and thus form a hairy surface admirable alike for its -soft smoothness, its gloss, and its colour. - -(_f_) _Lustre and Colour._—Lustrous, sparkling eyes, glossy hair, pearly -teeth,—where would human beauty be without them without the delicate -tints and blushes of the skin, the brown or blue iris, the golden or -chestnut locks, the ebony eyebrows and lashes? - -Yet the greatest art-critics incline to the opinion that, on the whole, -colour is a less essential ingredient of beauty than form. “Colour -assists beauty,” says Winckelmann, but “the essence of beauty consists -not in colour but in shape.” “A negro might be called handsome when the -conformation of his face is handsome.” “The colour of bronze and of the -black and greenish basalt does not detract from the beauty of the -antique heads,” hence “we possess a knowledge of the beautiful, although -in an unreal dress and of a disagreeable colour.” - -Similarly Mr. Ruskin, who remarks of colour that it “is richly bestowed -on the highest works of creation, and the eminent _sign and seal of -perfection in them_; being associated with _life_ in the human form, -with _light_ in the sky, with purity and hardness in the earth,—death, -night, and pollution of all kinds being colourless. And although if form -and colour be brought into complete opposition, so that it should be put -to us as a stern choice whether we should have a work of art all of -form, without colour (as an Albert Dürer’s engraving), or all of colour, -without form (as an imitation of mother-of-pearl), form is beyond all -comparison the more precious of the two ... yet if colour be introduced -at all, it is necessary that, whatever else may be wrong, _that_ should -be right,” etc. - -Again: “An oak is an oak, whether green with spring or red with winter; -a dahlia is a dahlia, whether it be yellow or crimson; and if some -monster-hunting botanist should ever frighten the flower blue, still it -will be a dahlia; but let one curve of the petals—one groove of the -stamens—be wanting, and the flower ceases to be the same. Let the -roughness of the bark and the angles of the boughs be smoothed or -diminished, and the oak ceases to be an oak; but let it retain its -inward structure and outward form, and though its leaves grew white, or -pink, or blue, or tricolour, it would be a white oak, or a pink oak, or -a republican oak, but an oak still.” - -“If we look at Nature carefully, we shall find that her colours are in a -state of perpetual confusion and indistinctness, while her forms, as -told by light and shade, are invariably clear, distinct, and speaking. -The stones and gravel of the bank catch green reflections from the -boughs above; the bushes receive grays and yellows from the ground; -every hairbreadth of polished surface gives a little bit of the blue of -the sky, or the gold of the sun, like a star upon the local colour; this -local colour, changeful and uncertain in itself, is again disguised and -modified by the hue of the light or quenched in the gray of the shadow; -and the confusion and blending of tint is altogether so great that were -we left to find out what objects were by their colours only, we would -scarcely in place distinguish the boughs of a tree from the air beyond -them or the ground beneath them. I know that people unpractised in art -will not believe this at first; but if they have accurate powers of -observation, they may soon ascertain it for themselves; they will find -that, while they can scarcely ever determine the _exact_ hue of -anything, except when it occurs in large masses, as in a green field or -the blue sky, the form, as told by light and shade, is always decided -and evident, and the source of the chief character of every object.” - -Professor Bain remarks on this topic that “Among the several kinds of -beauty, the eye takes most delight in colour.... For this reason we find -the poets borrowing more of their epithets from colours than from any -other topic.” - -This view seems to be confirmed by the fact that lovers in expatiating -on the beauty of their Dulcineas seem to have much more to say about -their brown or golden locks, their light or dark complexion, their blue -or black eyes, than about the shape of their features. This, however, -partly finds its explanation in the fact that colour, being a sensuous -quality, is more easily and more directly appreciated than form, the -perception of which is a much more complicated matter, being a -translation into intellectual terms of remembered impressions of touch, -associated with certain colours, lights, and shades which recall them; -and partly in the greater ease with which peculiarities of colour are -referred to than peculiarities of form. In the days of ancient Greece -the nomenclature of colours was equally undeveloped, and is so vague in -Homer that Gladstone and Geiger actually set up the theory that Homer’s -colour-sense was imperfect, and that that sense has been gradually -developed within historic times,—a theory which I have confuted on -anatomical grounds in _Macmillan’s Magazine_, Dec. 1879. - -That as regards human beauty colour is of less importance than form is -shown, moreover, in this, that a girl with regular features and a -freckled complexion will much sooner find a lover than one with the most -delicately-coloured complexion, conjoined with a big mouth, irregular -nose, or sunken cheeks. And a beautifully-shaped eye is sure to be -admired by all, no matter whether blue, gray, or brown; whereas an eye -that is too small or otherwise defective in form can never be redeemed -by the most beautiful colour or brilliancy. - -On the other hand, there are several things to be said in favour of -colour that will mitigate our judgment on this point. In the first -place, colour is more perfect in its way than form, so that it is -impossible ever to improve on it by idealising, as it is often with -form. As Mr. Ruskin remarks, “Form may be attained in perfection by -painters, who, in their course of study, are continually altering or -idealising it; but only the sternest fidelity will reach colouring. -Idealise or alter in that, and you are lost. Whether you alter by -debasing or exaggerating, by glare or by decline, one fate is for -you—ruin.... Colour is sacred in that you must keep to facts. Hence the -apparent anomaly that the only schools of colour are the schools of -realism.” - -Again, looking at Nature with an artist’s eye, Ruskin discovered and -frequently alludes to the “apparent connection of brilliancy of colour -with vigour of life,” and Mr. Wallace, looking at Nature with a -naturalist’s eye, established this “apparent connection” as a scientific -fact. The passage in which he sums up his views has been once already -quoted; but it is of such extreme importance in enforcing the lesson -that beauty is impossible without health, that it may be quoted again:— - -“The colours of an animal usually fade during disease or weakness, while -robust health and vigour adds to its intensity.... In all quadrupeds a -‘dull coat’ is indicative of ill-health or low condition; while a glossy -coat and sparkling eye are the invariable accompaniments of health and -energy. The same rule applies to the feathers of birds, whose colours -are only seen in their purity during perfect health; and a similar -phenomenon occurs even among insects, for the bright hues of -caterpillars begin to fade as soon as they become inactive, preparatory -to their undergoing transformation. Even in the Vegetable Kingdom we see -the same thing; for the tints of foliage are deepest, and the colours of -flowers and fruits richest, on those plants which are in the most -healthy and vigorous condition.” - -(_g_) _Expression, Variety, Individuality._—Besides the circumstances -that colour is more uniformly perfect in Nature than form, and that it -is always associated with Health, without which Beauty is impossible, -another peculiarity may be mentioned in its favour. The complexion is a -kaleidoscope whose delicate blushes and constant changes of tint, from -the ashen pallor of despair to the rosy flush of delight, are the -fascinating signs of emotional expression. And herein lies the superior -beauty of the human complexion over all other tinted objects: it -reflects not only the hues of surrounding external bodies, but all the -moods of the soul within. - -Form without colour is form without expression. But form without -expression soon ceases to fascinate, for we constantly crave novelty and -variety; and form is one, while expression is infinitely varied and ever -new. Herein lies the extreme importance of expression as a test of -Beauty. Colour, of course, is only one phase of expression. The soul not -only changes the tints of the complexion, but liquifies the facial -muscles so that they can be readily moulded into forms characteristic of -joy, sadness, hope, fear, adoration, hatred, anger, affection, etc. - -Why is the portrait-painter so infinitely superior to the photographer? -Because the photographer—paradoxical as this may seem—gives you a less -realistic picture of yourself than the artist. He only gives you the -fixed form, or at most a transient expression which, being fixed -permanently, loses its essence, which is motion—and thus becomes a -caricature—an exaggeration in duration. But the artist studies you by -the hour, makes you talk, notes the habitual forms of expression most -characteristic of your individuality; and, blending these into a sort of -“typical portrait” of your various individual traits, makes a picture -which reveals all the advantages of art over mere solar mechanism or -photography. - -This explains why some of the most charming persons we know never appear -well in a photograph, while others much less charming do. The beauty of -the latter lies in form, of the former in expression. But expression is -much more potent to inspire admiration and Love than mere beauty of -features; and not without reason, for beautiful features, being a lucky -inheritance, may be conjoined with unamiable individual traits, whereas -beautiful expression is the infallible index of a beautiful mind and -character; and promises, moreover, beautiful sons and daughters, because -“expression is feature in the making.” It is by such subtle signs and -promises that Love is unconsciously and instinctively guided in its -choice. - -Formal Beauty alone is external and cold. It is those slight variations -in Beauty and expression which we call individuality and character that -excite emotion: so much so that Love, as we have seen, is dependent on -individuality, and a man who warmly admires all beautiful women is in -love with none. - -Speaking of the Greeks, Sir Charles Bell says: “In high art it appears -to have been the rule of the sculptor to divest the form of -expression.... In the Venus, the form is exquisite and the face perfect, -but there is _no expression_ there; it has no human softness, _nothing -to love_.” “All individuality was studiously avoided by the ancient -sculptors in the representation of divinity; they maintained the beauty -of form and proportion, but without expression, which, in their system, -belonged exclusively to humanity.” - -But inasmuch as the Greeks attributed to their deities all the various -emotions which agitate man, why did they refuse them the signs of -expression? One cannot but suspect that the Greeks did not sufficiently -appreciate the beauty of expression. Had they valued it more they would -not have allowed their women to vegetate in ignorance like flowers, one -like the other, but would have educated them and given them the -individuality and expression which alone can inspire Love. - -Again, if the Greeks had been susceptible to the superior charms of -emotional expression, is it likely that they would have been so -completely absorbed in the two least expressive and emotional of the -arts—architecture and sculpture? - -We cannot avoid the conclusion that the Greeks were as indifferent to -the charms of individual expression as to Romantic Love, which is -dependent on it. In their statues, as Dr. Max Schasler remarks, a mouth -or eye has no more significance as a mark of beauty than a well-shaped -leg. Whereas in modern, and even sometimes in mediæval art, what a world -of expression in a mouth, a pair of eyes! - -Leaving individual exceptions (like Homer) aside, it may be said that -the arts have been successively developed to a climax in the order of -their capacity for emotional expression, viz.—Architecture, Sculpture, -Painting, Poetry, and Music. Poetry precedes music, because though its -emotional scope is wider, it is less intense. To-day music is the most -popular and universal of all the arts because it stirs most deeply our -feelings. And just as the discovery of harmony, by individualising the -melodies, has increased the power and variety of music a thousandfold; -so the individualisation of Beauty and character through modern culture -has made Romantic Love a blessing accessible to all—the most prevalent -form of modern affection. - -Individuality is of such extreme importance in Love that a slight -blemish is not only pardoned but actually adored if it increases the -individuality. Bacon evidently had this in his mind when he said that -“there is no excellent beauty which has not some strangeness in its -proportion.” Seneca, as well as Ovid, noted the attractiveness of slight -short-comings; and the following anecdote shows that though the -Persians, as a nation, have ever been strangers to Romantic Love, their -greatest poet, Háfiz, understood the psychology of the subject in its -subtlest details:— - -“One day Timur (fourteenth century) sent for Háfiz and asked angrily: -‘Art thou he who was so bold as to offer my two great cities Samarkand -and Bokhara for the black mole on thy mistress’s cheek?’ alluding to a -well-known verse in one of his odes. ‘Yes, sire,’ replied Háfiz, ‘and it -is by such acts of generosity that I have brought myself to such a state -of destitution that I have now to solicit your bounty.’ Timur was so -pleased with the ready wit displayed in this answer that he dismissed -the poet with a handsome present.” - -To sum up: the reason why - - “The rose that lives its little hour - Is prized beyond the sculptured flower” - -is not, as Bryant implies, the transitoriness of the rose, but the fact -that the marble flower, like the wax-flower, is dead and unchangeable, -while the short-lived rose beams with the expression of happy vitality -after a shower, or sadly droops and hangs its head in a drouth. It has -life and expression, subtle gradations of colour, and light and shade, -which are the signs of its vitality and moods, varying every day, every -hour. And so with all the higher forms of life, those always being most -beautiful and highly prized which are most capable of expressing subtle -variations of health, happiness, and mental refinement. - -There is no part of the human body which does not serve as a mark of -expression— - - “In many’s looks the false heart’s history - Is writ in moods and frowns and wrinkles strange.” - - “There’s language in her eye, her cheek, her lip, - _Nay, her foot speaks_.”—SHAKSPERE. - -It will not do, therefore, to neglect any part of the body. As it is the -last straw which breaks the camel’s back, so Cupid’s capricious choice -is often determined by some minor point of perfection, when the balance -is otherwise equal. Suppose there are two sisters whose faces, figures, -and mental attractions are about equal; then it is possible that one of -them will die an old maid simply because the other had a smaller foot, a -more graceful gait, or longer eyelashes. - -But though every organ has its own beauty, there is an æsthetic scale of -lower and higher which corresponds pretty accurately with the physical -scale from down upwards—from the foot to the eye and forehead. It is in -this order, accordingly, that we shall now proceed to consider the -various parts of the human form, and those peculiarities in them which -are considered most beautiful and most liable to inspire Romantic Love. - - - - - THE FEET - - - SIZE - - -There is hardly anything concerning which vain people are so sensitive -as their feet. To have large feet is considered one of the greatest -misfortunes that can befall a woman. Mathematically stated, the length -of a woman’s skirts is directly proportional to the size of her feet; -and women with large feet are always shocked at the frivolity of those -who have neat ankles and coquettishly allow them to be seen on occasion; -nor do they see any beauty in Sir John Suckling’s lines— - - “Her feet beneath her petticoat - Like little mice stole in and out, - As if they feared the light.” - -Nor are men, as a rule, sufficiently free from pedal vanity to pose as -satirists. Byron found a mark of aristocracy in small feet, and he was -rendered almost as miserable by the morbid consciousness of his own -defects as Mme. de Staël (who had very ugly feet, yet once ventured to -assume the _rôle_, in private theatricals, of a statue) was offended by -Talleyrand’s witticism, that he recognised her by the _pied de Staël_. - -There is a _ben trovato_, if not true, story of a clever wife who -objected to her husband’s habit of spending his evenings away from home, -and who reformed him by utilising his vanity. By insisting that his -boots were too large, she repeatedly induced him to buy smaller ones, -which finally tortured him so much that he was only too glad to stay at -home and wear his slippers. - - - FASHIONABLE UGLINESS - -How universal is the desire to have, or appear to have, small feet is -shown by the fact that everybody blackens his shoes or boots; for, owing -to a peculiar optical delusion, black objects always appear smaller than -white ones; which is also the reason why too slim and delicate ladies -never appear to such advantage in winter as they do in summer, when they -exchange their dark for light dresses. - -To a certain point the admiration of small feet is in accordance with -the canons of good Taste, as will be presently shown. But Taste has a -disease which is called Fashion. It is a sort of microbe which has the -effect of distorting and _exaggerating_ everything it takes hold of. -Fashion is not satisfied with small feet; it wants them _very_ small, -unnaturally small, at the cost of beauty, health, grace, comfort, and -happiness. Hence for many generations shoemakers have been compelled to -manufacture instruments of torture so ruinous to the constitution of man -and woman, that an Austrian military surgeon has seriously counselled -the enactment of legal fines to be imposed on the makers of -noxiously-shaped shoes, similar to those imposed on food-adulterators. - -Most ugly and vulgar fashions come from France; but as regards crippled -feet the first prize has to be yielded to the Chinese, even by the -Parisians. The normal size of the human foot varies, for men, from 9½ to -13; for women, from 5½ to 9 inches, man’s feet being longer -proportionately to the greater length of his lower limbs. In China the -men value the normal healthy condition of their own feet enough to have -introduced certain features of elasticity in their shoes which we might -copy with advantage; but the women are treated very differently. “The -fashionable length for a Chinese foot,” says Dr. Jamieson, “is between -3½ and 4 inches, but comparatively few parents succeed in arresting -growth so completely.” When girls are five years old their feet are -tightly wrapped up in bandages, which on successive occasions are -tightened more and more, till the surface ulcerates, and some of the -flesh, skin, and sometimes even a toe or two come off. “During the first -year,” says Professor Flower, “the pain is so intense that the sufferer -can do nothing but lie and cry and moan. For about two years the foot -aches continually, and is subject to a constant pain, like the pricking -of sharp needles.” Finally the foot becomes reduced to a shapeless mass, -void of sensibility, which “has now the appearance of the hoof of some -animal rather than a human foot, and affords a very insufficient organ -of support, as the peculiar tottering gait of those possessing it -clearly shows.” - -The difference between the Chinese belle and the Parisian is one of -degree merely. The former has her torturing done once for all while a -child, whereas the latter allows her tight, high-heeled shoes to torture -her throughout life. The English are the only nation that have -recognised the injuriousness and vulgarity of the French shoe, and -substituted one made on hygienic principles; and as England has in -almost everything else displaced France as the leader in modern fashion, -it is reasonable to hope that ere long other nations will follow her in -this reform. American girls are, as a rule, much less sensible in this -matter than their English sisters; one need only ask a clerk in a shoe -store to find out how most of them endeavour to squeeze their small feet -into shoes too small by a number. - -Fashions are always followed blindly, without deliberation. But would it -not be worth while for French, American, and German women—and many men -too—to ask themselves what they gain and what they lose by trying to -make their feet appear smaller than they are? The disadvantages outweigh -the advantages to an almost ludicrous extent. - -On the one side there is absolutely nothing but the gratification of -vanity derived from the fact that a few acquaintances admire one’s -“pretty feet”; and even this advantage is problematical, because a -person who wears too tight shoes can hardly conceal them from an -observer, and is therefore apt to get pity for her vain weakness in -place of admiration. - -On the other hand are the following disadvantages:— - -(1) The constant torture of pressure (not to mention the resulting corns -and bunions), which alone must surely outweigh a hundred times the -pleasure of gratified vanity at having a Chinese foot. - -(2) The unconscious distortion of the features and furrowing of the -forehead in the effort to endure and repress the pain,—and wrinkles, be -it remembered, when once formed are ineradicable. - -(3) The discouragement of walking and other exercise, involving a -general lowering of vitality, sickly pallor and premature loss of the -bloom of youth. - -(4) The wasting of the calf of the leg to dimensions characteristic of -savagedom, disease, and old age, not to speak of the numerous maladies -resulting to women from the use of hard high heels of fashionable shoes, -every contact of which with the ground sends a shock through the spinal -column to the brain and produces obscure disorders in various parts of -the organism. - -(5) The mutilation of one of the most beautiful and characteristically -human parts of the body. As the author of Harper’s _Ugly Girl Papers_ -remarks: “One’s foot is as proper an object of pride and complacency as -a shapely hand. But where in a thousand would a sculptor find one that -was a pleasure to contemplate like that of the Princess Pauline -Bonaparte, whose lovely foot was modelled in marble for the delight of -all the world who have seen it?” - -(6) Finally, and most important of all, the loss of a graceful gait, of -the poetry of motion, which is a thousand times more calculated to -inspire admiration—æsthetic or erotic—than a small foot. - -Man is said to be a reasoning animal; and man embraces woman. But surely -in matters of fashion woman is not a reasoning being. Very large feet -being properly regarded as ugly, she draws the inference that the -smaller they can be made the more will they be beautiful; forgetting -that Beauty is a matter of proportion, not of absolute size. A foot may, -like a waist, as easily appear ugly from being too small as from being -too large. A large woman with very small feet cannot but make a -disagreeable impression, like a bust on an insecure pedestal or a -leaning tower. - - - TESTS OF BEAUTY - -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. - - - A GRACEFUL GAIT - -So long as the foot remains entirely covered, its beauty is, on the -whole, of less importance than the grace of its movements. Grace, under -all circumstances, is as potent a love-charm as Beauty itself—of which, -in fact, it is only a phase; and if young men and women could be made to -realise how much they could add to their fascinations by cultivating a -graceful gait and attitudes, hygienic shoemakers, dancing-masters, and -gymnasiums would enjoy as great and sudden a popularity as -skating-rinks, and a much more permanent popularity too. - -It is the laws of Grace that chiefly determine the most admirable -characteristics of the foot. The arched instep is beautiful because of -its curved outlines; but its greatest value lies in the superior -elasticity and grace it imparts to the gait. The habitual carrying of -heavy loads tends to make the feet flat and to ruin Grace; hence the -clumsy gait of most working people, and, on the other hand, the graceful -walk of the “aristocratic” classes. - -The proper size of the foot, again, is most easily determined with -reference to the principles of Grace. Motion is graceful when it does -not involve any waste of energy, and when it is in accordance with the -lines of Beauty. There must be no disproportion between the machinery -and the work done—no locomotive to pull a baby-carriage. Too large feet -are ugly because they appear to have been made for carrying a giant; too -small ones are ugly because seemingly belonging to a dwarf. What are the -exact proportions lying between “too large” and “too small” can only be -determined by those who have educated their taste by the study of the -laws of Beauty and Grace throughout Nature. - -From this point of view Grace is synonymous with _functional fitness_. A -monkey’s foot is less beautiful than a man’s, but in _climbing_ it is -more graceful; whereas in _walking_ man’s is infinitely more graceful. -Apes rarely assume an erect position, and when they do so they never -walk on the flat sole. “When the orang-outang takes to the ground,” says -Mr. E. B. Tylor, “he shambles _clumsily_ along, generally putting down -the outer edge of the foot and the bent knuckles of the hand.” - -I have italicised the word “clumsily” because it touches the vital point -of the question. Man owes his intellectual superiority largely to the -fact that he does not need his hands for walking or climbing, but uses -them as organs of delicate touch and as tools. To acquire this -independence of the hands he needed feet, which enabled him to stand -erect and walk along, not “clumsily,” but firmly, naturally, and -therefore gracefully. Hence in course of time, through the effects of -constant use, there was developed the callous cushion of the heel and -toes; while, through discontinuance of the habit of climbing, the toes -became reduced in size. In the ape’s foot, it is well known, the toes -are almost as long as the fingers of the hand: a fact which led -Blumenbach and Cuvier to classify apes as quadrumana or four-_handed_ -animals. But Professor Huxley showed that this classification was based -on erroneous reasoning. The resemblance between the hands and feet of -apes is merely _physiological_ or functional—because hands and feet are -used alike for climbing. But _anatomically_, in its bones and muscles, -etc., the monkey’s apparent hind “hand” is a true foot no less than -man’s. If the _physiological_ function, _i.e._ the opposability of the -thumb to the other fingers, were taken as a ground of classification, -then birds, who have such toes, would have no feet at all but only wings -and hands. - -There is a limit, however, beyond which the size of man’s toe’s cannot -be reduced without injuring the foot’s usefulness and the grace of gait. -The front part of the foot is distinguished for its yielding or elastic -character. Hence, says Professor Humphrey, “in descending from a height, -as from a chair or in walking downstairs, we alight upon the balls of -the toes. If we alight upon the heels—for instance, if we walk -downstairs on the heels—we find it an uncomfortable and rather jarring -procedure. In walking and jumping, it is true, the heels come first in -contact with the ground, but the weight then falls obliquely upon them, -and is not fully borne by the foot till the toes also are upon the -ground.” - -One of the reasons why Grace is more rare even than Beauty on this -planet is that the toes are cramped or even turned out of their natural -position by tight, pointed, fashionable shoes, and are thus prevented -from giving elasticity to the step. Instances are not rare (and by no -means only in China) where the great toe is almost at right angles to -the length of the foot. In walking, says Professor Flower, “the heel is -first lifted from the ground, and the weight of the body gradually -transferred through the middle to the anterior end of the foot, and the -final push or impulse given with the great toe. It is necessary then -that all these parts should be in a straight line with one another.” - -It is a mooted question whether the toes should be slightly turned -outward, as dancing-masters insist, or placed in straight parallel -lines, as some physiologists hold. For the reason indicated in the last -paragraph, physiologists are clearly right. With parallel or almost -parallel great toes, a graceful walk is more easily attained than by -turning out the toes. Even in standing, Dr. T. S. Ellis argues, the -parallel position is preferable: “When a body stands on four points I -know of no reason why it should stand more firmly if those points be -unequally disposed. The tendency to fall forwards would seem to be even -increased by widening the distance between the points in front, and it -is in this direction that falls most commonly occur.” - - - EVOLUTION OF THE GREAT TOE - -Perhaps the most striking difference between the feet of men and apes -lies in the relative size of the first and second toes. In the ape’s -foot the second toe is longer than the first, whereas in modern -civilised man’s foot the first or great toe is almost always the longer. -Not so, however, with savages, who are intermediate in this as in other -respects between man and ape; and there are various other facts which -seem to indicate that the evolution of the great toe, like that of the -other extreme of the body—the head and brain—is still in progress. - -There is a notion very prevalent among artists that the second toe -should be longer than the first. This idea, Professor Flower thinks, is -derived from the Greek canon, which in its turn was copied from the -Egyptian, and probably originally derived from the negro. It certainly -does not represent what is most usual in our race and time. “Among -hundreds of bare, and therefore undeformed, feet of children I lately -examined in Perthshire, I was not able to find one in which the second -toe was the longest. Since in all apes—in fact, in all other animals—the -first toe is considerably shorter than the second, a long first toe is a -specially human attribute; and instead of being despised by artists, it -should be looked upon as a mark of elevation in the scale of organised -beings.” - -Mr. J. P. Harrison, after a careful examination of the unrestored feet -of Greek and Roman statues in various museums and art galleries, wrote -an article in the _Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great -Britain_ (vol. xiii. 1884), in which he states that he was “led to the -conviction that it was from Italy and not Greece that the long second -toe affected by many English artists had been imported.” Among the -Italians a longer second toe is common, as also among Alsatians; in -England so rarely that its occurrence probably indicates foreign blood. -Professor Flower, as we have seen, found no cases at all; Paget examined -twenty-seven English males, in twenty-four of whom the great toe was the -longer. “In the case of the female feet, in ten out of twenty-three -subjects the first or great toe was longest, and _in ten females it was -shorter_ than the second toe. In the remaining three instances the first -and second toes were of equal length.” - -Bear these last sentences in mind a moment, till we have seen what is -the case with savages. Says Dr. Bruner: “A slight shortening of the -great toe undoubtedly exists, not merely amongst the Negro tribes, but -also in ancient and modern Egyptians, and even in some of the most -beautiful races of Caucasian _females_.” And Mr. Harrison found this to -be, with a few exceptions, a general trait of savages. The great toe was -shorter than the second in skeletons of Peruvians, Tahitians, New -Hebrideans, Savage islanders, Ainos, New Caledonians. - -Must we therefore agree with Carl Vogt when he says, “We may be sure -that, whenever we perceive an approach to the animal type, the female is -nearer to it than the male”? - -Perhaps, however, we can find a solution of the problem _somewhat_ less -insulting to women than this statement of the ungallant German -professor. - -It is _Fashion_, the handmaid of ugliness, that has thus apparently -caused almost half the women to approximate the simian type of the foot; -_Fashion_, which, by inducing women for centuries to thrust their tender -feet into Spanish boots of torture, has taken from their toes the -freedom of action requisite for that free development and growth which -is to be noticed in almost all the men. - -Considering the great difference between the left and the right foot, it -appears almost incredible, but is a sober fact, that until about half a -century ago “rights and lefts” were not made even for the men, who now -always wear them. But even to-day “they are not, it is believed, made -use of by women, except in a shape that is little efficacious,” says Mr. -Harrison; and concerning the Austrians Dr. Schaffer remarks, similarly, -that “the like shoe for the left and right foot is still in use in the -vast majority of cases.” No wonder women are so averse to taking -exercise, and therefore lose their beauty at a time when it ought to be -still in full bloom. For to walk in such shoes must be a torture -forbidding all unnecessary movement. - -Once more be it said—it is Fashion, the handmaid of ugliness, that is -responsible for the inferior beauty of the average female foot, by -preventing the free development and play of the toes which are -absolutely necessary for a graceful walk. - -To what an extent the woful rarity of a graceful gait is due to the -shape of “fashionable” shoes is vividly brought out in a passage -concerning the natives of Martinique, which appeared in a letter in the -New York _Evening Post_: “Many of the quadroons are handsome, even -beautiful, in their youth, and all the women of pure black and mixed -blood walk with a lightness of step and a graceful freedom of motion -that is very noticeable and pleasant to see. I say all the women; but I -must confine this description to those who go shoeless, for when a -negress crams her feet into even the best-fitting pair of shoes her gait -becomes as awkward as the waddle of an Indian squaw, or of a black swan -on dry land, and she minces and totters in such danger of falling -forward that one feels constrained to go to her and say, ‘Mam’selle -Ebène or Noirette, do, I beseech you, put your shoes where you carry -everything else, namely, on the top of your well-balanced head, and do -let me see you walk barefoot again, for I do assure you that neither -your Chinese cousins nor your European mistresses can ever hope to -imitate your goddess-like gait until they practise the art of walking -with their high-heeled, tiny boots nicely balanced on _their_ heads, as -you so often are pleased to do.’” - -There is another lesson to be learned from this discussion, namely, that -in trying to establish the principles of Beauty, it is better to follow -one’s own taste than adhere blindly to Greek canons, and what are -supposed to be Greek canons. The longer second toe, as we have seen, is -not a characteristic of Greek art, but due apparently to restorations -made in Italy where this peculiarity prevails. The Greeks, indeed, never -hesitated to idealise and improve Nature if caught napping; and there -can be little doubt that if in their own feet the first toe had been -shorter than the second, they would have made it longer all the same in -their statues, following the laws of gradation and curvature which a -longer second toe would interrupt. For it is undeniable that, as Mr. -Harrison remarks, “a model foot, according to Flaxman, is one in which -the toes follow each other imperceptibly in a graceful curve from the -first or great toe to the fifth.” - - - NATIONAL DIFFERENCES - -The statement made above regarding the prevalence among Italians of a -longer second toe enables us also to qualify the remark made in the -_Westminster Review_ (1884), that “Even at the present day it is a fact -well known to all sculptors that Italy possesses the finest models as -regards the female hands and feet in any part of Europe; and that to the -eye of an Italian the wrists and ankles of most English women would not -serve as a study even for those revivalisms of the antique which are to -be purchased in our streets for a few shillings.” Whatever may be true -of wrists and ankles, the toes must be excepted, at least if a larger -percentage of Italian than of English women have the second toe longer. - -Although in matters where so many individual differences exist it is -hazardous to generalise, the following remarks on national peculiarities -in feet, made by a reviewer of Zachariae’s _Diseases of the Human Foot_, -may be cited for what they are worth: “The French foot is meagre, -narrow, and bony; the Spanish foot is small and elegantly curved, thanks -to its Moorish blood.... The Arab foot is proverbial for its high arch; -‘a stream can run under his foot,’ is a description of its form. The -foot of the Scotch is large and thick—that of the Irish flat and -square—the English short and fleshy. The American foot is apt to be -disproportionately small.” - - - BEAUTIFYING HYGIENE - -Walking, running, and dancing are the most potent cosmetics for -producing a foot beautiful in form and graceful in movement. It is -possible that much walking does slightly increase the size of the foot, -but not enough to become perceptible in the life of an individual; and -it has been sufficiently shown that the standard of Beauty in a foot is -not smallness but curved outlines, litheness, and grace of gait, these -qualities being a thousand times more powerful “love-charms” than the -smallest Chinese foot. Moreover, it is probable that _graceful_ walking -has no tendency to enlarge the foot as a whole, but only the great toe; -and a well-developed great toe is a distinctive sign of higher -evolution. - -It is useless for any one to try to walk or dance gracefully in shoes -which do not allow the toes to spread and act like two sets of elastic -springs. One of the most curious aberrations of modern taste is the -notion that the shape of the natural foot is not beautiful—that it will -look better if made narrowest in front instead of widest. Even were this -so, it would not pay to sacrifice all grace to a slight gain in Beauty. -But it is not so. It is only habit, which blunts perception, that makes -us indifferent to the ugliness of the pointed shoes in our shop-windows, -or even in many cases prefer them to naturally-shaped shoes. Were we -once accustomed to properly-shaped hygienic boots, in which no part of -the foot is cramped, our present shoes, with their unnatural curves -where there should be none, and the absence of curves where they should -be (“rights and lefts”), would seem as “awful” and “horrid” as the old -crinoline does to the eyes of the present generation. As Professor -Flower remarks: “The fact that the excessively pointed, elongated toes -of the time of Richard II., for instance, were superseded by the broad, -round-toed, almost elephantine, but most comfortable shoes seen in the -portraits of Henry VIII. and his contemporaries, shows that there is -nothing in the former essential to the gratification of the æsthetic -instincts of mankind. Each form was, doubtless, equally admired in the -time of its prevalence.” - -The Germans claim that it was one of their countrymen, Petrus Camper, -who first called attention, about a hundred years ago, to another -objectionable peculiarity of the modern shoe—its high heels—ruinous -alike to comfort, grace, and health (a number of female diseases being -caused by them); yet they admit that Camper’s advice was hardly heeded -by the Germans, and that it therefore serves them right that quite -recently the modern hygienic shoe, with low, broad heels, has been -introduced in Germany as the “English form,” the English having proved -themselves less obtuse and conservative in this matter. - -The heel is, however, capable of still further improvement. It is not -elastic like the cushion of the heel, after which it should be modelled; -and Dr. Schaffer’s suggestion that an elastic mechanism should be -introduced in the heel is certainly worthy of trial. Everybody knows how -much more lightly, gracefully, as well as noiselessly, he can walk in -rubbers than in leather shoes; and this gain is owing to the superior -elasticity of the heel and the middle part of the shoe, covering the -arch, which should be especially elastic. It is pleasanter to walk in a -meadow than on a stone pavement; but if we wear soles that are both soft -and elastic we need never walk on a hard surface; for then, as Dr. -Schaffer remarks, “we have the meadow in our boots.” - -As the left foot always differs considerably from the right, it is not -sufficient to have one measure taken. The fact that shoemakers do take -but one measure shows what clumsy bunglers most of them are. As a rule, -it is easier to get a fit from a large stock of ready-made boots than at -a shoemaker’s. - -The stockings, as well as the shoes, often cramp and deform the foot; -and Professor Flower suggests that they should never be made with -pointed toes, or similar forms for both sides. Digitated stockings, -however, are a nuisance, for they hamper the free and elastic action of -the toes. Woollen stockings are the best both for summer and winter use. -No one who has ever experienced the comfort of wearing woollen socks -(and underclothes in general), will ever dream of reverting to silk, -cotton, or any other material. - -Soaking the feet in water in which a handful of salt has been dissolved, -several times a week, is an excellent way of keeping the skin in sound -condition. For perfect cleanliness it does not suffice to change the -socks frequently. As the author of the _Ugly Girl Papers_ remarks, “The -time will come when we will find it as shocking to our ideas to wear out -a pair of boots without putting in new lining as we think the habits of -George the First’s time, when maids of honour went without washing their -faces for a week, and people wore out their linen without the aid of a -laundress.” - - - DANCING AND GRACE - -Among the ancients dancing included graceful gestures and poses of all -parts of the body, as well as facial expression. In Oriental dancing of -the present day, likewise, graceful movements of the arms and upper part -of the body play a more important _rôle_ than the lower limbs. Modern -dancing, on the contrary, is chiefly an affair of the lower extremities. -It is pre-eminently an exercise of the toes; and herein lies its -hygienic and beautifying value, for, as we have seen, grace of gait -depends chiefly on the firm litheness and springiness of the toes, -especially the great toe. By their grace of gait one can almost always -distinguish persons who have enjoyed the privilege of dancing-lessons, -which have strengthened their toes and, by implication, many other -muscles, not forgetting those of the arm, which has to hold the partner. - -There are thousands of young women who have no opportunities for -prolonged and exhilarating exercise except in ballrooms. In the majority -of cases, unfortunately, Fashion, the handmaid of Ugliness and Disease, -frustrates the advantages which would result from dancing by prescribing -for ballrooms not only the smallest shoes, but the tightest corsets and -the lowest dresses, which render it impossible or imprudent to breathe -fresh air, without which exercise is of no hygienic value, and may even -be injurious. But what are such trifling sacrifices as Health, Beauty, -and Grace compared to the glorious consciousness of being fashionable! - - - DANCING AND COURTSHIP - -The ballroom is Cupid’s camping ground, not only because it facilitates -the acquisition of that grace by which he is so easily enamoured, but -because it affords such excellent opportunities for Courtship and Sexual -Selection. And this applies not only to the era of modern Romantic Love, -but, from its most primitive manifestations in the animal world, -dancing, like song, has been connected with love and courtship. - -Darwin devotes several pages to a description of the love-antics and -dances of birds. Some of them, as the black African weaver, perform -their love-antics on the wing, “gliding through the air with quivering -wings, which make a rapid whirring sound like a child’s rattle;” others -remain on the ground, like the English white-throat, which “flutters -with a fitful and fantastic motion;” or the English bustard, who “throws -himself into indescribably odd attitudes whilst courting the female;” -and a third class, the famous Bower-birds, perform their love-antics in -bowers specially constructed and adorned with leaves, shells, and -feathers. These are the earliest _ballrooms_ known in natural history; -and it is quite proper to call them so, for, as Darwin remarks, they -“are built on the ground for the sole purpose of courtship, for their -nests are formed in trees.” - -Passing on to primitive man, we again find him inferior to animals in -not knowing that the sole proper function of dancing is in the service -of Love, courtship, and grace. Savages have three classes of dance, two -being performed by the men alone, the third by men and women. First come -the war-dances, in which the grotesquely-painted warriors brandish their -spears and utter unearthly howls, to excite themselves for an -approaching contest. Second, the Hunter’s Dances, in which the game is -impersonated by some of the men and chased about, which leads to many -comic scenes; though there is a serious undercurrent of superstition, -for they believe that such dances—a sort of saltatorial prayer—bring on -good luck in the subsequent real chase. Third, the dance of Love, -practised _e.g._ by the Brazilian Indians, with whom “men and women -dance a rude courting dance, advancing in lines with a kind of primitive -polka step” (Tylor.) That there is as little refinement and idealism in -the savage’s dances as in his love-affairs in general is self-evident. - -The civilised nations of antiquity, as we have seen, had no prolonged -Courtship, and therefore no Romantic Love. Since young men and women -were not allowed to meet freely, dancing was of course not esteemed as a -high social accomplishment. It was therefore commonly relegated to a -special class of women (or slaves), such as the Bayaderes of India and -the Greek flute girls. Notwithstanding that even the Greek gods are -sometimes represented as dancing, yet this art came to be considered a -sign of effeminacy in men who indulged in it; and as for the Romans, -their view is indicated in Cicero’s anathema: “No man who is sober -dances, unless he is out of his mind, either when alone or in decent -society, for dancing is the companion of wanton conviviality, -dissoluteness, and luxury.” - -In ancient Egypt, too, the upper classes were not allowed to learn -dancing. And herein, as in so many things in which women are concerned, -the modern Oriental is the direct descendant of the ancients. “In the -eyes of the Chinese,” says M. Letourneau, “dancing is a ridiculous -amusement by which a man compromises his dignity.” - -Plato appears to have been the first who recognised the importance of -dancing as affording opportunities for Courtship and pre-matrimonial -acquaintance. But his advice remained unheeded by his countrymen. A view -regarding dancing similar to Plato’s was announced by an uncommonly -liberal theologian of the sixteenth century in the words, as quoted by -Scherr, that “Dancing had been originally arranged and permitted with -the respectable purpose of teaching manners to the young in the presence -of many people, and enabling young men and maidens to form honest -attachments. For in the dance it was easy to observe and note the habits -and peculiarities of the young.” - -Thus we see that, with the exception of the savage’s war-dances and -hunting pantomimes, the art of dancing has at all times and everywhere -been born of love; even the ancient religious dances having commonly -been but a veil concealing other purposes, as among the Greeks. But all -ceremonial dancing, like ceremonial kissing, has been from the beginning -doomed to be absorbed and annihilated by the all-engrossing modern -passion of Romantic Love. - -True, as a miser mistakes the means for the end and loves gold for its -own sake, so we sometimes see girls dance alone—possibly with a vaguely -coy intention of giving the men to understand that they can get along -without them. But their heart is not in it, and they never do it when -there are men enough to go round. As for the men, they are too open and -frank ever to veil their sentiments. They never dance except with a -woman. - -To-day our fashion and society papers are eternally complaining of the -fact that the young men—especially the _desirable_ young men—seem to -have lost all interest in dancing. But who is to blame for this? -Certainly not the men. It is _Fashion_ again, and the mothers who -sacrifice the matrimonial prospects of their daughters—as well as their -Health, Beauty, and Individuality—to this hideous fetish. It is the late -hours of the dance, prescribed by Fashion, that are responsible for the -apparent loss of masculine interest in this art. Formerly, when -aristocracy meant laziness and stupidity, the habit of turning night -into day was harmless or even useful, because it helped to rid the world -prematurely of a lot of fools. But to-day the leading men of the -community are also the busiest. Aristocracy implies activity, -intellectual and otherwise. Hence there are few men in the higher ranks -who have not their regular work to do during the day. To ask them after -a day’s hard labour to go to a dance beginning at midnight and ending at -four or five is to ask them to commit suicide. Sensible men do not -believe in slow suicide, hence they avoid dancing-parties as if such -parties were held in small-pox hospitals. - -Let society women throw their stupid conservatism to the winds. Let them -arrange balls to begin at eight or nine and end at midnight or one, and -“desirable” men will be only too eager to flock to assemblies which they -now shun. The result will be a sudden and startling diminution in the -number of old maids and bachelors. - -It is the _moral duty_ of mothers who have marriageable daughters to -encourage this reform. Maternal love does not merely imply solicitude -for the first twenty years of a daughter’s life, but careful provision -for the remainder of her life, covering twice that period, by enabling -her to meet and choose a husband after her own heart - - - EVOLUTION OF DANCE MUSIC - -Did space permit, it would be interesting to study in detail the dances -of various epochs and countries, coloured, like the Love which -originated them, by national peculiarities—the Polish mazourka and -polonaise, the Spanish fandango, the Viennese waltz, the Parisian -cancan, etc. Suffice it to note the great difference between the dances -of a few generations ago and those of to-day, as shown most vividly in -the evolution of dance-music. - -The earliest dance-tunes are vocal, and were sung by the (professional) -dancers themselves, in the days when the young were not yet allowed to -meet, converse, and flirt and dance. Subsequently, the transference of -dance-music to instruments played by others gave the dancers opportunity -to perform more complicated figures, and made it possible to converse. -But even as late as the eighteenth century dancing and dance-music were -characterised by a stately reserve, slowness, and pompous dignity which -showed at once that they had nothing to do with Romantic Love. It was -not the fiery, passionate youths who danced these solemnly stupid -minuets, gavottes, sarabandes, and allemandes, but the older folks, -whose perruques, and collars, and frills, and bloated clothes would not -have enabled them to execute rapid movements even if the warm blood of -youth had coursed in their veins. - -How all this artificiality and snail-like pomp has been brushed away by -triumphant Romantic Love, which has secured for modern lovers the -privilege of dancing together before they are married and cease to care -for it! True, we still have the monotonous soporific quadrille, as if to -remind us of bygone times; but the true modern dance is the round dance, -which differs from the stately mediæval dance as a jolly rural picnic -does from a formal morning call. - -The difference between the mediæval and the modern dance is thus -indicated by F. Bremer:— - -“Peculiar to modern dance-music is the round dance, especially the -waltz; and it is in consequence warmer than the older dance-music, more -passionate in expression, in rhythm and modulation more sharply -accented. As its creator we must regard Carl Maria von Weber, who, in -his _Invitation to Dance_, struck the keynote through which -subsequently, in the music of Chopin, Lanner, Strauss, Musard, etc., -utterance was given to the whole gamut of dreamy, languishing, -sentimental, ardent passion. The consequence was the displacement of the -stately, measured dances by impetuous, chivalrous forms; and in place of -the former naïve sentimentality and childish mirth, it is the _rapture -of Love_ that constitutes the spirit of modern dance-music.” - -Not to speak of more primitive dance-tunes, what a difference there is -between the slow and dreary monotony of eighteenth century dances and a -Viennese waltz of to-day! The vast superiority of a Strauss waltz lies -in this—that it is no longer a mere rhythmic noise calculated to guide -the steps, and skips, and bows, and evolutions of the dancers, but _the -symphonic accompaniment to the first act in the drama of Romantic Love_. -It recognises the fact that Courtship is the prime object of the dance. -Hence, though still bound by the inevitable dance rhythm, Strauss is -ever trying to break loose from it, to secure that freedom and variety -of rhythm which is needed to give full utterance to passion. Note the -slow, pathetic introductions; the signs in the score indicating an -accelerated or retarded tempo when the waltz is played at a concert, -where the uniformity of ballroom movement is not called for; note what -subtle use he makes of all the other means of expressing amorous -feeling—the wide melodic intervals, the piquant, stirring harmonies, the -exquisitely melancholy flashes of instrumental colouring, alternating -with cheerful moments, showing a subtle psychologic art of translating -the Mixed Moods of Love into the language of tones. - -In the waltzes, mazourkas, and polonaises of Chopin we see still more -strikingly that the true function of dance-music is amorous. Even as -Dante’s Love for Beatrice was too super-sensual, too ethereal for this -world, so Chopin’s dance-pieces are too subtle, too full of delicate -_nuances_ of _tempo_ and Love episodes, to be adapted to a ballroom with -ordinary mortals. Graceful fairies alone could dance a Chopin waltz; -mortals are too heavy, too clumsy. They can follow an amorous Chopin -waltz with the imagination alone, which is the abode of Romantic Love. -To a Strauss waltz a hundred couples may make love at once, hence he -writes for the orchestra; but Chopin wrote for the parlour piano, -because the feelings he utters are too deep to be realised by more than -two at a time—one who plays and one who listens, till their souls dance -together in an ecstatic embrace of Mutual Sympathy. - - - THE DANCE OF LOVE - -It is at Vienna, which has more feminine grace and beauty to the square -mile than any other city in the world, that the art of dancing is to be -seen in its greatest perfection. No wonder that it is the home of the -Waltz-King, Johann Strauss; and that a Viennese feuilletonist has shown -the deepest insight into the psychology of the dance in an article from -which the following excerpts are taken:— - -"The waltz has a creative, a rejuvenating power, which no other dance -possesses. The skipping polka is characterised by a certain stiffness -and angularity, a rhythm rather sober and old-fashioned. The galop is a -wild hurricane, which moves along rudely and threatens to blow over -everything that comes in its way; it is the most brutal of all dances, -an enemy of all tender and refined feelings, a bacchanalian rushing up -and down.... - -"The waltz, therefore, remains as the only true and real dance. Waltzing -is not walking, skipping, jumping, rushing, raving; it is a gentle -floating and flying; from the heaviest men it seems to take away some of -their materiality, to raise the most massive women from the ground into -the air. True, the Viennese alone know how to dance it, as they alone -know how to play it.... - -“The waltz insists on a personal monopoly, on being loved for its own -sake, and permits no vapid side-remarks regarding the fine weather, the -hot room, the toilets of the ladies; the couple glide along hardly -speaking a word; except that she may beg for a pause, or he, -indefatigable, insatiable, intoxicated by the music and motion, the -fragrance of flowers and ladies, invites her to a new flight around the -hall. And yet is this mute dance the most eloquent, the most expressive -and emotional, the most sensuous that could be imagined; and if the -dancer has anything to say to his partner, let him mutely confide it to -her in the sweet whirl of a waltz, for then the music is his advocate, -then every bar pleads for him, every note is a _billet-doux_, every -breath a declaration of love. Jealous husbands do not allow their wives -to waltz with another man. They are right, for the waltz is the Dance of -Love.” - - - BALLET-DANCING - -There is one more form of dancing which may be briefly alluded to, -because it illustrates the hypocrisy of the average mortal as well as -the rarity of true æsthetic taste. Solo ballet-dancing is admired not -only by the bald-headed old men in the parquet, but there are critics -who seriously discuss such dancing as if it were a fine art; generally -lamenting the good old times of the great and graceful ballet-dancers. -The truth is that ballet-dancing _never can be graceful_, as now -practised. To secure graceful movement it is absolutely necessary to -make use of the elasticity of the toes—to touch the ground at the place -where the toes articulate with the middle foot, and to give the last -push with the yielding great toe. Ballet-dancers, however, walk on the -tips of their stiffened toes, the result of which is, as the anatomist, -Professor Kollmann, remarks, that “their gait is deprived of all -elasticity and becomes stiff, as in going on stilts.” - -It speaks well for the growing sensibility of mankind that this form of -dancing is gradually losing favour. Like the vocal tight-rope dancing of -the operatic _prime donne_ with whom ballet-dancers are associated, -their art is a mere circus-trick, gaped at as a difficult _tour de -force_, but appealing in no sense to æsthetic sentiments. - -These strictures, of course, apply merely to solo-dancing on tiptoe. The -spectacular ballet, which delights the eye with kaleidoscopic colours -and groupings, is quite another thing, and may be made highly artistic. - - - - - THE LOWER LIMBS - - - MUSCULAR DEVELOPMENT - -The assumption by man of an erect attitude has modified and improved the -appearance of his leg and thigh quite as marvellously as his feet. “In -walking,” says Professor Kollmann, “the weight of the body is -alternately transferred from one foot to the other. Each one is obliged -in locomotion to take its turn in supporting the whole body, which -explains the great size of the muscles which make up man’s calf. The -ape’s calf is smaller for the reason that these animals commonly go on -all fours.” Professor Carl Vogt gives these details: “No ape has such a -cylindrical, _gradually diminishing_ thigh; and we are justified in -saying that man alone possesses thighs. The muscles of the leg are in -man so accumulated as to form a calf, while in the ape they are more -equally distributed; still, transitions are not wanting, since one of -the greatest characteristics of the negro consists in his calfless leg.” -And again: “Man possesses, as contrasted with the ape, a distinctive -character in the strength, _rotundity_, and length of the lower limb; -especially in the thighs, which in most animals are shortened in -proportion to the leg.” - -The words here italicised call attention to two of the qualities of -Beauty—gradation and the curve of rotundity—which the lower limbs in -their evolution are thus seen to be gradually approximating. Other -improvements are seen in the greater smoothness, the more graceful and -expressive gait resulting from the rounded but straight knee, etc. - -The implication that savages are in the muscular development of their -limbs intermediate between apes and civilised men calls for further -testimony and explanation. Waitz states that “in regard to muscular -power Indians are commonly inferior to Europeans”; and Mr. Herbert -Spencer has collected much evidence of a similar nature. The Ostyaks -have “thin and slender legs”; the Kamtchadales “short and slender legs”; -those of the Chinooks are “small and crooked”; and the African Akka have -“short and bandy legs.” The legs of Australians are “inferior in mass of -muscle”; the gigantic Patagonians have limbs “neither so muscular nor so -large-boned as their height and apparent bulk would induce one to -suppose.” Spencer likewise calls attention to the fact that -relatively-inferior legs are “a trait which, remotely simian, is also -repeated by the child of the civilised man”—which thus individually -passes through the several stages of development that have successively -characterised its ancestors. - -Numerous exceptions are of course to be found to the rule that the -muscular rotundity and plumpness of the limbs increases with -civilisation. The lank shins which may be seen by the hundred among the -bathers at our sea-coast resorts contrast disadvantageously with many -photographs of savages; and tourists in Africa and among South American -Indians and elsewhere have often enough noted the occurrence of -individuals and tribes who would have furnished admirable models for -sculptors. But this only proves, on the one hand, that “civilised” -persons who are uncivilised in their neglect of the laws of Health, -inevitably lose certain traits of Beauty which exercise alone can give; -while, on the other hand, those “savages” who lead an active and healthy -life are _in so far_ civilised, and therefore enjoy the superior -attractions bestowed by civilisation. Moreover, as Mr. Spencer suggests, -“In combat, the power exercised by arm and trunk is limited by the power -of the legs to withstand the strain thrown on them. Hence, apart from -advantages in locomotion, the stronger-legged nations have tended to -become, other things equal, dominant races.” - -“Rengger,” says Darwin, “attributes the thin legs and thick arms of the -Payaguas Indians to successive generations having passed nearly their -whole lives in canoes, with their lower extremities motionless. Other -writers have come to a similar conclusion in analogous cases.” - -Although savages have to hunt for a living and occasionally go to war, -they are essentially a lazy crew, taking no more exercise than -necessary; which accounts for the fact that, with the exceptions noted, -their muscular development is inferior to that of higher races. - - - BEAUTIFYING EXERCISE - -One of the most discouraging aspects of modern life is the growing -tendency toward concentration of the population in large cities. Not -only is the air less salubrious in cities than in the country, but the -numerous cheap facilities for riding discourage the habit of walking. -London is one of the healthiest cities, and the English the most -vigorous race, in the world; yet it is said that it is difficult to -trace a London family down through five generations. Few Paris families -can, it is said, be traced even through three generations. Without -constant rural accessions cities would tend to become depopulated. - -The enormous importance of exercise for Health and Beauty, which are -impossible without it, is vividly brought out in this statement of -Kollmann’s: “Muscles which are thoroughly exercised do not only retain -their strength, but increase in circumference and power, in man as in -animals. The flesh is then firm, and coloured intensely red. In a -paralysed arm the muscles are degenerated, and have lost a portion of -one of their most important constituents—albumen. Repeated contractions -strengthen a muscle, because motion accelerates the circulation of the -blood and the nutrition of the tissues. What a great influence this has -on the whole body may be inferred from the fact that the organs of -locomotion—the skeleton and muscles—make up more than 82 per cent of the -substance of the body. With this enormous proportion of bone and muscle, -it is obvious that exercise is essential to bodily health.” - -Exercise in a gymnasium is useful but monotonous; and too often the -benefits are neutralised by the insufficient provision for fresh air, -without which exercise is worse than useless. Hence the superiority of -open-air games—base-ball, tennis, rowing, riding, swimming, etc., to the -addiction to which the English owe so much of their superior physique. -Tourists in Canada invariably notice the wonderful figures of the women, -which they owe largely to their fondness for skating. “Beyond question,” -says the _Lancet_, “skating is one of the finest sports, especially for -ladies. It is graceful, healthy, stimulating to the muscles, and it -develops in a very high degree the important faculty of balancing the -body and preserving perfect control over the whole of the muscular -system, while bringing certain muscles into action at will. Moreover, -there is this about it which is of especial value: it trains by exercise -the power of intentionally inducing and maintaining a continuous -contraction of the muscles of the lower extremity. The joints, hip, -knee, and ankle are firmly fixed or rather kept steadily under control, -while the limbs are so set by their muscular apparatus that they form, -as it were, part of the skate that glides over the smooth surface. To -skate well and gracefully is a very high accomplishment indeed, and -perhaps one of the very best exercises in which young women and girls -can engage with a view to healthful development.” - -For the acquisition of a graceful gait women need such exercise more -even than men; and while engaged in it they should pay especial -attention to exercising the left side of the body. On this point Sir -Charles Bell has made the following suggestive remarks:— - -“We see that opera-dancers execute their more difficult feats on the -right foot, but their preparatory exercises better evince the natural -weakness of the left limb; in order to avoid awkwardness in the public -exhibitions, they are obliged to give double practice to the left leg; -and if they neglect to do so an ungraceful preference to the right side -will be remarked. In walking behind a person we seldom see an equalised -motion of the body; the tread is not so firm upon the left foot, the toe -is not so much turned out, and a greater push is made with the right. -From the peculiar form of woman, and from the elasticity of her step, -resulting from the motion of the ankle rather than of the haunches, the -defect of the left foot, when it exists, is more apparent in her gait.” - -Those who wish to acquire a graceful gait will find several useful hints -in this extract from Professor Kollmann’s _Plastische Anatomie_, p. -506:— - -“Human gait, it is well known, is subject to individual variations. -Differences are to be noted not only in rapidity of motion, but as -regards the position of the trunk and the movements of the limbs, within -certain limits. For instance, the gait of very fat persons is somewhat -vacillating; other persons acquire a certain dignity of gait by bending -and stretching their limbs as little as possible while taking long -steps; and others still bend their knees very much, which gives a -slovenly character to their gait. And as regards the attitude of the -trunk, a different effect is given according as it is inclined backwards -or forwards, or executes superfluous movements in the same direction or -to the sides. All these peculiarities make an impression on our eyes, -while our ears are impressed at the same time by the differences in -rapidity of movement, so that we learn to recognise our friends by the -sound of their walk as we do by the quality of their voice.” - -Bell states that “upwards of fifty muscles of the arm and hand may be -demonstrated, which must all consent to the simplest action.” Walking is -a no less complicated affair, to which the attention of men of science -has been only quite recently directed. The new process of instantaneous -photography has been found very useful, but much remains to be done -before the mystery of a graceful gait can be considered solved. If some -skilled photographer would go to Spain and take a number of -instantaneous pictures of Andalusian girls, the most graceful beings in -the world, in every variety of attitude and motion, he might render most -valuable service to the cause of personal æsthetics. - -The time will come, no doubt, when dancing masters and mistresses will -consider the teaching of the waltz and the lancers only the crudest and -easiest part of their work, and when they will have advanced classes who -will be instructed in the refinements of movement as carefully and as -intelligently as professors of music teach their pupils the proper use -of the parts and muscles of the hand, to attain a delicate and varied -touch. The majority of women might make much more progress in the art of -gracefulness than they ever will in music; and is not the poetry of -motion as noble and desirable an object of study as any other fine art? - - - FASHIONABLE UGLINESS - -It is the essence of fashion to exaggerate everything to the point of -ugliness. Instead of trying to remedy the disadvantages to their gait -resulting from anatomical peculiarities (just referred to in a quotation -from Bell), women frequently take pains to deliberately exaggerate them. -As Alexander Walker remarks: “The largeness of the pelvis and the -approximation of the knees influence the gait of woman, and render it -vacillating and unsteady. Conscious of this, women, in countries where -the nutritive system in general and the pelvis in particular are large, -affect a greater degree of this vacillating unsteadiness. An example of -this is seen in the lateral and rotatory motion which is given to the -pelvis in walking by certain classes of the women in London.” - -The Egyptians and Arabians consider this ludicrous rotatory motion a -great fascination, and have a special name for it—Ghung. - -But Fashion, the handmaid of ugliness, is not content with aping the bad -taste of Arabians and Egyptians. It goes several steps lower than that, -down to the Hottentots. The latest hideous craze of Fashion, against -which not one woman in a hundred had taste or courage enough to -revolt—the bustle or “dress-improver” (!)—was simply the milliner’s -substitute for an anatomical peculiarity natural to some African -savages. - -“It is well known,” says Darwin, “that with many Hottentot women the -posterior part of the body projects in a wonderful manner; they are -steatopygous; and Sir Andrew Smith is certain that this peculiarity is -greatly admired by the men. He once saw a woman who was considered a -beauty, and she was so immensely developed behind, that when seated on -level ground she could not rise, and had to push herself along until she -came to a slope. Some of the women in various negro tribes have the same -peculiarity; and, according to Burton, the Somal men ‘are said to choose -their wives by ranging them in a line, and by picking her out who -projects farthest _a tergo_. Nothing can be more hateful to a negro than -the opposite form.’” - -Evidently “civilised” and savage women do not differ as regards Fashion, -the handmaid of ugliness. But the men do. While the male Hottentots -admire the natural steatopyga of their women, civilised men, without -exception, detest the artificial imitation of it, which makes a woman -look and walk like a deformed dromedary. - - - THE CRINOLINE CRAZE - -The bustle is not only objectionable in itself as a hideous deformity -and a revival of Hottentot taste, but still more as a probable -forerunner of that most unutterably vulgar article of dress ever -invented by Fashion—the crinoline. For we read that when, in 1856, the -crinoline came in again, it was preceded by the “inelegant bustle in the -upper part of the skirt”; and it is a notorious fact that cunning -milliners are making strenuous efforts every year to reintroduce the -crinoline. - -In their abhorrence of the crinoline men do not stand alone. There are -several refined women to-day who would absolutely refuse to submit to -the tyranny of Fashion if it should again prescribe the crinoline. One -of these is evidently Mrs. Haweis, who in _The Art of Beauty_ remarks -that “The crinoline superseded all our _attention to posture_; whilst -our long trains, which can hardly look inelegant [?] even on clumsy -persons, make small ankles or thick ones a matter of little moment. We -have become inexpressibly slovenly. We no longer study how to walk, -perhaps the most difficult of all actions to do gracefully. Our -fashionable women stride and loll in open defiance of elegance,” etc. -And again: “This gown in outline simply looks _like a very ill-shaped -wine-glass upside down_. The wide crinoline entirely _conceals every -natural grace of attitude_.” - -Another lady, writing in the _Atlantic Monthly_ (1859), remarks -concerning the crinoline: “A woman in this rig hangs in her skirts _like -a clapper in a bell_; and I never meet one without being tempted to take -her by the neck and ring her.” - -About 1710, says a writer in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, “as if -resolved that their figures should rival their heads in extravagance, -they introduced the hooped petticoat, at first worn in such a manner as -to give to the person of the wearer below her very tightly-laced waist a -contour _resembling the letter V inverted_—ʌ. The hooped dresses, thus -introduced, about 1740 attained to an enormous expansion; and being worn -at their full circumference immediately below the waist, they in many -ways emulated the most outrageous of the fardingales of the Elizabethan -period.” - -“About 1744 hoops are mentioned as so extravagant,” says Chambers’s -_Encyclopædia_, “that _a woman occupied the space of six men_.” George -IV. had the good taste to abolish them by royal command, but they were -revived in 1856. The newspapers of two decades ago daily contained -accounts of accidents due to the idiotic crinoline. “The _Spectator_ -dealt out much cutting, though playful, raillery at the hoops of his -day, but apparently with little effect; and equally unavailing are the -satires of _Punch_ and other caricaturists of the present time against -the hideous fashion of crinoline.... Owing to its prevalence, -church-pews that formerly held seven are now let for six, and yet feel -rather crowded. The hoops are sometimes made with a _circumference of -four or even five yards_.” - -It is universally admitted that the human form, in its perfection, is -Nature’s _chef d’œuvre_—the most finished specimen of her -workmanship. Yet the accounts of savage taste given by travellers and -anthropologists show that the savage is never satisfied with the human -outlines as God made them, but constantly mars and mutilates them by -altering the shape of the head, piercing the nose, filing or colouring -the teeth, enlarging the lips to enormous dimensions, favouring an -adipose bustle, etc. This is precisely what modern Fashion, the handmaid -of ugliness, does. We have just seen how fashionable women, unable to -comprehend the beauty of the human form, have for several generations -endeavoured to give it the shape of “a very ill-shaped wine-glass, -upside down,” “a clapper in a bell,” or “the letter V inverted.” And -concerning Queen Elizabeth the _Atlantic_ writer already quoted says -very pithily: “What with stomachers and pointed waist and fardingale, -and sticking in here and sticking out there, and ruffs and cuffs, and -ouches and jewels and puckers, she looks _like a hideous flying insect_ -with expanded wings, seen through a microscope—not at all like a woman.” - -Fortunately, for the moment, the crinoline, like the fardingale, is not -“in fashion.” But, as already stated, there is considerable danger of a -new invasion every year; and, should Fashion proclaim its edict, no -doubt the vast majority of women would follow, as they did a decade or -two ago. In the interest of good taste, as of common sense, it is -therefore necessary to speak with brutal frankness on this subject. -There is good evidence to show that the crinoline originated in the -desire of an aristocratic dame of low moral principles to conceal the -evidences of a crime. Hence the original French name for the -crinoline—_Cache-Bâtard_. Will respectable and refined women consent -once more to have the fashion set for them by a courtesan? - - - - - THE WAIST - - - THE BEAUTY CURVE - -In a well-shaped waist, as in every other part of the body, the curved -line of Beauty, with its delicate gradations, exercises a great charm. -Examination of a Greek statue of the best period, male or female, or of -the goddess of beauty in the Pagoda at Bangalur, India, shows a slight -inward curve at the waist, whereas in early Greek and Egyptian art this -curve is absent. The waist, therefore, like the feet and limbs, appears -to have been gradually moulded into accordance with the line of Beauty—a -notion which is also supported by the following remarks in Tylor’s -_Anthropology_: “If fairly chosen photographs of Kaffirs be compared -with a classic model such as the Apollo, it will be noticed that the -trunk of the African has a somewhat wall-sided straightness, wanting in -the inward slope which gives fineness to the waist, and in the expansion -below, which gives breadth across the hips, these being two of the most -noticeable points in the classic model which our painters recognise as -an ideal of manly beauty.” - -In woman, owing to the greater dimensions of her pelvis, this curvature -is more pronounced than in man; yet even in woman it must be slight if -the laws of Health and Beauty are to suffer no violation. “_Moderation_” -is the one word which Mr. Buskin says he would have inscribed in golden -letters over the door of every school of art. For “the least appearance -of violence or extravagance, of the want of moderation and restraint, -is,” as he remarks, “destructive of all beauty whatsoever in -everything—colour, form, motion, language, or thought—giving rise to -that which in colour we call glaring, in form inelegant, in motion -ungraceful, in language coarse, in thought undisciplined, in all -unchastened; which qualities are in everything most painful, because the -signs of disobedient and irregular operation. And herein we at last find -the reason of that which has been so often noted respecting the -subtility and almost invisibility of natural curves and colours, and why -it is that we look on those lines as least beautiful which fall into -wide and far license of curvature, and as most beautiful which approach -nearest (so that the curvilinear character be distinctly asserted) to -the government of the right line, as in the pure and severe curves of -the draperies of the religious painters,” etc. - - - THE WASP-WAIST MANIA - -But Fashion, the handmaid of ugliness, too vulgar to appreciate the -exquisite beauty of slight and subtle curvature, makes woman’s waist the -most maltreated and deformed part of her body. There is not one woman in -a hundred who does not deliberately destroy twenty per cent of her -Personal Beauty by the way in which she reduces the natural dimensions -of her waist. There is, indeed, ground to believe that the main reason -why the bustle, and even the crinoline, are not looked on with -abhorrence by all women is because they aid the corset in making the -waist look smaller by contrast. The Wasp-waist Mania is therefore the -disease which most imperatively calls for cure. But the task seems -almost hopeless; for, as a female writer remarks, it is almost as -difficult to cure a woman of the corset habit as a man of intemperance -in drink. - -“The injurious custom of tight lacing,” says Planché in his _Cyclopædia -of Costumes_, “‘a custom fertile in disease and death,’ appears to have -been introduced by the Normans as early as the twelfth century; and the -romances of the Middle Ages teem with allusions to and laudations of the -wasplike waists of the dames and demoiselles of the period.... Chaucer, -describing the carpenter’s wife, says her body was ‘gentyll and small as -a weasel’; and the depraved taste extended to Scotland. Dunbar, in _The -Thistle and the Rose_, describing some beautiful women, observes— - - “‘Their middles were as small as wands.’ - -And to make their middles as small as possible has been ever since an -unfortunate mania with the generality of the fair sex, to the detriment -of their health and the distortion of their forms.” - -Ever since 1602, when Felix Plater raised his voice against the corset, -physicians have written against tight lacing. But not only has it been -found impossible to cure this mania, even its causes have remained a -mystery to the present day. Certainly no man can understand the problem. -Is it simply the average woman’s lack of taste that urges her thus to -mutilate her Personal Beauty? Is it the admiration of a few vulgar -“mashers” and barber’s pets—since educated men detest wasp-waists? Or is -it simply the proverbial feminine craze for emulating one another and -arousing envy by excelling in some extravagance of dress, no matter at -what cost? This last suggestion is probably the true solution of the -problem. The only satisfaction a woman can get from having a wasp-waist -is the envy of other silly women. What a glorious recompense for her -æsthetic suicide, her invalidism, and her humiliating confession that -she considers the natural shape of God’s masterwork—the female -body—inferior in beauty to the contours of the lowly wasp! - -With this ignoble pleasure derived from the envy of silly women and the -admiration of vulgar men, compare a few of the disadvantages resulting -from tight lacing. They are of two kinds—hygienic and æsthetic. - -_Hygienic Disadvantages._—Surely no woman can look without a shudder at -a fashionable Parisian figure placed side by side with the Venus of Milo -in Professor Flower’s _Fashion in Deformity_, in Mrs. Haweis’s _Art of -Beauty_, or in Behnke and Brown’s _Voice, Song, and Speech_; or look -without horror at the skeletons showing the excessive compression of the -lower ribs brought about by fashionable lacing, and the injurious -displacement, in consequence, of some of the most important vital -organs. Nor can any young man who does not desire to marry a foredoomed -invalid, and raise sickly children, fail to be cured for ever of his -love for any wasp-waisted girl if he will take the trouble to read the -account of the terrible female maladies resulting from lacing, given in -Dr. Gaillard Thomas’s famous treatise on the _Diseases of Women_, in the -chapter on “Improprieties in Dress.” To cite only one sentence: Women, -he says, subject their waist to a “constriction which, in autopsy, will -sometimes be found to have _left the impress of the ribs upon the liver, -producing depressions corresponding to them_.” - -Says Dr. J. J. Pope: “The German physiologist, Sömmering, has enumerated -no fewer than _ninety-two diseases_ resulting from tight lacing.... ‘But -I do not lace tightly,’ every lady is ready to answer. No woman ever -did, if we accept her own statement. Yet stay. Why does your corset -unclasp with a snap? _And why do you involuntarily take a deep breath -directly it is loosened?_” Young ladies who imagine they do not wear too -tight stays, inasmuch as they can still insert their hand, will find the -fallacy and danger of this reasoning exposed in Mr. B. Roth’s _Dress: -its Sanitary Aspect_. - -The last line which I have italicised is of extreme significance. -Perhaps the greatest of all evils resulting from tight lacing is that it -discourages or _prevents deep breathing_, which is so absolutely -essential to the maintenance of health and beauty. The “heaving bosom” -of a maiden may be a fine poetic expression, but it indicates that the -maiden wears stays and breathes at the wrong (upper) end of her lungs. -“The fact of a patient breathing in this manner is noted by a physician -as a grave symptom, because it indicates mischief of a vital nature in -lungs, heart, or other important organ.” Healthy breathing should be -chiefly costal or abdominal; but this is made impossible by the corset, -which compresses the lower ribs, till, instead of being widely apart -below, they meet in the middle, and thus prevent the lungs from -expanding and receiving the normal share of oxygen, the only true elixir -of life, youth, and beauty. - -This wrong breathing, due to tight lacing, also causes “congestion of -the vessels of the neck and throat ... gasping, jerking, and fatigue in -inspiration, and unevenness, trembling, and undue vibration in the -production and emission of vocal tone.” - -Further, as the _Lancet_ points out, “tight stays are a common cause of -so-called ‘weak’ spine, due to weakness of muscles of the back.” Lacing -prevents the abdominal muscles from exercising their natural -functions—alternate relaxation and contraction: “A tight-laced pair of -stays acts precisely as a splint to the trunk, and prevents or greatly -impedes the action of the chief back muscles, which therefore become -weakened. The unfortunate wearer feels her spine weaken, thinks she -wants more support, so laces herself still tighter; she no doubt does -get some support in this way, but at what a terrible cost!” - -In regard to tight corsets, as another physician has aptly remarked, -women are like the victims of the opium habit, who also daily feel the -need of a larger dose of their stimulant, every increment of which adds -a year to their age, and brings them a few steps nearer disease and ugly -decrepitude. - -_Æsthetic Disadvantages._—Among the æsthetic disadvantages resulting -from the Wasp-waist Mania, the following may be mentioned, besides the -loss of a clear, mellow, musical voice already referred to:— - -(1) A stiff, inflexible waist, with a coarsely exaggerated contour, in -place of the slight and subtle curvature so becoming to woman. In other -words, a violation of the first law of personal æsthetics—imposing the -shape of a vulgar garment on the human form, instead of making the dress -follow the outlines of the body. - -(2) A sickly, sallow complexion, pale lips, a red nose, lack of -buoyancy, general feebleness, lassitude, apathy, and stupidity, -resulting from the fact that the compression of the waist induces an -oxygen-famine. The eyes lose their sparkle and love-inspiring magic, the -features are perceptibly distorted, the brow is prematurely wrinkled, -and the expression and temper are soured by the constant discomfort that -has to be silently endured. - -(3) Ugly shoulders. A woman’s shoulders should be sloping and well -rounded, like every other part of her body. Regarding the common -feminine deformity of square shoulders, Drs. Brinton and Napheys remark, -in their work on _Personal Beauty_, that “in four cases out of five it -has been brought about by too close-fitting corsets, which press the -shoulder-blades behind, and collar-bones in front, too far upwards, and -thus ruin the appearance of the shoulders.” - -(4) An ugly bust. Tight lacing “flattens and displaces the breasts.” - -(5) Clumsiness. The corset is ruinous to grace. “Almost daily,” says Dr. -Alice B. Stockham (_Tokology_), “women come to my office [in Chicago] -burdened with bands and heavy clothing, every vital organ restricted by -dress. It is not unusual to count from _sixteen to eighteen thicknesses -of cloth_ worn tightly about the pliable structure of the waist.” And -Dr. Lennox Browne advances the following crushing _argumentum ad -feminam_:— - -“It is impossible for the stiffly-corseted girl to be other than -inelegant and ungraceful in her movements. Her imprisoned waist, with -its flabby muscles, has no chance of performing beautiful undulatory -movements. In the ballroom the ungraceful motions of our stiff-figured -ladies are bad enough; there is no possibility for poetry of motion; but -nowhere is this more ludicrously and, to the thoughtful, painfully -manifest than in the tennis court. Let any one watch the movements of -ladies as compared with those of male players, and the absolute ugliness -of the female figure, with its stiff, unyielding, deformed, round waist, -will at once be seen. Ladies can only bend the body from the hip-joint. -All that wonderfully contrived set of hinges, with their connected -muscles, in the elastic column of the spine, is unable to act from the -shoulders downwards; and their figures remind one of the old-fashioned -modern Dutch doll.” - - - CORPULENCE AND LEANNESS - -Many women consider the corset necessary as a figure-improver, -especially if they suffer from excessive fatness. They will be surprised -to hear that the corset is one of the principal causes of their -corpulence. Says Professor M. Williams: “There is one horror which no -lady can bear to contemplate, viz. fat. What is fat? It is an -accumulation of unburnt body-fuse. How can we get rid of it when -accumulated in excess? Simply by burning it away—this burning being done -by means of the oxygen inhaled by the lungs. If, as Mr. Lennox Browne -has shown, a lady with normal lung capacity of 125 cubic inches, reduces -this to 78 inches by means of her stays, and attains 118 inches all at -once on leaving them off, it is certain that her prospects of becoming -fat and flabby as she advances towards middle age are greatly increased -by tight lacing, and the consequent suppression of natural respiration.” - -Thus corpulence may be put down as a sixth—or rather seventh—æsthetic -disadvantage resulting from the use of corsets. - -The reason why women, although inferior to men in muscular development, -have softer and rounder forms, is because there is a greater natural -tendency in women than in men towards the accumulation of fatty tissue -under the skin. The least excess of this adipose tissue is, however, as -fatal as emaciation to that admiration of Personal Beauty which -constitutes the essence of Love. Leanness repels the æsthetico-amorous -sense because it obliterates the round contours of beauty, exposes the -sinews and bones, and thus suggests old age and disease. Corpulence -repels it because it destroys all delicacy of form, all grace of -movement, and in its exaggerated forms may indeed be looked upon as a -real disease imperatively calling for medical treatment; as Dr. Oscar -Maas shows most clearly and concisely in his pamphlet on the -“Schwenninger Cure,” which should be read by all who suffer from -obesity. - -Although the very “father of medicine,” Hippokrates, studied the subject -of corpulence, and formulated rules for curing it, doctors still -disagree regarding some of the details of its treatment. Some forbid all -fatty food, others prescribe it in small quantities, and Dr. Ebstein -specially recommends fat viands and sauces as preventives; but the -preponderance of the best medical opinion is against him. Dr. Say -recommends the drinking of very large quantities of tea, while Professor -Oertel urges the diminution of fluids in the body, first by drinking -little, and secondly by inducing copious perspiration, either -artificially (by hot air and steam baths, etc.), or, what is much -better, by brisk daily exercise. Dr. Schwenninger, who secured so much -fame by reducing Bismarck’s weight about 40 pounds, forbids the taking -of liquids during or within an hour or two of meal-time; in other words, -he counsels his patients not to eat and drink at the same time. - -On the two most important points all authorities are practically agreed. -They are that the patient must avoid food which contains large -quantities of starch and sugar (such as cake, pastry, potatoes, bread, -pudding, honey, syrup, etc.); and secondly, that he must take as much -exercise as possible in the open air, because during walking the bodily -fat is consumed as fuel, to keep the machine going. - -The notorious Mr. Banting, who reduced his weight in a year from 202 to -150 pounds, “lived on beef, mutton, fish, bacon, dry toast and biscuit, -poultry, game, tea, coffee, claret, and sherry in small quantities, and -a night-cap of gin, whisky, brandy, or wine. He _abstained_ from the -following articles: pork, veal, salmon, eels, herrings, sugar, milk, and -all sorts of vegetables grown underground, and nearly all fatty and -farinaceous substances. He daily drank 43 ounces of liquids. On this -diet he kept himself for seven years at 150 pounds. He found, what other -experience confirms, that _sugar was the most powerful of all -fatteners_” (Dr. G. M. Beard, in _Eating and Drinking_, a most -entertaining and useful little volume). - -Lean persons wishing to increase their weight need only reverse the -directions here given as regards the choice or avoidance of certain -articles of food. Not so, however, with regard to exercise. If you wish -to reduce your corpulence, take exercise; if you wish to increase your -weight, again take exercise. The apparent paradox lurking in this rule -is easily explained. If you are too fat and walk a great deal, you burn -up the superfluous _fat_ and lose weight. If you are too lean and walk a -great deal you increase the bulk of your _muscles_, and thus gain -weight. Moreover, you greatly stimulate your appetite, and become able -to eat larger quantities of sweet and starchy food—more than enough to -counteract the wear and tear caused by the exercise. - -Muscle is the plastic material of beauty. Fat should only be present in -sufficient quantity to prevent the irregular outlines of the muscles -from being too conspicuously indicated, at the expense of rounded -smoothness. What the ancient Greeks thought on this subject is vividly -shown in the following remarks by Dr. Maas: “According to the unanimous -testimony of Thukydides, Plato, Xenophon, the gymnastic exercises to -which the Greeks were so passionately addicted, and which constituted, -as is well known, a very essential part of the public education of the -young, had for their avowed object the prevention of undue corpulence, -since an excessive paunch did not only offend the highly-developed -æsthetic sense of this talented nation, but was justly regarded as an -impediment to bodily activity. In order, therefore, to make the youths -not only beautiful, but also vigorous and able to resist hardship, and -thus more capable of serving their country, they were, from their -childhood, and uninterruptedly, exercised daily in running, wrestling, -throwing the discus, etc.; so that the prevention of corpulence was -practically raised to a formal state-maxim, and as such enforced -occasionally with unyielding persistence.” - -The ruinous consequences of an exaggerated abdomen to the harmonious -proportions of the body, and to grace of attitude and gait, are so -universally known that it would be superfluous to apply any of our -negative tests of Beauty—such as the facts that apes and savages are -commonly characterised by protuberant bellies, and that intemperance and -gluttony have the same disastrous effect on Personal Beauty. In -civilised communities, indolence and beer-drinking are the chief causes -predisposing to corpulence. In Bavaria, where enormous quantities of -beer are consumed, almost all the men are deformed by obesity; but in -other countries, as a rule, women suffer more from this anomaly than -men, because they lead a less active life. - -It may be stated as a general rule that girls under eighteen are too -slight and women over thirty too heavy—"fat and forty." This calamity is -commonly looked on as one of the inevitable dispensations of Providence, -whereas it is simply a result of indolence and ignorance. With a little -care in dieting, and two or three hours a day devoted to walking, -rowing, tennis, swimming, dancing, etc., any young lady can add ten to -fifteen pounds to her weight in one summer, or reduce it by that amount, -as may be desired. But as the consumption of enormous quantities of -fresh air by the unimprisoned lungs is the absolute condition of success -in this beautifying process, it is useless to attempt it without laying -aside the corset. - -The plea that corsets are needed to hold up the heavy clothing is of no -moment. Women, like men, should wear their clothing suspended from the -shoulder, which is a great deal more conducive to health, comfort, and -gracefulness than the clumsy fashion of attaching everything to the -waist. - -Still less weight can be attached to the monstrous argument that women -need stays for support. What an insulting proposition to assert that -civilised woman is so imperfectly constructed that she alone of all -created beings needs artificial surgical support to keep her body in -position! If there are any women so very corpulent or so very lean that -they need a corset as a figure-improver or a support, then let them have -it for heaven’s sake, and look upon themselves as subjects ripe for -medical treatment. What is objected to here is that strong, healthy, -well-shaped girls should deform themselves deliberately by wearing -tight, unshapely corsets, rankly offensive to the æsthetic sense. - - - THE FASHION FETISH ANALYSED - -Once more the question must be asked, “Why do women wear such hideous -things as crinolines, bustles, and corsets, so universally abhorred by -men?” Is it because they are inferior to men in æsthetic taste? Is -Schopenhauer right when he says that “women are and remain, on the -whole, the most absolute and incurable Philistines?” They are deficient -in objectivity, he adds: “hence they have no real intelligence or -appreciation for music or poetry, or the plastic arts; and if they make -any pretences of this sort, it is only apish affectation to gratify -their vanity. Hence it would be more correct to call them the -_unæsthetic_ than the beautiful sex.” - -The pessimistic woman-hater no doubt exaggerates. Yet—without alluding -to the paucity of women who have distinguished themselves in the fine -arts—is it credible that the average woman would so readily submit to a -repulsive fashion like the bustle, or a hat “adorned” with the corpse of -a murdered bird, if she had even a trace of æsthetic feeling? If women -had the refined æsthetic taste with which they are commonly credited, is -it conceivable that they would voluntarily adopt the African bustle, -because fashionable, in preference to a more becoming style? Have you -ever heard that a person of acknowledged musical taste, for example, -gave up his violin or piano to learn the African banjo, because that -happened to be the fashionable instrument? - -Yet there are, no doubt, many women whose eyes even custom cannot blind -to the hideousness of most Parisian fashions. But they have not the -courage to show their superior taste in their dresses, being overawed -and paralysed in presence of a monstrous idol, the Fashion Fetish. - -Never has a stone image, consecrated by cunning priests, exercised a -more magic influence on a superstitious heathen’s mind than the -invisible Fashion Fetish on the modern feminine intellect. It is both -amusing and pathetic to hear a woman exclaim: “Our women are most blind -and thoughtless followers of fashions still imposed upon them, _Heaven -knows wherefore and by whom_” (Mrs. Haweis). - -So great is the awe in which this Fetish is held that no one has yet -dared to lay violent hands on it. Yet if we now knock it on the head, we -shall find it hollow inside; and the fragments, subjected to chemical -analysis, show that they consist of the following five elements:— - -(1) _Vulgar Display of Wealth._—A certain number of rich people, being -unable to distinguish themselves from poorer mortals in any other way, -make a parade of their money by constantly introducing changes in the -fashion of their apparel which those who have less income are unable to -adopt at once. This, and not the love of novelty, is the real cause of -the minute variations in styles constantly introduced. Of course it is -generally understood that to boast of your wealth is as vulgar as to -boast of your wit or wisdom; but this makes no difference, for Fashion -in its very essence is vulgar. - -(2) _Milliners’ Cunning._—Milliners grow fat on fashionable -extravagance. Hence it is the one object of their life to encourage this -extravagance. So they constantly invent new styles, to prevent women -from wearing the same dress more than one season. And every customer is -slyly flattered into the belief that nothing was ever so becoming to her -as the latest style, though it probably makes her look like a fright. As -a little flattery goes a great way with most women, the milliner’s -hypocrisy escapes detection. “The persons who devise fashions are not -artists in the best sense of the word, nor are they persons of culture -or taste,” as Mr. E. L. Godkin remarks: “their business is not to -provide beautiful costumes but new ones.” - -It is to such scheming and unscrupulous artisans that women entrust the -care of their personal appearance. And they will continue doing so until -they are more generally taught the elements of the fine arts and a love -of beauty in Nature. - -To make sure of a rich harvest, milliners, when a new fashion has -appeared, manufacture all their goods in that style, so that it is -almost impossible to buy any others, all of which are declared “bad -form.” And their poor victims meekly submit to this tyranny! - -(3) _Tyranny of the Ugly Majority._—This is another form of tyranny from -which ladies suffer. Most women are ugly and ungraceful, and resent the -contrast which beautiful women, naturally and becomingly attired, would -present to their own persons: hence they favour the crinolette, the -bustle, the corset, the long, trailing dresses, the sleeve-puffs at the -shoulders, etc., because such fashionable devices make all women look -equally ugly and ungraceful. - -Mrs. Armytage throws light on the origin of some absurd fashions when -she refers to the cases of “the patches first applied to hide an ugly -wen: of cushions carried to equalise strangely-deformed hips; of long -skirts to cover ugly feet; and long shoes to hide an excrescence on the -toe.” - -Surely it is sufficient to expose the origin of such fashions to make -sensible women turn away from them in disgust. There are indeed -indications that the handsome women have at last begun to find out the -trick which the ugly majority have been playing on them; and many are -now dressing in such a way as to show their personal beauty to -advantage, undaunted by the fact that ugly women pretend to be shocked -at short dresses which allow a pretty ankle to be seen, and jerseys -which reveal the outlines of a beautiful bust and waist. - -(4) _Cowardice._—Many women adopt a fashion which they dislike simply -because they do not dare to face the remark of a rival that they are not -in fashion. As one of them frankly confesses: “We women dress not to be -simple, genuine, and harmonious, or even to please you men, but _to -brave each other’s criticism_.” A noble motive, truly! - -One is often tempted to doubt the old saying that the first desire of -women is to be considered beautiful, on observing how ready they are to -sacrifice fifty per cent or more of their beauty for the sake of being -in fashion. Last summer, for instance, the edict seems to have gone -forth that the hair was no longer to be allowed to form a graceful -fringe over the forehead, but was to be combed back tightly. So back it -was combed, and beautiful faces became rarer than ever. Leigh Hunt had -written in vain that the hair should be brought over large bare -foreheads “as vines are trailed over a wall.” Théophile Gautier, “the -most perfect poet in respect of poetical form that France has ever -produced” (Saintsbury), agreed with Schopenhauer regarding woman’s -æsthetic sense: “Women,” he says, “have only the sense of fashion and -not that of beauty. A woman will always find beautiful the most -abominable fashion if it is the _genre suprême_ to wear that style.” He -commends the women of Granada for their good taste in preferring their -lovely mantillas to the hideous French hats, and hopes Spain may never -be invaded by French fashions and milliners. - -(5) _Sheepishness._—It may seem ungallant to apply this term to the -conduct of a woman who imitates the habits of a sheep; but, after all, -which is the more gallant action: to applaud a woman’s self-chosen -ugliness, or, at least, to ignore it for fear of offending her; or, on -the other hand, to restore her beauty by boldly holding up the mirror -and allowing her to see herself as others see her? It is the nature of a -flock of sheep to jump into the sea without a moment’s hesitation if -their leader does so. It is the nature of fashionable women to commit -æsthetic suicide if their leader sets the example. Where is the -difference? - -It is surprising that Darwin did not refer to Fashion as furnishing a -most convincing proof of his theory that men are descended from -apelike ancestors. One of the ape’s most conspicuous traits is -imitativeness—blind, silly, slavish imitation: hence the verb “to -ape.” Blind, silly, slavish imitation is also the essence of Fashion. -Imitativeness implies a low order of mind, a lack of originality. The -more a man is intellectually removed from the ape, the less is he -inclined to imitate blindly. Men of genius are a law unto themselves, -while inferior minds can only re-echo or plagiarise. Just so the -prevalent anxiety to be in fashion is a tacit confession of mental -inferiority, of insufficient independence of taste and originality to -choose a style suited to one’s individual requirements. - - - INDIVIDUALISM _VERSUS_ FASHION - -Fashion is a deadly enemy of Romantic Love, not only because it makes -women sacrifice their Beauty to unhealthful garments and habits, but -because it obliterates _individuality_, on which the ardour of Love -depends. “Why don’t girls marry?” asks Mrs. Haweis. “Because the press -is great, and girls are undistinguishable in the crowd. The -distinguishable ones marry—those who are beautiful or magnetic in some -way, whose characters have some definite colouring, and who can make -their _individuality_ felt. I would have said—who can make themselves in -any way conspicuous, but that the word has been too long associated with -an _undesirable_ prominence. Yet after all, prominence is the thing -needed—prominence of character, or _individuality_. Men, so to speak, -pitch upon the girls they can see: those who are completely negative, -unnoticeable, colourless, formless, invisible, are left behind.” - -Women, in their eagerness to sacrifice their individuality to Fashion, -forget that _fashion leaders are never in fashion_, _i.e._ that _they_ -always adopt a new style as soon as the crowd has aped them: wherefore -it is doubly silly to join the apes. - -Mlle. Sarah Bernhardt never allows a corset to deform her figure and mar -her movements: and who has not had occasion to admire the inimitable -grace of this actress? But how many women have the courage thus to -sacrifice Fashion to Grace and Beauty? - -Yet, notwithstanding the continuance of the corset and the bustle mania -and Parisian hats, it may be asserted that women are just at present -more sensibly dressed than they have been for some generations, and -there is _some_ disposition to listen to the artistic and hygienic -advice of reformers. Unfortunately, the history of Fashion does not tend -to confirm any optimistic hopes that may be based on this fact. There -have been periods heretofore when women became comparatively sensible, -only to relapse again into utter barbarism. Thus we read that “after the -straight gown came the fardingale, which in turn developed into the hoop -with its concomitants of patches, paint, and high-heeled shoes.” Then -came the reaction: “Short waists and limp, clinging draperies came in to -expose every contour; stays and corsets were for a time discredited, -only to be reintroduced, and with them the whole cycle of fashions which -had once already had their day.” - -Experience shows that argumentation, ridicule, malicious or -good-natured, and satire, are equally powerless against Fashion. -Progress can only be hoped for in two ways—by instructing women in the -elementary laws of beauty in nature and mankind, and by destroying the -superstitious halo around the word _Fashion_. It has just been shown -that a disposition to imitate a fashion set by others is always a sign -of inferior intellect and rudimentary taste; and the time no doubt will -come when this fact will be generally recognised, and when it will be -considered anything but a compliment to have it said that one follows -the flock of fashionable imitators. - -The progress of democratic institutions and sentiments will aid in -emancipating women from the slavery of Fashion. Empresses who can set -the fashion for two continents are becoming scarce; and the woman of the -future will no doubt open her eyes wide in astonishment on reading that -in the nineteenth century most women allowed some mysterious personage -to prescribe what they should wear. “Can it be _possible_,” she will -exclaim, "that my poor dear grandmothers did not know that what is food -for one person is poison for another, and that any fashion universally -followed means æsthetic suicide for nine-tenths of the women who adopt -it? _I_ am _my own fashion-leader_, and wear only what is becoming to my -_individual_ style of beauty. What a preposterous notion to proclaim -that any particular colour or cut is to be exclusively fashionable this -year for all women, for blondes and brunettes, for the tall and the -short, the stout and the slim alike! What _could_ have induced those -women thus to annihilate their own beauty deliberately? And not only -their beauty, but their comfort as well. For I see that in New York, -Fashion used to decree that women must exchange their light, comfortable -summer clothes for heavier autumn fabrics exactly in the middle of -September, although the last two weeks of September are often the -hottest part of the year. And the women, almost without exception, -obeyed this decree! - -“And then those long trailing dresses! How they must have added to their -ease and grace of movement in the ballroom, tucked up clumsily or held -in the hand! And it seems that these trails were even worn in the dirty -streets, for I see that at one time the Dresden authorities forbade -women to sweep the streets with their dresses; and in one of Mr. -Ruskin’s works I find this advice to girls: ‘Your walking dress must -never touch the ground at all. I have lost much of the faith I once had -in the common sense, and even in the personal delicacy, of the present -race of average English women, by seeing how they will allow their -dresses to sweep the streets if it is _the fashion to be scavengers_.’” - - - MASCULINE FASHIONS - -In his emancipation from Fashion man has made much more progress than -woman. There is still a considerable number of shallow-brained young -“society men” who naïvely and minutely accept the slight variations -introduced every year in the cut and style of cravats, shirts, and -evening-dress by cunning tailors, in order to compel men to throw away -last season’s suits and order new ones. But much larger is the number of -men who disregard such innovations, and laugh at the silly persons who -meekly accept them, even when their taste is offended by such new -fashions as the hideous collars and hats with which the market is -occasionally flooded. - -There was a time when men spent as much time and money on dress in a -week as they now do in a year; a time when men were as strictly ruled by -capricious, cunning Fashion as women are to-day. Lord March, we read, -“laid a wager that he would make fashionable the most humiliating dress -he could think of. Accordingly, he wore a blue coat with crimson collar -and cuffs—a livery, and not a tasteful livery—but he won his bet.” After -the battle of Agincourt, it is said, “the Duc de Bourbon, in order to -ransom King John, sold his overcoat to a London Jew, who gave no more -than its value, we may be pretty sure, but nevertheless gave 5200 crowns -of gold for it. It seems to have been a mass of the most precious gems.” -The Duke of Buckingham “had twenty-seven suits of clothes made, the -richest that embroidery, lace, silk, velvet, silver, gold, and gems -could contribute; one of which was a white uncut velvet, set all over, -both suit and cloak, with diamonds valued at fourscore thousand pounds, -besides a great feather stuck all over with diamonds, as were also his -sword, girdle, hat, and spurs.” - -Mr. Spencer cites two amusing instances of masculine subjection to -fashion in Africa and mediæval Europe. Among the Darfurs in Africa, “If -the sultan, being on horseback, happens to fall off, all his followers -must fall off likewise; and should any one omit this formality, however -great he may be, he is laid down and beaten.” “In 1461, Duke Philip of -Burgundy, having had his hair cut during an illness, issued an edict -that all the nobles of his states should be shorn also. More than five -hundred persons sacrificed their hair.” - -So far as men are still subject to the influence of ugly fashions, they -differ from women in at least frankly acknowledging the ugliness of -these fashions. Whereas most women admire, or pretend to admire, -corsets, high-heeled boots, crinolettes, bustles, etc., there are few -men who do not detest _e.g._ the unshapely, baggy trousers, which were -so greatly abhorred by the æsthetic sense of the ancient Greeks; and -most men to-day (except those who have ugly legs) would gladly wear -knee-breeches, if they could do so without making themselves too -conspicuous. Herein lies the greatest impediment to dress reform. To -make oneself very conspicuous is justly considered a breach of good -manners; and few have the courage, like Mr. Oscar Wilde, to make martyrs -and butts of ridicule of themselves. - -But if individuals are comparatively powerless, clubs of acknowledged -standing might make themselves very useful to the cause of Personal -Beauty, as affected by dress, if they would vote to adopt in a body -certain reforms as regards trousers, hats, and evening-dress. Then it -would no longer be said of a man rationally dressed that he is -eccentric, but that he belongs to the X—— Club; and many outsiders would -immediately follow suit for the coveted distinction of being taken for -members of that club. Thus both the wise and the foolish would be -gratified. - -As showing how invariably and consistently Fashion is the handmaid of -ugliness, it is curious to note that the several styles of dress worn by -men are fashionable in proportion to their ugliness. For the greatest -occasions the swallow-tail or evening-dress is prescribed. Next in rank -is the ugly frock-coat, for morning calls. Of late, it is true, the more -becoming “cut-away” has been tolerated in place of the frock-coat; but -the sack-coat, which alone follows the natural outlines of the body, and -neither has a caudal appendage, like the evening-dress, nor, like the -frock-coat, gives the impression that a man’s waist extends down to his -knees, is altogether tabooed at social gatherings, except those of the -most informal kind. - -Man’s evening-dress is so uniquely unæsthetic and ugly that fashionable -women have of course long been eyeing it with envy and have gradually -adopted some of its features. One of these is the chimney-pot hat, the -cause of so much premature baldness and discomfort. But women are not -quite so foolish as men in this matter; for they do not wear tall hats -at evening-parties and the opera, but only when out riding, where the -necessity of dodging about to keep them on against the force of the wind -and the blows of overhanging boughs, compels them to go through all -sorts of grotesque gymnastics with neck and head. If they wore a more -rational and becoming head-dress on horseback they might easily look -pretty and graceful, which would be fatal to their chances of being -considered fashionable. - -In comparing masculine and feminine fashions, we must note that trousers -and swallow-tailed coats, though ugly, are harmless; while high-heeled -shoes, corsets, chignons, etc., are as fatal to health as to Personal -Beauty. - -It is sometimes claimed in behalf of Fashion that, though it often -favours ugliness, it establishes a rule and model for all; whereas, if -everything were left to individual taste, the result might be still more -disastrous. Nonsense. Rare as good taste is among women, a modicum is -commonly present; and there are extremely few who, if not overawed by -the Fashion Fetish, would ever invent or adopt such hideous -irrepressible monstrosities as bustles, crinolines, chignons, trailing -dresses, Chinese boots, bird-corpse hats, etc. - -A protest must, finally, be made against the horrible figures which in -our fashion papers are constantly offered as models of style and -appearance. Even in the best of them, such as Harper’s _Bazar_, which -frequently points out the injuriousness of tight lacing, female figures -are printed every week with hideously narrow waists, such as no woman -could possibly possess unless she were in the last stages of -consumption, or some other wasting disease. - - - - - CHEST AND BOSOM - - - FEMININE BEAUTY - -Burke, in his chapter on “Gradual Variation” as a characteristic of -Beauty, begs us to “observe that part of a beautiful woman where she is -perhaps the most beautiful, about the neck and breasts; the smoothness, -the softness, the easy and insensible swell; the variety of the surface, -which is never for the smallest space the same; the deceitful maze -through which the unsteady eye slides giddily, without knowing where to -fix, or whither it is carried. Is not this a demonstration of that -change of surface, continual, and yet hardly perceptible at any point, -which forms one of the greatest constituents of beauty?” - -There is reason to believe that the beautifully-rounded form of the -female bosom is a result of æsthetico-sexual selection; for primitive -human tribes resemble in this respect the lower animals. Says the famous -anatomist Hyrtl: “It is only among the white and yellow races that the -breasts, in their compact virginal condition, have a hemispheric form, -while those of negresses of a corresponding age and physique are more -elongated, pointed, turned outwards and downwards; in a word, more like -the teats of animals.” Even the Arabian poets sing of the charms of a -goatlike breast. In the Soudan older women, when at work, sometimes -throw their breasts over the shoulder to prevent them from being in the -way; and “the women of the Basutos, a Kaffir tribe, carry their children -on the back, and pass the breast to them under the arm.” - -It is a very interesting and important fact that not only do we find -more beauty among the higher than among the lower races of mankind, but -the superior beauty of civilised races is also _of a more permanent -kind_. This truth is admirably illustrated in the following remarks by -Dr. Peschuel Lœschke: The breasts of the Loango negress, he says, -“approach the conic rather than the hemispheric form; they often have a -too small and insufficiently gradated basis, and in rare extreme cases -have almost the appearance of teats, besides being unequally developed. -Breasts of such a shape are naturally much more easily affected by the -law of gravitation, and soon become changed into the pendent bags which -we find so ugly, especially among Africans, although they also occur -among other tribes, and are not unknown among civilised peoples. The -superior form, with a broad basis, is naturally the more enduring, and -remains in many cases an ornament of women of a more advanced age.” - -Savages and Orientals, being deficient in æsthetic taste, admire an -excessively-developed bust. Europeans, on the other hand, long ago -recognised the connection between such a bust and clumsy, unhealthy -corpulence, suggesting advanced age. The same appears to have been true -of the most refined nations of antiquity. Says Professor Kollmann: “The -ancient as well as the modern inhabitants of the Nile region appear, in -the majority of cases, like those of India, to possess hemispheric -breasts, for neither in the sphinxes or other superhuman beings, nor in -the images of human beauties, do we come across pointed breasts.... The -Romans did not consider large bosoms a mark of beauty. Among European -women the Portuguese are said to have the largest busts, the Castilians -the smallest. To judge by Rubens’s nude figures, the Netherland women -appear to rival the Portuguese in exuberant bosoms.” - -In Greek works of art, says Winckelmann, “the breast or bosom of female -figures is never exuberant.” “Among ideal figures, the Amazons alone -have large and fully-developed breasts.” “The form of the breasts in the -figures of divinities is virginal in the extreme, since their beauty was -made to consist in the moderateness of their size. A stone, found in the -Island of Naxos, was smoothly polished and placed upon them for the -purpose of repressing an undue development.” - -Modern Fashion, for a wonder, endorses the Greek standard of beauty as -regards a moderately-developed bust. But it was not always thus. It is -Fashion that induces some savages whose breasts are naturally long and -hanging to use bandages which make them still more hanging and elongated -in form. In Spain, during the sixteenth and seventeenth century, and in -other parts of Europe, on the contrary, Fashion prescribed flat chests. -Plates of lead were tied on the breasts of young girls with such force -that sometimes the natural form was replaced by an actual depression -where “love’s pillows” should have been. In some parts of South Germany -and the Tyrol a similar fashion prevails to the present day among the -lower classes, the result being not only a sacrifice of beauty, but a -great mortality among the children, that have to be reared artificially -in consequence of it. - -But if modern Fashion has a correct standard of taste in this matter, it -nevertheless encourages practices which lead to as disastrous results as -the Spanish fashions of three centuries ago. “The horrible custom of -wearing pads,” says the author of the _Ugly Girl Papers_ “is the ruin of -natural figures, by heating and pressing down the bosom.... A low, deep -bosom, rather than a bold one, is a sign of grace in a full-grown woman, -and a full bust is hardly admirable in an unmarried girl. Her figure -should be all curves, but slender, promising a fuller beauty when -maturity is reached. One is not fond of over-ripe years.... Due -attention to the general laws of health always has its effect in -restoring the bust to its roundness.... Weakness of any kind affects the -contour of the figure, and it is useless to try to improve it in any -other way than by restoring the strength where it is wanting.” - -The same author, whose book is brimful of useful advice, not only to -“ugly girls,” but to those who have beauty and wish to preserve it, also -recommends battledore, swinging the skipping-rope over the shoulder, -swinging by the hand from a rope, as well as playing ball, “bean bags,” -pillow fights, and especially daily vocal exercises with corset off and -lungs deeply inflated—as excellent means of improving the bust. - -If women could be made to realise how rarely they succeed, even with the -aid of the cleverest milliner, in counterfeiting a properly developed -chest, they would, perhaps, be more willing to submit to the exercise or -regimen requisite for the acquirement and preservation of Personal -Beauty. Flat chests are a consequence of insufficient muscular exercise, -insufficient fresh air, and insufficient food. The main reason why the -majority of girls in the world are over-delicate and fragile is because -they do not get enough properly-cooked food in which _fat is introduced -in such a way as to be palatable and digestible_. The adipose layer -between the skin and the muscles contributes so much to the undulating -roundness of contour peculiar to feminine beauty, that Kollmann places -it among the differentiating sexual characteristics. - -Too exuberant busts, on the other hand, are the result of too much -indulgence in fattening food, combined with lack of exercise in the open -air, which would consume the fat. Maternity, with proper hygienic -precautions, is never fatal to a fine bust. - -That savages, like their civilised brethren and sisters, owe their -deformed chests entirely to their indolence and neglect of the laws of -health, is shown by the fact that there are notable exceptions—energetic -tribes living healthy lives, and therefore blessed with beautiful -figures. Thus Mr. A. R. Wallace tells us regarding some of the Amazon -valley Indians that “their figures are generally superb; and I have -never felt so much pleasure in gazing at the finest statue as at these -living illustrations of the beauty of the human form. The development of -the bust is such as I believe never exists in the best-formed European, -exhibiting _a splendid series of convex undulations, without a hollow in -any part of it_.” And what he says in another place regarding a -neighbouring tribe explains the secret of this Beauty: “Though some of -them were too fat, most of them had splendid figures, and many of them -were very pretty. Before daylight in the morning all were astir and came -to the river to wash. It is the chilliest hour of the twenty-four, and -when we were wrapping our sheet or blanket more closely around us, we -could hear the plunges and splashings of these early bathers. Rain or -wind is all alike to them: their morning bath is never dispensed with.” - - - MASCULINE BEAUTY - -Wincklemann remarks that, among the ancient Greeks, “a proudly-arched -chest was regarded as a universal attribute of beauty in male figures. -The father of the poets describes Neptune with such a chest, and -Agamemnon as resembling him; and such a one Anakreon desired to see in -the image of the youth whom he loved.” - -“A prominent, _arched_ chest,” says Professor Kollmann, “is an -infallible sign of a vigorous, _healthy_ skeleton; whereas a narrow, -_flat_, and, still more, a bent thorax is a physical index of bodily -weakness and inherited _decrepitude_. An arched chest imparts to a man’s -whole figure an aspect of physical perfection, not to say sublimity, as -may be seen in the ancient statues of gods, in which the chest is -intentionally made more prominent than it ever can be in a man, -presumably in order to weaken the impression of the chest’s more -_animal_ neighbour, the abdomen. There is a deep meaning in our -phraseology which localises courage, boldness, martial valour, in a -man’s vigorous breast.” - -I have italicised several words in this quotation, because they tersely -show how writers on art are guided both by the positive and negative -tests of Beauty formulated in another part of this volume. - - - MAGIC EFFECT OF DEEP BREATHING - -Indolence is the mother of ugliness. No one who realises the absolute -necessity to Health of a sufficient supply of fresh air can wonder at -the rarity of Beauty in the world, if he considers that nineteen people -out of every twenty are _too lazy to breathe properly_. - -It is estimated that there are from 75 to 100 cubic inches of air which -always remain in a man’s lungs. About an equal amount of “supplemental” -air remains after an _ordinary_ expiration; and only 20 to 30 inches of -what Professor Huxley calls “tidal air” passes in and out. But this -“tidal air” can be largely increased in amount by the habit of breathing -deeply and _slowly_, whereby an additional supply of oxygen is supplied -to the lungs, which is a thousand times better for the health than -quinine, iron pills, or any other tonic. There are few persons whose -health and personal appearance would not be improved vastly if they -would take _several daily meals_ of fresh air—consisting of 20-50 deep -inspirations in a park or some other place where the air is pure and -bracing. Slowly inhale as much air as you can get into the lungs without -discomfort (avoiding a strain), and then exhale again just as slowly. -After a while the habit will be formed of _constantly_ breathing more -deeply than formerly, both awake and asleep; thus bringing into regular -use a larger part of the lungs’ surface. It is the slight sense of -fatigue at first accompanying deep breathing which prevents most people -from enjoying its benefits; but when once this natural indolence is -overcome the reward of deep breathing is analogous to the delicious -exhilaration which follows a brisk walk or a cold bath. - -It is important to note that all breathing, whether deep or ordinary, -should be done through the nose, as thus the air is warmed before it -reaches the delicate lungs, and the mucous membranes remain moist, thus -preventing those disagreeable enemies of refreshing sleep—a dry mouth -and snoring. - -Habitual deep breathing adds to Personal Beauty not only by exercising -the muscles of the chest, which thus becomes more arched and prominent -relatively to the abdomen, but also by throwing back the neck and head -and compelling the whole body to assume a straight, military attitude. -We are all taught as children, says Professor Kollmann, to hold -ourselves straight; but rarely is the information added that the best -way to secure an erect, manly bearing and a dignified gait is by -cultivating the habit of deep breathing. “It is worthy of notice that -forcible breathing, such as results from a correct bearing, from -prolonged sojourn and exercise in the open air, in hunting, gymnastic -exercises, riding, etc., not only increases the chest for the moment, -but permanently.... There are proofs in abundance that even with young -persons of eighteen to twenty years, the whole circumference of the -chest is capable of considerable widening under such circumstances.” - -A medical writer, referring to the fact that children frequently become -round-shouldered from sitting for hours and bending over a desk, makes -these very sensible suggestions:— - -“In the first place, the lungs should be fully expanded by drawing in -all the air that is possible; this process will be aided by throwing the -shoulders well back, and you should encourage your children to do this -frequently in the open air when going to and coming from school. -Children are easily bribed, and we would suggest to school teachers a -simple and effective way of accomplishing this desirable end. This -forcible expansion of the lungs will enlarge the chest and increase its -circumference. Then let the teacher, at the beginning of the session, -measure each child’s chest and record the circumference, then explain -and demonstrate to them how to forcibly fill the lungs, and offer a -premium at the end of the session to the child who shall have most -increased the circumference of his chest; make it worth their while to -expand their lungs, as much so as we now do for them to expand their -minds, and the result will be wonderful.” - - - A MORAL QUESTION - -An eminent authority on the physiology of the vocal organs, Dr. Lennox -Browne, remarks (in _Voice, Song, and Speech_), that “respiratory -exercises, and subsequently lessons in reading, reciting, and singing, -are oftentimes of the greatest use in strengthening a weak chest; and, -indeed, it is not too much to say, _in arresting consumption_.” Another -excellent authority, Mr. A. B. Bach, points out (in his _Musical -Education and Vocal Culture_, which should be consulted by all who wish -to learn the art of Deep Breathing) that “very few vocalists die of -consumption,” owing to the fact that they properly exercise their lungs -and chests. - -This brings us face to face with a moral question of enormous -importance, to which writers on ethics have by no means as yet given the -attention it loudly clamours for. Consumption, we read, “is a disease of -great frequency and severity, which, in the civilised nations of Europe, -produces from _one-sixth to one-tenth of the total mortality_, in -ordinary times.” Now if, as we have just seen, consumption can be -arrested and cured by proper exercise of the lungs and chest in pure -air, does it not follow that the neglect of such exercises makes certain -parties criminally responsible for the greater number of deaths from -consumption? It is “proved by careful inquiries that the workshops of -tailors, printers, and other businesses carried on in close, -ill-ventilated apartments, by large numbers of workmen, are, in a very -aggravated sense, _nurseries of consumption_. Cotton and linen factories -have also been shown, when ill-regulated, to be largely responsible for -the death of their inmates from this disease.” - -Why should not the owners of factories who refuse to ventilate their -buildings be held responsible for the ill-health, the early decrepitude -and death of many of the workers, and the workers’ weakly, consumptive -children who die young? As England alone has over three hundred thousand -women engaged in cotton manufacture, the amount of ill-health, early -senility, ugliness, consumption, etc., bred by criminal neglect of -hygienic precautions, is appalling to the imagination. A case was -mentioned in the American papers a few years ago, where the windows in a -factory were _nailed fast_ to prevent the poor, suffocating girls from -opening them. And, strange to say, the owner of that factory was not -immediately lynched. Surely, if ever a monster deserved to be hanged to -the nearest tree, it was the man who ordered those windows to be nailed -down. - -But factory owners are by no means the only persons who are thus -responsible for indirect manslaughter by foul-air poisoning. Thousands -of loving mothers and fathers blaspheme their Creator in attributing the -early death of their children to a “dispensation of Providence,” when -the plain truth, brutally expressed, is that they killed them with the -poisoned air, indigestible food, and insufficient exercise that brought -on the fatal consumption. To say that the disease was hereditary is only -to shift the hygienic crime on the shoulders of the grand-parents. - -In human courts of justice ignorance of the law is not considered an -excuse for the commission of crime. If the same principle holds true in -some future world where human actions will be judged, what terrible -indictments will be brought against some parents for crimes committed -against the health and life of their children and grandchildren, for -neglecting to learn the laws of health, as laid down in physiological -and hygienic textbooks! - -Inasmuch as Personal Beauty is the flower and symbol of perfect Health, -it might be shown, by following out this argument, that _ugliness is a -sin, and man’s first duty the cultivation of Beauty_. - - - - - NECK AND SHOULDER - - -Nowhere are the æsthetic laws of Gradation and gentle Curvature more -beautifully illustrated than in the neck—the column of the head. Note -how a lovely woman’s neck repeats on a small scale the delicate contours -of the trunk—widened at the base and at the top, with a subtle inward -slope towards the middle. Note, also, how imperceptibly it passes into -the shoulders, which continue the gentle curve in a downward slope, -unless prevented by the deforming corset. - -Man’s neck is less cylindrical than woman’s, and presents four slightly -flattened surfaces; while his shoulders are not sloping, but square. We -not only pardon, but even admire and demand this conformation in man; -because in judging masculine beauty we are guided by dynamic as much as -by æsthetic considerations, while the fair sex is judged by the laws of -beauty alone. A masculine neck is in good form if it shows traces of the -sinews and muscles which give it strength; but in a woman’s neck the -feminine adipose layer under the skin must obliterate all such traces of -masculinity,—especially the bones at the junction of neck and breast, -the prominence of which suggests emaciation and disease. - -In the face of such considerations, how can any one maintain that man is -more beautiful than woman? He may show more character, more -individuality, more originality than a fine woman, but more beauty -_never_. And the fact that in Sexual Selection women have always been -chiefly guided by dynamic considerations—_i.e._ vigour, boldness, -“manliness”—whereas men have been fascinated by beauty alone, explains -why, as Schopenhauer asserts, women are the “unæsthetic sex,” and why -their taste for Personal Beauty, not being exercised, like that of man, -in the selection of a mate, is so lamentably callous to the deformities -resulting from corsets and other instruments of torture. - -The neck being the pivot on which the head executes its movements, it is -evident that it requires attention from the point of view of Grace as -well as of Beauty. To how many women has it ever occurred that as the -feet are taught to dance lithely, the arms to execute eloquent gestures, -so the neck should be trained to naturally assume graceful attitudes? -Great paintings and famous actresses should be studied from this point -of view. Always bear in mind that grace of movement often excels beauty -of form in the power of inspiring Romantic Love. And remember that any -pains you take to acquire grace will not only multiply your own charms, -but will establish a habit of graceful movement in your muscles which -will be inherited by your children. It is owing to this circumstance -that the children of truly refined families are born with an ease, -grace, and dignity of movement and mien which it is impossible for -“self-made” persons to acquire in a lifetime, because they are not born -with an inherited _talent_ for graceful movement. - - - - - ARM AND HAND - - - EVOLUTION AND SEXUAL DIFFERENCES - -One of the redeeming features of what is ironically called “full-dress” -is the opportunity it gives of admiring a woman’s shapely neck, -shoulders, and arms—if she has such. No healthy woman of the well-to-do -classes need have an ill-favoured arm if she has a sensible mother, who -compels her from her childhood to exercise her muscles. The great -preponderance of leathery, angular, bony arms at ballrooms shows, -therefore, how shamefully the hygienic arts of personal adornment are -neglected in our best society. The stifling heat which commonly prevails -at social gatherings suggests the thought that many ladies are -indifferent to the display of their bony arms on the grounds given in -Sydney Smith’s exclamation: “Heat, ma’am! it was so dreadful here that I -found there was nothing left for it but to take off my flesh and sit in -my bones.” - -A meagre, skinny arm is objectionable not only because it offends -against all the conditions of Beauty—plump roundness, softness, fresh -colour, smoothness, gradual tapering to the wrist—but because it is -associated with the aspect of old age and disease; and again, because it -suggests man’s lowly origin by its approximation to the appearance of -the arms in our simian country cousins. - -Man’s arm has become differentiated from the ape’s not only in the -matter of greater muscular rotundity and smoothness, _i.e._ loss of -hair, but also in regard to length. An ape’s arms are much longer than a -white man’s, the negro’s being intermediate. Says Mr. Tylor: “In an -upright position and reaching down with the middle finger, the gibbon -can touch its foot, the orang its ankle, the chimpanzee its knee, while -man only reaches partly down his thigh.... Negro soldiers standing at -drill bring the middle finger-tip an inch or two nearer the knee than -white men can do, and some have been even known to touch the knee-pan.” -Taking this in connection with the fact that the arms of sailors, who -use them constantly in climbing, are longer than those of soldiers, we -may safely infer that man’s arms have gradually become shorter because -he has ceased to climb trees; while the greater muscular rotundity, -especially of the forearm, has been acquired through the varied activity -and movements of the hand and fingers: a circumstance almost -self-evident on physiological principles, and furthermore corroborated -by the fact that negroes, unskilled in trades which call for -manipulation of the separate fingers, again occupy an intermediate -position. “Even in muscular negroes the arms are less rotund,” says -Professor Carl Vogt; and, according to Van der Hœven, the skin -between the fingers reaches up higher in the negro, which must impede -activity. - -The peculiar arrangement of the hair on man’s arm has been referred to -by Wallace and Darwin as one of the countless signs arguing our descent -from apelike ancestors. On the arm of man, as of most anthropoid apes, -the hair “tends to converge from above and below to a point at the -elbow.” Now it is known that the gorilla, as well as the orang, “sits in -pelting rain with his hands over his head”; and Mr. Wallace, therefore, -suggests that the present inclination of the hair on man’s arms is -simply a survival of the time when his arboreal ancestors used to sit in -that fashion, the hair having gradually assumed the direction which -would most easily allow the rain to run off. - -The evolution theory that the hair on the arm, as on the body in -general, was lost through Sexual Selection, is corroborated by the fact -that woman’s arm has made more progress toward complete smoothness than -man’s, owing to the circumstance that man is in Sexual Selection more -guided by æsthetic, woman by dynamic, considerations. Yet there can be -no doubt that a hairy arm and hand are always ugly, in man as in woman, -not only on account of their simian suggestiveness, but because they -cover the smooth skin and its delicate tints, and, moreover, especially -if black, are very apt to make the arm and hand look as if they needed a -good scrubbing. Hair on the hand may sometimes be permanently removed by -passing the hand quickly and repeatedly through a large flame—a much -less painful process than the use of pincers. - -The _muscular_ deviations from the lines of beauty are much more -pardonable in a man’s arm than the hair, although it is evident that a -professional athlete’s excessively muscular arm is æsthetically -objectionable, however much it may be admired on other grounds. To -feminine beauty, and the chances of inspiring Love, an arm which is so -muscular as to obliterate the lines of beauty is absolutely fatal. Among -the labouring classes there are many women whose arms are so hard and -sinewy that the very bones to which they are attached have become heavy -and masculine, so that it becomes difficult to tell a woman’s from a -man’s skeleton, which ordinarily is very easy. - - - CALISTHENICS AND MASSAGE - -It is, however, hardly necessary to refer to these facts as a warning to -girls not to use their arms too much. The danger almost always lies the -other way, and what girls need is a set of intelligent directions for -securing a shapely arm. If the arm is too plump the method discussed in -preceding pages for the general reduction of corpulence will also affect -the arm. If too thin, which is much more frequently the case in young -women, don’t be afraid that exercise will make them thinner—on the -ground that hard labourers are commonly meagre. It is only _excessive_ -exercise that produces leanness, by burning away all the fat. Moderate -exercise develops the muscles—the plastic material of beauty—and -stimulates the appetite, so that the fat-cushion under the skin also -increases in depth, covering up the angular outlines of bones, muscles, -and sinews. - -It is a suggestive fact that the word calisthenics—"the art of promoting -the health of the body by exercise"—comes from two Greek words meaning -“beautiful” and “strength.” - -So many books have been written on calisthenics that it is needless to -repeat here minute directions for training the muscles of the arm or any -other part of the body. One bit of sensible advice may, however, be -quoted from the _Ugly Girl Papers_: “Throwing quoits and sweeping are -good exercises to develop the arms. There is nothing like three hours of -housework a day for giving a woman a good figure, and if she sleep in -tight cosmetic gloves, she need not fear that her hands will be spoiled. -The time to form the hand is in youth, and with thimbles for the -finger-tips, and close gloves lined with cold cream, every mother might -secure a good hand for her daughter.” - -It is an ill wind that blows no man good. The incessant piano-banging -and violin-scraping of thousands of unmusical young ladies has at least -one thing to be said in its favour: it helps to round and beautify the -arms of these young players. - -Active exercise is the surest and quickest way of securing muscular -rotundity. But in cases where, owing to some infirmity, long-continued -spontaneous exertion is out of the question, _massage_, which has been -defined as “passive exercise,” may be resorted to as of calisthenic -value. It should only be performed by an expert, and always -centripetally, _i.e._ in the direction of the heart. It facilitates the -flow of the venous current, which in the arms and lower limbs has to -struggle upwards against the force of gravitation; and to this is partly -due its refreshing effect. As Americans are the most nervous and -sensitive people in the world, it seems probable that the feeling of -ease following the facilitating of the venous flow has taught them -instinctively to assume that peculiar position, with the feet on a chair -or table, which has been so often ridiculed by Europeans. - - - THE “SECOND FACE” - -“The beauty of a youthful hand,” says Winckelmann “consists in a -moderate degree of plumpness, and a scarcely observable depression, -resembling a soft shadow, over the articulations of the fingers, where, -if the hand is plump, there is a dimple. The fingers taper gently -towards their extremities, like finely-shaped columns; and, in art, the -articulations are not expressed. The fore part of the terminating joint -is not bent over, nor are the nails very long, though both are common in -the works of modern sculptors.” - -Balzac pointed out that “men of superior intellect almost always have -beautiful hands, the perfection of which is the distinctive indication -of a high destination.... The hand is the despair of sculptors and -painters when they wish to express the changing labyrinth of its -mysterious lineaments.” - -A fine hand is, indeed, a sign of superior intelligence in a much more -comprehensive sense than that which Balzac had in mind. The difference -between the simian and human faces is hardly greater than the progress -from an ape’s hand to a man’s in beauty of outline, smoothness of -surface, grace of movement, and varied utility. The ape’s hand is hairy -on the upper surface, hard and callous on the lower. Except in climbing, -its movements are clumsy. The fingers have adapted themselves to the -need of climbing, and have become permanently bent in front, so that -when the animal goes on all fours it cannot walk on the palm, but only -on the bent knuckles. - -A step higher we have the negro’s hands, in which the fingers are less -independent and nimble, and the palmar fat-cushions less developed and -sensitive, than in our hands. These fat-cushions serve to protect the -blood-vessels as well as the delicate nerves, which make the hand the -principal organ of touch. The muscles of the hand are more easily and -instantaneously obedient to the will than those of any other part of the -body, except those of the mouth and eyes; and hence it is that the hands -are almost as good an index of a man’s character, habits, and profession -as his face, and have been aptly called his “second face.” - -Division of labour is the index of progress in the evolution of organs. -To the fact that his feet have become exclusively adapted to locomotion, -leaving the hands free to serve as tools, man chiefly owes his -superiority to other animals. For what would superior intellect avail -him without the implements needed to carry out its schemes? Feeling, -grasping, handling, writing, sewing, playing an instrument, squeezing, -caressing,—these are a few of the innumerable functions of the human -hand; while the ape’s is good for little but climbing. The finger -language of deaf mutes shows to what subtle intellectual uses the hands -can be put; and as for emotional expression, are there any facial -muscles which can indicate finer shades of feeling than the infinitely -varied touch with which a pianist or violinist gives utterance to every -mood and phase of human passion? - -No wonder that, just as the face has had its physiognomists and -phrenologists, so the hand its chiromancers, who pretended, by looking -at its lines, not only to read character, but even to foretell one’s -fate. Books on this subject are indeed still published, which shows that -the race of fools is in no immediate danger of extinction. Wrinkles in -the face do bear some relation to character and experience; but surely -no one needs to be told that the palmar lines are purely -accidental—caused by the manner in which the skin is folded when we -close the hand. - - - FINGER-NAILS - -Our nails are modified claws—modified to their advantage. When properly -cared for, they are one of the greatest personal ornaments—beginning and -ending as they do with a delicate curve, rounded on the surface, -suffused with a gentle blush, and smooth as ivory. They may also serve -as a mode of expression and index of nationality, as seen in these -remarks by Mr. E. B. Tylor: “In the Southern United States, till slavery -was done away a few years ago, the traces of Negro descent were noted -with the utmost nicety. Not only were the mixed breeds regularly classed -as mulattos, quadroons, and down to octoroons, but even where the -mixture was so slight that the untrained eye noticed nothing beyond a -brunette complexion, the intruder, who had ventured to sit down at a -public dinner-table, was called upon to show his hands, and the African -taint detected by the dark tinge at the root of the finger-nails.” - -Becker remarks that among the ancient Greeks “it was considered very -unseemly to appear with nails unpared”; nor did the Greeks consider it -beneath their dignity, like the Romans, to pare their own nails. - -The Greeks, being an æsthetic nation, were guided in the treatment of -their nails by the sense of beauty. Elsewhere, however, the idiotic -notion that laziness is aristocratic led to a different treatment of the -nails. Mr. Tylor, in his _Anthropology_, gives an illustration of the -hand of a Chinese ascetic whose finger-nails are five or six times as -long as his fingers. “Long finger-nails,” he remarks, “are noticed even -among ourselves as showing that the owner does no manual labour, and in -China and neighbouring countries they are allowed to grow to a monstrous -length as a symbol of nobility, ladies wearing silver cases to protect -them, or at least as a pretence that they are there.” - -Useless hands, with elongated nails, reverting to a clawlike character, -as “symbols of nobility!” The study of evolution throws much sarcastic -light on the fashionable follies of mankind. - - - MANICURE SECRETS - -According to the New York _Analyst_: “There are not nearly as many -secrets in manicure as people imagine. A little ammonia or borax in the -water you wash your hands with, and that water just lukewarm, will keep -the skin clean and soft. A little oatmeal mixed with the water will -whiten the hands. Many people use glycerine on their hands when they go -to bed, wearing gloves to keep the bedding clean; but glycerine don’t -agree with every one. It makes some skins harsh and red. These people -should rub their hands with dry oatmeal and wear gloves in bed. The best -preparation for the hands at night is white of egg, with a grain of alum -dissolved in it.... The roughest and hardest hands can be made soft and -white in a month’s time by doctoring them a little at bedtime, and all -the tools you need are a nail-brush (avoid metal), a bottle of ammonia, -a box of powdered borax, and a little fine white sand to rub the stains -off, or a cut of lemon. Manicures use acids in their shops, but the -lemon is quite as good, and isn’t poisonous, while the acids are.” - -In the _Ugly Girl Papers_ the following recipes are given:— - -“To give a fine colour to the nails, the hands and fingers must be well -lathered and washed with scented soap; then the nails must be rubbed -with equal parts of cinnabar and emery, followed by oil of bitter -almonds. To take white specks from the nails, melt equal parts of pitch -and turpentine in a small cup; add to it vinegar and powdered sulphur. -Rub this on the nails and the specks will soon disappear. Pitch and -myrrh melted together may be used with the same results.” - -But, after all, what is the use of beautifying one’s hands as long as -ladies bow to the Fashion Fetish, which compels them to conceal them in -the skins of animals? To wear gloves on going out, as a protection -against rough weather and for the sake of cleanliness, is rational -enough; but to wear them at social gatherings is almost as absurd as the -compulsory impenetrable veils of Turkish women; for does not the hand -rank next to the face as an index of character? - -Another stupidity of fashion is our enforced and cultivated -right-handedness. Despite the force of inherited habit, children show a -natural inclination toward using both their hands equally; but they are -constantly scolded and punished, until they have succeeded, like their -parents, in reducing one hand to a state of imbecility, so to speak, -which is constantly betrayed in awkward, ungraceful action. Practising -on a musical instrument, with special attention to the left hand, has a -tendency to correct this awkwardness. Indeed, is there any part of the -body that music does not benefit? Dancing to a Strauss waltz gives -elasticity to the limbs and grace to the gait; singing is the most -useful kind of lung-gymnastics, and develops the chest; a -musically-trained ear modulates the voice to sweeter expression; while -equally skilled and graceful hands are acquired by practice on a musical -instrument. So that the word music, though much less comprehensive than -among the ancient Greeks, has lost none of the magic, beautifying power -they ascribed to it. - -Much of the ugliness in the world is due to the neglect of parents in -properly supervising the actions of their children, to prevent the -formation of bad habits, which ruin beauty irretrievably. As an instance -of what can be done in this direction may be cited the following remark -by a Philadelphia surgeon: “The school-girl habit of biting the nails -must be broken up at once. If in children, rub a little extract of -quassia on the finger-tips. This is so bitter that they are careful not -to taste it twice. Not only the nails, but the whole finger and hand is -often forfeited by neglect in this respect.” - -By travelling from the shoulder down to the finger-tips we have -apparently interrupted our steady progress from toe to tip of the body. -But we shall see in a moment that the interruption is only apparent, for -our subject leads naturally “from Hand to Mouth.” - - - - - JAW, CHIN, AND MOUTH - - - HANDS _VERSUS_ JAWS - -Just as among some male ruminants the growth of horns as a means of -defence has apparently led to the disappearance of the canine teeth, so -man’s erect attitude, by leaving his hands free to do much of the work -which inferior animals do with their jaws and teeth, has gradually -modified the appearance of his face, greatly to its advantage. “The -early male forefathers of man,” says Darwin, “were probably furnished -with great canine teeth; but as they gradually acquired the habit of -using stones, clubs, or other weapons, for fighting with their enemies -or rivals, they would use their jaws and teeth less and less. In this -case the jaws, together with the teeth, would become reduced in size, as -we may feel almost sure from innumerable analogous cases.” And in -another place he remarks: “As the prodigious difference between the -skulls of the two sexes in the orang and gorilla stands in close -relation with the development of the immense canine teeth in the males, -we may infer that the reduction of the jaws and teeth in the early -progenitors of man must have led to a most striking and favourable -change in his appearance.” - -Why a “favourable” change? No doubt a male gorilla, if it could be -taught to pronounce an æsthetic judgment, would indignantly scout the -notion that our weak, delicate jaw is preferable to its own massive -bones; nor would a prognathous or “forward-jawed” African or Australian -admit that he is less beautiful than the orthognathous or -“upright-jawed” European. What right, then, have we to claim that we -alone have beautiful faces? Must we not admit, with the Jeffrey Alison -school, that it is all “a matter of taste,” and that in so far as a -heavy, projecting jaw _appears_ beautiful to a gorilla or a savage, it -_is_ beautiful to them? - -The general answer to such questions as these has already been given in -another part of this volume. We need therefore only say in brief -_résumé_ that a heavy, projecting, clumsy, brutal jaw probably appears -to a gorilla or a Hottentot _neither ugly nor beautiful_. The æsthetic -sense—as we can see among ourselves—is the last and highest product of -civilisation. Monkeys are apparently excited by brilliant _colours_, but -to beauty of _form_ neither apes nor the lower races and classes of man -appear to be susceptible. - -Should a negro, however, on having his attention called to this matter, -claim that his prognathous face is more beautiful than our orthognathous -face, the retort simple would be that his imagination is not -sufficiently educated to understand our more refined and delicate -beauty; just as an Esquimaux prefers a rotten egg to a fresh one, a -working man a glass of fusil oil to one of tokay—simply because their -senses of taste and smell are not sufficiently refined to appreciate _or -even detect_ the delicate flavour of a fresh egg and the subtle bouquet -of wine. - -Of the positive tests of beauty, Delicacy is the one which most -emphatically condemns the heavy, prognathous jaw and the accompanying -big mouth. Massive bones and clumsy movements are everywhere the signs -of excessive toil, fatal to beauty, as may be seen on comparing the -angular and almost masculine skeleton of a labouring woman with the -delicately-articulated joints of a “society woman”; or the heavy -structure of a dray-horse with the fine contours of a race-horse; -showing that Delicacy is always associated with the other elements of -beauty—Curvature, Gradation, Expression, etc. - -On the manner in which the beauty of the mouth is proportioned to its -capability for Expression, Mr. Ruskin has made the following interesting -observations: “Taking the mouth, another source of expression, we find -it ugliest where it has none, as mostly in fish; or perhaps where, -without gaining much in expression of any kind, it becomes a formidable -destructive instrument, as again in the alligator; and then, by some -increase of expression, we arrive at birds’ beaks, wherein there is much -obtained by the different ways of setting on the mandibles (compare the -bills of the duck and the eagle); and thence we reach the -finely-developed lips of the carnivora (which nevertheless lose their -beauty in the actions of snarling and biting); and from these we pass to -the nobler, because gentler and more sensitive, of the horse, camel, and -fawn, and so again up to man: only the principle is less traceable in -the mouths of the lower animals, because they are only in slight measure -capable of expression, and chiefly used as instruments, and that of low -function; whereas in man the mouth is given most definitely as a means -of expression, beyond and above its lower functions.... The beauty of -the animal form is in exact proportion to the amount of moral or -intellectual virtue expressed by it.” - -Shakspere, by the way, seems to differ from Ruskin’s theory implied in -this last sentence. According to Ruskin, animals “lose their beauty in -the actions of snarling and biting.” But man has an action similar to -snarling, namely, what Bell calls “that arching of the lips so -expressive of contempt, hatred, and jealousy.” It is to this that -Shakspere refers in these lines— - - “O what a deal of scorn looks beautiful - In the contempt and anger of his lip.” - -But the word “beautiful” is here evidently taken by Shakspere in the -wider sense of interesting and characteristic, and not in the special -æsthetic sense of formal and emotional beauty. - -Delicacy and the capacity for varied and subtle Expression—these, we may -conclude, are the chief criteria of beauty in the lower part of the -face. Anatomically, it may be well to state here, the word “face” does -not include the forehead, but only extends from the chin to the -eyebrows. The upper and posterior part is called the cranium or skull. -It seems odd at first not to include the forehead in the face, but there -are scientific grounds for making such a division, for a discussion of -which the reader must be referred to some anatomical text-book (_vide_ -Kollmann, pp. 82-85). - -To a certain extent the face and the cranium are independent of one -another in development and physiognomic significance. And it should be -noted that, contrary to the general impression, in estimating the degree -of intelligence and refinement, the face is a safer guide than the -cranium; for there are many powerful brains in low and even receding -foreheads, whereas a large projecting jaw is almost invariably a sign of -vulgarity or lack of delicate feeling. We do not find a dog ugly because -of his receding forehead; but we do find that the most infallible way of -giving a man’s picture a brutal expression is by enlarging the jaw and -mouth. It is the deadliest weapon of the caricaturist. - -What makes a gorilla so frightfully ugly is the prominence and massive -preponderance of his face over his cranium. It is his monstrous jaws, -with their “simply brutal armature” of teeth, that give him such a -repulsive appearance. The gorilla’s mouth, as Professor Kollmann -remarks, is a caricature even from the animal point of view. How much -more delicate and refined are a dog’s or cat’s jaws and teeth in -comparison! Unfortunately, while man is a savage, or when he relapses -into brutal habits, it is the gorilla’s mouth and teeth that his -resemble, and not the cat’s or the dog’s. - -A small face being therefore a test of refined beauty, we have here -another proof of the superiority of feminine over masculine beauty. For -although woman has a smaller cranium than man, it is larger than man’s -relatively to the face. In other words, women have smaller and less -massive faces than men, both absolutely and relatively to their size. -Kollmann, who is not an evolutionist, endeavours to account for this -difference on the ground that men are more addicted to the pleasures of -the table than women. But surely, though women eat less than men, they -do not make much less use of their teeth; and for any deficiency in this -respect they more than make up by the constant wagging of their jaws in -small-talk. It is infinitely more probable that Darwin is right in -attributing the massiveness of the masculine jaws to the accumulated, -inherited effects of constant use in fighting with enemies and -rivals—contests from which the passive females have as a rule been -exempt. - -It is the assumption by the hands of many of the former functions of the -teeth that has led to the decrease in the size of the teeth, and, in -consequence, of the jaw-bones to which they are attached. Some writers -have even claimed that the wisdom-teeth are becoming rudimentary, and -will ultimately disappear, because there will be no room for them in our -gradually diminishing jaws. We may feel confident, however, that if this -reduction in the size of the jaws tended to go _too_ far, the sense of -beauty and Sexual Selection, _i.e._ Love, would step in to arrest the -process, by favouring the survival of those who gave their teeth -sufficient exercise to prevent the lower part of the face from becoming -too much reduced in size. Our sense of beauty demands that the distance -from tip of chin to nose should be about the same as the length of the -nose and the height of the forehead. Should these proportions be -violated, Love will restore the balance; for no lover would ever select -a face in which the chin almost touches the nose, as in infants, whose -teeth and jaws are not yet developed, or as in old men and women, in -whom the loss of the teeth has led to a collapse of the jaws, resulting -in a loss of proportion, clumsy movements, and prognathism. - - - DIMPLES IN THE CHIN - -An oval, well-rounded chin is one of the most important elements of -formal beauty, and is a characteristic trait of humanity; for man is the -only animal that has a chin. Lavater distinguishes three principal -varieties of chin: the receding chin, which is peculiar to lower races -and types; the chin which does not project beyond a line dropped from -the lips; and the chin which does project beyond that line. Of all parts -of the face the chin has the least variety of form and capability of -emotional expression. Physiognomists have expended much ingenuity in -attempting to trace a connection between various forms of the chin and -traits of character; but their generalisations have no scientific value. -It is probable that often a very small, weak chin indicates weak desires -and a vacillating character, while an energetic chin, like Richard -Wagner’s, indicates the iron will of a reformer. But the connection -between the development of the brain and special modifications of the -bones of the chin is too remote to permit a safe inference in individual -cases. - -In ancient Egyptian art, as Winckelmann points out, “the chin is always -somewhat small and receding, whereby the oval of the face becomes -imperfect.” - -One of the most essential conditions of beauty in a chin, if we may -judge by the descriptions of novelists, is a dimple. Yet it is doubtful -whether a dimple can ever be accepted as a special mark of beauty. -Temporary dimples (for the production of which there seems to be a -special muscle) are interesting as a mode of transient emotional -expression. But permanent dimples interrupt the regular gradation of the -beauty-curve, and too often indicate that the plump roundness, so -fascinating in a woman’s face, has passed the line which indicates -corpulence and obliterates the delicate lines of expression. - -Dimples occur not only in the chin, but also in the cheek, at the -elbow-joints, on the back, and in plump female hands at the knuckles. -They are caused by a dense tissue of fibres, blood-vessels, and nerves -holding down the skin tightly in one place, and thus preventing such an -accumulation of fat between the skin and muscles as is seen in the -surrounding parts. - -Tommaseo (quoted by Mantegazza) probably had in mind the connection -between corpulence and mental indolence when he said that “a dimple in -the chin indicates more physical than mental grace.” - -“As a dimple—by the Greeks termed νύμφη—is an isolated and somewhat -accidental adjunct to the chin, it was not,” says Winckelmann, “regarded -by the Greek artists as an attribute of abstract and pure beauty, though -it is so considered by modern writers.” With a few unimportant -exceptions, it is not found in “any beautiful ideal figure which has -come down to us.” And although Varro prettily calls a dimple in a statue -of Bathyllus an impress from the finger of Cupid, Winckelmann thinks -that when dimples do occur in Greek art works they must be attributed to -a conscious deviation from the highest principles of art for the sake of -personal portraiture. “In images whose beauties were of a lofty cast, -the Greek artists never allowed a dimple to break the uniformity of the -chin’s surface. Its beauty, indeed, consists in the rounded fulness of -its arched form, to which the lower lip, when full, imparts additional -size.” - - - REFINED LIPS - -Whereas the beauty of the chin is purely physical, its neighbour, the -mouth, has the emotional charm of expression besides the formal beauty -of outline. When we come to speak of the ears we shall find that some -animals have five times as many muscles as man, wherewith they can -execute expressive movements with those organs. But in the number and -delicacy of the muscles of the mouth no animal approaches man, in whom -they are more numerous even than those which serve for the varied -expression of the eyes. Great as is the difference between an animal’s -forefoot and man’s hand, it is not so great as the difference between an -animal’s and a man’s mouth. Chewing and sucking are almost the only -functions of the animal’s mouth, while man moulds his lips into a -thousand shapes in singing, whistling, pouting, blowing, speaking, -smiling, kissing, etc. From being a mere mechanism for masticating food, -it has become the most delicate instrument for intellectual and -emotional expression. - -Sir Charles Bell’s testimony that “the lips are, of all the features, -the most susceptible of action, and the most direct index of the -feelings,” has already been quoted in the chapter on Kissing. Could -Rubinstein himself express a wider range of emotions, by subtle -variations of pianistic touch, than our lips can express degrees and -varieties of affection in the family, friendly, conjugal, and love -kisses? And can we find, even in the music of Chopin and Wagner, -harmonic changes more infinitely varied than the countless subtle -modulations of the human lips, as revealed in the fact that deaf mutes -can be taught to understand what we say to them merely by watching the -movements of our lips? - -“The mouth, which is the end of love” (Dante), is also the seat of -Love’s smiles; “and in her smile Love’s image you may see.” We often -read of smiling eyes, and the eyes _do_ partake in the expression of -smiling, by increased brightness and the wrinkling of the surrounding -muscles. But that the mouth is a more important factor in this -expression can be shown by painting the face of a man with a sad -expression, and then pasting on a smiling mouth, which will give the man -at once a happy expression, notwithstanding the unchanged eyes. In life -the muscles of the mouth and eyes execute certain movements in harmony. -“In all exhilarating emotions,” says Bell, “the eyebrows, the eyelids, -the nostril, and the angle of the mouth are raised. In the depressing -emotions it is the reverse.” - -For the execution of these diverse movements, which make it the most -expressive organ of the body, the mouth employs more than a dozen -important groups of muscles, some of which originate in the chin, some -in the cheeks, some in the lips themselves, enabling them to execute -independent movements. - -While surpassing the eyes in expressiveness, the mouth rivals them in -beauty of form and colour. “The lips answer the purpose of displaying a -more brilliant red than is to be seen elsewhere,” says Winckelmann. “The -under lips should be fuller than the upper.” In Greek divinities the -lips are not always closed: “and this is especially the case with Venus, -in order that her countenance may express the languishing softness of -desire and love.” At the same time, “very few of the figures which have -been represented laughing, as some Satyrs or Fauns are, show the teeth.” -This is natural enough, for the long-continued exposure of the teeth -would only result in a grimace. It is only in the transient smile that -the teeth may peep forth; and then what a charming contrast their ivory -curve and lustrous colour presents to the full-blooded, soft, pink lips! - - “Lilies married to the rose, - Have made her cheek the nuptial bed; - Her lips betray their virgin red, - As they only blushed for this, - That they one another kiss.” - -Health, Beauty, and Love—everywhere we see them inseparably associated. -Who could ever fall in love with a pair of thin, pallid lips that have -lost their pink and plump loveliness through anæmic indolence, or -disease, or tight lacing? The very teeth, though the hardest substance -of the body, lose their natural colour and beauty in ill-health. Not -only do they decay and become blackish, but “in bilious people they -become yellow, and in consumptive patients they show occasionally an -unnaturally pearly and translucent whiteness” (Brinton and Napheys). - -Negroes have, normally, teeth of a dazzling whiteness, which is often -regarded as a racial peculiarity, but is due, according to Waitz, to the -use of chalk or vegetal fibres. But various savages are dissatisfied -with the natural form and colour of their teeth, and disfigure them in -various ways. “In different countries the teeth are stained black, red, -blue, etc., and in the Malay Archipelago it is thought shameful to have -teeth like those of a dog” (Darwin). - -“In Macassar the women spend a part of the day in painting their teeth -red and yellow, in such a way that a red tooth follows a yellow one, and -alternately.” In Japan, Fashion compels married women to blacken their -teeth, not, however, as an ornament, but to make them ugly and save them -from temptation. - -Some African tribes knock out two or more of their front teeth, on the -ground that they do not wish to look like brutes. The Batokas “think the -presence of incisors most unsightly, and on beholding some Europeans, -cried out, ‘Look at the great teeth!’... In various parts of Africa, and -in the Malay Archipelago, the natives file the incisors into points like -those of a saw, or pierce them with holes, into which they insert -studs.” - -In case of the lips, primitive Fashion prescribes still more atrocious -mutilations. One would think that a negro’s swollen lips were ugly -enough to suit even a devotee of African Fashion; but no! Her lips being -naturally large, the fashionable negro belle considers it incumbent on -her to exaggerate them into additional hideousness, just as European and -American fashionable women exaggerate the slight and beautiful natural -curve of their waist into the atrocious hour-glass shape. - -“Among the Babines, who live north of the Columbia River,” says Sir John -Lubbock, “the size of the under lip is the standard of female beauty. A -hole is made in the under lip of the infant, in which a small bone is -inserted; from time to time the bone is replaced by a larger one, until -at last a piece of wood, three inches long and an inch and a half wide, -is inserted in the orifice, which makes the lip protrude to a frightful -extent. The process appears to be very painful.” - -“In Central Africa,” says Darwin, “the women perforate the lower lip and -wear a crystal, which, from the movement of the tongue, has ‘a wriggling -motion, indescribably ludicrous during conversation.’ The wife of the -chief of Latooka told Sir S. Baker that Lady Baker ‘would be much -improved if she would extract her four front teeth from the lower jaw, -and wear the long pointed polished crystal in her under lip.’ Further -south, with the Makalolo, the upper lip is perforated, and a large metal -and bamboo ring, called a _pelelé_, is worn in the hole. This caused the -lip to project in one point two inches beyond the tip of the nose; and -when the lady smiled, the contraction of the muscles elevated it over -the eyes. ‘Why do the women wear these things?’ the venerable chief -Chinsurdi was asked. Evidently surprised at such a stupid question, he -replied, ‘For beauty! They are the only beautiful things women have; men -have beards, women have none. What kind of a person would she be without -a _pelelé_? She would not be a woman at all, with a mouth like a man but -no beard.’” - -In New Zealand, according to Tylor, “it was considered shameful for a -woman not to have her mouth tattooed, for people would say with disgust, -‘She has red lips.’” - -Compare these two pictures for a moment: on the one side, the -protuberant mouth-borders of the negro woman, swollen as by disease or -an insect’s sting, enlarged, in smiling, to the very ears, and showing -not only the teeth but the gums, the tongue and the unæsthetic -œsophagus; on the other side, the full but delicate cherry lips of -civilised woman, capable of an infinite variety of subtle, graceful -movements, a keyboard on which the whole gamut of human feelings finds -expression, and revealing, in a smile, only the tips of the pearly, -undeformed teeth. Shall we say, with Alison and Jeffrey, that it is all -a matter of taste, and that the negro has as much right to his taste as -we have to ours? Or have we not plentiful reasons for claiming that -Personal Beauty is a fine art, and that the reason why the negro prefers -his coarse mouth to our refined lips is because he _does not understand_ -our highly-developed and specialised Beauty? - -There are cogent scientific reasons for believing that, just as the -skull has been modified and developed from the upper part of the spinal -column, and the brain from its contents, so the facial muscles are all -developed from the broad muscle of the neck. In the orang, according to -Professor Owen, we find already all the important facial muscles which -man uses to express emotions. But, as Darwin remarks, “distinct uses, -independently of expression, can ... be assigned with much probability -for almost all the facial muscles.” - -On the other hand, the facial muscles “are, as is admitted by every one -who has written on the subject, very variable in structure; and Moreau -remarks that they are hardly alike in half a dozen subjects. They are -also variable in function. Thus the power of uncovering the canine tooth -on one side differs much in different persons. The power of raising the -wings of the nostrils is also, according to Dr. Piderit, variable in a -remarkable degree; and other such cases could be given.” - -The facts that the facial muscles blend so much together that their -number has been variously estimated at from nineteen to fifty-five, and -that they vary so much in details of structure and function in -individuals, are of extreme significance. For, in the first place, this -variableness allows Love—or Sexual Selection—to favour the survival of -those modifications of the features which are most in harmony with the -laws of Beauty; and, secondly, it affords the means of further -specialisation and increased accuracy in the modes of emotional -expression. - -When we see a friend reading a letter, we fancy his face a perfect -mirror, reflecting every mood touched upon in its contents. Yet many of -our expressions are vague, and there is much room for improvement in -definiteness. Darwin, in the introduction to his work on the _Expression -of Emotions in Man and Animals_, has remarked how difficult it often is -to name the exact emotion intended to be expressed in a picture of a -man, unless we regard the accessories by which the painter illustrates -the situation; and how apt people are to disagree in naming the emotions -expressed by a series of physiognomic portraits. With monkeys, he says, -“the expression of slight pain, or of any painful emotion, such as -grief, vexation, jealousy, etc., is not easily distinguished from that -of moderate anger.” - -Savages, as we saw in a previous chapter, are strangers to many of the -tender emotions which enter into our daily life; hence it would be -absurd to look for muscles specially trained to express them. And even -with Europeans the refined emotions are of such recent development that, -as just stated, they are capable of much further specialisation. To take -only one case: it is probable that, whereas in the present stage of -human evolution, it is almost impossible, without accessories, to -distinguish the facial expression of feminine Romantic Love from that of -maternal love, future generations will have specially modified muscles -for those modes of expression. Duchenne has pointed out on the side of -the nose a series of transient folds expressive of amorous desire. As -Romantic Love displaces coarse passion, may not these or another set of -muscles be pressed into the special service of refined Love as a sign of -encouragement to lovers about to propose? Coquettes, of course, would -immediately cultivate this expression, as a new wile or “wrinkle.” - -Between the facial muscles that are thus utilised for the expression of -emotions and other muscles of the body, there is one difference which is -of the utmost importance from the point of view of Personal Beauty. The -function of ordinary muscles is to move bones, whereas the muscles of -expression in the face are only concerned with the movements of the -skin. Hence they do not enlarge the bones of the face, which would -destroy its delicacy. Their exercise gives elasticity and plump -roundness to the outlines of the face; and as they are subtly subdivided -in function, they cannot easily become too plump from exercise. - -Individual peculiarities of expression are of course due to the frequent -exercise of certain sets of muscles, leading gradually to a fixed -physiognomic aspect; for form is merely crystallised expression. Hence -no one can be beautiful without being good. Vice soon destroys Personal -Beauty. If the muscles of anger, envy, jealousy, spite, cruelty, etc., -are too frequently called into exercise, the result is a face on which -the word _vicious_ is written as legibly and in as many corners as the -numerals X and 10 are printed on a United States banknote. - -One of the reasons why Fashion encourages the _blasé_, _nil admirari_ -attitude, and the stolid suppression of emotional expression, is to hide -these signs of moral and hygienic sins. - -Oliver Wendell Holmes, anatomist and poet, says of Emerson that he had -“that look of refinement centring about the lips which is rarely found -in the male New Englander, unless the family features have been for two -or three cultivated generations the battlefield and the playground of -varied thoughts and complex emotions, as well as the sensuous and -nutritive port of entry.” - -Dr. Holmes need not have limited his generalisation to “male New -Englanders.” Refined mouths are rare in every country, among women as -well as among men. As a writer in the _Victoria Magazine_ exclaims: “It -is wonderful how far more common good foreheads and eyes are amongst us -than good mouths and chins.” Yet there is a special reason for singling -out the average male New Englander as a “warning example.” He inherits -the thin, famished, pale, stern, forbidding lips of his Puritan -ancestors, whose sins are thus visited on later generations. Sins? Yes, -sins against health. Without cheerfulness there can be no sound health, -and the Puritans made the systematic pursuit of unhappiness the chief -object of their life. They made cruel war on all those innocent pursuits -and amusements which bring the bloom of health and beauty to the -youthful cheek, and exercise the lips in the expression of refined -æsthetic emotion. Even music, the most innocent of the arts, was -included in their fanatic ostracism, to which historians also trace the -rarity of musical taste of the highest order in England. - -There is reason to believe that it is especially æsthetic culture which -betrays itself in the refined contours and expression of the lips. Men -of genius, though their cast of features is not always handsome, -commonly have finely-cut mouths. Among German women addicted to music -and love of nature, though beauty is comparatively rare—owing to causes -which will be considered in a later chapter—good mouths are more common -than in some other countries which boast a higher general average of -Personal Beauty. Among Americans in general, all the features are apt to -be finely cut, hence the lips also partake of this advantage. - -But it is among Spanish maidens that perhaps the most inviting, -full-blooded yet delicate, soft, and refined lips are to be sought. -True, the Spanish maiden seems to lack refined feelings when she goes, -as commonly supposed, to be thrilled by a bull fight. Yet it is well -known that the upper classes of women in Spain do not commonly attend -these spectacles; and if they did, would they be more cruel than our -fashionable women? Which is the more glaring evidence of callous -emotions, to voluntarily witness the slaughter of an infuriated, -dangerous beast, or to wear on one’s hat the painted corpses of innocent -song-birds? - -The following passage in one of Washington Irving’s works shows that the -Spanish have genuine æsthetic feeling and taste:— - -“‘How near the Sierra looks this evening!’ said Mateo; ‘it seems as if -you could touch it with your hand, and yet it is many leagues off.’ -While he was speaking a star appeared over the snowy summit of the -mountain, the only one yet visible in the heavens, and so pure, so -large, so bright and beautiful as to call forth ejaculations of delight -from honest Mateo. - -”‘Que lucero hermoso!—que clara y limpio es!—no pueda ser lucero mas -brillante.’ (What a beautiful star! how clear and lucid!—no star could -be more brilliant!) - -“I have often remarked this sensibility of the common people of Spain to -the charms of natural objects. The lustre of a star—the beauty or -fragrance of a flower—the crystal purity of a fountain, will inspire -them with a kind of poetical delight—and then what euphonious words -their magnificent language affords with which to give utterance to their -transports!” - -Possibly the constant pronouncing of these “euphonious words” is one of -the causes of the beauty of Spanish lips. But one need not go into such -subtle details for an explanation of the phenomenon. Sexual Selection -accounts for it sufficiently. The admiration of Beauty is the strongest -factor in Romantic Love. The Spaniard’s sense of Beauty is refined -through his love of Beauty in natural objects. Hence in Sexual Selection -he is guided by a taste which abhors equally the coarse, protuberant -lips suggestive of mere animality, and the leathery, lifeless lips -indicating neglect of the laws of health and a lack of lusty vitality. -For true labial refinement consists not in ascetic elimination of -sensuous fulness, but in æsthetic harmony between sense and intellect. -The lips, like all other parts of the body, are naturally plump and -full-blooded in Southern nations, saturated with sunshine and fresh air; -and when this plumpness is checked by mental refinement and the -exigencies of varied expression, then it is that lips become ideally -beautiful. - -It is with the lips as with Love, of which they are the perch. Neither -Zola nor Dante are the true painters of the romantic passion, but -Shakspere, who pays respect to flesh and blood as well as to emotion and -intellect. - - - COSMETIC HINTS - -Although the size and shape of the lips afford an index of coarse or -refined ancestry, the mouth is commonly the most self-made feature in -the countenance, because it is such an important seat of individual -expression. Herein lies a soothing balm to those who, owing to the -stupidly irregular and incalculable laws of heredity, have inherited an -ugly mouth from a grandfather or a more remote ancestor. - -A pleasing impression, oft repeated, leaves its traces on the facial -muscles. Kant gives this advice to parents: “Children, especially girls, -must be accustomed early to smile in a frank, unconstrained manner; for -the cheerfulness and animation of the features gradually leave an -impression on the mind itself, and thus create a disposition towards -gaiety, amiableness, and sociability, which lay an early foundation for -the virtue of benevolence.” - -So Kant evidently believed that we can beautify the soul by beautifying -the body. And the reverse is equally true. As Mr. Ruskin remarks: “There -is not any virtue the exercise of which, even momentarily, will not -impress a new fairness upon the features.... On the gentleness and -decision of just feeling there follows a grace of action which by no -discipline may be taught or obtained.” - -If educators and parents would thoroughly impress on the minds of the -young the great truth that good moral behaviour and the industry which -leads to intellectual pre-eminence are magic sources of youthful and -permanent Personal Beauty, they would find it the most potent of all -civilising agencies, especially with women. - -Drs. Brinton and Napheys, in their work on _Personal Beauty_ (1870), -which is especially valuable from the point of view of medical and -surgical cosmetics, but which is unfortunately out of print, offer the -following suggestions as to how the shape and expression of the mouth -may be improved:— - -"For cosmetic reasons, immoderate laughter is objectionable. It keeps -the muscles on the stretch, destroys the contour of the features, and -produces wrinkles. It is better to cultivate a ‘classic repose.’ - -"Still more decidedly should the habit of ‘making mouths’ be condemned, -whether it occur in conversing in private or to express emotions. It -never adds to the emphasis of the discourse, never improves the looks, -and leads to actual malformations. - -"Children sometimes learn to suck and bite their lips. This distorts -these organs, and unless they are persuaded to give it up betimes, a -permanent deformity will arise. - -“When the lips have once assumed a given form, it is difficult to change -them. Those that are too thin can occasionally be increased by adopting -the plan of sucking them. This forces a large quantity of blood to the -part, and consequently a greater amount of nutriment. When too large, -compresses can sometimes, but not always, be used to effect. We have -employed silver plates connected by a wire spring, or a mould of stiff -leather. Either may be worn at night, or in the house during the day.” - -It is astonishing to note how many persons are utterly unconcerned -regarding the appearance of their mouths in talking, smiling, and -laughing, sometimes revealing the whole of the teeth and even the gums, -like savages, or as if they were walking tooth-powder advertisements. -Self-observation before a mirror is the best antidote against such -grimaces. - -Chapped lips sometimes call for constitutional treatment, but ordinarily -they can be easily cured by obtaining a lip-salve of some reputable -chemist. Glycerine is almost always adulterated and injurious, and -should only be used on any part of the skin when chemically pure. - -Pale lips are commonly an indication of ill-health, and therefore call -for exercise, tonics, or other medical treatment. And the colour of the -lips is an index of emotion as well as of health— - - “Whispering, with white lips, ‘The foe! They come! They come!’”—BYRON. - -That sound teeth, though they should never be seen except in glimpses, -are an extremely important element in facial beauty, may be seen by the -fact that the loss of a few front teeth makes a person look ten years -older at once. The art of dentistry has reached such marvellous -perfection that there is no excuse for having unsightly teeth. They may -be easily preserved to a good age, if properly exercised on solid -food—bread crusts, etc. Very hot and very cold food and drink is -injurious, especially if cold and hot things are taken in immediate -succession. The teeth should be cleaned twice a day, on rising and -before retiring. The brush should not be too hard, and a harmless -powder, wash, or soap should be obtained of a trustworthy chemist for -the threefold purpose of whitening the teeth by removing tartar, of -killing the numerous microbes in the mouth, and purifying the breath. An -offensive breath is shockingly common, probably owing to the fact that -many brush only the outside surface of their teeth. They should be -brushed inside as well, and on the top, and the tooth wash or soap -should be brought into contact with every corner and crevasse of the -mouth and teeth. An offensive breath ought to be good cause for divorce, -and certainly it is a deadly enemy of Romantic Love. - - - - - THE CHEEKS - - - HIGH CHEEK-BONES - -When we look at a Mongolian, the flat nose and oblique eyes at once -attract our attention, but hardly to such a degree as his high and -prominent cheek-bones. The North American Indians, who are probably the -descendants of Mongolians, resemble them in their prominent cheek-bones; -and the Esquimaux likewise possess these in a most exaggerated form. -“The Siamese,” says Darwin, “have small noses with divergent nostrils, a -wide mouth, rather thick lips, a remarkably large face, with very high -and broad cheek-bones. It is therefore not wonderful that ‘beauty, -according to our notion, is a stranger to them. Yet they consider their -own females to be much more beautiful than those of Europe.’” - -Here is another “matter of taste,” which is decided in our favour by the -general laws of Beauty, positive and negative. - -High, prominent cheek-bones are ugly, in the first place, because they -interfere with the regularly gradated oval of the face. Secondly, -because, like projecting bones and angles in any other part of the body, -they interrupt the regular curve of Beauty. Thirdly, because they are -coarse and inelegant, offending the sense of delicacy and grace, like -big, clumsy ankles and wrists. Fourthly, because they suggest the -decrepitude of old age and disease. In the healthy cheek of youth and -beauty there is a large amount of adipose tissue, both under the skin -and between the subjacent muscles. When age or disease makes fatal -inroads on the body, this fat disappears and leaves the impression of -starvation. “Famine is in thy cheeks,” exclaims Shakspere; and again— - - “Meagre were his looks, - Sharp misery had worn him to the bones.” - -When the malar bones are too high, the fleshy cheeks, instead of -including them in a plump curve, are made by contrast to appear hollow, -thus simulating and suggesting the appearance of disease to those whose -imagination is sufficiently awake to notice such suggestions. And -besides emaciation, hollow cheeks suggest another sign of age and -decrepitude—the loss of the teeth, which on the sides of the jaws help -to give youthful cheeks their plump outlines. - -Finally, prominent cheek-bones are objectionable because they are -concomitants of the large, clumsy, brutal jaws which characterise -savages and apes. To the cheek-bones the upper jaw-bone is directly -attached; hence the larger the teeth are, and the more vigorously they -are exercised in fighting and picking bones, the more massive must be -the cheek-bones, to prevent the upper jaw from being pushed out of -position. Moreover, there is attached to the cheek-bones a powerful -muscle which connects it with the lower jaw, and by its contraction -brings the two jaws together; and this is a second way in which violent -exercise of the jaws tends to enlarge the cheek-bones, for all bones -become enlarged if the muscles attached to them are much exercised. - -At a recent meeting of the British Association, Sir George Campbell -advanced the theory that the Aryan race, to which we belong, originally -had prominent cheek-bones, like those of lower races. On general -evolutionary grounds this is indeed a foregone conclusion; as is the -corollary that our cheek-bones have become smaller, for the same reason -that our jaws have become more delicate; viz. because we no longer use -them to fight and tear our food like wild beasts, but to masticate soft -cooked food, to talk, etc. Thus does the progress of civilisation -enhance our Personal Beauty. - -An excessive diminution in the size of the cheek-bones, as of the jaws, -will be prevented by Romantic Love (Sexual Selection), which ever aims -at establishing and preserving those proportions and outlines of the -features which are most in harmony with the general laws of beauty. - -Among the lower animals cruel Natural Selection eliminates those -individuals who are ugly, _i.e._ unnatural, unhealthy, clumsy. With -mankind charity and pity have checked the operation of this cruel though -beneficial law, and progress in the direction of refinement and Beauty -would therefore be fatally impeded were it not that Sexual Selection, or -Love guided by the sense of Beauty, steps in to eliminate the -ill-favoured, who bear in their countenance too conspicuously the marks -of their savage and animal ancestry. Perhaps Mr. Wallace had some such -thought in his mind when he anticipated the time when man’s selection -shall have supplanted natural selection. - -Yet there are thousands of good people who still profess to believe that -“beauty is only skin deep,” and that Romantic Love and æsthetic culture -are of no practical importance, but mere gaudy soap-bubbles to delight -our vision for a transient moment! - -In future ages, when æsthetic refinement will be more common, and -Romantic Love, its offspring, less impeded by those considerations of -rank and money and imaginary “prudence” which lead parents to _sacrifice -the physique and wellbeing of their grand-children_ to the illusive -comfort of their sons and daughters (in “marriages of reason”)—what an -impetus will then be given to the development of Personal Beauty! -Refined mouths and noses, rosy cheeks, sparkling eyes, plump and -graceful healthy figures, now so lamentably rare, will then become as -plentiful as blackberries in the autumn. - - - COLOUR AND BLUSHES - -Although the heart’s warm blood is not carried to the cheeks in so dense -a network of arteries, nor so near the surface as in the lips, yet the -cheeks come next to the lips in delicate sensibility—a fact which Love -has discovered instinctively; for a kiss on the cheeks is still a kiss -of love, whereas a kiss on the forehead or eyelids indicates less -ecstatic forms of affection or esteem. - -What makes the cheeks so sensitive is the great delicacy of their -transparent skin, which readily allows the colour of the blood to be -seen as through a veil, not only in blushing, but in the natural rosy -aspect of youth and health. - -Though the cheeks may not vie with the lips and teeth, the hair and the -eyes, in lustrous depth of colour, they have an advantage in their -chamæleonic variety and changes of tint, and their delicious gradations. -Even the delicate blushes on an apple or a peach, caused by the warm and -loving glances of the sun,—what are they compared to the luscious, -mellow tints on a maiden’s ripe cheeks? Nor is it possible to find in -the leaves of an autumnal American forest more endless individual -_nuances_ and shades of red and rose and pink than in the cheeks of -lovely girls—unless indolence or other sins against health have painted -them with ghastly repulsive pallor, or the hideous Hottentot habit of -bedaubing them with brutal paint has ruined their translucent delicacy. - -Says the author of the _Ugly Girl Papers_: “Some cheeks have a winelike, -purplish glow, others a transparent saffron tinge, like yellowish-pink -porcelain; others still have clear, pale carmine; and the rarest of all, -that suffused tint like apple-blossoms.” - -At summer resorts where girls drink in daily draughts of the elixir of -youth and beauty, commonly known as fresh air, one of their greatest -love-charms is these colour-symphonies on their cheeks, changing their -melody with every pulse-beat. These charms they might possess all the -year round did not their parents commonly convert their dwelling-houses -into hothouses, reeking with stagnant, enervating air. - -If, therefore, we read that Africans prefer the opaque, inky, immutable -ebony of their complexion to the translucent, ever-changing tints, -eloquent of health and varied emotions, in a white maiden’s face, -we—well, we simply smile, on recalling the fact that even among -ourselves a cheap, gaudy chromo is preferred by the great multitude to -the work of a great master which they do not understand. The slow growth -of æsthetic refinement is illustrated by the fact that it is only a few -years since Fashion has set its face against the use of vulgar paints -and powders, which ensure a most questionable temporary advantage at the -expense of future permanent defacement. - -The colours of the cheeks, so far under consideration, are to a certain -extent subject to our will and skill; for no one who cultivates the -complexion and has plenty of pure air need be without these blooming -buccal roses. But the “thousand _blushing apparitions_” that start into -our faces are, as Shakspere’s well-chosen words imply, as independent of -our will and control as any other apparitions. - -Are blushes ornamental or useful? That is, were they developed through -Sexual or through Natural Selection? Such Shaksperian expressions as -“Bid the cheek be ready with a blush, modest as morning;” “Thy cheeks -blush for pure shame to counterfeit our roses;” and “To blush and -beautify the cheek again,” suggest the notion that the great poet -regarded blushes as beautiful; while the following permit a different -interpretation: “Her blush is guiltiness, not modesty;” “Blushing cheeks -by faults are bred, and fears by pale white shown;” “You virtuous ass, -you bashful fool, must you be blushing?” “His treasons will sit blushing -in his face.” - -Let us see if any light is thrown on the problem by going back to the -beginning, and tracing the development of the habit of blushing. That -blushing is a comparatively recent human acquisition is made apparent -from the facts that it is not seen in animals, nor in very young -children, nor in idiots, as a rule; while among savages the faculty of -blushing seems to be dependent on the presence of a sense of shame, -which is almost, if not entirely, unknown to the lowest tribes. - -That animals never blush, Darwin thinks, is almost certain. “Blushing,” -he says, “is the most peculiar and the most human of all expressions. -Monkeys redden from passion, but it would require an overwhelming amount -of evidence to make us believe that any animal could blush.” Concerning -children he says: “The young blush much more freely than the old, but -not during infancy, which is remarkable, as we know that infants at a -very early age redden from passion. I have received authentic accounts -of two little girls blushing at the ages of between two and three years; -and of another sensitive child, a year older, blushing when reproved for -a fault.” - -“In the dark-brown Peruvian,” says Mr. Tylor, “or the yet blacker -African, though a hand or a thermometer put to the cheek will detect the -blush by its heat, the somewhat increased depth of colour is hardly -perceptible to the eye.” Dr. Burgess repeatedly had occasion to observe -that a scar in the face of a negress “invariably became red whenever she -was abruptly spoken to, or charged with any trivial offence.” And Darwin -was assured by several trustworthy observers “that they have seen on the -faces of negroes an appearance resembling a blush, under circumstances -which would have excited one in us, though their skins were of an -ebony-black tint. Some describe it as a blushing brown, but most say -that the blackness becomes more intense.” - -Now evidence has already been quoted in a previous chapter showing that -negroes admire a black skin more than a white one (vide _Descent of -Man_, 1885, p. 579). Is it likely, therefore, that the blush was admired -by negroes, and became a ground of selection, because it intensified the -blackness of the skin. It hardly seems probable that the coarse negro -can be influenced in his amorous choice by any such subtle, almost -imperceptible difference; and even the great originator of the theory of -Sexual Selection does not believe that it accounts for the origin of -blushes: “No doubt a slight blush adds to the beauty of a maiden’s face; -and the Circassian women who are capable of blushing invariably fetch a -higher price in the seraglio of the Sultan than less susceptible women. -But the firmest believer in the efficacy of sexual selection will hardly -suppose that blushing was acquired as a sexual ornament. This view would -also be opposed to what has just been said about the dark-coloured races -blushing in an invisible manner.” - -On the other hand, it seems equally difficult to account for the origin -of blushing on utilitarian grounds. No one likes to be caught blushing; -on the contrary, every one tries to conceal such a state by lowering or -averting the face. How could such an unwelcome, embarrassing habit prove -of advantage to us? Sir Charles Bell’s remarks on the subject may serve -as a clue to the answer. That blushing “is a provision for expression -may be inferred,” he says, “from the colour extending only to the -surface of the face, neck, and breast—the parts most exposed.... The -colour caused by blushing gives brilliancy and interest to the -expression of the face. In this we perceive an advantage possessed by -the fair family of mankind, and which must be lost to the dark; for I -can hardly believe that a blush may be seen in the negro.... Blushing -assorts well with youthful and with effeminate features, while nothing -is more hateful than a dog-face that exhibits no token of sensibility in -the variations of colour.” - -The poet Young tells us that “the man that blushes is not quite a -brute;” and Darwin quotes from Humboldt a sneer of the Spaniard, “How -can those be trusted who know not how to blush?” Darwin’s remark that -some idiots, “_if not utterly degraded_, are capable of blushing,” also -accords with Bell’s notion that blushing is a provision for expression. -Bell’s assertion that it is “indicative of excitement” is, however, not -sufficiently definite. What is it that a blush expresses? Evidently -nervous sensibility, a moral sense, modesty, innocence. The Circassian -who can blush is more highly valued than another, because the blush is -eloquent of maiden modesty and heart untainted. The fact that there is -also a blush of violated modesty, a blush of shame, and of guilt, does -not argue against this view, any more than the fact that we blush if, -though innocent, we are accused of guilt. It is the association of ideas -and of emotions that evokes the blush in such cases. - -We may therefore conclude that a blush is useful on account of its -_moral beauty_, _i.e._ its expressiveness of presumptive innocence, or -at least of a desire to be considered innocent; whereas the unblushing -front and cheek indicate a brutal, callous indifference to virtue. We -admire a blush as “the most peculiar and the most human of all -expressions.” And we admire it also, to some extent, on purely æsthetic -grounds, if not exaggerated. A slight blush has a rosy charm of its own, -and it is only when it becomes a too diffused and deep facial Aurora -borealis that it loses its charm, because suggestive of the hectic or -fever flush, or the redness caused by anger, heat, violent exertion, -etc., which has a physiological origin distinct from that of blushing. - -According to Bell, “the colour which attends exertion or the violent -passions, as of rage, arises from general vascular excitement, and -differs from blushing. Blushing is too sudden and too partial to be -traced to the heart’s action.” Darwin endeavours to find the explanation -of blushing in the intimate sympathy which exists between the capillary -circulation of the surface of the head and face, and that of the brain, -which would account for the mental confusion of shyness, modesty, etc., -being so immediately photographed on the face. He sums up his theory in -these words:— - -“I conclude that blushing—whether due to shyness—to shame for a real -crime—to shame from a breach of the laws of etiquette—to modesty from -humility—to modesty from an indelicacy—depends in all cases on the same -principle; this principle being a sensitive regard for the opinion, more -particularly for the depreciation of others, primarily in relation to -our personal appearance, especially of our faces; and secondarily, -through the force of association and habit, in relation to the opinion -of others on our conduct.” - -He gives various illustrations showing how by directing our attention to -certain parts of the body we can increase their sensitivity and activity -in a manner analogous to that postulated by the theory of blushing. But -for these the reader must be referred to his essay on this subject in -the Expression of Emotions—a masterpiece of physiological and -psychological analysis. One more passage, however, may be cited, as it -helps to justify this long discussion of blushing by showing its special -relations to Romantic Love and Personal Beauty:— - -“It is plain to every one that young men and women are highly sensitive -to the opinion of each other with reference to their personal -appearance; and they blush incomparably more in presence of the opposite -sex than in that of their own. A young man, not very liable to blush, -will blush intensely at any slight ridicule of his appearance from a -girl whose judgment on any important subject he would disregard. No -happy pair of young lovers, valuing each other’s admiration and love -more than anything else in the world, probably ever courted each other -without many a blush. Even the barbarians of Tierra del Fuego, according -to Mr. Bridges, blush ‘chiefly in regard to women, but certainly also at -their own personal appearance.’” - - - - - THE EARS - - - A USELESS ORNAMENT - -The shell of the ear appears to be the only part of man’s visible body -which has ceased to be useful and become purely ornamental “Persons -whose ears have been cut off hear just as well as before,” says -Professor Haeckel. Dr. J. Toynbee, F.R.S., “after collecting all the -evidence on this head, concludes that the external shell is of no -distinct use;” and Darwin was informed by Professor Preyer that after -experimenting on the functions of the shell of the ear he had come to -nearly the same conclusion. - -To infer from this that our external ears have been developed, through -Sexual Selection, for purely ornamental purposes, would not be in accord -with scientific analogies. For, often as existing organs (horns, -feathers, etc.) are _modified_ for ornamental purposes, there are no -known instances of any that have been specially developed for that -purpose; even the facial muscles of expression being, as we have seen, -in this predicament. Hence we are led to conclude that man has inherited -the shell of his ear from a remote apelike ancestor, to whom it was of -use in catching faint sounds, and who consequently had the power, common -to other animals, not only of directing the ears as a whole to different -points of the compass, but of temporarily altering its shape. Indeed, -one of the strongest proofs of our descent from lower animals lies in -the fact that man still possesses, in a rudimentary form, the muscles -needed to move the ears. Some savage tribes have considerable control -over these muscles. The famous physiologist, Johannes Müller, after long -and patient efforts, succeeded in recovering the power of moving his -ears; and Darwin writes: “I have seen one man who could draw the whole -ear forwards; other men can draw it upwards; another who could draw it -backwards; and from what one of these persons told me, it is probable -that most of us, by often touching our ears, and thus directing our -attention towards them, could recover some power of movement by repeated -trials.” - -Ordinary monkeys still possess the power to move their ears; but the -manlike or anthropoid apes resemble us in the rudimentary condition of -their ear-muscles; and Darwin was assured by the keepers in the London -Zoological Gardens that these animals never move or erect their ears. He -suggests two theories to account for the loss of this power: first, -that, owing to their arboreal habits and great strength, these apes were -not exposed to much danger, and thus gradually, through disuse, lost -control over these organs, just as birds on oceanic islands where they -are not subject to attacks have lost the use of their wings; secondly, -that the freedom with which they can move the head in a horizontal plane -enabled them to dispense with mobile ears. - -The remarkable variability of the ears—greater, by the way, in men than -in women—is another reason for regarding them as rudimentary organs, -inherited from remote semi-human ancestors, to whom they were useful; -for great variability is a characteristic of all rudimentary organs. -Haeckel facetiously suggests that “at large assemblies, where our -interest is not sufficiently enchained, nothing is more instructive and -entertaining than a comparative study of the countless variations in the -form of the ears.” The ancient Greek artists were aware of this -variability, for Wincklemann speaks of “the infinite variety of forms of -the ear on heads modelled from life.” “It was customary with the ancient -artists to elaborate no portion of the head more diligently than the -ears.” “In portrait figures, when the countenance is so much injured as -not to be recognised, we can occasionally make a correct conjecture as -to the person intended, if it is one of whom we have any knowledge, -merely by the form of the ear; thus we infer a head of Marcus Aurelius -from an ear with an unusually large inner opening.” - -If we compare a man’s ears with those of a dog or horse, differences of -shape appear no less conspicuous than differences in mobility. Two -points are especially characteristic of man—the folded upper margin and -the lobule. Our cousins, the anthropoid apes, are the only other animals -which have the margin of the ear thus folded inwards, the lower monkeys -having them simple and pointed, like other animals. The sculptor, Mr. -Woolner, called Darwin’s attention to “a little blunt point, projecting -from the inwardly-folded margin or helix.” Darwin, on investigating the -matter, came to the conclusion that these points “are vestiges of the -tips of former erect and pointed ears”; being led to think so “from the -frequency of their occurrence, and from the general correspondence in -position with that of the tip of a pointed ear.” - -The lobule is still more peculiar to man than the folded margin, since -he does not even share it with the anthropoid apes, although, according -to Professor Mivart, “a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla.” An -intermediate stage between man and ape is occupied by some savage tribes -in whom the lobule is scantily developed or even absent. - - - COSMETICS AND FASHION - -The lobule of the human ear has been presumably developed through the -agency of Sexual Selection, as it is an ornament the absence of which is -at once felt. And there are other ways in which this organ has been -gradually brought into harmony with the laws of beauty. Thus the loss of -the hair (of which rudiments are still occasionally present) made -visible the soft skin and the delicate tint of the ear, which, like that -of the cheeks, may be momentarily heightened by a blush, and thus become -an index of emotional expression. A permanently heightened colour of the -ear, however, caused by exposure to extreme cold or by rough treatment, -is almost as great a blemish as a red nose or pallid lips. If boxers are -anxious to deform their ears, no one has a right to object; but children -have a right to ask of their parents and teachers not to redden their -ears permanently by pulling or boxing them. That a delicate and -important sense-organ like the ear should be so frequently chosen as a -place to inflict punishment, shows the necessity of a general diffusion -of hygienic knowledge. It may not be superfluous to add a caution to -lovers, that the ears should never be taken as an osculatory substitute -for the lips or cheeks, as cases are known in medical practice where the -tympanum, and consequently the hearing, has been destroyed by a vigorous -kiss implanted by a foolish lover on his sweetheart’s ears. - -An ear to be beautiful should be about twice as long as broad. It should -be attached to the head almost straight, or slightly inclined backwards, -and should almost touch the head with the back of its upper point. Many -poor girls are deformed for life through the ignorance of their mothers, -who allow them to wear their hair or bonnets in such a way as to make -the ears stand out obliquely. As the ears contain no bones, but consist -entirely of cartilages and skin, they can be, more readily even than the -nose, moulded into a fine shape at an early age. As Drs. Brinton and -Napheys remark, “Even when the ear is in part or altogether absent, the -case is not desperate. An ‘artificial ear’ can be made of vulcanised -rubber, or other material, tinted the colour of the flesh, and attached -to the side of the head with such deftness that its character will -escape every ordinary eye.” There is therefore no excuse for having -badly-shaped or wrongly-inclined ears in these days of cosmetic surgery. - -In the most beautiful ears the lobe is free, and not attached to the -head in its lower part. Heavy earrings, which have a tendency to unduly -enlarge the lobules, are now tabooed by Fashion; but very small jewels -in the ear may be looked on, like small finger-rings, necklaces, and -bracelets, as unobjectionable from an æsthetic point of view, though -real beauty unadorned is adorned the most. - -Formerly Fashion maltreated the poor ears quite as badly as it still -does the waist and the feet. Lubbock remarks that the East Islanders -enlarge their ears till they come down to the shoulders; and Darwin, -after referring to liberties taken with the nose, says that “the ears -are everywhere pierced and similarly ornamented, and with the Botocudos -and Lenguas of South America the hole is gradually so much enlarged that -the lower edge touches the shoulder.” - -Among the Greeks, as Becker remarks, "it was considered a dishonour, or -a token of foreign manners, for men to have their ears bored.... Women -and girls, however, not only used earrings, ἐνώτια, ἐλλόβια, ἑλικτῆρες -which are seen perpetually in vases, but also wore numerous articles of -jewellery about the neck, the arms, and on the leg above the ankle." - -The ancients, too, had heard of the malformed ears of primitive peoples. -“It is possible,” says Tylor, “that there may be some truth in the -favourite wonder-tale of the old geographers, about the tribes whose -great ears reached down to their shoulders, though the story had to be -stretched a good deal when it was declared they lay down on one ear and -covered themselves with the other for a blanket.” - -Such blanket-ears would be the æsthetic equivalent of modern bustles, -crinolettes, and wasp-waists. - - - PHYSIOGNOMIC VAGARIES - -Ever since the days of ancient Greek philosophy ingenious attempts have -been made to find a special meaning for this or that particular form of -the ear. According to Aristotle, a long ear indicates a good memory, -whereas modern physiognomists incline to the opinion that a long ear -shows a man’s mental relationship to a certain unjustly-maligned animal. -Small ears, Lavater thinks, are a sign of an active mind, while a deep -shell indicates a thirst for knowledge. - -As a matter of fact, the ears have no connection whatever with -intellectual or emotional expression, except that a well-shaped ear -indicates in a general way that its possessor comes off a stock in which -the laws of cosmetic hygiene have been observed during many generations. -To many of the lower animals the ears are a means of emotional -expression. What, for instance, could be more expressive and droll than -the way a dog expresses mild surprise or expectation by pricking up his -ears? Or what a more certain sign of viciousness in a horse than the -drawing back of the ears?—a movement of which Darwin has found the -reason in the fact that all animals that fight with their teeth retract -their ears to protect them; whence, through habit and association, it -comes that they draw them back whenever a fighting mood comes over them. -Man, on the other hand, never uses his ears for emotional expression, -because they are the least mobile part of the body. Now form is merely -crystallised expression: and the absence of special movements for -emotional expression necessarily prevents individual alterations -indicative of character. Hence the absurdity of trying to use the ears -as a basis for physiognomic distinctions. - - - NOISE AND CIVILISATION - -What is the cause of the folding of the margin of the human ear, which -distinguishes it from that of all other animals? Darwin remarks that it -“appears to be in some manner connected with the whole external ear -being permanently pressed backwards;” but this does not explain the -mysterious phenomenon. After many hours of profound meditation on this -subject I have come to the conclusion that this slight folding of the -ear’s margin is the beginning of a new phase of human evolution. In -course of time—this cannot be disproved—the fold of the margin will -become larger and larger, until finally the shells of the ear will have -been transformed into mobile lids for shutting out at will disagreeable -noises, even as the eyelids have been developed to shut out glaring -light. This would account for the providential preservation of the -rudimentary ear-muscles referred to above. When this process of -evolution is completed men coming home late will no longer have to -listen to curtain-lectures. The innovation will tend to make them -polite, for instead of telling the lecturer to “shut up,” they will shut -up themselves. - -Seriously speaking, such movable ear-lids are very much needed in this -transition stage of civilisation. The present age of steam will by -future historians be classified as the age of noise. It is almost -impossible to find a place within ten miles of a city where one can rest -without having one’s sleep constantly disturbed, or at least _deprived -of its refreshing depth_, by the blowing of railway and factory -whistles. Both are unnecessary, inasmuch as railway signals would be -quite as effective if not so murderously loud and prolonged, while -factory whistles are either blown at the moment when the operatives go -to work, when a simple bell would do as well, or they are blown an hour -earlier to wake up the workmen,—a most outrageous proceeding, as -everybody else sleeping within a radius of a mile or more is thus waked -up at six o’clock. - -The fact that these nuisances have so long been tolerated shows how -primitive is as yet the æsthetic development of the average human ear. -Some people even smile at you for being so “nervous,” and boast of their -indifference to such hideous, brain-racking noises. The Esquimaux and -Chinese would doubtless assume a similar attitude regarding their -indifference to noisome stenches. In mediæval times, Europeans in -general were quite as indifferent to the emanations from their gutters -as they still are to the hideous noises in the streets. It has often -been noted with surprise that the death-rate in London and the general -aspect of health should be so much more favourable than that of -continental cities, which are free from the depressing London fogs. The -reason, doubtless, lies chiefly in the facts that there are no vile -sewer odours in London to poison the atmosphere, and that the pavement -of the streets is of such a nature that one can sleep soundly at night, -provided there are no steam whistles near. London, too, does not -tolerate the brutal whip-cracking which transforms French, German, and -Swiss towns and cities into Bedlams of noise. In this respect New York -resembles London; but here the comparison ends. New York pavements are -the noisiest, roughest, and dirtiest in the world. I have known of -invalids who were advised to drive in the Central Park, but could not do -so because they could not bear on their way to drive even up Fifth -Avenue,—a street lined with the houses of millionaires. And to walk on -Broadway for twenty minutes, talking to a friend, makes one as hoarse as -delivering a two-hour lecture. - -There can be no doubt that a horror of useless noise grows with the -general refinement of the senses and the mind. Goethe’s aversion to -noise, especially at night, is well known. It led him to poison dogs -that disturbed him. The delicate hearing of Franz, the great song -composer, was ruined by the whistle of a locomotive. And Schopenhauer -has put the whole matter into a nutshell in these admirable words: -“Intellectual persons, and all in general who have much _esprit_, cannot -endure noise. Astounding, on the other hand, is the insensibility of -ordinary people to noise. The quantity of noise which any one can endure -without annoyance is really related inversely to his mental endowments, -and may be regarded as a pretty accurate measure of them.” - - - A MUSICAL VOICE - -It is self-evident that indifference to ear-splitting noises implies a -lack of appreciation for the exquisite clang-tints of music; for -whenever the acoustic nerve is sufficiently refined to appreciate such -subtle tints, it is affected as painfully by harsh sounds as the -artistic eye is by glaring colours and flickering light. And an ear -which is indifferent to the sweetness of musical sounds is of course -indifferent also to the musical charm of the speaking voice. But a -sweetly modulated voice is one of the most conspicuous attributes of -Personal Beauty—for Beauty refers to sounds as well as to sights— - - “Her voice was ever soft, - Gentle and low, an excellent thing in woman.”—SHAKSPERE. - -There is as much variety in voices as in faces; and in estimating a -person’s general refinement, the voice is perhaps a safer guide than the -face; because the quality of the voice is largely a matter of individual -training, whereas in reading faces the judgment is warped by the -presence of inherited features speaking of traits which have not been -modified by individual effort and culture. - -Many young men and women live in absolute indifference to the quality of -their speaking voice, till one day Cupid arouses them from their -unæsthetic slumber with his golden arrows, and makes them eager not only -to brush up their hats and improve their personal appearance, but also -to modulate their voices into sweet, expressive accents. But the vocal -cords, like a violin, can only be made to yield mellow sounds after long -practice; hence the usual result of a sudden effort to speak in love’s -sweet accents is a ridiculous lover’s falsetto. - - - - - THE NOSE - - - SHAPE AND SIZE - -“The fate of innumerable girls has been decided by a slight upward or -downward curvature of the nose,” says Schopenhauer; and Pascal points -out that if Cleopatra’s nose had been but a trifle larger, the whole -political geography of this planet might have been different. Owing to -the fact that the nose occupies the most prominent part of the face, -Professor Kollmann remarks that “the partial or complete loss of the -nose causes a greater disfigurement than a much greater fault of -conformation in any other part of the face.” And Winckelmann thus bears -witness to the importance of the nose as an element of Personal Beauty: -“The proof, easy to be understood, of the superiority of shape of the -Greeks and the present inhabitants of the Levant lies in the fact that -we find among them no flattened noses, which are the greatest -disfigurement of the face.” - -Yet here again we find that “tastes differ.” Thus we read in Darwin -“that the ancient Huns during the age of Attila were accustomed to -flatten the noses of their infants with bandages, ‘for the sake of -_exaggerating a natural conformation_’” [note the stamp of Fashion]; -that, “with the Tahitians, to be called _long-nose_ is considered as an -insult, and they compress the noses and foreheads of their children for -the sake of beauty;” and that “the same holds true with the Malays of -Sumatra, the Hottentots, certain Negroes, and the natives of Brazil.” -But the _ne-plus-ultra_ of nasal ugliness is found among the Tartars and -Esquimaux. “European travellers in Tartary in the Middle Ages,” says -Tylor, “described its flat-nosed inhabitants as having no noses at all, -but breathing through holes in the face.” And among the Esquimaux, as -Mantegazza remarks, a rule can be placed on both the cheeks at once -without touching the nose. Flat noses, says Topinard, “are either -depressed as a whole, as among Chinese, or only in the lower half, as -among Malays. Negroes have both forms.” - -The yellow and black races, who naturally have flat noses, consider it -fashionable to have them _very_ flat. The same is true with our modern -Fashion regarding wasp-waists and feet. But in regard to the face the -white races—including even the women—have emancipated themselves from -the tyranny of fashionable exaggeration. Hence, though we admire -prominent noses, we do not admire them more and more in proportion to -their size. On the contrary, every one looks upon the very large Jewish -nose as ugly. The reason is that in judging of the face Fashion has been -displaced by æsthetic Taste, whose motto is Moderation, and which is -based on a knowledge of the cosmic laws of beauty. Savages have Fashion -but no Taste. We have both; but Taste is gradually demolishing Fashion, -like other relics of barbarism. - -Sometimes our estimate of the nose, as of other features, may be -influenced by non-æsthetic considerations—by prejudices of race, -aristocracy, etc. “In Italy,” says Mantegazza, “we call a long nose -aristocratic (especially if it is aquiline) perhaps because conquerors -with long noses, Greeks and Romans, have subjected the indigenous -small-nosed inhabitants.” But the Italians are not the only people who, -if asked to choose between a nose too large or one too small, would ask -for the former. And the cause of this preference is suggested very -forcibly in these remarks of Grose: “Convex faces, prominent features, -and large aquiline noses, though differing much from beauty, still give -an air of dignity to their owners; whereas concave faces, flat, snub, or -broken noses, always stamp a meanness and vulgarity. _The one seems to -have passed through the limits of beauty, the other never to have -arrived at them._” - - - EVOLUTION OF THE NOSE - -The flat, irregular nose of savages and semi-civilised peoples, with its -visible nostrils and imperfectly developed bridge, being intermediate -between the ape’s nose and our own, we are naturally led to infer that -the nose has been gradually developed into the shape now regarded as -most perfect by good judges of Beauty. To what are we indebted for this -favourable change—to Natural or to Sexual Selection? In other words, is -the present perfected shape of the nose of any use to us, or is it -purely ornamental? - -It appears that both these laws have acted in subtle combination to -improve our nasal organ. The nose is a sort of funnel for warming the -air on its way to the sensitive lungs. In cold latitudes a long nose -would therefore be an advantage favoured by Natural Selection; and it is -noteworthy that in general the flat-nosed peoples live in warm climes. -There are exceptions, however, notably the Esquimaux, showing that this -hypothesis does not entirely cover the facts. - -Let us examine, therefore, the second function of the nasal organ. The -external nose is a sort of filter for keeping organic impurities out of -the lungs. At the entrance of the nostrils there are a number of fine -hairs which serve to keep out the dust. If any particles manage to get -beyond this first fortress, they are liable to be arrested by the rows -of more minute, microscopic hairs, or _cilia_, which line the mucous -membrane and keep up a constant downward movement, by means of which -dusty intruders are expelled and the air filtered. Esquimaux living in -snowfields, and savages in the forests and grass-carpeted meadows, do -not need these filters so much as we do in our dusty cities and along -dusty country roads; hence their noses have remained more like those of -the arboreal apes, while ours have grown larger, so as to yield a larger -surface of sifting hairs and cilia. When we think of the dusty American -prairies and the African and Asian deserts, can we wonder, accordingly, -that the American Indians, as well as the nomadic Arabs and Jews, have -such immense noses? The theory seems fanciful, if not grotesque; but -perhaps there is more in it than appears at first sight. - -Even if both these hypotheses should prove untenable, there is a third -consideration which alone suffices to account for the development of the -European nose. The nose has a most important _musico-philological_ -function. The language of savages often consists of only a few hundred -words, while ours is so complicated that it requires the co-operation of -the vocal cords, and the cavities of the mouth and the nose to produce -the countless modifications of speech and song which make us listen with -so much pleasure to an eloquent speaker or a great singer. The subject -is far too complicated with anatomical details to be fully explained -here, and the reader must be referred to a full discussion (not from the -evolutionary point of view, however) to Professor Georg Hermann von -Meyer’s elaborate treatise on _The Organs of Speech_, chap. iii. - -A few points, however, must be noted here. The nasal air-passage, “with -its two narrow openings and intermediate greater width, possesses the -general form of a resonator, and there can be no doubt but that it has a -corresponding influence, and that the tones with which the air passing -through it vibrates are strengthened by its resonance. The larger the -nasal cavity the more powerful the resonance, and, consequently, the -reinforcement experienced by the tone.... In consequence of the -peculiarity of the walls of the nasal cavity, it appears that sounds -uttered with the nasal resonance, particularly the nasal vowels, are -fuller and more ample than the same sounds when strengthened by the -resonance of the cavity of the mouth. The general impression of fulness -and richness conveyed by the French language arises from its wealth in -nasal vowels; and it is for this reason that second-rate tragic actors -like to give a nasal resonance to all the vowels in the pathetic -speeches of their heroic parts.” - -Further, it is of great importance to bear in mind “_that the resonance -of the nasal cavity also plays a part in the formation of non-nasal -articulate sounds,_” appearing here as a mere reinforcement of the -resonance of the cavity of the mouth, and free from the nasal twang. -Indeed, paradoxical as it may seem, an infallible way to make our speech -sound “nasal” is to keep the air out of the nose by clasping it tightly; -whereas if the nasal passage remains open the nasal twang is replaced by -an agreeable resonance. What could more forcibly illustrate the -importance of a well-developed nose? - -Now there are several groups of muscles attached to the lower cartilages -of the nose,—parts which are imperfectly developed in apes and negroes. -The constant exercise of these, during many generations, in the service -of speech, in expressing several emotions, and in heavy breathing, -suffice to account, on accepted physiological principles, for the -gradual enlargement of the resonant tube which we call the nose. - -So much for Natural or Utilitarian Selection. But Sexual Selection or -Romantic Love plays also a most important _rôle_ in the development of -the nose. The quotations from Pascal and Schopenhauer made at the -beginning of this chapter show that the efficacy of Sexual Selection was -recognised long before Darwin had coined the term. As soon as a refined -æsthetic taste appears, it rejects ugly forms of the nose. It rejects, -for instance, open, visible nostrils, because they are a scavenging -apparatus, unæsthetic to behold, though the savage, having no taste, is -not thus offended. It gives the preference, in the second place, to the -long nose, on musical grounds, because its owner has a more sonorous -speech. It scorns the snub-nose because of its simian suggestiveness, -and dislikes the excessively large and aquiline nose because it is an -exaggerated form, which has passed beyond the delicate dimensions and -subtle curves of beauty. - - - GREEK AND HEBREW NOSES - -This checking of excessive development in the direction at first -prescribed by the cosmic laws of beauty is indeed one of the main -functions of Sexual Selection, without which our mouths would gradually -become too small, our eyes and noses too large, our foreheads too high, -our hair too scant, etc. - -Why, for instance, have the Jews such large noses compared with the -Greeks? Evidently because Taste—which, though commonly associated with -Romantic Love, may, in a highly æsthetic nation, act independently of -it—did not restrain the excessive development of the Jewish nose. The -ancient Hebrews were not an æsthetic nation, like the Greeks. The finest -works of sculpture ever created were made by the Greeks, while the -Hebrews practically had no sculpture at all—not even such works as were -produced by Assyrians and Egyptians. And if any further proof were -needed of the statement that the ancient Hebrews had little taste for -beauty it might be found in the fact that Solomon, esteemed a great -judge of feminine charms, compares his love’s nose to “the tower of -Lebanon, which looketh toward Damascus.” - -The admission which I have just made that there may be a sort of -æsthetic selection independent of real Romantic Love, does not militate -against the general thesis of this book: that Love is the cause of -Beauty, as Beauty is the cause of Love. For though the Greek artists -knew what the shape and size of a beautiful nose should be, there are -cogent reasons for believing that “Greek noses” were rare even among the -ancient Greeks, thanks to their habit of sacrificing Romantic Love to -the dragon chaperon. Hear what Ruskin has to say, in his _Aratra -Pentelici_, about the Greek features in general: “Will you look again at -the series of coins of the best time of Greek art which I have just set -before you? Are any of these goddesses or nymphs very beautiful? -Certainly the Junos are not. Certainly the Demeters are not. The Siren -and Arethusa have well-formed and regular features; but I am quite sure -that if you look at them without prejudice, you will think neither -reaches even the average standard of pretty English girls. The Venus -Urania suggests at first the idea of a very charming person, but you -will find there is no real depth nor sweetness in the contours, looked -at closely. And remember, these are chosen examples; the best I can find -of art current in Greece at the great time; and even if I were to take -the celebrated statues, of which only two or three are extant, not one -of them excels the Venus of Melos; and she, as I have already asserted -in _The Queen of the Air_, has nothing notable in feature except dignity -and simplicity. Of Athena I do not know one authentic type of great -beauty; but the intense ugliness which the Greeks could tolerate in -their symbolism of her will be convincingly proved to you by the coin -represented in Plate VI. You need only look at two or three vases of the -best time to assure yourselves that beauty of feature was, in popular -art, not only unattained, but unattempted; and finally—and this you may -accept as a conclusive proof of the Greek insensitiveness to the most -subtle beauty—there is little evidence, even in their literature, and -none in their art, of their having ever perceived any beauty in infancy -or early childhood.” - -Nevertheless, it was to the contours of childhood that the Greek artists -apparently went for their ideal of the divine nose. Greek beauty was -youthful masculine beauty; and the “Greek nose” is one which not only is -straight in itself, but forms a straight line with the forehead. In -other words, there is no hollow at the root of the nose, where it meets -the forehead. Now the absence of this cavity is characteristic of youth, -and is owing to the imperfect development of the brain cavities. Later -in life these cavities bulge forwards and produce the hollow, which, -therefore, is an indication of superior cranial development and higher -intellectual powers. Hence, as Professor Kollmann suggests, the object -of the Greek artists in making the nose of their deities form a straight -line with the forehead, was probably to give them the stamp of eternal -youth; which would thus appear to have been considered a more important -attribute even than the expression of superior _masculine_ intellectual -power, which we associate with the hollow at the junction of nose and -forehead, and for which reason we do not admire it in women if too -pronounced. Nevertheless, even in women the cosmic laws of Beauty call -for a gentle curve instead of a perfectly straight line; but the more -subtle the curve the greater is its beauty; whereas the nose itself may -be perfectly straight on its upper edge, because it forms a dividing -line of the face into two symmetric halves, and by its contrasting -straightness heightens the beauty of the surrounding facial curves. - -To sum up: the Greeks admiration of such features as are naturally -associated with youthful masculine beauty no doubt led him, in choosing -a wife, to give the preference to similar features, including the -“Greek” nose. Yet in the absence of opportunities for courtship, Sexual -Selection could not operate very extensively; hence it is probable that -ungainly noses, though not so extravagant as among the Semitic races, -were common enough in Greece as in Rome. In the Dark Ages hideous noses -must have prevailed everywhere, as might be inferred from the facts that -Romantic Love was unknown, and physical beauty looked on as a sinful -possession, even if the painted and sculptured portraits did not prove -it to our eyes in most instances. - -Regarding modern noses it may be said that the nose is such a prominent -feature that more has been done for its improvement, through the agency -of Love or Sexual Selection, than for the mouth or any other feature, -excepting the eye. The average Englishman’s nose of to-day, for example, -is a tolerably shapely organ, and yet his ancestors were not exactly -distinguished for nasal beauty, according to a close observer and -student of portraiture, Mr. G. A. Simcox, who remarks that “sometimes -both Danes and Saxons had their fair proportions of snub-noses and -pug-noses, but when they escaped that catastrophe the Danish nose tended -to be a beak (rather a hawk’s beak than an eagle’s), while the Saxon -nose tends to be a proboscis.” - -Yet even at this date perfect noses are rare, and it is easy to see why. -In the first place, it takes many generations to wipe out entirely the -ugliness inherited from our unæsthetic ancestors; secondly, Romantic -Love, based on æsthetic admiration, is still very commonly ignored in -the marriage market in favour of considerations of rank and wealth; and -thirdly, a lover, infatuated by his sweetheart’s fascinating eyes, is -apt to overlook her large nose or mouth—till after the honeymoon. - - - FASHION AND COSMETIC SURGERY - -Inasmuch as the civilised races of Europe have so long been indifferent -to their ugly noses, we can hardly wonder that barbarians should not -only disregard their nasal caricatures, but even exaggerate their -grotesqueness deliberately. We have already seen how certain tribes -habitually flatten their already flat noses. Moreover, “in all quarters -of the world the septum, and more rarely the wings, of the nose are -pierced; rings, sticks, feathers, and other ornaments being inserted -into the holes.” “In Persia one still finds the nose-ring through one -side of a woman’s nostril;” and Professor Flower states that such rings -are often worn by female servants who accompany English families -returning from India. - -Captain Cook, in the account of his first voyage, says of the east-coast -Australians: “Their principal ornament is the bone which they thrust -through the cartilage which divides the nostrils from each other.... As -this bone is as thick as a man’s finger, and between five and six inches -long, it reaches quite across the face, and so effectually stops up both -the nostrils that they are forced to keep their mouths wide open for -breath, and snuffle so when they attempt to speak that they are scarcely -intelligible even to each other.” - -This last sentence bears out our assertion regarding the philological or -conversational importance of the nose. And there is another lesson to be -learned from these barbarian mutilations of the nose. If Huns, -Tahitians, and Hottentots are able to make their noses as delightfully -ugly as they please, why should not we utilise the plastic character of -the nasal cartilages for beautifying ourselves? Says a specialist: “Much -can be done by an ingenious surgeon in restoration and improvement. A -nose that is too flat can be raised, one with unequal apertures can be -modified, one too thin can be expanded. Cosmetic surgery is rich in -devices here, all of which are very available in children and young -persons, less so when years have hardened and stiffened the cartilages -and bones.” - -Thus may Cupid employ a medical artist as an assistant in his efforts at -improving the physical beauty of mankind. Needless to add that only a -first-class surgeon should ever be allowed to meddle with the features. - -Cosmetic surgery has already reached such perfection that it can even -make “a good, living, fleshly nose. It will transplant you one from the -arm or the forehead, Roman or Grecian, _à volonté_; it will graft it -adroitly into the middle of the face, with two regular nostrils and a -handsome bridge; and it will almost challenge Nature herself to improve -on the model” (Brinton and Napheys). - -Medical men are daily complaining in a more clamorous chorus that their -profession is overcrowded. Why don’t some of them in every city and town -make a specialty of cosmetic surgery and hygienic advice? Why leave this -remunerative field entirely in the hands of dangerous quacks who alone -have enterprise and sense enough to advertise? - -As illustrations of what may be done in this direction, two points may -be noted. A French surgeon, Dr. Cid, noticed that persons who wear -eyeglasses are apt to have long and thin noses. The thought occurred to -him that this might be due to the compression of the arteries which -carry blood to the nose, by the springs of the glasses; so he -constructed a special apparatus for compressing these arteries, and by -attaching it to a young girl’s large and fleshy nose, succeeded in -reducing its size. Why should people worry themselves and frighten -others with ugly noses when they can be so easily improved? - -The second point is still more simple. It is important that the nose -should occupy exactly the middle of the face, so as to secure bilateral -symmetry. Yet Welcker, who made a number of accurate observations on -skulls, plaster casts of the dead, as well as on the living countenance, -noted that perfect symmetry is very rarely found. The obliqueness is -sometimes at the root, sometimes at the tip of the nose, and the cause -of the deviation from a straight line is attributed to the habit most -persons have of sleeping exclusively on one side,—a practice which is -also objectionable on other grounds. Mantegazza, however, suggests that, -as he has found the deviation almost always toward the right side, it -may be due to our habit of always taking our handkerchief in the right -hand; and the same view is held by Drs. Brinton and Napheys. So that we -have here an additional argument in favour of ambidexterity. - -The New York _Medical and Surgical Reporter_ for November 1, 1884, -prints a lecture by Dr. J. B. Roberts on “The Cure of Crooked Noses by a -New Method,” which, as it is not conspicuous and hardly leaves a scar, -may be commended to the attention of those afflicted with nasal -deformities. The pin method, he says, is applicable “even to those -slight deformities whose chief annoyance is an æsthetic and cosmetic -one. I leave the pins in position for about two weeks.” - -Red noses, if due to exposure, can be readily whitened by one of the -methods to be discussed in the chapter on the complexion. If due to -disease, they call for medical treatment; if to intemperance or tight -lacing, moral and æsthetic reform is the only possible cure. - - - NOSE-BREATHING AND HEALTH - -Owing to its tendency toward unsightly redness and malformation, the -nose is very apt to be looked at from a comic point of view. Wits and -caricaturists fix on it habitually for their nefarious purposes, as if -it were a sort of facial clown. Indeed, ninety-nine persons in a -hundred, if questioned regarding the functions of the nose, would know -no answer but this: that it is sometimes ornamental, and is remotely -connected with the “almost useless” sense of smell. - -We have seen, however, that besides being ornamental _per se_, the nose -plays a most important æsthetic—as well as utilitarian—_rôle_ in giving -sonority and variety to human speech; and that it is, further, of great -use as an apparatus for warming, moistening, and filtering the air -before it enters the lungs. Hence the importance of nose-breathing. -Professor Reclam states that city people at the age of thirty usually -have _a whole gramme of calcareous dust in their lungs_, which they can -never again get rid of, and which may at any time engender dangerous -disease. This is one of the bad results of mouth-breathing, but by no -means the only one. “The continued irritation from dry, cold, and -unfiltered air upon the mucous membrane of the upper air tract soon -results,” says Dr. T. R. French, “in the establishment of catarrhal -inflammation, the parts most affected being the tongue, pharynx, and -larynx.... The habit of breathing through the mouth interferes with -general nutrition. The subjects of this habit are usually anæmic, spare, -and dyspeptic.” - -That mouth-breathing at night leaves a disagreeable taste in the mouth -and leads to snoring, thus interfering with refreshing sleep, has -already been stated. It also injures the teeth and gums by exposing them -all night to the dry air. And in the daytime it compels one to keep the -mouth wide open, which imparts a rustic if not semi-idiotic expression -to the face. Moreover, think of the filthy dust you swallow in walking -along the street with your mouth open. However, it is useless to advise -people on such matters. An attempt is made for a day or two to reform, -and then—the whole matter is forgotten. These points are therefore noted -here not with any missionary intentions, but merely for their scientific -interest. - - - COSMETIC VALUE OF ODOURS - -We come now to the fourth important function of the nose—the sense of -smell. What has this to do with Personal Beauty? A great deal. In the -first place, is not the flower-like fragrance of a lovely maiden a -personal charm that has been sung of by a thousand poets, of all times? -“The fragrant bosom of Andromache and of Aphrodite finds a place in -Homer’s poetry,” as Professor Bain remarks; and an eccentric German -professor, Dr. Jäger of Stuttgart, even wrote a book a few years ago on -the _Discovery of the Soul_, in which he endeavoured to prove that the -whole mystery of Love lies in the intoxicating personal perfumes. - -It is not with such fancies, however, that we are concerned here. It can -be shown on purely scientific grounds that the cause of Personal Beauty -would gain an immense advantage if people would train and refine their -olfactory nerves systematically, as they do their eyes and ears. -Unfortunately, Kant’s absurd notion, expressed a century ago, that it is -not worth while to cultivate the sense of smell, has been countenanced -to the present day by the erroneous views held by the leading men of -science, including Darwin, who wrote that “the sense of smell is of -extremely slight service” to man. - -In an article on the “Gastronomic Value of Odours,” which appeared in -the _Contemporary Review_ for November 1886, I pointed out that this -under-valuation of the sense of smell is explained by the fact that the -sense of taste has hitherto been credited with all the countless -flavours inherent in food, whereas, in fact, taste includes only four -sensations of gastronomic value—sweet, sour, bitter, and saline, all -other “flavours” being in reality odours; as is proved by the fact that -by clasping the nose we cannot distinguish between a lime and a lemon, -different kinds of confectionery, of cheese, of nuts, of meat, etc. - -Now it is well known that most people show a most amazing tolerance to -insipid, badly-cooked food, gulping it down as rapidly as possible; and -why? Simply because they do not know that in order to enjoy our meals we -must eat slowly, and, while masticating, _continually exhale the -aroma-laden air through the nose_ (mind, not inhale but _exhale_). This -is what epicures do unconsciously; and look at the results! No -dyspepsia, no anæmia and sickly pallor, no walking skeletons;—and surely -a slight _embonpoint_ is preferable to leanness from the point of view -of Personal Beauty. - -If this gastronomic secret were generally known, people would insist on -having better cooked food; dyspepsia, and leanness, and a thousand -infirmities hostile to Beauty would disappear, and in course of time -everybody would be as sleek and handsome and rosy-cheeked as a -professional epicure. - -Nor is this the only way in which refinement of the sense of smell would -benefit Personal Beauty. In consequence of the criminally superstitious -dread of night air, the atmosphere in most bedrooms is as foul, compared -to fresh air, as a street puddle after a shower compared to a mountain -brook. I have seen well-dressed persons in America and Italy take into -their mouths the shamefully filthy and disease-soaked banknotes current -in those countries; and I have seen others shudder at this sight who, if -their smell were as refined as their sight, would have shuddered equally -at the foul air in their bedrooms, which diminishes their vital energy -and working power by one-half. Architects, of course, will make no -provision for proper ventilation as long as they are not compelled to do -so. Why should they? They don’t even care, in building a theatre, how -many hundreds of people will some day be burnt in it, in consequence of -their neglect of the simplest precautions for exit. - -One more important consideration. When you leave the city for a few -weeks everybody will exclaim on your return, “Why, how well you look! -where have you been?” But wherein lies this cosmetic magic of country -air? Not in its oxygen, for it has been proved, by accurate chemical -tests, that in regard to the quantity of oxygen there is not the -slightest difference between city and country air. What, then, is the -secret? - -I am convinced, from numerous experiments, that the value of country air -lies partly in its tonic fragrance, partly in the _absence of -depressing, foul odours_. The great cosmetic and hygienic value of -deep-breathing has been proved in the chapter on the Chest. Now the -tonic value of fragrant meadow or forest air lies in this—that it causes -us involuntarily to breathe deeply, in order to drink in as many -mouthfuls of this luscious aerial Tokay as possible: whereas in the city -the air is—well, say unfragrant and uninviting; and the constant fear of -gulping down a pint of deadly sewer gas discourages deep breathing. The -general pallor and nervousness of New York people have often been noted. -The cause is obvious. New York has the dirtiest streets of any city in -the world, except Constantinople and Canton; and, moreover, it is -surrounded by oil-refineries, which sometimes for days poison the whole -city with the stifling fumes of petroleum, so that one hardly dares to -breathe at all. No wonder that, by universal consent, there is more -Fashion than Beauty in New York. And no wonder that it is becoming more -and more customary, for all who can afford it, to spend six to eight -months of the year in the country. - - - - - THE FOREHEAD - - - BEAUTY AND BRAIN - -It has been stated already that, anatomically considered, the forehead -is not a part of the face but of the cranium. From an artistic and -popular point of view, however, the forehead is a part of the face, and -a most important one. Modern taste fully endorses the ancient law of -facial proportion, which makes the height of the forehead equal to the -length of the nose, and to the distance from the tip of the nose to the -tip of the chin. “Foreheads villainous low” are objectionable, because -associated with a vulgar unintellectual type of man, and too vividly -suggestive of our simian ancestors. Foreheads abnormally high, though -preferable to the other extreme, displease, because they violate the law -of facial proportion. We excuse them in men, because they are commonly -expressive of intellectual power. But in women a high forehead is always -objectionable, because it gives them a masculine appearance. Hence -Romantic Love, which cannot exist without sexual contrasts, and which -aims at making woman a perfect embodiment of the laws of Beauty, -eliminates girls with too high foreheads. Yet at the command of Fashion -thousands of maidens deliberately prevent men from falling in love with -them by combing back their hair and giving their foreheads a masculine -appearance, instead of coyly hiding it under a fringe or “bang.” - -The fact that the feminine forehead, though more perpendicular than the -masculine at the lower part, slants backward in its upper part in a more -pronounced angle, is another reason why women should cover up this part -of their forehead, which Sexual Selection has not yet succeeded in -moulding into perfect shape. For the receding forehead is universally -recognised as a sign of inferior culture. Everybody knows what is meant -by Camper’s facial angle, which is formed by a horizontal line drawn -from the opening of the ear to the nasal spine, and a perpendicular line -touching the most prominent parts of the forehead and front teeth. In -adult Europeans Camper’s angle rarely exceeds 85 degrees. The average in -the Caucasian race is 80°; in the yellow races 75°; in the negro 60° to -70°; in the gorilla 31°. In antique Greek heads the angle is sometimes -over 90°. Says Camper: “If I cause the facial line to fall in front, I -have an antique head; if I incline it backwards, I have the head of a -negro; if I cause it to incline still further, I have the head of a -monkey; inclined still more, I have that of a dog, and, lastly, that of -a goose.” - -It appears, however, that this angle has more value as a test of beauty -than as an absolute gauge of intellect. Generally speaking, there is no -doubt a correlation between a bulging forehead and a superior intellect; -but individual exceptions to this rule are not infrequent. Nor is it at -all difficult to account for them. For intellectual power does not -depend so much on the size and shape of the skull as on the convoluted -structure of the brain. - -Our brain consists of two kinds of matter—the white, which is inside, -and the gray, which covers it. The white substance is a complicated -telegraphic network for conveying messages which are sent from the -external gray cells. It has been proved, by comparing the brains of man -and various animals, that the amount of intelligence depends not so much -on the absolute size of the brain, as on the abundance of this gray -matter. And, what is of extreme importance from a cosmetic point of -view, the gray cells are increased in number, not by an addition to the -absolute size or circumference of the brain, but by a system of furrows -and convolutions which increase the surface lining of the brain without -enlarging its visible mass. For the benefit of those who have never seen -a human brain, it may be very roughly compared to the convoluted kernel -of an English walnut. - -Wherein lies the æsthetic significance of this mode of cerebral -evolution? It prevents our head from becoming too large. Have you ever -considered why infants appear so ugly to every one but their mothers? -One of the principal reasons is that their heads are twice as large in -proportion to the rest of the body as those of adults. A child’s stature -is equal to four times the height of its head, an adult’s to eight -heads. If our heads continued to grow larger as our minds expanded, from -generation to generation, all the proportions of human stature would -ultimately be violated. But thanks to the peculiar mode of cerebral -evolution just described, Romantic Love may continue to “select” in -accordance with our present standards of beauty, without thereby -favouring the survival of lower intellectual types. - -This view of the question also solves a difficulty which has staggered -even such a leading evolutionist as Mr. Wallace, viz., the fact that the -oldest prehistoric skulls that have been found “surpass the average of -modern European skulls in capacity.” But if it is the easiest thing in -the world to find an ordinary stupid man in our streets with a larger -skull than that of many a clever brain-worker, why should we attach so -much importance to those prehistoric skulls? Had their brains been -examined, they would doubtless have been found as scantily furrowed as -those of a big-headed modern anarchist. - - - FASHIONABLE DEFORMITY - -That the intellectual powers are to a large extent independent of the -particular conformation of the skull is shown further by the -circumstance that so many savage tribes have for centuries followed the -fashion of artificially shaping their heads, without any apparent effect -on their minds. Man’s brain incites him, as Topinard remarks, “to the -noblest deeds, as well as to the most ridiculous practices, such as -cutting off the little finger, scorching the soles of the feet, -extracting the front teeth, or deforming the head _because others have -done so before him_.” But of all silly Fashions hostile to Beauty, that -of deforming the head has found the largest number of followers—always -excepting, of course, the modern Wasp-Waist Mania. - -Deformed skulls have been found in the Caucasus, the Crimea, Hungary, -Silesia, France, Belgium, Switzerland, in Polynesia, in different parts -of Asia, etc. “But the classic country in which these deformations are -found is America,” says Topinard. “M. Gosse has described sixteen -species of artificial deformation, ten of which were in American -skulls.” “Sometimes the infant was fastened on a plank or a sort of -cradle with leather straps; or they applied pieces of clay, pressing -them down with small boards on the forehead, the vertex, and the -occiput.... Sometimes the head was kneaded with the hands or knees, or, -the infant being laid on the back, the elbow was pressed on the -forehead. Circular bands were sometimes employed to support the sides of -the head.” - -“Many American Indians,” says Darwin, “are known to admire a head so -extremely flattened as to appear to us idiotic. The natives of the -north-western coast compress the head into a pointed cone;” while the -inhabitants of Arakhan “admire a broad, smooth forehead, and in order to -produce it, they fasten a plate of lead on the head of the new-born -children.” - -“The genuine Turkish skull is of the broad Tartar form,” says Mr. Tylor, -“while the nations of Greece and Asia Minor have oval skulls, which -gives the reason why at Constantinople it became the fashion to mould -the babies’ skulls round, so that they grew up with the broad head of -the conquering race. Relics of such barbarism linger on in the midst of -civilisation, and not long ago a French physician surprised the world by -the fact that nurses in Normandy were still giving the children’s heads -a sugar-loaf shape by bandages and a tight cap, while in Brittany they -preferred to press it round. No doubt they are doing so to this day.” - -“Failure properly to mould the cranium of her offspring,” says Bancroft, -“gives to the Chinook matron the reputation of a lazy and undutiful -mother, and subjects the neglected children to the ridicule of their -young companions, _so despotic is fashion_.” - -Food for thought will also be found in these remarks by Darwin. -Ethnologists believe, he says, “that the skull is modified by the kind -of cradle in which infants sleep;” and Schaffhausen is convinced that -“in certain trades, such as that of a shoemaker, where the head is -habitually held forward, the forehead becomes more round and prominent.” -If this is true, then we have one reason, at least, why authors have -such large foreheads. - - - WRINKLES - -Wrinkles in the face are signs of advanced age, or disease, or habits of -profound meditation, or frequent indulgence in frowning and grief. The -wrinkles on a thinker’s forehead do not arouse our disapproval, because -they are often eloquent of genius, which excuses a slight sacrifice of -the smoothness of skin that belongs to perfect Beauty. In women, -however, we apply a pure and strict æsthetic standard, wherefore all -wrinkles are regarded as regrettable inroads on Personal Beauty. Old -women, of course, form an exception, because in them we no longer look -for youthful Beauty, and are therefore gratified at the sight of -wrinkles and folds as stereotyped forms of expression bespeaking a life -rich in experiences, and associated with the veneration due to old age. -Such wrinkles are characteristic but not beautiful; and it may be -stated, by the way, that Alison’s whole book on Taste is vitiated by the -ever-recurring argument in which he forgets that we may take a personal -and even an artistic interest in a thing which is characteristic without -being beautiful. - -In youth, while the skin is firm and elastic, the wrinkles on the -forehead or around the eyes, caused by a frown or smile, pass away, -leaving no more trace than the ripples on the surface of a lake. With -advancing age the skin becomes looser and less elastic, so that frequent -repetition of those movements which produce a fold in the skin finally -leaves an indelible mark on the furrowed countenance. Woman’s skin, -being commonly better “padded” with fat than man’s, is not so liable to -wrinkles, provided attention is paid to the laws of health. Mantegazza -suggests that the simplest antidote for wrinkles would be to distend the -folded skin again by fattening up. The daily use of _good_ soap and -slight friction helps to ward off wrinkles by keeping the facial muscles -toned up and the skin elastic. - -The (voluntary) mobility of the skin of the forehead, to which we owe -our wrinkles, affords an interesting illustration of the way in which -facial muscles, once “useful,” have been modified for mere purposes of -expression. “Many monkeys have, and frequently use, the power of largely -moving their scalps up and down.” This may be of use in shaking off -leaves, flies, rain, etc. But man, with his covered head, needs no such -protection; hence most of us have lost the power of moving our scalps. A -correspondent wrote to Darwin, however, of a youth who could pitch -several heavy books from his head by the movement of the scalp alone; -and many other similar cases are on record, attesting our simian -relationship. But lower down on the forehead, our skin has universally -retained the power of movement, as shown in frowning and the expression -of various emotions. - -At first sight it is somewhat difficult to understand why meditation -should wrinkle the skin; but Darwin explains it by concluding that -frowning (which, oft repeated, results in wrinkles) “is not the -expression of simple reflection, however profound, or of attention, -however close, but of something difficult or displeasing encountered in -a train of thought or in action. Deep reflection can, however, seldom be -long carried on without some difficulty, so that it will generally be -accompanied by a frown.” - -Fashionable women sometimes endeavour (unsuccessfully) to distend the -skin and remove wrinkles by pasting court-plaster on certain spots in -the face. But the repulsive fashion of wearing patches of court-plaster -all over the face as an ornament (“beauty-spots!”), doubtless had its -origin in the desire of some aristocratic dame to conceal pimples or -other skin blemishes. At one time women even submitted to the fashion of -pasting on the face and bosom paper flies, fleas, and other loathsome -creatures. - -The African monkeys who held an indignation meeting when they first -heard of Darwin’s theory of the descent of man, had probably just been -reading a history of human Fashions. - - - - - THE COMPLEXION - - - WHITE _VERSUS_ BLACK - -“The charm of colour, especially in the intricate infinities of human -flesh, is so mysterious and fascinating, that some almost measure a -painter’s merit by his success in dealing with it,” says Hegel; and -again: “Man is the only animal that has flesh in its display of the -infinities of colour.” “No loveliness of colour, even of the humming -birds or the birds of Paradise, is living, is glowing with its own life, -but shines with the lustre of light reflected, and its charm is from -without and not from within” (_Æsthetics_, Kedney’s edition). - -For a metaphysician, trained to scornfully ignore facts, the difference -between man and animals is in these sentences pointed out with -commendable insight. Regard for scientific accuracy, it is true, compels -us to qualify Hegel’s generalisation, for not only have monkeys bare -coloured patches in their faces, and elsewhere, which are subject to -changes, but the plumage of birds, too, is dulled by ill-health and -brightened by health, reaching its greatest brilliancy in the season of -Courtship, thus showing a connection between internal states and -external appearances. Nevertheless, these correspondences in animals are -transient and crude; and man is the only being whose nude skin is -sufficiently delicate and transparent to indicate the minute changes in -the blood’s circulation brought about by various phases of pleasure and -pain. - -To understand the exact nature of these tints of the complexion, which -are so greatly admired—though different nations, as usual, have -different standards of “taste”—it is necessary to bear in mind a few -simple facts of microscopic anatomy. - -To put the matter graphically, it may be said that our body wears two -tight-fitting physiological coats, called the epidermis or overskin, and -the cutis or underskin. - -The overskin is not simple, but consists of an outside layer of horny -cells, such as are removed by the razor on shaving, and an inside mucous -layer, as seen on the lips, which have no horny covering. - -The underskin contains nerves, fat cells, hairbulbs, and numerous -blood-vessels, some as fine as a hair, all embedded in a soft, elastic -network of connective tissue. - -The overskin has none of these blood-vessels; but as it is very delicate -and transparent, it allows the colour of the blood to be seen as through -a veil. In the extremely blond races of the North nothing but the blood -can be seen through this veil; but in the coloured races the lower or -mucous layer of the overskin contains a number of black, brown, or -yellowish pigment cells. The colours of these cells blend with that of -the blood, thus producing, according to their number and depth of -coloration, the brunette, black, yellow, or red complexion. The palm of -the negro’s hand is whiter than the rest of his body, because there the -horny epidermis is so thick that the black pigmentary matter cannot be -seen through it. And the reason why every negro is born to blush unseen -is because the pigmentary matter in his skin is so deep and abundant -that it neutralises the colour of the blood. - -Now, why do the races of various countries differ so greatly in the -colour of their skin? This is the most vexed and difficult question in -anthropology, on which there are almost as many opinions as writers. - -The oldest and most obvious theory is that the sun is responsible for -dark complexions. Are not those parts of our body which are constantly -exposed to sunlight—the hands, face, and neck—darker than the rest of -the body? and does not this colour become darker still if we spend a few -weeks in the country or make a trip across the Atlantic? Do we not find -in Europe, as we pass from the sunny South to the cloudy North, that -complexion, hair, and eyes grow gradually lighter? And not only are the -Spaniards and Italians darker than the Germans, but the South Germans -are darker than the North Germans, and the Swedes and Norwegians lighter -still than the Prussians. - -The same holds true not only of South America as compared to North -America, but of the southern United States compared to the northern. It -also holds true of the East, where, as Waitz tells us, “The Chinese from -Peking to Canton show every shade from a light to a dark-copper colour, -while in the Arabians, from the desert down to Yemen, we find every -gradation from olive colour to black.” Moreover, aristocratic ladies in -Japan and China are almost or quite white, whereas the labouring -classes, as with us, are of a darker tint. - -These and numerous similar facts, taken in connection with the -circumstance that the blackest of all races lives in the hottest -continent, and that Jews may be found of all colours according to the -country they inhabit, lead almost irresistibly to the conclusion that it -is the sun who paints the complexion dark. - -Nevertheless there are numerous and striking exceptions to the rule that -the warmer the climate the darker the complexion. To obviate this -difficulty, Heusinger in 1829, Jarrold in 1838, and others after them, -have endeavoured to show that the moisture and altitude, as well as the -direct action of the sun, had to be taken into consideration. But since -“D’Orbigny in South America, and Livingstone in Africa, arrived at -diametrically opposite conclusions with respect to dampness and -dryness,” Darwin excogitated the theory (which, he subsequently found, -had already been advanced in 1813 by Dr. Wells), that inasmuch as “the -colour of the skin and hair is sometimes correlated in a surprising -manner with a complete immunity from the action of certain vegetable -poisons, and from the attacks of parasites ... negroes and other dark -races might have acquired their dark tints by the darker individuals -escaping from the deadly influence of the miasma of their native -countries, during a long series of generations.” - -The testimony on this point being, however, conflicting and -unsatisfactory, Darwin gave up this notion too, and fell back on the -theory that differences in complexion are due to differences in taste, -and were created through the agency of Sexual Selection. “We know,” he -says, “from the many facts already given that the colour of the skin is -regarded by the men of all races as a highly important element in their -beauty; so that it is a character which would be likely to have been -modified through selection, as has occurred in innumerable instances -with the lower animals. It seems at first sight a monstrous supposition -that the jet-blackness of the negro should have been gained through -sexual selection; but this view is supported by various analogies, and -we know that negroes admire their own colour.” - -Doubtless there is some truth in Darwin’s view, but it does not cover -the whole ground. Natural as well as Sexual Selection has been -instrumental in producing the diverse colours of various races. Hitherto -the trouble has been that no one could understand how a black skin could -be useful to an African negro. It ought to make him feel uncomfortably -hot—for is it not well known that black absorbs heat more than any other -colour? and do we not feel warmer in summer if we wear black than if we -wear white clothes? - -No doubt whatever. But it so happens that the skin is not made of dead -wool or felt. It contains, among various other ingenious arrangements, a -vast number of minute holes or pores, through which, when we are very -warm, the perspiration leaks, and, in changing into vapour, absorbs the -body’s heat and leaves it cool, or even cold. Now, in a negro’s skin -these pores are both larger and more numerous than in ours, which partly -accounts for his indifference to heat, and the fact that his temperature -is lower than ours. Yet it does not solve the problem in hand; for there -is no visible reason why Natural Selection should not succeed in -enlarging the number and size of the pores in a white skin as easily as -in a black one. - -A year or two ago Surgeon-Major Alcock sent a communication to _Nature_ -in which, as I believe, he for the first time suggested the true reason -why tropical man is black, and why his blackness is useful to him. He -pointed out that since the pigment-cells in the negro’s skin are placed -in front of the nerve terminations, they serve to lessen the intensity -of the nerve vibrations that would be caused in a naked human body by -exposure to a tropical sun; so that the pigment plays the same part as a -piece of smoked glass held between the sun and the eyes. - -This ingenious theory at once explains some curious and apparently -anomalous observations communicated to _Nature_ by Mr. Ralph Abercrombie -from Darjeeling. They are that “In Morocco, and all along the north of -Africa, the inhabitants blacken themselves round the eyes to avert -ophthalmia from the glare off hot sand;” that “In Fiji the natives, who -are in the habit of painting their faces with red and white stripes as -an ornament, invariably blacken them when they go out fishing on the -reef in the full glare of the sun;” and that “In the Sikkim hills the -natives blacken themselves round the eyes with charcoal to palliate the -glare of a tropical sun on newly-fallen snow.” - -How, on the other hand, are we to account for the white complexion of -northern races? It is well known that there is a tendency among arctic -animals to become white. This, in many cases, can be accounted for by -the advantage white beasts of prey, as well as their victims, thus gain -in escaping detection. But it is probable that another agency comes into -play, first suggested by Craven in 1846, and thus summarised by a writer -in _Nature_, 2d April 1885: “It is well known that white, as the worst -absorber, is also the worst radiator of all forms of radiant energy, so -that _warm-blooded_ creatures thus clad would be better enabled to -withstand the severity of an arctic climate—the loss of heat by -radiation might, in fact, be expected to be less rapid than if the hairs -or feathers were of a darker colour.” - -This argument, which may be applied to man as well as to animals, is -greatly strengthened by a circumstance which at first appears to oppose -it—the fact, namely, that insects in northern regions, instead of being -light-coloured, show a tendency toward blackness. But this apparent -anomaly is easily explained. Insects, being cold-blooded, cannot lose -any bodily heat through radiation; whereas a black surface, by absorbing -as much solar heat as possible while it lasts, adds to their comfort and -vitality. - -The question now arises, Which was the original colour of the human -race, white or black? This question, too, we are enabled to answer with -the aid of a principle of evolution which, so far, has stood every -test,—the principle that the child’s development is an epitome of the -evolution of his race. Before birth there is no colouring matter at all -in the skin of a negro child. “In a new-born child the colour is light -gray, and in the northern parts of the negro countries the completely -dark colour is not attained till towards the third year,” says Waitz; -and again, in speaking of Tahiti: “The children are here (as everywhere -in Polynesia) white at birth, and only gradually assume their darker -colour under the influence of sunlight; covered portions of their bodies -remain lighter, and since women wear more clothes than men, and dwell -more in the shade, they too are often of so light a colour that they -have red cheeks and blush visibly.” - -So we are entitled to infer that primitive man was originally white, or -whitish. As he moved south, Natural Selection made him darker and darker -by continually favouring the survival of those individuals whose -colour—owing to the spontaneous variation found throughout Nature—was of -a dark shade, and therefore better able to dull the ardour of the sun’s -rays. In the north, on the contrary, a light complexion was favoured for -its quality of retaining the body’s heat. The yellow and red varieties -need not be specially considered, for it has been shown that the -different tints of the iris are merely due to the greater or less -quantity of the same pigmentary matter; and as the colouring matter of -the complexion and the hair is similar to that of the eye, it is -probable that the same holds true of different hues of the skin; so that -yellowish, brown, and reddish tints may be looked upon as mere -intermediate stages between white and black. A trace of pigment, indeed, -is found even in our skins; and I believe that the reason why we become -brown on exposure to the sun is that the skin, when thus exposed and -irritated, secretes a larger amount of this colouring matter, to serve, -like a dimly-smoked glass, as a protection against scorching rays. - -From all these considerations we may safely infer that the particular -hue of man’s skin in each climate is useful to him, and not merely an -ornamental product of “taste,” as Darwin believed. Yet to some extent -Sexual Selection, doubtless, does come into play in most cases. At a low -stage of culture each race likes its special characteristics in an -exaggerated form,—a trait which would lead the more vigorous men to -persistently select the darkest girls as wives, and thus cause their -gradual predominance over the others: while the men, too, would, of -course, inherit a darker tint from their mothers. But a still more -important consideration is this, that, as Dr. Topinard points out, “Dark -colour in the negro is _a sign of health_,”—naturally, since the darker -the dermal pigment, the better are the nerves of temperature protected -against the enervating solar rays. Concerning the Polynesians, too, -Ellis (cited by Waitz) “notes expressly that a dark colour was more -admired and desired because it was looked upon as a sign of vigour.” - -These facts yield us a most profound insight into the methods of amorous -selection. The erotic instinct, whose duty is the preservation of the -species, is above all things attracted by Health, because without Health -the species must languish and die out. In a climate where—under the -circumstances in which negroes live—a light complexion is incompatible -with Health, it is bound to be eliminated. - -Fortunately, the negro’s taste is not sufficiently refined to make him -feel the æsthetic inferiority of the ebony complexion imposed on him by -his climate. Wherein this æsthetic inferiority consists is graphically -pointed out in these words of Figuier: “The colour of the skin takes -away all charm from the negro’s countenance. What renders the European’s -face pleasing is that each of its features exhibits a particular shade. -The cheeks, forehead, nose, and chin of the white have each a different -tinge. On an African visage, on the contrary, all is black, even the -eyebrows, as inky as the rest, are merged in the general colour; -scarcely another shade is perceptible, except at the line where the lips -join each other.” - -Nor is this all. Not only do we look in vain, in the monotonous -blackness of the negro’s face, for those varied tints which adorn a -white maiden’s face, borrowing one another’s charms by insensible -gradations, but also for those subtle emotional changes which, even if -they existed in the negro’s mind, could not paint themselves so -delicately on his opaque countenance, betraying every acceleration or -retardation in the heart’s beats, indicating every _nuance_ of hope and -despair, of pleasure or anguish. - -In our own latitude, luckily, Natural Selection favours, in the manner -indicated, the survival of the translucent white complexion. And what -Natural Selection leaves undone, Sexual Selection completes. Romantic -Love is the great awakener of the sense of Beauty, and in proportion as -Love is developed and unimpeded in its action, does the complexion -become more beautiful and more appreciated. Savages, blind to the -delicate tints of a transparent skin, daub themselves all over with -mixtures of grease and paint. The women of ancient Greece had taste -enough to feel the ugliness of the pallor caused by being constantly -chaperoned and locked up, but not enough to know that no artificial -paint can ever replace the natural colour of health. Hence, as Becker -tells us, “painting was almost universal among Grecian women.” Perhaps -they did not use any rouge at home, but it “was resumed when they were -going out, or wished to be specially attractive.” The men, apparently, -had better taste, for we read that “Ischomachos counselled his young -wife to take exercise, that she might do without rouge, which she was -accustomed constantly to use.” - -Coming to more recent times, we find men still protesting in vain -against the feminine fashion of bedaubing the face with vulgar paint. -More than two centuries ago La Bruyère informed his countrywomen -pointedly that “If it is the men they desire to please, if it is for -them that they paint and stain themselves, I have collected their -opinions, and I assure them, in the name of all or most men, that the -white and red paint renders them frightful and disgusting; that the red -alone makes them appear old and artificial; that men hate as much to see -them with cherry in their faces, as with false teeth in their mouth and -lumps of wax in the jaws.” - -It is needless to say that women who paint their faces put themselves on -a level with savages; for they show thereby that they prefer hideous -opaque daubs to the charm of translucent facial tints. Masculine -protestation, combined with masculine amorous preference for pure -complexions, has at last succeeded in banishing paint from the boudoir -of the most refined ladies; and this, combined with compulsory -vaccination against smallpox, accounts for the increasing number of good -complexions in the world. - -But, the important question now confronts us, Is there no limit to the -evolution of whiteness of complexion? Will Sexual Selection continue to -favour the lighter shades until the hyperbolic “milk and blood” -complexion will have been universally realised? - -An emphatic “No” is the answer. An exaggerated white is as objectionable -as black,—more so, in fact, because, whereas the deepest black indicates -good health, _extreme_ whiteness suggests the pallor of ill-health, and -will therefore always displease Cupid, the supreme judge of Personal -Beauty. Moreover, in a very white face the red cheek suggests the -confusing blush or the hectic flush rather than the subtle tints of -health and normal emotion. And again, the Scandinavian rose-and-lily -complexion is inferior to the delicate and slightly-veiled tint of the -Spanish brunette, because the latter suggests _the mellowing action of -the sun’s rays, which promises more permanence of beauty_. Hence it is -that in the marriage market a decided preference is shown for the -brunette type, as we shall see in the chapter on Blondes and Brunettes. - - - COSMETIC HINTS - -We are now in a position to understand the extreme importance of the -complexion from an amorous point of view, and to see why the care of the -complexion has almost monopolised the attention of those desiring to -improve their personal appearance, as shown by the fact that the word -“cosmetic,” in common parlance, refers to the care of the skin alone. - -Books containing recipes for skin lotions, ointments, and powders are so -numerous, that it is not worth while to devote much space to the matter -here. As a rule, the best advice to those about to use cosmetics is -_Don’t_. Every man whose admiration is worth having will infinitely -prefer a freckled, or even a pallid or smallpox-marked, face to one -showing traces of powder or greasy ointments, or lifeless, cadaverous -enamel, opaque as ebony blackness. - -If a woman’s skin is so morbidly sensitive as to be injured by ordinary -water and good soap, it is a sign of ill-health which calls for -residence in the country and the mellowing rays of the sun. Where this -is unattainable, the water may be medicated by the addition of a slice -of lemon, cucumber, or horse-radish, to all of which magic effects are -often attributed. The black spots on the sides of the nose may be -removed in a few weeks by the daily application (with friction) of lemon -juice. For pimples and barber’s itch a camphor and sulphur ointment, -which may be obtained of any chemist, is the simplest remedy. For a -shiny, polished complexion, and excessive redness of the nose, cheeks, -and knuckles, the following mixture is recommended by a good -authority:—Powdered borax, one half ounce; _pure_ glycerine, one ounce; -camphor-water, one quart. Borax, indeed, is as indispensable a toilet -article as soap or a nail-brush. After washing the face, exposure to the -raw air should always be avoided for ten or fifteen minutes. - -“A certain amount of friction applied to the face daily will do much,” -says Dr. Bulkley, “to keep the pores of the sebaceous glands open; and, -by stimulating the face, to prevent the formation of the black specks -and red spots so common in young people, I generally direct that the -face be rubbed to a degree short of discomfort, and that the towel be -not too rough.” Slight friction also helps to ward off wrinkles. - -Two or three weekly baths—hot in winter, cold in summer—are absolutely -necessary for those who wish to keep their skin in a healthy condition; -and no elixir of youth and beauty could produce such a sparkling eye and -glow of rosy health as a daily morning sponge bath, followed by -friction—care being taken, in a cold room, to expose only one part of -the body at a time. The importance of keeping open the pores of the skin -by bathing is seen by the fact that if a man were painted with varnish -he would suffocate in a few hours; for the skin is a sort of external -lung, aiding its internal colleague in removing effete products, -dissolved in the perspiration, from the system. - -The debris and oily matter brought to the surface of the skin and -deposited there by the perspiration cannot be completely removed without -soap. Unfortunately, this article has done more to ruin complexions than -almost any other cause, except smallpox and the superstitious dread of -sunshine. Many people have a peculiar mania for economising in soap. If -they can buy a piece of soap for a farthing, they consider themselves -wonderfully clever, regardless of the fact that it may not only ruin -their complexion, but produce a repulsive skin disease which it will -cost much gold to cure. Do they ever realise that these soaps, which -they thus smear over the most delicate parts of their body every day, -are made of putrid carcasses of animals, rancid fat, and corrosive -alkalies? Has no one ever told them that if a soap is both cheap and -highly perfumed it is _certain_ to be of vile composition, and injurious -to the skin? After washing yourself wait a moment till the soap’s -artificial odour has disappeared, and then smell your hands. That vile -rancid odour which remains—if you knew its source, you would immediately -run for a Turkish bath to wash off the very epidermis to which that -odour has adhered. - -What has ruined so many complexions is not soap itself, but bad soap. A -famous specialist, Dr. Bulkley, says that “there is no intrinsic reason -why soap should not be applied to the face, although there is a very -common impression among the profession, as well as the laity, that it -should not be used there.... The fact is, that many cases of eruptions -upon the face are largely due to the fact that soap has _not_ been used -on that part; and it is also true that, if properly employed, and _if -the soap is good_, it is not only harmless, but beneficial to the skin -of the face, as to every other part of the body.” - -“A word may be added in reference to the so-called ‘medicated soaps,’ -whose number and variety are legion, each claiming virtues far excelling -all others previously produced.... Now all or most of this attempt to -‘medicate’ soap is a perfect farce, a delusion, and a snare to entrap -the unwary and uneducated.... Carbolic soap is useless and may be -dangerous, because the carbolic acid may possibly become the blind -beneath which a cheap, poor soap is used; for in all these advertised -and patented nostrums the temptation is great to employ inferior -articles that the pecuniary gain may be greater. The small amount of -carbolic acid incorporated in the soap cannot act as an efficient -disinfectant.” - - - FRECKLES AND SUNSHINE - -Soap is not the only cosmetic that has been tabooed in the face because -of illogical reasoning. There is a much more potent beautifying -influence—viz., the mellowing rays of the sun—of which the face has long -been deprived, chiefly on account of an unscientific prejudice that the -sun is responsible for freckles. In his famous work on skin diseases -Professor Hebra of Vienna, the greatest modern authority in his -specialty, has completely disproved this almost universally accepted -theory. The matter is of such extreme importance to Health and Beauty -that his remarks must be quoted at length:— - -"It is a fact that lentigo (freckles) neither appears in the newly-born -nor in children under the age of 6-8 years, whether they run about the -whole day in the open air and exposed to the bronzing influence of the -sun, or whether they remain confined to the darkest room; it is -therefore certain that neither light nor air nor warmth produces such -spots in children.... - -“If we examine the skin of an individual who is said to be affected with -the so-called freckles only in the summer, at other seasons of the year -with sufficient closeness in a good light, and with the skin put on the -stretch by the finger, we shall detect the same spots, of the same size -but of somewhat lighter colour than in summer. In further illustration -of what has just been said, I will mention that I have repeatedly had -the opportunity of seeing lentigines on parts of the body that, as a -rule, are never exposed to the influence of the light and sun.... - -”_A priori_, it is difficult to understand how ephelides can originate -from the influence of sun and light in the singular form of disseminated -spots, since these influences act not only on single points, but -uniformly over the whole surface of the skin of the face, hands, etc. -The pigmentary changes must appear, therefore, in the form of patches, -not of points. Moreover, it is known to every one that, if the skin of -the face be directly exposed, even for only a short time, to a rough -wind or to intense heat, a tolerably dark bronzing appears, which -invades the affected parts uniformly, and not in the form or -disseminated, so-called summer-spots (freckles). It was, therefore, only -faulty observation on the part of our forefathers which induced them to -attribute the ephelides to the influence of light and sun." - -But the amount of mischief done by this “faulty observation of our -forefathers” is incalculable. To it we owe the universal feminine horror -of sunshine, without which it is as impossible for their complexion to -have a healthy, love-inspiring aspect, as it is for a plant grown in a -cellar to have a healthy green colour. How many women are there who -preserve their youthful beauty after twenty-five—the age when they ought -to be in full bloom? They owe this early decay partly to their -indolence, mental and physical, partly to their habit of shutting out -every ray of sunlight from their faces as if it were a rank poison -instead of the source of all Health and Beauty. If young ladies would -daily exercise their muscles in fresh air and sunshine, they would not -need veils to make themselves look younger. Veils may be useful against -very rough wind, but otherwise they should be avoided, because they -injure the eyesight. Parasols are a necessity on very hot summer -afternoons, but “the rest of the year the complexion needs all the sun -it can get.” - -Were any further argument needed to convince us that the sun has been -falsely accused of creating freckles, it would be found in the fact that -southern brunette races, though constantly exposed to the sun, are much -less liable to them than the yellow and especially the red-haired -individuals of the North. Professor Hebra regards freckles as “a freak -of Nature rather than as a veritable disease,” and thinks they are -“analogous to the piebald appearances met with in the lower animals.” As -has just been noted, they exist in winter as well as in summer. All that -the summer heat does is to make them visible by making the skin more -transparent. As the heat itself causes them to appear any way, it is -useless to taboo the direct sunlight as their source. - -Inasmuch as freckles appear chiefly among northern races, whose skin has -been excessively bleached and weakened in its action by constant indoor -life, it seems probable, notwithstanding Dr. Hebra’s opinion, that they -are the result of an unhealthy, abnormal action of the pigment-secreting -apparatus which exists even in the white skin. If this be so, then -proper care of the skin continued for several generations would -obliterate them. The reason why country folks are more liable to -freckles than their city cousins would then be referable, not to the -greater amount of sunlight in the country, but to the rarity of -bath-tubs, good soap, and friction-towels. My own observation leads me -to believe that freckles are rarer in England than on the continent, and -the English are proverbially enamoured of the bath-tub and open-air -exercise. - -For those who, without any fault of their own, have inherited freckles -from their parents, there is this consoling reflection that these -blemishes reside in a very superficial layer of the skin, and can -therefore be removed. Several methods are known; but as no one should -ever use them without medical assistance, they need not be described -here (see Hebra’s _Treatise_, vol. iii.) Any one who wishes to -temporarily conceal skin-blemishes may find this citation from Hebra of -use: “Perfumers and apothecaries have prepared from time immemorial -cosmetics whose chief constituent is _talcum venetum_, or _pulvis -aluminis plumosi_ (Federweiss), which, when rubbed in, in the form of a -paste, with water and alcohol, or a salve with lard, or quite dry, as a -powder, gives to the skin an agreeable white colour, and does not injure -it in the least, even if the use of the cosmetic be continued throughout -life.” - -It is probable that electricity will play a grand _rôle_ in future as an -agent for removing superfluous hairs, freckles, moles, port-wine marks, -etc. Much has already been done in this direction, and the only danger -is in falling into the hands of an unscrupulous quack. In vol. iii. No. -4 of the _Journal of Cutaneous and Venereal Diseases_, Dr. Hardaway has -an interesting article on this subject. - - - - - THE EYES - - -In one of the Platonic dialogues Sokrates points out the relativity of -standards of Beauty. “Is not,” he asks in effect, “the most beautiful -ape ugly compared to a maiden? and is not the maiden, in turn, inferior -in beauty to a goddess?” - -Regarding most of the human features it may be conceded that Sokrates is -right in his second question. To find a human forehead, nose, or mouth -that could not be improved in some respect, is perhaps impossible. But -_one_ feature must be excepted. There are human eyes which no artist -with a goddess for a model could make more divine. And of these glorious -orbs there are so many, in every country, that one cannot help -concluding that Schopenhauer made a great mistake in placing the face, -with the eyes, so low down in his list of love-inspiring human -qualities. On the contrary, I am convinced that no feminine charm so -frequently and so fatally fascinates men as lovely eyes, and that it is -for this reason that Sexual Selection has done more to perfect the eyes -than any other part of the body. - -When Petruchio says of Katharina that “she looks as clear as morning -roses newly washed with dew,” he compliments her complexion; but when -the Persian poet compares “a violet sparkling with dew” to “the blue -eyes of a beautiful girl in tears,” the compliment is to the violet. A -woman’s eye is the most beautiful object in the universe; and what made -it so is man’s Romantic Love. - -Putting poetry aside, we must now consider a few scientific facts and -correct a few misconceptions regarding the eye, its colour, lustre, -form, and expression. - - - COLOUR - -To say of any one that he has gray, blue, brown, or black eyes, is vague -and incorrect from a strictly scientific point of view, inasmuch as -there are no really gray or black eyes, and, as a matter of fact, every -eye, if closely examined, shows at least five or six different colours. - -There is, first, the tough sclerotic coat or _white_ of the eye, which -covers the greater part of the eyeball, and is not transparent, except -in front where the coloured _iris_ (or rainbow membrane) is seen through -it. This central transparent portion of the sclerotic coat is called the -cornea, and is slightly raised above the general surface of the eyeball, -like the middle portion of some watch-glasses. - -The white of the eye is sometimes slightly tinged with blue or yellow, -and sometimes netted with inflamed blood-vessels. All these deviations -are æsthetically inferior to the pure white of the healthy European, -because suggestive of disease, and conflicting with the general cosmic -standards of beauty. The bluish tint is a sign of consumption or -scrofulous disorders, being caused by a diminution of the pigmentary -matter in the choroid coat which lines the inside of the sclerotic. The -yellowish tint, in the European, is indicative of jaundice, dyspepsia, -or premature degeneracy of the white of the eye. It is normal, on the -other hand, in the healthy negro; but if a negro should claim that, -inasmuch as a yellowish sclerotic is to him not suggestive of disease, -he has as much right to consider it beautiful as we our white sclerotic, -the simple retort would be, that we are guided in our æsthetic judgment -by positive as well as negative tests. Disease is the negative test; the -positive lies in the fact that in inanimate objects, where disease is -altogether out of the question—as in ivory ornaments (which no one -associates with an elephant’s tusk)—we also invariably prefer a pure -snowy white to a muddy uncertain yellow. It is these two tests in -combination which have guided Sexual Selection in its efforts to -eliminate all but the pure white sclerotic,—a tint which, moreover, -throws into brighter relief the enchanting hues of the “sunbeamed” iris. - -More objectionable still than a yellowish or bluish sclerotic is a -bloodshot eye, not only because the inflamed blood-vessels which swell -and flood the white surface of the eye deface the marble purity of the -sclerotic (in a manner not in the least analogous to marble “veins”), -but because the red, watery blear eye generally indicates the ravages of -intemperance or unrestrained passions. However, a bloodshot eye may be -the result of mere overwork, or reading in a flickering light, or lack -of sleep; hence it is not always safe to allow the disagreeable æsthetic -impression given by inflamed eyes to prognosticate moral obliquity. But, -after all, the intimate connection between æsthetic and moral judgments -is in this case based on a correct, subtle instinct; for is not a man -who ruins the health and beauty of his eyes by intemperance in drink or -night-work sinning against himself? If attempts at suicide are punished -by law, why should not minor offences against one’s Health at least be -looked upon with moral disapproval? If this sentiment could be made -universal, there would be fifty per cent more Beauty in the world after -a single generation. - -In the centre of the white sclerotic is the membrane which gives the -eyes their characteristic variations of colour,—the iris or rainbow -curtain. If we look at an eye from a distance of a few paces, it seems -to have some one definite colour, as brown or blue. But on closer -examination we see that there are always several hues in each iris. The -colour of the iris is due to the presence of small pigment granules in -its interior layer. These granules are _always_ brown, in blue and gray -as well as in brown eyes; and the greater their number and thickness, -the darker is the colour of the iris. Blue eyes are caused by the -presence, in front of the pigment-layer, of a thin, almost colourless -membrane, which absorbs all the rays of light except the blue, which it -reflects, and thus causes the translucent iris to appear of that colour. - -The Instructions de la Société d’Anthropologie, says Dr. Topinard, -"recognise four shades of colour,—brown, green, blue, and gray; each -having five tones—the very dark, the dark, the intermediate, the light, -and the very light. The expression “brown” does not mean pure brown; it -is rather a reddish, a yellowish, or a greenish brown, corresponding -with the chestnut or auburn colour, the hazel and the sandy, made use of -by the English. The gray, too, is not pure; it is, strictly speaking, a -violet more or less mixed with black and white." - -“The negro, in spite of his name, is not black but deep brown,” as Mr. -Tylor remarks; and what is true of his complexion is also true of his -eyes; “what are popularly called black eyes are far from having the iris -really black like the pupil; eyes described as black are commonly of the -deepest shades of brown or violet.” - -The pupil, however, is always jetblack, not only in negroes, but in all -races. For the pupil is simply a round opening in the centre of the iris -which allows us to see clear through the lens and watery substance of -the eyeball to the black pigment which lines its inside surface. The -iris, in truth, is nothing but a muscular curtain for regulating the -size of the pupil, and thus determining how much light shall be admitted -into the interior of the eye. When the light is bright and glaring, a -little of it suffices for vision, hence the iris relaxes its fibres and -the pupil becomes smaller; whereas, in twilight and moonlight, the eye -needs all the light it can catch, so the muscles of the iris-curtain -contract and enlarge the pupil-window. This mechanism of the iris in -diminishing or enlarging the pupil can be neatly observed by looking -into a mirror placed on one side of a window. If the hand is put up in -such a way as to screen the eye from the light, the pupil will be seen -to enlarge; and if the hand is then suddenly taken away, it will -immediately return to its smaller size. For the muscles of the iris have -the power, denied to other unstriped or involuntary muscles, of acting -quite rapidly. - -Thus we find in the eyeball three distinct zones of colour—the white of -the eye, sometimes slightly tinted blue, yellow, or red; the iris, which -has various shades of brown, green, blue, and gray, commonly two or -three in each eye; and the central black pupil. Add to this the -flesh-colour of the eyelid and surrounding parts, and the light or dark -lashes and eyebrows, and we see that the eye in itself is a perfect -colour-symphony. - -Can we account for the existence of all these colours? The easiest thing -in the world, with the aid of the principles of Natural and Sexual -Selection. There are reasons for believing that the sense of sight is -merely a higher development from the sense of temperature, adapted to -vibrations so rapid that the nerves of temperature can no longer -distinguish them. In its simplest form, among the lowest animals, the -sense of sight is represented by a mere pigment spot. And in the highest -form of sight, after the development of the various parts of our -complicated eye, we still find this pigment as one of the most essential -conditions of vision. Its function, however, is not the same as that of -the pigment in the human skin. There it is interposed between the sun -and the underskin, in order to protect the nerves of temperature. The -optic nerve needs no such protection; for the heat-rays of the sun -cannot but be cooled on passing through the membranes, the lens, and the -watery substance in the eye, before reaching the optic nerve, spread out -on the retina. Consequently the eye-pigment, instead of being placed in -front of the nerves, is put behind them; and their function is to absorb -any excess of light that enters the eye. Were the membrane which -contains this pigment whitish, all the light would be reflected back, -and create such a glare and confusion that no object could be seen -distinctly. - -This view regarding the function of the pigment is strikingly supported -by the anomalous case of Albinos. “The pink of their eyes (as of white -rabbits) is caused by the absence of the black pigment,” says Mr. Tylor, -“so that light passing out through the iris and pupil is tinged red from -the blood-vessels at the back; thus their eyes may be seen to blush with -the rest of the face.” - -Bearing these facts in mind, it is obvious why it is an advantage in a -sunny country to have as much pigmentary matter as possible in the eye, -and why, therefore, Natural Selection makes the eyes blacker the nearer -we approach the tropics. And, as with the complexion, so here, it is -fortunate for the negro that he has not sufficient taste to feel the -æsthetic inferiority of the monotonous black thus imposed on him by -Natural Selection. “The iris is so dark,” says Figuier, “as almost to be -confounded with the black of the pupil. In the European, the colour of -the iris is so strongly marked as to render at once perceptible whether -the person has black, blue, or gray eyes. There is nothing similar in -the case of the negro, where all parts of the eye are blended in the -same hue. Add to this that the white of the eye is always suffused with -yellow in the Negro, and you will understand how this organ, which -contributes so powerfully to give life to the countenance of the White, -is invariably dull and expressionless in the Black Race.” - -To the Esquimaux, living in the constant glare of ice and snowfields, a -protective pigment is quite as necessary as to an African savage; hence -their eyes are equally black. But among other northern races, who are -less constantly exposed to the blinding rays of the sun, it suffices to -have coal-black pigment in the back part of the eye, as seen through the -pupil, while the iris need not be so absolutely opaque. This leaves room -for the action of Sexual Selection in giving the preference to eyes less -monotonously black. Our æsthetic sense craves variety and contrasts in -colour; and as the sense of Beauty originally stood in the service of -Love almost exclusively, it is to Cupid’s selective action that we -doubtless owe the diverse hues of the modern iris. - -To what kind of an iris does modern Love or æsthetic selection give the -preference? Doubtless to that which has the deepest and most -unmistakable colour—to dark brown, or deep blue, or violet. One reason -why we care less for the lighter, faded tints of the iris is because -they present a less vivid contrast to the white of the eye; and another -reason, as Dr. Hugo Magnus suggests, lies in the disagreeable impression -produced in us by the difficulty of making out the exact character of -the various indistinct shades of gray, yellow, green, or blue. - -The consideration of the question whether amorous selection shows any -further preference for one of its two favourite colours—dark brown and -deep blue—must be deferred to the chapter on Blondes and Brunettes. - - - LUSTRE - -But Cupid is not guided by colour alone in his choice. However beautiful -the colour of an eye, it loses half its charm if it lacks lustre. A -bright, sparkling eye is the most infallible index of youthful vigour -and health, whereas the lack-lustre eyes of ill-health can never serve -as windows from which Cupid shoots his arrows. No wonder that the poets -have searched all nature for analogies to the lustre of a maiden’s eye, -comparing it to sun and stars, to diamonds, crystalline lakes, the light -of glow-worms, glistening dewdrops, etc. - -What is the source of this light which shines from the eye and -intoxicates the lover’s senses? Several answers to this question have -been suggested. Twenty-five hundred years ago Empedokles taught that -“there is in the eye a fine network which holds back the watery -substance swimming about in it, but the fiery particles penetrate -through it like the rays of light through a lantern” (Ueberweg). And a -notion similar to this, that there is a kind of magnetic or nervous -emanation which beams from the eye and is a direct efflux of the soul, -was entertained in recent times by Lavater and Carus. It was apparently -supported by the peculiar light which may be seen occasionally in the -eyes of cats, dogs, and horses in the twilight; but this has been proved -to be a purely physical phenomenon of reflection, due to an anatomical -peculiarity in the eyes of these animals. - -Some writers have attempted to account for the lustrous fire of the eye -by attributing it to the increased tension of the eyeball brought about -through certain joyous and exciting emotions. Dr. Hugo Magnus, however, -denies that these emotions ever increase the tension of the eyeball: “We -know from numerous exceedingly minute measurements that there is no such -thing whatever as a rapid change of tension in the eye, as long as it is -in a healthy condition.” In some diseases, especially in cataract or -glaucoma, such an increased tension does occur, indeed, but it does not -in the least impart to the eye the sparkle of joyous excitement. Hence -Professor Magnus concludes that “the mimic significance of the eye -cannot be conditioned by changes in the form of the eyeball, through -tension or pressure on it.” - -His own theory (as developed in his two interesting pamphlets, _Die -Sprache der Augen_ and _Das Auge in seinen aesthetischen und -culturgeschichtlichen Beziehungen_) is that the greater or less -brilliancy of the eyes depends entirely on the movements of the eyelids. -Instead of calling the eye the window of the soul, it is more correct to -say that the cornea is a mirror which, like any other mirror, reflects -the light that falls on it. The higher the eyelids are raised the larger -becomes the mirror, and the more light is therefore reflected. Now it is -well known that exciting emotions like joy, enthusiasm, anger, and pride -have a tendency to raise the eyelids, while the sad and depressing -emotions cause them to sink and partially cover the eyeball; hence joy -makes the eyes sparkling, while grief renders them dull and lustreless. - -The old poetic and popular notion that the lustre of the eye is a direct -emanation of the human soul must therefore be abandoned. The sparkling -eye is a mere physical consequence of the involuntary raising of the -eyelids brought about through exhilarating or exciting emotions. - -This theory of Dr. Magnus doubtless comes nearer the truth than the -others referred to; and the fact that snakes’ eyes, though small, are -proverbially glistening, apparently because they are lidless, may be -used as an additional argument in his favour, which he overlooked. Yet -his view does not cover the whole ground; for it does not explain why, -after weeping, or when we are weary or ill, we may open our eyes as -widely as we please without making them appear lustrous. - -This difficulty suggested to me the theory that, though partly dependent -on the movements of the eyelids, the lustre of the eyes is due -originally to the tension and moisture of the _conjunctiva_. - -The _conjunctiva_, though consisting of 6-8 layers of cells, is an -extremely thin and highly sensitive, transparent membrane, which lines -the surface of the eyeball as well as the inside of the eyelids. In this -membrane is located the pain which we feel if dust, etc., flies into our -eyes. In order to wash out any particles that may get into the eye, and -to prevent the lid from sticking to the eyeball, the lachrymal glands -constantly secrete the water, which, during an emotional shower, -consolidates into tear-drops. - -Now, just as “the rose is sweetest washed with morning dew,” so the eye -is brightest and most fascinating which glistens in an ever fresh supply -of lachrymal fluid. After weeping, this supply is temporarily exhausted, -hence not only are the eyes “sticky” and the lids difficult to raise, -but even if they are raised there is no lustre; you look in vain for -“Cupid’s bonfires burning in the eye.” But when we wake up from -refreshing sleep in the morning, or when we take a walk in the bracing -country air, the eye sparkles its best and “emulates the diamond,” -because at such a time all the vital energies, including of course those -of the lachrymal glands, are incited to fresh activity, which they lose -again after prolonged use of the eye, thus making it appear duller in -the evening. - -Thus we can readily account for those lights in the eye “that do mislead -the morn.” Yet it is probable that (although in a less degree than dewy -moisture) the tension and translucency of the conjunctiva are also -concerned in the production of a liquid, lustrous expression. Though the -eyeball itself may not undergo any changes in tension, the conjunctiva -doubtless does. The eyeball rests on a bed of fatty tissue which shrinks -after death, owing to the emptying of the blood-vessels and the -consolidation of the fat, which makes a corpse appear “hollow-eyed.” The -same effect, to a slighter degree, is caused by disease and excessive -fatigue, making the eyes sink into their sockets. This sinking must -diminish the tension of the conjunctiva, both under the eyelids and on -the surface of the eyeball; and in shrinking it becomes less transparent -and glistening. - -The following observations of Professor Kollmann indirectly support my -theory that the conjunctiva is the source of the eye’s lustre: “After -death this transparent membrane (the conjunctiva) becomes turbid, the -eye loses its lustre and becomes veiled. The surface reflects but a -faint degree of light, the eye is ‘broken.’” The loss of lustre extends -to the white of the eye, but is less noticeable, perhaps because there -lustre does not blend with colour, as in the iris region. - -Fashionable young ladies who dance throughout the night several times a -week may well be disgusted with the _blue_ rings which appear around -their sunken eyes. These rings are a warning that they need “beauty -sleep” and fresh air to fill up the sockets again with healthy fat and -_red_ blood, so as to increase the tension of the conjunctiva and -stimulate the flow of dewy moisture on which the lustre of the eye -depends. There are tears of Beauty as well as of anguish and joy. - - - FORM - -Of the beauty of the eye as conditioned by its form, Dr. Magnus has made -such an admirable and exhaustive analysis that I can do little more than -summarise his observations. He points out, in the first place, that the -form of the eyeball itself is of subordinate importance. The differences -in the size and shape of eyeballs are insignificant, and are, moreover, -liable to be concealed by the shape of the eyelids; hence it is to the -lids and brows that the eye chiefly owes its formal beauty. - -“The form of the eye is conditioned exclusively by the cut of the lids -and the size of the aperture between them.... The countless individual -differences in this aperture give to the eyeballs the most diverse -shapes, so that we speak of round eyes, wide eyes, almond-shaped, -elongated, and owl eyes, etc.” - -The first condition of beauty in an eye is size. Large eyes have been -extolled ever since the beginnings of poetry. The Mahometan heaven is -peopled with “virgins with chaste mien and large black eyes,” and the -Arabian poets never tire of comparing their idols’ eyes to those of the -gazelle and the deer. The Greeks appear to have considered large eyes an -essential trait of beauty as well as of mental superiority; hence -Sokrates as well as Aspasia are described as having had such eyes; and -who has not read of Homer’s ox-eyed Juno? Juvenal specially mentions -small eyes as a blemish. - -Large eyes, however, are not beautiful if the aperture between the lids -is too wide, or if the white can be seen above the iris. They must owe -their largeness to the graceful curvature of the upper eyelid. As -Winckelmann remarks, “Jupiter, Apollo, and Juno have the opening of -their eyelids large and vaulted, and less elongated than is usual, so as -to make the arch more pronounced.” - -At the same time we are sufficiently catholic in taste to admire eyes -which are not quite round but somewhat elongated. One favourite variety -is that in which “the upper lid shows, in the margin adjoining the inner -corner of the eye, a rather decided curvature, which, however, -diminishes toward the outer corner in an extremely graceful and pleasing -wavy line. As the lower lid has a similar, though less decided, marginal -curve, the eyeball which appears within this aperture assumes a unique -oval form, which has been very aptly and characteristically named -‘almond-shaped.’ The Greeks compared the graceful curve of such lids to -the delicate and pleasing loops formed by young vines, and therefore -called an eye of this variety ἑλικοβλέφαρος. Winckelmann has noted that -it was the eyes of Venus, in particular, that the ancient artists were -fond of adorning with this graceful curve of the lids.... Italian, and -especially Spanish eyes, are far-famed for their classical and graceful -oval form.” - -Almond eyes are peculiar to the Semitic and ancient Aryan races. Some of -the bards of India sing the praises of an eye so elongated that it -reaches to the ear; and in Assyrian statues such eyes are common. The -ancient Egyptians had a similar taste; and Carus relates that some -Oriental nations actually enlarge the slit of the eye with the knife; -while others use cosmetics to simulate the appearance of very long eyes. -According to Dr. Sömmering, the eye of male Europeans is somewhat less -elongated than that of females. - -Round or oval marginal curvature, however, is not the only condition of -beauty in an eyelid. The surface, too, must be kept in a tense, -well-rounded condition. Sunken, hollow eyes displease us not only -because they suggest disease and age, but because they destroy the -smooth surface and curvature of the eyelids. Thus do we find the laws of -Health and Beauty coinciding in the smallest details. - -The position of the eye also largely influences our æsthetic judgment. -What strikes us first in looking at a Chinaman is his obliquely-set -eyes, with the outer corner drawn upwards, which displeases us even more -than their excessive elongation and small size. Oblique eyes are a -dissonance in the harmony of our features, and almost as objectionable -as a crooked mouth. True, our own eyes are rarely absolutely horizontal, -but the deviation is too minute to be noticed by any but a trained -observer. Sometimes, as Mantegazza remarks, the opposite form may be -noticed, the outer corner of the eye being lower than the inner. “If -this trait is associated with other æsthetic elements, it may produce a -rare and extraordinary charm, as in the case of the Empress Eugénie.” - -The eyelashes and eyebrows, though strictly belonging in the chapter on -the hair, must be referred to here because they bear such a large part -in the impression which the form of the eye makes on us. The short, -stiff hairs, which form “the fringed curtain of the eye,” are attached -to the cartilage which edges the eyelids. They are not straight but -curved, downward in the lower, upward in the upper lid. And the -Beauty-Curve is observed in still another way, the hairs in the central -part of each lid being longer than they are towards the ends. In the -upper lid the hairs are longer than in the lower. Their æsthetic and -physiognomic value will be considered presently under the head of -Expression. - -In the eyebrows the Curve of Beauty is again the condition of -perfection. It must be a gentle curve, however, or else it imparts to -the countenance a Mephistophelian expression of irony. Eyebrows were -formerly held to be peculiar to man, but Darwin states that “in the -Chimpanzee, and in certain species of Macacus, there are scattered hairs -of considerable length rising from the naked skin above the eyes, and -corresponding to our eyebrows; similar long hairs project from the hairy -covering of the superciliary ridges in some baboons.” - -The existence of the eyebrows may be accounted for on utilitarian -grounds. Natural Selection favoured their development because they are, -like the lashes, of use in preventing perspiration and dust from getting -into the eyes. Their delicately curved form, however, they probably owe -to Sexual Selection. Cupid objects to eyebrows which are too much or not -sufficiently arched, and he objects to those which are too bushy or -which meet in the middle. The ancient Greeks already disliked eyebrows -meeting in the middle, whereas in Rome Fashion not only approved of -them, but even resorted to artificial means for producing them. The -Arabians go a step farther in the use of paint. They endeavour to -produce the impression as if their eyebrows grew down to the middle of -the nose and met there. The Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, and Indians -also used paint to make their eyebrows seem wider, but they did not -unite them. On the outside border the eyebrows should extend slightly -beyond the corner of the eye. - - - EXPRESSION - -In the chapter on the nose reference was made to our disposition to -seize upon any sensation experienced inside the mouth and label it as a -“taste,” whereas psychologic analysis shows that in most cases the sense -of smell (excited during _exhalation_) has more to do with our enjoyment -of food than taste; and that the nerves of temperature and touch -likewise come into play in the case of peppermint, pungent condiments, -alcohol, etc. We are also in the habit of including in the term -“feeling” or “touch” the entirely distinct sensations of temperature, -tickling, and some other sensations, to the separate study of which -physiologists are only now beginning to devote special attention. - -Similarly with the eyes. Being the most fascinating part of the face, on -which we habitually fix our attention while talking, they are credited -with various expressions that are really referable to other features, -which we rapidly scan and then transfer their language to the eyes. Nor -is this all. Most persons habitually attribute to the varying lustre of -the eyeball diverse “soulful” expressions which, as physiologic analysis -shows, are due to the _movements_ of the eyeball, the eyebrows, and -lashes. The poets, who have said so many beautiful things about the -eyes, are rarely sufficiently definite to lay themselves open to the -charge of inaccuracy. But there can be little doubt that the popular -opinion concerning the all-importance of the eyeball is embodied in such -expressions as these: “Love, anger, pride, and avarice all visibly move -in those little orbs” (Addison). “Her eye in silence has a speech which -eye best understands” (Southwell). “An eye like Mars to threaten or -command.” “The heavenly rhetoric of thine eye, ’gainst which the world -cannot hold argument.” “Behold the window of my heart, mine eye.” -“Sometimes from her eyes I did receive fair speechless messages.” “For -shame, lie not, to say mine eyes are murderers.” “If mine eyes can -wound, now let them kill thee.” “There’s an eye wounds like a leaden -sword.” The last three of these Shaksperian lines were evidently echoing -in Emerson’s mind when he wrote that “Some eyes threaten like a loaded -and levelled pistol, and others are as insulting as hissing or kicking; -some have no more expression than blueberries, while others as deep as a -well which you can fall into.” “Glances are the first _billets-doux_ of -love,” says Ninon de L’Enclos. - -In order to make perfectly clear the mechanism by which the eye becomes -an organ of speech, it is advisable to consider separately these six -factors, which are included in it—(_a_) Lustre; (_b_) Colour of the -Iris; (_c_) Movements of the Iris or Pupil; (_d_) Movements of the -Eyeball; (_e_) Movements of the Eyelids; (_f_) Movements of the -Eyebrows. - -(_a_) _Lustre._—"The physiological problem whether the surface of the -eyeball, independent of the muscles that cover and surround it, can -express emotion, a near study of the American girl seems to answer quite -in the affirmative." Dr. G. M. Beard remarks, without, however, -endeavouring to specify what emotions the surface of the eyeball -expresses, or in what manner it does express them. - -Dr. Magnus, on the other hand, who has made a more profound study of -this question than any other writer, is emphatic in his conviction that -“the eyeball takes no active part in the expression of emotions, which -is entirely accomplished by the muscles and soft parts surrounding it.” -His view is supported by the fact that although some of the ancient -sculptors endeavoured by the use of jewels or by chiselling semi-lunar -or other grooves into the eyeball to simulate its lustre by means of -shadows, yet as a rule sculptors and painters strangely neglect the -careful elaboration of the eyeball; and in the Greek works of the best -period, including those of Phidias, the eyeball was left smooth and -unadorned, the artists relying especially on the careful chiselling of -the lids and brows for the attainment of the particular characteristic -expression desired. - -Nevertheless Dr. Magnus goes too far in denying that ocular lustre can -be directly expressive of mental states without the assistance of the -movements of the eyebrows and lids. His own observations show that he -has overstated his thesis. We can indeed, he says, infer from the -appearance of the eyeball, “whether the soul is agitated or calm, but we -have to rely on the facial muscles to specify the emotion. This is the -reason why we can never judge the sentiments of one who is masked; for -the fire in his eye can only indicate to us his greater or less -agitation, but not its special character. _That_ we could only read in -the features which the mask conceals. It is for this reason that the -orthodox Mahometan makes his women cover up their face with a veil which -leaves nothing exposed but the eyes, because these cannot, without the -constant play of the facial muscles, indicate the emotional state. The -lustre of the corneal mirror therefore indicates to us only the -quantity, but never the quality of emotional excitement.” - -Herein Dr. Magnus follows the assertion of Lebrun, a contemporary of -Louis XIV., that “the eyeball indicates by its fire and its movements in -general that the soul is passionately excited, but not in what manner.” - -No doubt the Turk attains his object in leaving only the eyes of his -women open to view, for thus the passing stranger cannot tell whether -her eye flashes Love or anger. But he _can_ tell whether she is agitated -or indifferent: and is not that a language too? Do we not call music -_the_ “language of emotions,” although it can only indicate the quantity -of emotion, and rarely its precise quality—just like the eyes? Therefore -Dr. Magnus is wrong in denying to the eyeball the power of emotional -expression. Vague emotion is still emotion. - -It has already been intimated in what manner emotional excitement -increases the eye’s lustre. It causes the blood-vessels in the sockets -of the eye to swell, thus increasing the tension of the conjunctiva and -the flow of the lachrymal fluid. - -Besides quantitative emotion there is another thing which ocular lustre -expresses, and that is Health. It is true that consumption, fever, and -possibly other diseases may produce a peculiar temporary transparency of -complexion and ocular lustre; but, as a rule, a bright eye indicates -Health and abundant vitality. - -As Health is the first condition of Love, and as the ocular lustre which -indicates Health cannot be normally secured without it, women of all -times and countries have been addicted to the habit of increasing the -eye’s sparkle artificially by applying a thin line of black paint to the -edge of the lids. The ancient Egyptians, Persians, Hindoos, Greeks, and -Romans followed this custom. But the natural sparkle which comes of -Health and Beauty-sleep [_i.e._ before midnight, with open windows] is a -thousand times preferable to such dangerous methods of tampering with -the most delicate and most easily injured organ of the body. - -Still another way in which the eyeball itself can express emotion is by -the varying amount on it of the lachrymal fluid, to which, in my -opinion, its lustre is chiefly owing. There is a supreme and thrilling -sparkle of the eye which can only come of the heavenly joys of Love; but -there is also “a liquid _melancholy_” of sweet eyes, to use Bulwer’s -words. Scott remarks that “Love is loveliest when embalmed in tears;” -and Dr. Magnus attests that “especially in the eyes of lovers we often -find a slight suspicion of tears.” He traces to this fact a peculiar -charm that is to be found in the eyes of Venus, which the Greeks called -ὑγρὸν (liquid, swimming, languishing). The sculptors produced this -expression by indicating the border between the lower lid and the -eyeball but slightly, thus giving the impression as if this border were -veiled by a liquid line of tear-fluid. - -What enables the lid to keep this fluid line in place is the fact that -its edge is lined with minute glands secreting an oily substance. The -presence of these glands in the upper lid, where they cannot serve to -retain lachrymal fluid, suggests the important inference that the lustre -of the eye may be partly due to a thin film of oil spread over the -cornea by the up-and-down movements of this lid. Indeed, this may -possibly be the chief cause of ocular lustre. - -When the lachrymal fluid habitually present in the eye becomes too -abundant it ceases to express amorous tenderness, and becomes instead -indicative of old age, or, worse still, of intemperance. Alcoholism has -a peculiarly demoralising effect on the lower eyelid, which becomes -swollen and inflamed. This probably overstimulates the action of the oil -glands in the lids, thus accounting for the watery or blear eye, -eloquent of vice. - -(_b_) _Colour of the Iris._—There is nothing in which popular -physiognomy takes so much delight as in pointing out what particular -characteristics are indicated by the different colours of eyes. All such -distinctions are the purest drivel. We have seen that differences in the -colour of eyes are entirely due to the varying amount of the same -pigmentary matter present in the iris. Now, what earthly connection -could a greater or less quantity of this colouring matter have with our -intellectual or moral traits? It is necessary thus to trace facts to -their last analysis in order to expose the absurdities of current -physiognomy. - -Inasmuch as black-eyed southern nations are, on the whole, more -impulsive than northern races, it may be said in a vague, general way -that a black eye indicates a passionate disposition. But there are -countless exceptions to this rule—apathetic black-eyed persons, as well -as, conversely, fiery blue-eyed individuals. Nor is this at all strange; -for the black colour is not stored up in some mysterious way as a result -of a fiery temperament, but is simply accumulated in the iris through -Natural Selection, as a protection against glaring sunlight. - -Although, therefore, the brilliancy of the eye may vary with its colour, -the colour itself does not express emotion, either qualitatively or -quantitatively. In reading character no assistance is given us by the -fact that eyes are “of unholy blue,” “darkly divine,” “gray as glass,” -or “green as leeks.” Shakspere calls Jealousy a “green-eyed monster”; -and the green iris has indeed such a bad reputation that blondes in -search of a compliment commonly abuse their “green” eyes, to exercise -your Gallantry, and give you a chance to defend their “celestial blue” -or “divine violet.” - -Dr. Magnus suggests that the reason why we dislike decidedly green or -yellow eyes is simply because they are of rare occurrence, and therefore -appear anomalous; for in animals we do not hesitate to pronounce such -eyes beautiful. He also explains ingeniously why it is that we are apt -to attribute moral shortcomings to persons whose eyes are of a vague, -dubious colour. Such eyes displease our æsthetic sense, and this -displeasure we transfer to the moral sense, and thus confound and -prejudice our judgment. In the same way our dislike of unusual green -eyes disposes us to accuse their owners of irregularities of conduct. -Moral: Keep your æsthetic and ethical judgments apart. - -Conversely, in the case of snakes, our fear and horror make it difficult -for us to appreciate the æsthetic charm of their colours. And all these -cases show that the æsthetic sense, if properly understood and -specialised, is independent of moral and utilitarian considerations: -which knocks the bottom out of the theory of Alison, Jeffrey, and Co. - -One more abnormality of colour in the iris must be referred to. It -happens not infrequently that the colour of the two eyes is not alike, -one being brown, the other blue or gray. In such cases, though each eye -may be perfect in itself, we dislike the combination. What is the ground -of this æsthetic dislike? Simply the fact that the dissimilarity of the -eyes violates one of the fundamental laws of Beauty—the law of Symmetry, -which demands that corresponding parts on the two sides of the body -should harmonise. - -(_c_) _Movements of the Iris._—The jetblack pupil of the eye, as already -noted, is not always of the same size. It becomes smaller if an excess -of light causes the iris to relax, larger if diminution of light makes -the iris contract its fibres. Another way of altering the size of the -pupil is by gazing at a distant object, which causes it to enlarge, -while gazing at a near object makes it smaller. According to Gratiolet -and some other writers, there is still another way in which the pupil is -affected, namely, through emotional excitement. Great fear, for -instance, enlarges the pupil, according to Gratiolet. Dr. Magnus, -however, remarks that, apart from the fact that some observers have -denied that the pupil is affected by emotions, the alterations in its -size are as a rule too insignificant to be noted by any but a trained -observer; so that they could not play any important physiognomic _rôle_. - -Yet a large pupil is everywhere esteemed a great beauty, and is often -credited with a special power of amorous expression. “Widened pupils,” -says Kollmann, “give the eye a tender aspect; they seem to increase its -depth, and fascinate the spectator by the strangeness this imparts to -the gaze. Oriental women put atropine into their eyes, which enlarges -the pupil. They do this in order to give their eyes the soulful -expression which they believe is imparted by large pupils, distinctly -foreshadowing the joys of love.” - -Whether emotionally expressive or not, so much is certain that large -pupils are more beautiful than small ones, for the same reason that -large eyes are more beautiful than small ones, _i.e._ because we cannot -have too much of a thing of Beauty. - -Finally, there is this to be said regarding the lustre, colour, and size -of pupil and iris, that they emphasise the language of the eye. If we -play a love-song on the piano, we may admire it; but if it is sung or -played on the violoncello, it makes a doubly deep impression; and why? -Because the superior sensuous beauty of the voice, or the amorous -tone-colour of the ’cello, paints and gilds the bare fabric of the song. -A small dull-coloured eye, similarly, may speak quite as definite a -language of command or entreaty, pride or humility, as any other; but -the flashing large pupil and the lustrous deep-dyed iris intensify the -emotional impressiveness of this language a hundredfold, by adding the -incalculable power of sensuous Beauty. Thus lustre and colour are for -the _visible_ music of the spheres what orchestration is to audible -music. - -(_d_) _Movements of the Eyeball._—The socket of the eye contains -(besides the fat-cushion in which the eyeball is imbedded, the -blood-vessels, and other tissues) seven muscles; one for raising the -upper lid, and six for moving the eyeball itself upwards, downwards, -inwards, outwards, or forwards and obliquely. To the action of these -muscles the eye owes much of its expressiveness. - -It has been noted that elating emotions have a tendency to raise the -features, depressing emotions to depress them. The eyeball is no -exception. Persons who are elated by their real or apparent superiority -to others turn their eyes habitually from the humble things beneath -them; hence the muscle which turns the eyeball upwards has long ago -received the name of “pride-muscle”; while its antipode, the _musculus -humilis_, is so called because humility and modesty are characterised by -a downward gaze. - -The muscle which turns the eyeball towards the inner corner, nosewards, -is much used by persons who are occupied with near objects. If this -convergence of the eyes is too pronounced, it gives one a stupid -expression; whereas, if moderate, the expression is one of great -intellectual penetration, as Dr. Magnus points out. He believes that the -trick, made use of by some portrait-painters, of making the eyes appear -to follow you wherever you go depends on this medium degree of -convergence of the eyes. - -Slight divergence of the eyeballs, on the other hand, is characteristic -of children and of great thinkers—an item which Schopenhauer forgot to -note when he pointed out that genius always retains certain traits of -childhood. “Donders,” says Dr. Magnus, “has always observed this -divergent position of the eyes in persons who meditate deeply. And the -artists make use of this position of the eyes to give their figures the -expression of a soul averted from terrestrial affairs, and fixed on -higher spiritual objects. Thus the Sistine Madonna has this divergent -position of the eyes, as well as the beautiful boy she carries on her -arm.” It is also found in Dürer’s portrait of himself, and in a bust of -Marcus Aurelius in the Vatican. - -If, however, this divergence becomes too great, it loses its charm, for -the eyes then appear to fix no object at all, and the gaze becomes -“vacant,” as in the eyes of the blind or the sick. To appreciate the -force of these remarks it must be borne in mind that there is only one -part of the retina, called the “yellow spot,” with which we can -distinctly fix an object. What we see with other parts of the retina is -indistinct, blurred. - -These details are here given because many will be glad to know that by -daily exercising the muscles of the eyeballs before the mirror, they can -greatly alter and improve their looks. Every day one hears the remark, -“She has beautiful eyes, but she does not know how to use them.” When we -read of a great thinker, like Kant, fixing his gaze immovably on a tree -for an hour, we think it quite natural; nor does any one object to “the -poet’s eye, in a fine frenzy rolling,” for we all know that a poet is -merely an inspired madman. But a young lady who wishes to charm by her -Beauty must learn to fix her wandering eyes calmly on others, while -avoiding a stony stare. One of the greatest charms of American girls is -their frank, steady gaze, free from any tinge of unfeminine boldness. -Such a charming natural gaze can only be acquired in a country where -girls are taught to look upon men as gentlemen, and not as wolves, -against whom they must be guarded by dragons. - -Eye-gymnastics are as important to Beauty as lung-gymnastics to Health, -and dancing-lessons to Grace. But of course there is a certain number of -fortunate girls who can dispense with such exercises, because they -gradually learn the proper use of their eyes, as well as general -graceful movements, from the example of a refined mother. - -Goldsmith’s pretty line about “the bashful virgin’s sidelong looks of -love,” is not a mere poetic conceit, but a scientific _aperçu_; for, as -Professor Kollmann remarks, “the external straight muscle of the eye was -also called the lover’s muscle, _musculus amatorius_, because the -furtive side-glance is aimed at a beloved person.” - -Nor is this the only way in which the movements of the eyeball are -concerned with Romantic Love. By constantly exercising certain muscles -of the eyeball in preference to others, the eyes gradually assume, when -at rest, a fixed and peculiar gaze which distinguishes them from all -other eyes. It is comparatively easy to find two pairs of eyes of the -same colour or form, but two with the same gaze, _i.e._ characteristic -position of the eyeballs, never. Hence Dr. Magnus boldly generalises -Herder’s statement that “Every great man has a look which no one but he -can give with his eyes,” into the maxim that “_Every individual_ has a -look which no one else can make with his eyes.” - -Bungling photographers commonly spoil their pictures by compelling their -victims to fix their eyes in an unwonted position. The result is a -picture which bears some general resemblance to the victim, but in which -the characteristic _individual_ expression is wanting. - -Our habit of masking our eyes alone when we wish to remain unrecognised, -and leaving the lower part of the face exposed, affords another proof of -the assertion that the eye is the chief seat of individuality. For -though the eyeball itself remains visible, the surrounding parts are -covered, so that its characteristic position cannot be determined. - -Now we know that Individual Preference is the first and most essential -element of Romantic Love. Hence Dante was as correct in calling the eyes -“the beginning of Love,” as in terming the lips “the end of Love.” And -Shakspere agrees with Dante when he speaks of “Love first learned in a -lady’s eyes”; and again: “But for her eye I would not love her; yes, for -her two eyes.” - -(_e_) _Movements of the Eyelids._—Although the foregoing pages -considerably qualify Dr. Magnus’s thesis that the eyeball owes all its -life and expressiveness to the movements of the eyelids and brows, yet -the physiognomic and æsthetic importance of lids, lashes, and brows can -hardly be too much emphasised. A very large proportion of the pleasure -we derive from beautiful eyes is due to the constant changes in the -apparent size of the eyeball, and the gradations in its lustre, produced -by the rapid movements of the upper lid. This is strikingly proved by -the fact, noted by Dr. Magnus, “that the eyes of wax figures, be they -ever so artistically finished, always give the impression of death and -rigidity,” whereas “artificial eyes, such as are often inserted by -physicians after the loss of an eye, have, thanks to the constant play -of the lids, an appearance so animated and lifelike that it requires the -trained eye of a specialist to detect the dead, lifeless glass-eye in -this apparently so animated orb.” - -A complete emotional scale is symbolised in these movements of the upper -eyelids. A medium position indicates rest or indifference. Joyous and -other exciting emotions raise them, so that the whole of the lustrous -iris becomes visible. Thus we get the eye “sparkling with joy” or the -“angry flash of the eye,” as well as Cupid’s darts: “He is already dead; -stabbed with a white wench’s black eye.” “Alack, there lies more peril -in thine eye than twenty of their swords.” - -But if the lids are raised too high, so that the white above the iris -becomes visible, the expression changes to one of affectation, or -maniacal wildness, or extreme terror. There are persons, says Magnus, in -whom the aperture between the lids is naturally so wide as to reveal the -upper white of the eyes; and in consequence we are apt to accuse them of -hollow pathos. I have seen not a few beautiful pairs of eyes marred by -the habitual tendency to raise the lids too much—a fault that can be -readily overcome by deliberate effort and practice before the mirror. - -On the other hand, if the aperture between the lids is too small, that -is, if the lids are naturally (or only transiently) lowered too much, we -get an apathetic, drowsy expression. The Chinese eye displeases us not -only by its oblique set, and the narrowness of the lid, but also because -the natural smallness of the eyeball is exaggerated by the narrow -palpebral aperture. The negro appears more wide awake to us, because in -his eyes this aperture is wider—so wide, in fact, that he is apt to -displease us by showing too much of the white sclerotic. - -A very drooping eyelid being expressive of fatigue, physical or mental, -_blasé_ persons affect it in order to indicate their _nil admirari_ -attitude. But there is another secret reason why they drop their -eyelids. If we lower the head and open our eyes widely, they retire -within their sockets and appear hollow, suggesting dissipation or -disease; whereas, if we raise the head, throwing it slightly backwards, -and lowering the eyelids, we obliterate this hollow, and give the -impression of languid indifference. This, rather than the “raising of -the eyebrows,” is what constitutes the “supercilious” expression. - -It cannot be said that a supercilious appearance is specially -attractive, yet the obliteration of the eyes’ hollowness is an -advantage; and it may be added that, since perfect health is not a -superabundant phenomenon, the same reasoning explains why many faces are -so much more fascinating in a reclining or semi-reclining position than -when upright. Fashion, of course, being the handmaid of ugliness, does -not object to hollow eyes encircled by blue rings, but even cultivates -them. Yet in her heart of hearts every fashionable woman knows that -nothing so surely kills masculine admiration—not to speak of Love—as -sunken eyes with blue rings. - -A slight drooping of the eyelids, on the other hand, gives a pleasing -expression of amorous languor. The lid, with its lashes, in this case, -coyly veils the lustre of the eye, without extinguishing it. Hence, in -the words of Dr. Magnus, the sculptors of antiquity made use of this -slight lowering of the lid to express sensuous love; and accordingly it -was customary to chisel the eyes of Venus with drooping lids and a small -aperture. - -In their task of moderating and varying the lustre of the eyeball, the -lids are greatly assisted by the lashes. An eye with missing or too -short lashes is apt to appear too fiery, glaring, or “stinging.” Long -dark eyelashes are of all the means of flirtation the most irresistible. -Note yonder artful maiden. How modestly and coyly she droops her eyes, -till suddenly the fringed curtain is raised and a glorious symphony of -colour and lustre is flashed on her poor companion’s dazed vision! No -wonder he staggers and falls in love at first sight. - -“White lashes and eyebrows are so disagreeably suggestive,” we read in -the _Ugly Girl Papers_, “that one cannot blame their possessor for -disguising them by a harmless device. A decoction of walnut juice should -be made in season, and kept in a bottle for use the year round. It is to -be applied with a small hair-pencil to the brows and lashes, turning -them to a rich brown, which harmonises with fair hair.” Another recipe -given, by a good authority, is as follows: “Take frankincense, resin, -pitch, of each one half ounce; gum mastic, quarter of an ounce; mix and -drop on red-hot charcoals. Receive the fumes in a large funnel, and a -black powder will adhere to its sides. Mix this with fresh juice of -alderberries (or Cologne water will do), and apply with a fine -camel-hair brush.” - -Those who wish to make their lashes longer and more regular may find the -following suggestions, by Drs. Brinton and Napheys, of use: “The -eyelashes should be examined one by one, and any which are split, or -crooked, or feeble, should be trimmed with a pair of sharp scissors. The -base of the lashes should be anointed nightly with a minute quantity of -oil of cajuput on the top of a camel-hair brush, and the examination and -trimming repeated every month. If this is sedulously carried out for a -few months the result will be gratifying.” - -All such operations should be performed by another person, for the eye -is a most delicate organ. Yet, not even this organ has been spared by -deforming Fashion. The fact that some Africans colour their eyelids -black may have a utilitarian rather than a cosmetic reason. But what -shall we say to the Africans who eradicate their eyebrows, and the -Paraguayans, who remove their eyelashes because they “do not wish to be -like horses?” - -Twin sisters ever are Fashion and Idiocy. - -(_f_) _Movements of the Eyebrows._—Herder called the arched eyebrow the -rainbow of peace, because if it is straightened by a frown it portends a -storm. In plain prose, the eyebrow partakes of the general upward -movement from joyous excitement, and the downward movement in grief. If -the eyebrows are too bushy, they overshadow the eye and produce a gloomy -or even ferocious appearance. The Chinese, possibly from an instinctive -perception that their eyes are not too large or bright, shave their -eyebrows, leaving only a narrow fringe. Dr. Broca also notes that the -eyebrow adds to the oblique appearance of the Chinese eye through a -particular movement, the two internal thirds of the eyebrows being -lower, and the external third higher than with us. - -Though not, perhaps, directly concerned in the expression of Love, the -eyebrow is not to be under-rated. No detail of Beauty escapes Cupid’s -eyes; for do we not read of “the lover, sighing like furnace, with a -woeful ballad made to his mistress’s eyebrows”? - - - COSMETIC HINTS - -As modern lovers disapprove of eyebrows meeting over the nose, -superfluous hairs should be removed. Coarse irregular hairs in any part -of the eyebrow should be pulled out or kept in position by a _fixateur_. -“It is not well to trim the eyebrow generally, as it makes it coarse.... -When it is desired to thicken or strengthen them, two or three drops of -oil of cajuput may be gently rubbed into the skin every other night; but -here, and _always_ when wiping them, the rubbing should be in the -direction of the hair, from the nose outward, and _never_ in the reverse -direction.” Among harmless dyes, pencils of dark pomatum or walnut-bark, -steeped in Cologne for a week, are recommended; or, for a transient -effect, a needle smoked over the flame of a candle may be used. - -Regarding the general hygienic care of the eye, the following rules -should be borne in mind. Never read or work in a too weak or too glaring -light, or when lying down, or with the book too near the eye. Rest the -muscles occasionally by looking at a distant object. Bathe the eyes -every morning in cold water, _keeping them closed_. For disorders, -consult a physician immediately; a day’s delay may be fatal to ocular -beauty. For ordinary inflammation, an external application of -witch-hazel extract, mixed with a few drops of Cologne, is very -soothing. _Never_ sleep with your eyes facing the window. Ninety-nine -persons in a hundred do so; hence the large number of weak, lustreless -eyes, early disturbances of slumber, and morning headaches. Large -numbers of tourists in Switzerland constantly suffer from headaches, and -lose all the benefits of their vacation, simply because they fail to -have their head at night in the centre of the room, where it ought to -be, because the air circulates there more freely than near the wall. - - - - - THE HAIR - - - CAUSE OF MAN’S NUDITY - -“From the presence of the woolly hair or lanugo on the human fœtus, -and of rudimentary hairs scattered over the body during maturity,” -Darwin inferred that “man is descended from some animal which was born -hairy and remained so during life.” He believed that “the loss of hair -is an inconvenience and probably an injury to man, even in a hot -climate, for he is thus exposed to the scorching in the sun, and to -sudden chills, especially during wet weather. As Mr. Wallace remarks, -the natives in all countries are glad to protect their naked backs and -shoulders with some slight covering. No one supposes that the nakedness -of the skin is any direct advantage to man; his body, therefore, cannot -have been divested of hair through Natural Selection.” Accordingly, he -concludes that man lost his hairy covering through Sexual Selection, for -ornamental purposes. - -But if it can be shown that the nakedness of his skin _is_ in some way -of advantage to man, this argument falls to the ground. There are -sufficient reasons, I think, for believing that Natural Selection aided -Sexual Selection in divesting man of his hairy coat. - -With his usual candour Darwin noticed the evidence which seemed to tell -against his view. Mr. Belt, he says, “believes that within the tropics -it is an advantage to man to be destitute of hair, as he is thus enabled -to free himself of the multitude of ticks (acari) and other parasites -with which he is often infested, and which sometimes cause ulceration.” -Darwin doubts, however, whether this evil is of sufficient magnitude to -have led to the denudation of the body through Natural Selection, “since -none of the many quadrupeds inhabiting the tropics have, as far as I -know, acquired any specialised means of relief.” But as primitive man’s -habits of cleanliness are much inferior to those of animals, this -objection loses its force; and it is, moreover, weakened by the -testimony of Sir W. Denison that “it is said to be a practice with the -Australians, when the vermin get troublesome, to singe themselves.” We -also know that the ancient Egyptians shaved off their hair from motives -of cleanliness. - -However, it is not likely that the superior advantages of cleanliness -and freedom from parasites would alone have sufficed to produce so great -a change in man as the loss of his hair. It is more probable that the -sun was the chief agent in accomplishing this transformation. I fail to -see the force of Darwin’s contention that the fact that “the other -members of the order of Primates, to which man belongs, although -inhabiting various hot regions, are well clothed with hair, generally -thickest on the upper surface, is opposed to the supposition that man -became naked through the action of the sun.” For these animals commonly -live in forests and on trees, where they are protected from the rays of -the sun, which is not the case with man. - -Furthermore, Darwin himself mentions some circumstances which point to -the conclusion that the sun is the cause of man’s nudity. He says, for -instance, that “elephants and rhinoceroses are almost hairless; and as -certain extinct species which formerly lived under an arctic climate -were covered with long wool or hair, it would almost appear as if the -existing species of both genera had lost their hairy covering from -exposure to heat. This appears the more probable as the elephants in -India which live on elevated and cool districts are more hairy than -those on the lowlands.” - -Bearing in mind what was said in the chapter on the Complexion regarding -the negro’s skin, there is no difficulty in understanding why Natural -Selection should eliminate the hairy covering of the skin while -favouring a dark complexion. Hair not only absorbs the sun’s heat, but -retains that of the body; hence a hairy man not living on trees would be -very uncomfortable in Africa, and likely to succumb to the enervating -effects of high temperature. The negro’s naked skin, on the other hand, -is, as we have seen, specially devised as a _body-cooler_. The black -pigment protects the underlying nerves of temperature, while the solar -heat absorbed by this pigment is immediately radiated in the form of -perspiration. Now we can see not only why the negro’s skin is more -velvety, smooth, and hairless than our own, but why its sweat-pores are -larger and more numerous than in our skin. - -At a later stage of evolution Sexual Selection probably came in to aid -in this process of denudation. We may infer this, in the first place, -from the analogous case of apes who have denuded and variously-coloured -patches on the head and elsewhere, which they use for purposes of -display, to attract the notice of the opposite sex; in the second place, -from the fact that there are not a few tribes who pluck out their hairs. -“The Fuegians threatened a young missionary, who was left for a time -with them, to strip him naked, and pluck the hairs from his face and -body, yet he was far from being a hairy man;” and “throughout the world -the races which are almost completely destitute of a beard, dislike -hairs on the face and body, and take pains to eradicate them.” Darwin -also notes some facts which, by analogy, seem to make it probable that -“the long-continued habit of eradicating the hair may have produced an -inherited effect.” - -In the case of the white race we cannot rely so much on the action of -the sun as accounting for the absence of hair, but must place more -especial emphasis on Sexual Selection. We are warranted in doing this by -the consideration that Taste for Beauty is more developed in the white -race, and therefore has more influence in controlling the choice of a -mate. “As the body in woman is less hairy than in man, and as this -character is common to all races, we may conclude” with Darwin “that it -was our female semi-human ancestors who were first divested of hair,” -this character being then transmitted by the mothers to their children -of both sexes. - -The two universal traits of Beauty which chiefly guided man in the -preference of a hairless skin were evidently Smoothness and Colour. One -need only compare for a moment the face of a female chimpanzee, its -leathery folded skin and straggling hairs, with the smooth and rosy -complexion of a European damsel, to understand that, leaving touch out -of consideration, sight alone would have sufficed to give the preference -to the hairless skin. But since we derive less direct advantage than the -tropical races from such a skin, cases of reversion to the hairy type -are more common among us than with them, and our bodies in general are -more hairy. - - - BEARDS AND MOUSTACHES - -The elimination of hair from those parts of the body where it is less -beautiful than a nude skin, is only one of the functions of Sexual -Selection. Another equally important function is the preservation and -elongation of the hair in a few places for ornamental purposes. - -“We know from Eschricht,” says Darwin, “that with mankind the female as -well as the male fœtus is furnished with much hair on the face, -especially round the mouth; and this indicates that we are descended -from progenitors of whom _both sexes were bearded_. It appears, -therefore, at first sight, probable that man has retained his beard from -a very early period, whilst woman lost her beard at the same time that -her body became almost completely divested of hair.” - -A long beard serves, to some extent, to protect the throat, but a -moustache serves no such use, and it seems therefore more probable that -beards as well as moustaches were developed in man for ornamental -purposes, as in many monkeys (see, for some very curious pictures of -bearded monkeys, _Descent of Man_, chap. xviii.) But why should women -have lost their beards while men retained theirs? Because of the -importance of emphasising the secondary sexual differences between man -and woman, on which the degree of amorous infatuation depends. The -tendency of evolution, as we have seen, has been to make the sexes more -and more different in appearance; and as man chooses his mate chiefly on -_æsthetic_ grounds, he habitually gave the preference to smooth-faced -women, whereas woman’s choice, being largely based on _dynamic_ grounds, -fell on the bearded and moustached men, since a luxurious growth of hair -is commonly a sign of physical vigour. Hence the humiliation of the -young man who cannot raise a moustache, and the reciprocal horror of the -young lady who finds the germs of one on her lip. Both are instinctively -afraid of being “boycotted” by Cupid, and for ever debarred from the -pleasures of mutual Romantic Love. - -Women are quite right in dreading hair in the face as a blemish, for it -is not only objectionable as a masculine trait, but also as a -characteristic of old age, a hairy face being quite a common attribute -of aged females. But with men the case is different. Though women may -still be often influenced in their amorous choice by a beard, it is not, -as just pointed out, on æsthetic grounds; and it is indeed very dubious -if the beard can be accepted as a real personal ornament. True, the -ancient Greeks respected a beard as an attribute of maturity and -manhood, but their ideal of _supreme_ beauty was nevertheless an -unbearded youth: Apollo has neither beard nor moustache. The ancient -Egyptians had a horror of the bearded and long-haired Greeks. “No -Egyptian of either sex would on any account kiss the lips of a Greek,” -and whenever the Egyptians “intended to convey the idea of a man of low -condition, or a slovenly person, the artists represented him with a -beard” (Wilkinson). Similarly, in the second edition of his _Anatomy of -Expression_ (1824), Sir Charles Bell wrote that “When those essays were -first written there was not a beard to be seen in England unless joined -with squalor and neglect, and I had the conviction that this appendage -_concealed the finest features_. Being in Rome, however, during the -procession of the Corpus Domini, I saw that the expression was not -injured by the beard, but that it added to the dignity and character of -years.” - -These two sentences contain the whole philosophy of beards. The -expression of character is not injured, but rather increased by a beard; -but if it conceals the fine features of youth it is objectionable. There -are men whose faces are too wide, and whose appearance is therefore -improved by a chin-beard; and there are others whose faces are too -narrow, and who consequently look better with side-whiskers. But in a -well-shaped youthful masculine face a beard is as great a superfluity, -if not a blemish, as in a woman’s face. - -Now, since the faces of civilised races are undoubtedly becoming more -beautiful as time advances, it is comforting to know that, -notwithstanding female selection, the beard is gradually disappearing. -Very few men are able to raise a fine beard to-day, even with the -artificial stimulus of several years’ daily shaving; and the time, no -doubt, is not very distant when men will go to the cosmetic electrician -to have their straggling hairbulbs in the chin killed. This may produce -an inherited effect on their children; and the always smooth-faced -mother, too, cannot but exert some hereditary influence on her sons as -well as her daughters. The women, in turn, will inherit some of the -superior æsthetic Taste of the men, and begin to see that there is more -charm in a smooth than in a bearded face; while there will still be room -enough for those sexual differences in facial Beauty which feed the -flame of Love. - -The following newspaper paragraph, though it may be a mere _jeu -d’esprit_, is amusing and suggestive: “A Frenchman sent a circular to -all his friends asking why they cultivated a beard. Among the answers 9 -stated, ‘Because I wish to avoid shaving’; 12 ‘Because I do not wish to -catch cold’; 5 ‘Because I wish to conceal bad teeth’; ‘Because I wish to -conceal the length of my nose’; 6 ‘Because I am a soldier’; 21 ‘Because -I was a soldier’; 65 ‘Because my wife likes it’; 28 ‘Because my love -likes it’; 15 answered that they wore no beards.” - -Moustaches are much more common to-day than beards, and it is barely -possible that they may escape æsthetic condemnation, and survive to the -millennium. Persons with very short upper lips or flat noses, it is -true, only emphasise their shortcomings by wearing a moustache; but in -broad faces with prominent noses a well-shaped, not too drooping, -moustache is no doubt an ornament, relieving the gravity of the -masculine features and adding to their expression. As Bell remarks: -“Although the hair of the upper lip does conceal the finer modulations -of the mouth, as in woman, it adds to the character of the stronger and -harsher emotions.” “I was led to attend more particularly to the -moustache as a feature of expression,” he says, “in meeting a handsome -young French soldier coming up a long ascent in the Côte d’Or, and -breathing hard, although with a good-humoured, innocent expression. His -sharp-pointed black moustache rose and fell with a catamount look that -set me to think on the cause.” - -Young men may find in Bell’s remarks a suggestion as to how they may -make the moustache a permanent ornament of the human race. The movements -of the moustache are dependent on the muscle called _depressor alæ -nasi_. By specially cultivating this muscle men might in course of time -make the movements of the moustaches subject to voluntary control. Just -think what a capacity for emotional expression lies in such a simple -organ as the dog’s caudal appendage, aptly called the “psychographic -tail” by Vischer: and moustaches are double, and therefore equal to two -psychographic appendages! - -Sexual Selection would not fail to seize on this “new departure” in -moustaches immediately in order to emphasise the sexual differences of -expression in the face, and thus increase the ardour of romantic -passion. A few days ago I came across an attempt in a German paper to -explain the meaning of the word Flirtation. The writer derives the word -from an old expression meaning to toss or cast about. This he refers to -the eyes, and thinks that the proper translation of Flirtation is -_äugeln_, _i.e._ to “make eyes.” We, of course, know that flirting is a -fine art which includes a vast deal besides _äugeln_; but “making eyes” -is certainly one of its tricks. Now, is it not probable that by and by, -when young men will have properly trained their _depressor alæ nasi_, -they will look upon the making of eyes as a feminine attribute, and, -instead of winking at their sweethearts, express their admiration by -some subtle and graceful movement of the moustaches? This would -obliterate Darwin’s assertion that Love has no special means of -expression. - - - BALDNESS AND DEPILATORIES - -Superficial students of Darwinism are constantly making owlish -predictions that ere many generations will have passed bald heads will -be the normal aspect of man. But, as we have just seen in the case of -beards, it is not utility or Natural Selection so much as Sexual, -Æsthetico-Amorous Selection on which the evolution of Personal Beauty -depends. If Natural Selection were at work alone we should, indeed, -ultimately become bald; for as soon as man begins to cover his head with -a cap or hat, he takes away the chief function of the hair on the top of -the head, where it serves as a protection against wind and weather. But -Sexual Selection now steps in and says that the hair must remain, -because without it the head looks decidedly ugly, whatever its shape. - -“Eschricht states that in the human fœtus the hair on the face during -the fifth month is longer than that on the head; and this indicates that -our semi-human progenitors were not furnished with long tresses, which -must therefore have been a late acquisition. This is likewise indicated -by the extraordinary difference in the length of the hair in the -different races: in the negro the hair forms a mere curly mat; with us -it is of great length, and with the American natives it not rarely -reaches to the ground. Some species of Semnopithecus have their head -covered with moderately long hair, and this probably serves as an -ornament, and was acquired through sexual selection. The same view may -perhaps be extended to mankind, for we know that long tresses are now -and were formerly much admired, as may be observed in the works of -almost every poet; St. Paul says, ‘If a woman have long hair it is a -glory to her;’ and we have seen that in North America a chief was -elected solely from the length of his hair” (Darwin). - -Inasmuch as Sexual Selection or Love is impeded in its action not only -by pecuniary and social considerations, but by the fact that it cannot -be guided by any particular feature alone, its action is slow and -sometimes uncertain. Hence the increase of bald heads. It is therefore -necessary to supplement the beautifying results of Sexual Selection by -means of hygienic precautions, such as avoiding air-tight, warm, high -hats, badly ventilated rooms, intemperate habits, and other causes of -baldness. Hereditary baldness is difficult to arrest in its course; but -even in such cases much may be accomplished by beginning in childhood to -take proper care of the hair. Most persons—especially men—seem to -imagine that combs and brushes are made solely for the purpose of -arranging the hair in some approved fashion; whereas, if properly used, -a brush adds as much to the _sensuous_ beauty of the hair as to its -_formal_ appearance. To remove all the dust from the hair, and give it -gloss and healthy colour, about fifty daily strokes, or more even, are -recommended. Avoid irritating the scalp with fine combs or hard -bristles, and wash it once or twice a week with a weak solution of -ammonia or borax. Hair that is properly brushed is always glossy with -its natural oil, and needs no vulgar ointment, offensive to the smell -and suggestive of uncleanliness. If with these hygienic precautions the -hair refuses to become beautiful, it is time to get medical advice; for -the dull colour and dryness of the hair which lead to baldness are often -due to constitutional disease. - -Powdering the hair is fortunately no longer in vogue as it was formerly. -It is a most unæsthetic habit, not only because white or gray hair is -naturally suggestive of old age, grief, and decrepitude, but because the -flour forms with the perspiration and with the oil of the hair a nasty -compound. William Pitt “estimated, in 1795, that the amount of flour -annually consumed for this purpose in the United Kingdom represented the -enormous and incredible value of six million dollars.” - -It is estimated that the average number of hairs on the head is 120,000. -This allows one to look with considerable indifference on the loss of a -few hundred, all the more as in ordinary cases, even after illness, -every hair lost is replaced by another. But when the papilla at the base -of the hair cavity is destroyed, then baldness is inevitable. It follows -from this that the only certain way of removing hair permanently from -places where it is not desired is to destroy this papilla. “Plucking -hair out by the root” does not destroy it. “If they are pulled out with -the tweezers there is a still greater stimulus given,” says Dr. Bulkley -(_The Skin in Health and Disease_), “and the hairs return yet more -coarse and obtrusive.” The various Oriental and Occidental pastes for -removing the hair have no more permanent effect than shaving. -“Superfluous hairs can be removed either by the introduction of an -irregularly-shaped needle into the follicle (after the extraction of the -hair), which is then twisted so as to break up the papilla and produce a -little inflammation, which closes the follicle; or a needle can be -inserted, and a current from a battery be turned on, when the follicle -is destroyed by what is known as electrolysis. These procedures could be -done only by a physician.” - -Concerning electrolysis Dr. S. E. Woody says in the _American -Practitioner and News_ that the number of hairs to return and demand a -second removal will decrease with the skill of the operator and the -thoroughness of the operation. He usually expects the return of about 5 -per cent, but when these are in turn removed the cure is complete. “You -should have the patient come only on bright days, for good light is -necessary.” - -ÆSTHETIC VALUE OF HAIR - -If not the most beautiful part of the head, hair certainly is the most -beautifying. To improve the shape of mouth, nose, chin, or eyes requires -time and patience, but the arrangement of the hair can be altered in a -minute, not only to its own advantage, but so as to enhance the beauty -of the whole face. By clever manipulation of her long tresses, a woman -can alter her appearance almost as completely as a man can by shaving -off his long beard or moustache. - -But, alas! If the prevalence of the bustle and wasp-waist allowed any -doubt to remain as to the woful rarity of æsthetic taste among women, it -would be found in the arrangement of the hair and the kind of -head-dresses they commonly adopt at the behest of Fashion. “Because -women as a rule do not know what _beauty_ means,” says Mrs. Haweis (_The -Art of Beauty_), “therefore they catch at whatever presents itself as a -novelty.... They do not pause to consider whether the old fashion became -them better—whether the new one reveals more clearly the slight -shrinking of the jaw, or spoils the pretty colour still blooming in the -cheek.” - -The latest head-dress foisted on the feminine world by Parisian Fashion -shows most strikingly how Fashion is the Handmaid of Vulgarity as well -as of Ugliness. Heaven knows, the high silk hats worn by men are bad -enough, on hygienic as well as æsthetic grounds. They promote baldness -and destroy all the artistic proportions of stature, making the head -look by one half too high. But silk hats are a harmless trifle compared -with the shapeless straw-towers, ornamented with bird-corpses, that have -been worn of late by almost all women in countries which slavishly -follow Parisian example. And there is this great difference between -man’s silk hat and woman’s bird-sarcophagus—the former only results in -ugliness, the second is also evidence of heartlessness, and leads to -vulgarity. For what is it but vulgarity if women continue to go to the -theatre for two winters with hats which make it quite impossible for -those sitting behind them to see the scenery and enjoy the play—and all -this in spite of innumerable sarcastic and angry protests in the -journals? Is not the first rule of etiquette and good manners regard for -the feelings and pleasures of others? - -What would women say to a man who kept on his tall hat in a theatre -until the ushers threw him out? Would they not all pronounce him either -intoxicated or ineffably vulgar? Would not Schopenhauer, if he could go -to an American theatre to-day, be justified in saying that women are not -only the “unæsthetic sex,” but also the “ill-bred sex”? And can the -women who are so devoid of courtesy towards the men wonder that -masculine gallantry towards women on street-cars and elsewhere seems to -be on the wane? - -Although there are no two heads in which the most pleasing effect is -secured by precisely the same arrangement of the hair and the same style -of hat, it may be laid down as a universal rule that a very high hat or -arrangement of the hair is becoming to no one, for the reason above -indicated. Let it be observed, says Mr. Buskin, “that in spite of all -custom, an Englishman instantly acknowledges, and at first sight, the -superiority of the turban to the hat.” “Guido,” says Mrs. Haweis, -“probably felt the peculiar charm of the turban when he placed one upon -the quiet melancholy head of Beatrice Cenci.” For full and bright young -faces the Tam o’ Shanter is the loveliest of all head-dresses. But this -subject is too large to be discussed in a paragraph. In Mrs. Haweis’s -_Art of Beauty_ may be found some elegant illustrations of head-dresses -placed near fashionable monstrosities; and young ladies would do well to -devote an hour a day for a year or two to the study of some history of -costume. Nothing awakens the sense of Beauty so rapidly as good models -and comparisons. - -Concerning the arrangement of the hair two more points may be noted. Is -it not about time to do away with the venerable absurdity of parting the -hair? If entire baldness is voted ugly, why should partial baldness be -courted? The hair should be allowed to remain in its natural direction -of growth. It does not part itself naturally, nor again—and this is a -much more important point—does it grow backward from the forehead. The -Chinese coiffure disfigures _every_ woman who adopts it; and the habit -of combing back the hair tightly from the forehead, moreover, often -causes neuralgic headache, the cause of which is unsuspected; not to -speak of the fact that such a coiffure raises the eyebrows, and thus -gives a fixed expression of amazed stupefaction. The hair naturally -falls over the forehead, and fringes it as beautifully as a grove does a -lake. - -The ancient Greek notions on this subject are worthy of attentive -consideration. “Women who had a high forehead placed a band over it, -with the design of making it thereby seem lower,” says Winckelmann. Not -only in women but in mature men the hair was so arranged as to cover up -“the receding bare corners over the temples, which usually enlarge as -life advances beyond that age when the forehead is naturally high.” The -modern fringe or “bang” is, however, an improvement even on the Greek -curve of the hair over the temples. It improves the appearance of all -women except those whose forehead is very low naturally; but in all -cases exaggeration must be avoided. - -A writer in the London _Evening Standard_ thinks it is strange that the -English, “who have the poorest hair in Europe, make the least attempt to -show what they have,” and that it has now “come to such a pass that a -maiden of twenty thinks it almost indecent to wear her hair loose.” He -traces this to the tyranny of Fashion—the ugly majority having compelled -the beautiful minority to conceal their charms. But we may be sure that -ere long Beauty will revolt against Fashion. It will be another French -revolution, practically,—an emphatic protest against Parisian dictation -and vulgarity. - - - - - BRUNETTE AND BLONDE - - - “In the old time black was not counted fair, - Or if it were it bore not beauty’s name; - _But now is black beauty’s successive heir_.”—SHAKSPERE. - - - BLONDE _VERSUS_ BRUNETTE - -Becker tells us that among the ancient Greeks “black was probably the -prevailing colour of the hair, though blond is frequently mentioned”; -and he adds that both men and women used dyes, and “the blond or yellow -hair was much admired.” Mr. Gladstone, in his work on Homer, remarks -that “dark hair is a note of the foreigner and of Southern -extraction.... I have been assured that, in the Greece of to-day, light -hair is still held as indicating the purest Hellenic blood.” According -to Winckelmann, “Homer does not even once mention hair of a black -colour”; and again: "Flaxen, ξανθὴ hair has always been considered the -most beautiful; and hair of this colour has been attributed to the most -beautiful of the gods, as Apollo and Bacchus, not less than to the -heroes; even Alexander had flaxen hair." - -That the Romans agreed with the Greeks in giving the preference to light -hair seems probable from the extensive importations of yellow German -hair for the Roman ladies, as also from the fact that “Lucretius, when -speaking of the false flatteries addressed to women, quotes one in -illustration, namely, that a maiden with black hair is μελίχροος -(honey-coloured)—thus ascribing to her a beauty which she does not -possess.” - -When the fair-haired Teuton overran the South a new motive for -preferring blond hair arose, as a writer in the London _Standard_ -remarks: “Whatever the feeling of the men, we may be sure that the dark -beauties of those climes felt a natural inclination to resemble the -wives and daughters of the conqueror, and when we perceive their -likenesses again, at the revival of art in Italy, not a black tress is -to be seen. Is there a single Madonna not blond?—or ten portraits of -women by the great masters? In all the gallery of Titian, we think only -of a figure, naked to the waist, in the Uffizi, described as one of his -mistresses.... But we know that the blond tint was artificial in a -majority of cases—the deep black of eye and brow would show it if no -evidence were forthcoming. But evidence turns up at every side ... a -hundred recipes are found in memoirs, correspondence, and treatises of -the time.” - -Hear another witness: “Southern Europe,” says Mr. R. G. White, “is -peopled with dark-skinned, dark-haired races, and the superior beauty of -the blond type was recognised by the painters, who always, from the -earliest days, represented angels as of that type. The Devil was painted -black so much as a matter of course that his pictured appearance gave -rise to a well-known proverb; ordinary mortals were represented as more -or less dark; celestial people were white and golden-haired: whence the -epithet ‘divinely fair.’” - -And the poets were quite as partial as the artists to the light type. -Petrarch’s sonnets are addressed to a blue-eyed Laura. Krimhild of the -_Nibelungenlied_ is blue-eyed, like Fricka, the Northern Juno, and -Ingeborg of the _Frithjof’s Saga_, and the Danish princess Iolanthe, as -Dr. Magnus points out; and in the French folk-songs “the girls are -almost as invariably blond as in the songs of Heine,” as a writer in the -_Saturday Review_ (1878) remarks, adding that “there is even such an -expression as _aller en blonde_, ‘to go a-wooing,’ which proves the -universality of the belief in fair beauties.” - -Concerning England, a writer in the _Quarterly Review_ declares that -Shakspere mentions black hair only twice throughout his plays; and that -in the National Gallery of that date (1853) there was not a single -female head with black hair. - - - BRUNETTE _VERSUS_ BLONDE - -Thus we have evidence showing that during the epoch preceding the -general prevalence of Romantic Love, the blond type was considered the -ideal of beauty throughout Europe—in Greece and Italy as well as in -Germany, Scandinavia, France, and England. And where the hair was not -naturally blond, artificial means were used to make it so. - -But as soon as Love appears on the scene and sharpens the æsthetic -sense, we find a reaction in favour of brunettes. There can be no doubt -of this, for it is attested not only by personal opinions and -observations, but by accurate statistics. The _Quarterly Review_ just -referred to believed that blondes were gradually decreasing in England, -and the _Saturday Review_ asserts that “some years ago Mr. Gladstone, -whom nothing escapes, declared that light-haired people were far less -numerous than in his youth. Many middle-aged persons will probably agree -with him.” “The time was,” the writer adds, “when the black-haired, -black-eyed girl of fiction was as dark of soul as of tresses, while the -blue-eyed maiden’s character was of ‘heaven’s own colour.’ Thackeray -damaged this tradition by invariably making his dark heroines nice, his -fair heroines treacherous sirens.” Byron, we may add, also showed a -passionate preference for brunettes; and does not another great -love-poet, Moore, speak of “eyes of unholy blue”? - -Speaking of the Germans, the anthropologist Waitz remarks that “the -blond and red hair, the blue eyes and light complexion, which most of -them had at the period of the Roman wars, have not disappeared, it is -true, but certainly diminished greatly in frequency. In Jarrold we find -the analogous statement that as late as the time of Henry VIII. red hair -predominated in England, and that at the beginning of the fifteenth -century gray eyes were more common, dark eyes and dark hair less common, -than now.” As this change is correlated in both these countries with a -gradual refinement of the features, does it not indicate that modern -æsthetico-amorous selection favours the brunette type? - -Waitz’s assertion regarding the gradual decrease in the number of -blondes in Germany is strikingly confirmed by the results of a series of -statistical investigations undertaken under the supervision of Professor -Virchow. Almost eleven million school children were examined in Germany, -Austria, Switzerland, and Belgium, and the results showed that -Switzerland has only 11·10, Austria 19·79, and Germany 31·80 per cent of -pure blondes. Thus the very country which, since the days of ancient -Rome has been proverbially known as the home of yellow hair and blue -eyes, has to-day only 32 pure blondes in a hundred; while the average of -pure brunettes is already 14·05 per cent (and in some regions as high as -25 per cent). The 53·15 per cent of the mixed type are evidently being -slowly transformed into pure brunettes, thanks to intermarriages with -the neighbours who are of the dark variety east and west, as well as -south of Germany. - -In England Dr. Beddoe has collected a number of statistics which also -bear out the theory that brunettes are gaining on blondes. Among 726 -women examined he found 369 brunettes and 357 blondes. Of the brunettes -he found that 78·5 per cent were married, while of the blondes only 68 -per cent were married. Thus it would seem that a brunette has ten -chances of getting married in England to a blonde’s nine. Hence Dr. -Beddoe reasons that the English are becoming darker because the men -persist in selecting the darker-haired women as wives. - -In France a similar view has been put forth by M. Adolphe de Candolle in -the _Archives des Sciences_. He found that when both parents have eyes -of the same colour 88·4 per cent inherit this colour. "But the curious -fact comes out that more females than males have black or brown eyes, in -the proportion, say, of 49 to 45 or of 41 to 39. Next, it appears that -with different coloured eyes in the two parents, 53·09 per cent of the -progeny followed the fathers in being dark-eyed, and 55·09 per cent -followed their mothers in being dark-eyed. An increase of 5 per cent of -dark-eyed in each generation of discolorous unions must tell heavily in -the course of time. It would seem," adds _Science_, to which I owe this -summary of De Candolle’s views, “that, unless specially bred by -concolorous marriages, blue-eyed belles will be scarce in the -millennium.” - - - WHY CUPID FAVOURS BRUNETTES - -How are we to account for this undeniable change in favour of brunettes? -Is it merely a matter of Taste and Fashion? Are we simply going through -a period of brunette-worship which in turn will be followed by a century -or two of blonde-worship, and so on _ad infinitum_? or are there reasons -for believing that Cupid will abide by his present decision, and -continue to eliminate blondes? There are several such reasons, which may -best be discussed separately, under the heads of Complexion, Hair, and -Eyes. - -(1) _Complexion._—The dark skin is more soft and velvety than the light -skin, and therefore more agreeable to the touch; hence, as Winckelmann -remarks, “he who prefers dark to fair beauty is not on that account to -be censured; indeed, one might approve his choice, if he is attracted -less by sight than by the touch.” But the eye, too, is likely to be more -pleased by a brunette than a pure blond complexion. In the dark skin the -pigmentary matter tones down the too vivid red of the translucent blood, -wherefore the brunette complexion appears more mellow and delicate in -its tints than the Scandinavian blonde, in which a blush suggests a -hectic flush, and its normal whiteness the pallor of ill-health or a -lack of invigorating and beautifying sunshine. - -The brunette complexion, in a word, suggests to the mind the idea of -_stored-up sunshine_, i.e. _Health_; and as Health is what primarily -attracts Cupid, this, combined with his taste for delicate tints and -veiled blushes, partly accounts for his preference of the dark type. -Youthful freshness is another bait which tempts Cupid; and it is well -known that the dark complexion does not, as a rule, fade so soon as the -blond. - -That the brownish skin is commonly healthier than the white is also -shown by its being less subject to the irregularity in the secretion of -pigmentary matter which causes freckles. These blemishes, like smallpox -marks, are much rarer among the dark than among blond races and -individuals. - -The skin of blondes who are exposed to a hot sun and raw weather becomes -red, inflamed, and decidedly unbeautiful, while a brunette’s complexion -only becomes a shade darker, and possibly all the more attractive. This -suggests another reason why the brunettes have an advantage over blondes -in the country, where love-making is chiefly carried on in summer. Yet -it will not do for the blondes to avoid the sunshine on this account, -for that will make them anæmic and prematurely old. - -There is a class of extreme blondes to whom sunlight is not only -irritating, but positively painful. They are called albinos, because -there is no brown pigment whatever in any part of their body—skin, hair, -or iris. The Dutch call them Kakerlaken or cockroaches, because, like -these animals, they avoid the light. Such anomalous individuals occur -also among animals; and Darwin has noted regarding birds that albinos do -not pair, apparently because they are rejected by their -normally-coloured comrades. This fact has a remote bearing on our -argument, for blondes are intermediate between albinos and brunettes. - -It would appear, indeed, as if not only the complexion but the general -constitution of the dark type were superior to that of the blond type. -In the chapter on the Complexion it was stated that a dark hue is -regarded in Australia and elsewhere as evidence of superior strength. -The ancient Greeks, Winckelmann tells us, although they called the young -with fair complexions “children of the gods,” looked upon a brown -complexion in boys as an indication of courage. Professor Topinard -states that “the fair races are especially adapted to temperate and cool -regions, and the South is looked upon as almost forbidden ground. The -brown races, on the contrary, have a remarkable power of becoming -acclimatised.” Several writers have even endeavoured to account for the -gradual increase in the proportion of brunettes by connecting it with -the modern tendency towards centralisation of the population in large -cities, where the blondes, being unable to resist their unsanitary -surroundings, are eliminated, while the more vigorous and fertile -brunettes survive and multiply. - -One reason why tourists are more impressed by the prevalence of beauty -in southern than in northern regions, is because the working classes are -more beautiful in the South than in the North; and the working classes, -of course, constitute the vast majority of the population everywhere. -“In northern countries,” says Mr. Lecky, “the prevailing cast of beauty -depends rather on colour than on form. It consists chiefly of a -freshness and delicacy of complexion which severe labour and constant -exposure necessarily destroy, and which is therefore rarely found in the -highest perfection among the very poor. But the southern type is -essentially democratic. The fierce rays of the sun only mellow and -mature its charms. Its most perfect examples may be found in the hovel -as in the palace, and the effects of this diffusion of beauty may be -traced both in the manners and the morals of the people.” - -Another advantage to the study and development of Personal Beauty lies -in the fact, noted by Ruskin, “that in climates where the body can be -more openly and frequently visited by sun and weather, the nude both -comes to be regarded in a way more grand and pure, as not of necessity -awakening ideas of base kind (as pre-eminently with the Greeks), and -also from that exposure receives a firmness and sunny elasticity very -different from the silky softness of the clothed nations of the North.” - -(2) _Hair._—"That noble beauty," says Winckelmann, “which consists not -merely in a soft skin, a brilliant complexion, wanton or languishing -eyes, but in the shape or form, is found more frequently in countries -which enjoy a uniform mildness of climate.” “This difference shows -itself even in the hair of the head and of the beard, and both in warm -climates have a more beautiful growth even from childhood, so that the -greater number of children in Italy are born with fine curling hair, -which loses none of its beauty with increasing years. All the beards, -also, are curly, ample, and finely shaped; whereas those of the pilgrims -who come to Rome from the other side of the Alps are generally, like the -hair of their heads, stiff, bristly, straight, and pointed.” - -Nevertheless, the hair is the blonde’s one feature in which, so far as -the head itself is concerned, she may dispute the supremacy with the -brunette. Light hair is finer than dark hair, and there is more of it to -the square inch; and as for the colour, who will say that a girl with -“golden locks which make such wanton gambols” is inferior in beauty to -one who is “robed in the long night of her deep hair”? - -But if the positive tests of Beauty—Colour, Lustre, Smoothness, -Delicacy, etc.—do not permit us to give the preference to dark hair, it -is otherwise when we come to the negative tests. A fine head of blond -hair _may_ be as beautiful as a head of brown hair, but it is not so apt -to be beautiful; it has a tendency to become “stiff, bristly, straight, -and pointed.” There are various reasons for believing that light hair as -a rule is not so healthy, not so well-nourished, as dark hair. Every -reader must have noticed among his friends that the blondes are much -more likely than the brunettes to complain of dry and refractory hairs, -and difficulty in keeping them in shape. - -“The end of long hair is usually lighter in colour than its beginning,” -as Professor Kollmann remarks: “at a distance from the skin the hairs -lose their natural oil as well as the nourishing sap which comes from -their roots.” This implies that the colour of the hair becomes darker -with increasing vigour and vitality. We have seen that the same is true -of the colour of animals in general, the healthiest being the most -vividly coloured, and the males commonly darker than the less vigorous -females; and as for plants, who has not noticed how easy it is to trace -the course of an invisible brooklet in a meadow, not only by the greater -luxuriance, but the much darker colour of the grass which lines its -banks? - -Once more, we know that old age, great sorrow, terror, headaches, or -insanity, diminish the pigmentary matter in the hair and make it -lighter—gray or white; and that by frequently brushing blond hair we not -only make it more glossy and shapely, but at the same time darker. - -Red hair is probably an abnormal variety of blond hair, since it does -not occur among the darker races. It is disliked not only because it is -so often associated with freckles, but because it is commonly dry, -coarse, and bristly. The Brahmins were forbidden to marry a red-haired -woman; and the populace of most countries, confounding moral with -æsthetic impressions, accuses red-haired people of various shortcomings. -“Sandy hair, when well brushed and kept glossy with the natural oil of -the scalp, changes to a warm golden tinge. I have seen,” says the author -of the _Ugly Girl Papers_, “a most obnoxious head of colour so changed -by a few years’ care that it became the admiration of the owner’s -friends, and could hardly be recognised as the withered, fiery locks -once worn.” - -An American newspaper paragraph, for the truthfulness of which I cannot -vouch, recently stated that twenty-one men in Cincinnati, who had -married red-haired women, were found to be colour-blind. A person who is -colour-blind mistakes red for black. - -(3) _Eyes._—But it is when we leave the scalp that the superiority of -dark over light hair becomes most manifest. That black eyelashes and -eyebrows are infinitely more beautiful than light-coloured ones, is -admitted without a dissentient voice; and it is needless to add that -brunettes, whether gray or black-eyed, are almost certain to have dark -eyelashes, while blondes are almost certain not to have them. Hence the -painting of light eyelashes has been a common artifice among all nations -and at all times; and Mrs. Haweis goes so far as to sanction the use of -nasty gray hair powder because it “makes the eyebrows and eyelashes -appear much darker than they really are.” I have, however, seen black -eyelashes on several young ladies who could hardly be classed as -brunettes, and who assured me on their conscience that they had not dyed -them. Can it be possible that Sexual Selection (_i.e._ the æsthetic -overtone in Romantic Love) is endeavouring to evolve a type of Beauty in -which golden locks will be allowed to remain, while the eyelashes will -be changed to black? The only objection to this surmise is that the hair -in other parts of the face (chin and upper lip), though rarely of the -same colour as that on the scalp, is almost always lighter in hue. But, -whether or not Love can accomplish the miracle of making black lashes -universal, the fact remains that they are in all cases a thousand times -more charming than yellow or red lashes, and also more apt to be long -and delicately curved, coyly veiling the mysterious lustre and fire of -the iris. - -Concerning the iris, in turn, it cannot be denied that it is most -beautiful when black (dark brown), or so deeply blue or violet as to be -easily taken for black. This superiority of the dark hue is due partly -to the fact that a brown eye is commonly more lustrous than a light eye, -and partly to the law of contrast; for a light-coloured iris obviously -does not present such a vivid contrast to the white of the eye as a -brown iris, and is therefore apt to seem vague, watery, and superficial -in expression. The light blue or gray eye appears shallow. All its -beauty seems to be on the surface, whereas the “soul-deep eyes of -darkest night” appear unfathomable through their bewitching glamour. - -What is the etymology of the word bella donna? Was it given to the plant -on account of the beauty of its cherry-like berries? or was it not -rather chosen by some poet who noted the wondrous effect of these -poisonous berries in changing all eyes into black eyes by enlarging the -pupils, thus making every donna a bella donna, or “beautiful lady”? -Great, indeed, must be the fascination of a large pupil, since so many -women have braved the danger to health, and the certainty of impairment -of vision, which follow the use of this poison as a cosmetic. - -It was noted in an earlier part of this volume that young men are led to -propose chiefly in the evening, because the twilight enlarges the pupil, -thus not only beautifying _her_ eyes, but enabling him to see _his own_ -divine image reflected in them, proving his Monopoly of her soul. A -brunette’s dark eyes on such an occasion appear to be _all_ pupil: how, -then, can you wonder that brunettes are gaining on blondes? - -However, let not the blondes despair. As they become scarcer they will -for that very reason be valued the more as curiosities, and the last of -them, should she fail to find a husband, will be able to command a -handsome salary in a museum or as a comic opera singer. - -Moreover, there is no reason why physiologists should not ere long -discover the secret of changing the tint of the skin, hair, and iris to -suit one’s taste. All children are born with light eyes, but a great -many exchange them for dark eyes as soon as they realise their mistake. -We also know that ill-health temporarily changes the colour of the hair. -According to the _Popular Science Monthly_, “Prentiss records a case of -a patient to whom muriate of pilocarpine was administered -hypodermically, and whose hair was changed from light blond to nearly -jet black, and his eyes from light blue to dark blue.” The eating of -sorghum is also said to favour the evolution of a brunette colour. But -it is to the electricians that we must look for a harmless and efficient -method of stimulating the secretion of pigmentary matter in the iris, -skin, and hair. The man who first discovers how to change blondes to -brunettes will acquire a fame as great as Newton’s or Shakspere’s, and -when he dies Cupid will appoint him his private secretary. - -“John,” we can hear a woman say to her husband twenty years hence—"John, -Laura is now five years old. Don’t you think it is time to send her over -to Dr. Electrode? I don’t object to her yellow hair, but I do think her -complexion, iris, and eyelashes should be made several shades darker. -She will then stand a better chance in the marriage-market when she gets -older." - - - - - NATIONALITY AND BEAUTY - - -Beauty, like Love, has its national peculiarities, based on climate, -customs, traditions, mental and physical. As the description of all -these differences between the various peoples in the world would require -several volumes the size of this, it cannot, of course, be attempted -here even roughly. Nor is this necessary, for most of these national -peculiarities are variations which have more ethnologic than æsthetic -interest. Many of them have been considered in the preceding pages to -illustrate the Evolution of Personal Beauty; and something has been said -episodically regarding Greek, Hebrew, Georgian, and Mediæval Beauty. -Polish women are famous for their beauty, but as I have never been in -Poland nor in Russia, I do not feel competent to pronounce judgment on -the common verdict, and will therefore limit my observations to the six -nations whose Love-customs I have endeavoured to describe. And even in -these cases I cannot claim that the following remarks have any greater -value than such as attaches to mere casual jottings. In most European -countries the nations are as wildly mixed as in the United States, -though less recently; and it is therefore extremely difficult to draw -any general conclusions, as is shown by the conflicting opinions of -tourists. Moreover, each nation is variously subdivided, so that some -things are, _e.g._ true of North Germany which are not true of South -Germany, and so in other countries. Yet there are a few points on which -travellers commonly agree, and these will be briefly considered here. -The highest beauty is pretty much the same the world over—in Japan as in -France; and even among the savages of Africa young girls are to be found -who, but for their colour, would be pronounced beauties in Europe. Most -nations are on their way towards this highest type of Beauty, and they -occupy different stages of evolution according to their attitude and -advantages regarding the four principal sources of Personal -Beauty—Hygienic Habits, Mixture of Nationalities, Romantic Love, and -Mental Refinement. - - - - - FRENCH BEAUTY - - -Widely as tourists commonly differ in their opinions as to the -prevalence of Beauty in various countries, on one point there seems to -be a universal agreement—viz. that nowhere in Europe is it so rare as in -France. Thackeray notes that nature has “rather stinted the bodies and -limbs of the French nation.” Walker, in his work on Beauty, remarks that -“the women of France are among the ugliest in the world”; and Sir Lepel -Griffin puts the truth pointedly in these words: “National vanity, where -inordinately developed, may take the form of asserting that black is -white, as in France, where the average of good looks, among both men and -women, is perhaps lower than elsewhere in Europe. If a pretty woman be -seen in the streets of Paris, she is almost certainly English or -American; yet if a foreigner were to form an estimate of French beauty -from the rapturous descriptions of contemporary French novels, or from -the sketches of _La Vie Parisienne_, he must conclude that the -Frenchwoman was the purest and loveliest type in the world in face and -figure. The fiction in this case disguises itself in no semblance of the -truth.” - -Yet there have been French writers who felt the shortcomings of their -nation in regard to Personal Beauty. One of them says that you find in -the Frenchman “the love of the graceful rather than the beautiful”; and -in the following characterisation of his countrywomen, by M. Figuier, it -is easy to see that he lays much more emphasis on their grace and the -expressiveness of their features than on their Beauty proper: “There is -in her face much that is most pleasing, although we can assign her -physiognomy to no determinate type. Her features, _frequently -irregular_, seem to be borrowed from different races; they do not -possess that unity which springs from calm and majesty, but are in the -highest degree expressive, and marvellously contrived for conveying -every shade of feeling. In them we see a smile though it be shaded by -tears; a caress though they threaten us; and an appeal when yet they -command. Amid _the irregularity of this physiognomy_ the soul displays -its workings. As a rule the Frenchwoman is short of stature, but in -every proportion of her form combines grace and delicacy. Her -extremities and joints are fine and elegant, of perfect model and -distinct form, without a suspicion of coarseness. With her, moreover, -art is brought wonderfully to assist nature” (_The Races of Man_). - -It appears, indeed, as if Frenchwomen, who are naturally bright and -quickwitted, endeavoured to make up in grace what they lack in beauty. -Hence nothing is more common than Frenchwomen who are so fascinating -with their graceful little ways and movements that one almost or quite -forgets their homeliness. No French girl ever needs to be taught how to -use her eyes to best advantage; and, as a clever newspaper writer has -remarked, French girls “can say more with their shoulders than most -girls can with their eyes; and when they talk with eyes, hands, -shoulders, and tongue at once, it takes a man of talent to keep up.” - -Of course it would be absurd to say that no specimens of supreme Beauty -are to be found in France; but they are scarce as strawberries in -December. The general tendency of women to become either too stout or -too lean after they have got out of their teens, is apparently more -pronounced in France than elsewhere in Europe. And as for the men, they -can be recognised anywhere, either by their almost simian hairiness or -their puny appearance. What a difference in stature and general manly -aspect between a regiment of French and one of English or German -soldiers! And the superiority of the English soldiers to the French in -vigour and beauty is more than “skin-deep”; it appears to extend to the -very chemical composition of their tissues; for Professor Topinard -remarks in his _Anthropologie_ that he enunciated more than twenty years -ago “a fact which was more or less confirmed by others, namely, that the -mortality after capital operations in English hospitals was less by -one-half than in the French. We attributed it to a better diet, to their -better sanitary arrangements, and to their superior management. There -was but one serious objection offered to our statement. M. Velapeau, -with his wonderful acumen, made reply, at the Academy of Medicine, that -the flesh of the English and of the French differed; in other words, -that the reaction after operations was not the same in both races. It -is, in effect, an anthropological character.” - -Thus the “wonderful acumen” of two French scientists has established the -fact that French deterioration is shown not only in a surprisingly low -birth-rate, but in the general inferiority of the French constitution: -for the ability to resist the effects of wounds or illness is evidence -of a sound constitution. - -That the chief cause of French ugliness, degeneration, and infertility -lies in their contemptuous treatment of Romantic Love, must be apparent -to any one after reading the preceding chapter on French Love. French -parents may point triumphantly to cases of genuine Conjugal attachment -in their sons and daughters, whose marriages were based on social or -pecuniary considerations. But they forget the _grandchildren_. It is -they who suffer from these ill-assorted, fortuitous unions. Only the -children of Love are beautiful and destined to multiply. - -French indifference to the claims of Love also explains why another -leading source of Beauty—the mixture of races—is inoperative in their -country. The French are a very mixed nation. In the North, says Dr. -Topinard, “we find the descendants of the Belgæ, the Walloons, and other -Kymri; in the East, those of Germans and Burgundians; in the West, -Normans; in the centre, Celts, who at the same epoch at which their name -took its origin consisted of foreigners of various origins and of the -aborigines; in the South, ancient Aquitanians and Basques; without -mentioning a host of settlers like the Saracens, who are found here and -there, Tectosages, who have left at Toulouse the custom of cranial -deformities, and the traders who passed through the Phocæan town of -Marseilles.” But the advantages which might result to Personal Beauty -from such a mixture of peoples are neutralised through the universality -of money-marriages, notwithstanding that these must in some cases bring -together the descendants of different races. For a mixture of races is -not necessarily and always an advantage, but only when it enables a -lover to profit by the greater physiognomic variety in finding a mate -whose qualities will blend harmoniously with his own. - -In the case of a third primal source of Beauty—Mental Culture—we find -again that its action is impeded through the anomalous position of Love -in France. Inasmuch as adulterous love-making is the only kind of -Love-making sanctioned by French custom and described in French -literature, it is necessary to withhold most books and periodicals from -the young of both sexes, who are thus compelled to grow up in ignorance. -“The burden of ignorance presses sorely upon her,” says M. Figuier of -the Frenchwoman: “It is a rare thing for a woman of the people to read, -as only those of the higher classes have leisure, during their girlhood, -to cultivate their minds. And yet even they must not give themselves up -too much to study, nor aspire to honour or distinction. The epithet _bas -bleu_ (‘blue-stocking’) would soon bring them back to the common -crowd—_an ignorant and frivolous feminine mass_.” - -Note that this is the confession of a patriotic Frenchman. The fact that -there have been a few brilliant Frenchwomen, famous for their _salons_, -has created the impression that most Frenchwomen are brilliant, whereas -the majority appear to be utterly without intellectual interests or -ambition. Nor could this possibly be otherwise, considering the -extremely superficial education which even the most favoured receive in -the nuns’ schools. And not a few of them bring home from these schools -something worse than ignorance, viz. the constitution and habits of an -invalid. Not only the girls, even the boys in French schools are never -allowed to play without supervision. Healthy romping is considered -undignified in young girls, and when they get a little older the -high-heeled, pointed shoes prescribed by Fashion take away any desire -they may feel to indulge in beautifying exercise. Uncomfortable shoes -and clothing, combined with the necessity of having a chaperon, even to -simply cross the street, prevent French girls from indulging in those -long walks to which English girls owe their fine physique. Nor do the -French show such a devotion to the bath-tub and other details of -Personal Hygiene as their neighbours across the channel. - -Thus we see that the French, thanks to their conservative, Oriental -customs, are placed at a disadvantage as regards every one of the four -main sources of Beauty—Romantic Love, Mixture of Races, Mental Culture, -and Hygiene. And it is not only Personal Beauty that suffers. A writer -in _La Réforme Sociale_ complains that “family feeling is dying out, the -moral sense is growing weaker ... the country is falling into a state of -anæmia.” And another writer in the same periodical, after noting the -alarming fact that although France has gained eight million inhabitants -since 1805, the number of births is no larger than it was then, calls -upon those interested in these symptoms of national decay to investigate -the local causes of it. - -But it is needless to look for “local causes.” The disease is a national -one, and calls for constitutional treatment. Let the French, in the -first place, instead of locking up their girls till they are ready to be -sold to a rich _roué_, initiate them into the arts of Anglo-American -Courtship, and then allow Romantic Love to take the place of money as a -matchmaker. That the effect of such a change would be miraculous may be -inferred from the fact that the products of a few generations of -American love-making—French girls in Canada and the United States—are -vastly superior in Beauty and Health to their transatlantic cousins. - -In the second place, the French must give up the notion that disease is -aristocratic. “In almost all countries,” says M. About, “there exists a -class distinguished from the masses as the aristocracy. In this social -miscellany the women have small white hands, because they wear gloves -and do not work; a pale complexion, because they are never exposed to -the sun; a sickly appearance and thin features, because they spend the -four months of the winter at balls. Hence it follows that ‘distinction’ -consists in a faded complexion, sickly appearance, a pair of white -hands, and thin features. The Madonnas of Raphael are not ‘_distingué_,’ -and the Venus of Milo also is very deficient in that quality.” - -After they have ceased to ridicule Love and to worship Disease, it will -be in order for the French to cultivate their æsthetic Taste. That of -all European men Frenchmen show the worst taste in dressing is commonly -admitted; but the preposterous superstition that French_women_ have a -special instinct for dressing tastefully is so firmly rooted in the mind -of women elsewhere, that nothing short of a miracle would be able to -eradicate it. The reason why the roots of this superstition are so deep -is this: Frenchwomen rarely have any great beauty of figure or features. -Hence they devote all their time to devising means for hiding their -formal defects and distracting the attention of men by some novelty or -eccentricity of apparel. In America and Germany, where the majority of -the women are also ugly, these tricks are eagerly copied; and the pretty -girls are compelled to yield to the tyranny of the majority, as has been -fully explained in the chapter on the Fashion Fetish. - -Englishwomen have, to a large extent, emancipated themselves from -Parisian Fashion Tyranny, aided by the protests of the men against -self-inflicted ugliness. And it is one of the healthiest signs of the -times that in America, too, the men are beginning to break the ice of -gallant timidity, and telling the women plainly what they think of their -hideous Parisian fashions. Not long ago an intelligent woman wrote to -the Boston _Transcript_, asking: “Why will not the press, instead of -growling and snarling at _the poor women who cannot help themselves_,” -ask the theatre managers to compel the women to take off their high -hats, which, she admits, ninety-nine in a hundred women consider a -nuisance? Yet they “cannot help themselves!” The poor women! What a -terrible slavery! the pretty women of America _compelled_ to adopt the -fashions originated by the ugliest women of Europe in order to hide -their defects! - -If American women must have models, let them go to Spain or Italy for -them, especially in the matter of headdresses. Of the Spanish mantilla, -which can be adapted to the style of every face, Prosper Mérimée says -that “it makes ugly women pretty, and pretty ones enchanting.” And a -German lady on her way to Spain bought on her way, as a matter of -course, the latest Parisian hat. “But when I arrived in Madrid,” she -writes, “my genuine Parisian hat seemed of such apelike ugliness that I -felt actually ashamed to wear it. For my taste had been corrected and -improved at sight of the first mantilla I saw; and I am convinced that a -large majority of German women and girls possess quite as much sense of -beauty as I, and will therefore prefer the Spanish mantilla to any hat -made by the most noted _modiste_ in Europe.” - - - - - ITALIAN BEAUTY - - -Although differences in form, complexion, and physiognomy are to be -noted in different parts of France, they are less pronounced than in -Italy, concerning which it is therefore more difficult to make general -statements. “The barbarian invasions in the north, and the contact with -Greeks and Africans in the south,” says M. Figuier, “have wrought much -alteration in the primitive type of the inhabitants of Italy. Except in -Rome and the Roman Campagna, the true type of the primitive Latin -population is hardly to be found. The Grecian type exists in the South, -and upon the eastern slope of the Apennines, while in the North the -great majority of faces are Gallic. In Tuscany and the neighbouring -regions are found the descendants of the ancient Etruscans.... The -mixture of African blood has changed the organic type of the Southern -Italian to such an extent as to render him entirely distinct from his -Northern compatriots, the exciting influence which the climate has over -the senses imparting to his whole conduct a peculiar exuberance.” - -In their estimate of Italian Beauty tourists differ widely. The raptures -and ecstasies of some writers are explained by others as due to the -æsthetic intoxication produced by sudden contact with a new type; and -they claim that a few years’ residence suffices to dispel these -illusions. On the judgment of the Italians themselves it is not safe to -rely, for that is tinged too much by local patriotism, the Milanese -claiming the pre-eminence in Beauty for themselves, while the Venetians, -Florentines, Romans, and Neapolitans blow their own horns respectively. -Professor Mantegazza thinks that the men are handsomer in Italy than the -women, of whom he allows only about ten per cent to have any claims to -real Beauty. Sir Charles Bell notes that “Raphael, in painting the head -of Galatea, found no beauty deserving to be his model; he is reported to -have said that there is nothing so rare as perfect beauty in woman; and -that he substituted for nature a certain idea inspired by his fancy.” -Montaigne, who travelled in Italy in the latter part of the sixteenth -century, expressed his surprise at the rarity of beauty in women and -girls, who at that time were kept in more than French seclusion. A -German author, Dr. J. Volkmann, wrote in 1770 that “there are few -beautiful women in Rome, especially among the higher classes; in Venice -and Naples more are to be seen. The Italian himself has a proverb which -says that Roman women are not beautiful” (quoted by Ploss). - -Byron, in one of his letters, gives a glowing description of an Italian -beauty of the Oriental type whom he met, and then adds: “Whether being -in love with her has steeled me or not, I do not know; but I have not -seen many other women who seem pretty. The nobility, in particular, are -a sad-looking race—the gentry rather better.” In another place he writes -that “the general race of women appear to be handsome; but in Italy, as -on almost all the Continent, the highest orders are by no means a -well-looking generation.” - -Yet was it not Byron who wrote of Italy that it is “the garden of the -world,” and that its “very weeds are beautiful”? And does not this apply -to the race as well as the soil? It is because they constantly live in a -garden, in the balmy air and mellowing sunshine, that Italians can to a -certain extent defy the laws of personal Hygiene, and flourish under -conditions which would torture us to death. Miss Margaret Collier -remarks, in _Our Home by the Adriatic_, that in the rural communities, -even among the well-to-do, to ask for a bath is to create alarm as to -the state of your health. And Berlioz speaks somewhere of Italian -peasant-girls “carrying heavy copper vessels and faggots on their heads; -but all so wretched, go miserable, so tattered, so filthily dirty, that, -_in spite of the beauty of the race_ and the picturesqueness of their -costume, all other feelings are swallowed up in one of utter -compassion.” - -Could the cosmetic value of fresh air and sunshine be more strikingly -attested than by the fact that Berlioz could speak of “the beauty of the -race,” notwithstanding the national indifference to the laws of -cleanliness? - -In regard to Romantic Love as a source of Beauty, the Italians also -occupy a somewhat anomalous position. In the rural districts French -matrimonial methods seem to be largely followed. Miss Collier mentions a -young lady who visited her to receive her congratulations on her -approaching marriage, and who, on being asked the name of her future -husband, replied naïvely, “Oh, I don’t know; papa has not yet told me -that.” The peasantry, however, are free to choose their own mates, and -it is among them that Italian Beauty is accordingly most prevalent. In -the cities the method of love-making is “operatic,” as we saw in the -chapter on Italian Love; but the main point is that Individual Choice is -not made impossible as in France, and that the Italians worship Love as -a law instead of looking on it with contemptuous cynicism and ridicule. - -The way in which the Mixture of Races affects Italian Beauty affords a -fresh illustration of the superiority of the Brunette type. In Germany, -by general consent, Beauty is much more frequent in the South, where -brunettes abound, than in the North, where they are scarce. Hence we may -conclude that the Blonde type is improved by the intermixture of the -Brunette type. But is the Brunette type of Northern Italy improved to -the same degree by the admixture of Northern Blondes? Not in my -judgment. Venice and Milan and Bologna, it is true, boast many beautiful -women; but has any tourist in writing about these cities ever expressed -much admiration for Italian Blondes? And are not Naples and Capri, the -paradise of Brunettes, commonly regarded as the region where Italian -Beauty is seen at its best? Here it is chiefly dark races that have -intermingled, hence the eyes are sure to be of a deep brown colour; -whereas in Northern Italy the introduction of blonde blood produces the -lighter, less decided tints of the iris which we do not admire. This -disadvantage, it is true, is also encountered in South Germany, but it -is neutralised by the gain of dark eyebrows, and long black lashes, and -the more supple and rounded limbs of the South. - -That mental culture adds much to Italian beauty cannot be said, for -Italian women of all classes are noted for their intellectual indolence. -But atonement is largely made for this by their extreme emotional -susceptibility. Blue skies, rank vegetation, pretty scenery, and a -natural love of music have softened and trained their feelings; and -though the Italian climate does not favour profound artistic culture it -warms the blood and incites the features to give expression to every -passing mood. It is this habit of emotional expression that has given a -unique charm and the power of graceful modulation to Italian features. -As a German artist, Herr Otto Knille, remarks of the Italians, “They -pose unintentionally. Their features, especially among the lower -classes, have been moulded through mimic expression practised for -thousands of years. Gesture-language has shaped the hands of many into -models of anatomic clearness. They have a complete language of signs and -gestures, which each one understands, as, for instance, in the ballet. -Add to this the innate grace of this race ... and we see that the -Italian artist has an abundance of material for copying, as compared -with which the German artist must admit his extreme poverty. Whoever has -lived in Italy is in a position to appreciate these advantages.... Think -of the neck, the nape, and the bust of Italian woman, the fine joints -and the elastic gait of both men and women. Nor are we much better -endowed as regards the physiognomy. The German potato-face is not a mere -fancy—the mirror which A. de Neuville has held up to us, though clouded -with prejudice, shows us an image not entirely untrue to life. We -artists know how rarely a head, especially one which lacks the -enchanting charm of youth, can be used as a model for anything but flat -realism. Most German faces, instead of becoming more clearly chiselled -and elaborated with age, appear more spongy, vague, and unmeaning.” - -Winklemann’s remarks on Italian Beauty are in the same vein: “We seldom -find in the fairest portions of Italy the features of the face -unfinished, vague, and inexpressive, as is frequently the case on the -other side of the Alps; but they have partly an air of nobleness, partly -of acuteness and intelligence; and the form of the face is generally -large and full, and the parts of it in harmony with each other. The -superiority of conformation is so manifest that the head of the humblest -man among the people might be introduced in the most dignified -historical painting, especially one in which aged men are to be -represented. And among the women of this class, even in places of the -least importance, it would not be difficult to find a Juno. The lower -portion of Italy, which enjoys a softer climate than any other part of -it, brings forth men of superb and vigorously-designed forms, which -appear to have been made, as it were, for the purposes of sculpture.” - -In confirmation of my statement that in Northern as in Southern Italy it -is the Brunette type that chiefly excites the admiration of the tourist, -I may finally cite Heine’s remarks on the women of Trent. For, although -Trent is a town of the Austrian Tyrol, it yet is practically an Italian -community. Had not business called him southwards, Heine relates in his -_Journey from Munich to Genoa_, he would have felt tempted to remain in -this town where “beautiful girls were moving about in bevies. I do not -know,” he adds, “whether other tourists will approve of the adjective -‘beautiful’ in this case; but I liked the women of Trent exceptionally -well. They were just of the kind I admire—and I do love these pale, -elegiac faces with the large black eyes that gaze at you so love-sick; I -love also the dusky tint of those proud necks which Phœbus already -has loved and browned with his kisses; ... but above all things do I -love that graceful gait, that dumb music of the body, those limbs with -their exquisitely rhythmic movements, luxurious, supple, divinely -careless, mortally languid, anon æthereal, majestic, and always highly -poetic. I love such things as I love poetry itself; and these figures -with their melodious movements, this wondrous concert of femininity -which delighted my senses, found an echo in my heart, and awoke in it -sympathetic strains.” - - - - - SPANISH BEAUTY - - -In Spain, as in Italy, Germany, France, and the United States, we find -more Personal Beauty in the Southern than in the Northern regions. This -coincidence cannot be accidental, but attests the great cosmetic value -of sunshine and plenty of fresh air. Perhaps no other portion of the -globe has such a paradisiacal climate as Andalusia, where the -inhabitants practically pass all their time in the open air,—on -verandahs and in their cosy little galleries, and fragrant orange -groves, in whose shade they can spend the hot part of the day, while the -nights are cooled by balmy mountain or sea breezes. To these natural -hygienic advantages add the unusually happy mixture of nationalities, -and the fact that Romantic Love is much less impeded in its sway than in -France or Italy, and we see at a glance to what the young Andalusian -owes the undulating lines and luscious plumpness of her figure, her -ravishing facial beauty, and her graceful gait, or “melodious -movements,” as Heine would say. - -Surely the goddess of Beauty herself mixed the national colours that -make up the Spanish type. When Spain was added to the Roman dominion she -was, as Mr. E. A. Freeman remarks, “the only one of the great countries -of Europe where the mass of the people were not of the Aryan stock. The -greater part of the land was still held by the _Iberians_, as a small -part is even now by their descendants the Basques. But in the central -part of the peninsula _Celtic_ tribes had pressed in, and ... there were -some _Phœnician_ colonies in the south, and some _Greek_ colonies on -the east coast. In the time between the first and second Punic Wars, -Hamilcar, Hasdrubal, and Hannibal had won all Spain as far as the Ebro -for _Carthage_.” Among the other nations which successively overran the -country were the Goths, Vandals, Suevi, and Moors; to whom must be added -large numbers of Jews and Gypsies, of which latter race Spain still -possesses about 50,000. - -Most of these nations had some favourable physical traits which Sexual -Selection had the opportunity to fix upon and perpetuate; while sundry -incongruities must have been neutralised and obliterated by the -intermingling of races. And another important consideration is, that -this intermingling of nations was effected so many centuries ago that it -is now no longer a heterogeneous physical mixture, but a true -“chemical,” or physiological, fusion, in which dissonances and -incongruities are less likely to occur than in countries where the -mixture is more recent. - -That the addition of Greek and Roman blood, redolent of ancient -civilisation, to the original Spanish stock was an advantage is obvious. -The Goth brought his manly vigour; the Gypsy his concentrated essence of -Brunetteism; the Arab his oval face, dusky complexion, the straight line -connecting nose and forehead, the small mouth and white teeth, the dark -and glossy hair, the delicate extremities and gracefully-arched foot, -and above all, the black eyes and long black eyelashes. If Shakspere is -right in saying that there is no author in the world “teaches such -beauty as a woman’s eye,” then Andalusia easily leads the world in -Personal Beauty. The prosiest tourist becomes poetic in describing the -Andalusian’s “black eye that mocks her coal-black veil.” Large and round -are these eyes, like those of Oriental Houris; long and dense their -black lashes, which yet cannot smother the mysterious fire and sparkle -which their iris appears to have borrowed of the Gypsies. In many cases -there is a vague, piquant indication of the almond-shaped palpebral -aperture—one of the Semitic traits derived from the Phœnicians, Jews, -and Saracens. And then, what woman can make such irresistibly -fascinating use of her eyes as the Spanish brunette? - -M. Figuier thus sums up the physical characteristics of the Spanish -woman: “She is generally brunette, although the blonde type occurs much -more frequently than is usually supposed. The Spanish woman is almost -always small of stature. Who has not observed the large eyes, veiled by -thick lashes, her delicate nose, and well-formed nostrils? Her form is -always undulating and graceful; her limbs are round and beautifully -moulded, and her extremities of incomparable delicacy. She is a charming -mixture of vigour, languor, and grace.” - -“The appearance of a Spanish woman,” says Bogumil Goltz, “is the -expression of her character. Her fine figure, her majestic gait, her -sonorous voice, her black, flashing eye, the liveliness of her -gesticulations, in a word, her whole external personality indicates her -character.” - -It is to be noted that whereas French Beauty appears to be visible to -French eyes only, and regarding Italian Beauty opinions differ, all -nations unite in singing the praises of “Spain’s dark-glancing -daughters.” To the French and German testimony just cited may now be -added a few Italian, English, and American witnesses. - -Signor E. de Amicis, in his interesting work on Spain, says of the women -of Madrid that “they are still the same little women so besung for their -great eyes, small hands, and tiny feet, with their very black hair, but -skin rather white than dark, so well-formed, erect, lithe, and -vivacious.” But, like all other tourists, he reserves most of his -remarks on Spanish women for his chapters on Andalusia, although this is -the part of Spain which also offers the richest material for description -in its architecture and scenery. Concerning the women and girls of -Seville, as seen in the large tobacco factory which employs 5000 -females, he says: “There are some very beautiful faces, and even those -that are not absolutely beautiful, have something about them which -attracts the eye and remains impressed upon the memory—the colouring, -eyes, brows, and smile, for instance. Many, especially the so-called -_gitane_, are dark brown, like mulattoes, and have protruding lips: -others have such large eyes that a faithful likeness of them would seem -an exaggeration. The majority are small, well-made, and all wear a rose, -pink, or a bunch of field-flowers among their braids.... On coming out -of the factory, you seem to see on every side for a time, black pupils -which look at you with a thousand different expressions of curiosity, -ennui, sympathy, sadness, and drowsiness.” - -The same writer found that “The feminine type of Cadiz was not less -attractive than that celebrated one at Seville. The women are a little -taller, a trifle stouter, and rather darker. Some fine observer has -asserted that they are of the Greek type; but I cannot see where. I saw -nothing, with the exception of their stature, but the Andalusian type; -and this sufficed to make me heave sighs deep enough to have blown along -a boat and obliged me to return as soon as possible to my ship, as a -place of peace and refuge.” - -Mr. G. P. Lathrop’s description (in _Spanish Vistas_) of the girls in -the Seville factory is pitched in a somewhat lower key than Signor de -Amicis’s: “Some of them,” he writes, “had a spendthrift, common sort of -beauty, which, owing to their southern vivacity and fine physique, had -the air of being more than it really was.... There were some appalling -old crones.... Others, on the contrary, looked blooming and coquettish. -Many were in startling deshabille, resorted to on account of the intense -(July) heat, and hastened to draw pretty pañuelos of variegated dye over -their bare shoulders when they saw us coming.... The beauty of these -Carmens has certainly been exaggerated. It may be remarked here that, as -an offset to occasional disappointment arising from such exaggerations, -all Spanish women walk with astonishing gracefulness, and natural and -elastic step; and that is their chief advantage over women of other -nations.” - -A writer in _Macmillan’s Magazine_ (1874), after referring to “the -stately upright walk of the Spanish ladies, and the graceful carriage of -the head,” notes that a mother will not allow her daughter to carry a -basket, so as not to destroy her “queenly walk”; and “her dull eye too -will grow moist with a tear, and her worn face will kindle with absolute -softness and sweetness, if an English señor expresses his admiration of -her child’s magnificent hair or flashing black eyes.” - -The description given by the same writer of a scene he witnessed along -the Guadalquiver, suggests one reason of the healthy physique and -vitality of Spanish women: “An old mill-house, with its clumsy wheel and -a couple of pomegranates, shaded one corner of this part of the river; -and under their shade, sitting up to their shoulders in the water, on -the huge round boulders of which the bottom of the river is composed, -were groups of Spanish ladies. Truly it was a pretty sight! They sat as -though on chairs, clothed to the neck in bathing-gowns of the gaudiest -colours—red, gray, yellow, and blue; and, holding in one hand their -umbrellas, and with the other fanning themselves, they formed a most -picturesque group.” - -Washington Irving, in a private letter, paints this picture of a Spanish -beauty whom he saw on a coast steamer: “A young married lady, of about -four or five and twenty, middle-sized, finely-modelled, a Grecian -outline of face, a complexion sallow yet healthful, raven black hair, -eyes dark, large, and beaming, softened by long eyelashes, lips full and -rosy red, yet finely chiselled, and teeth of dazzling whiteness. Her -hand ... is small, exquisitely formed, with taper fingers, and blue -veins. I never saw a female hand more exquisite.” The husband of this -young lady, noticing that Mr. Irving was apparently sketching her, -questioned him on the matter. Mr. Irving read his sketch to the man, who -was greatly pleased with it; and this led to a delightful though brief -acquaintance. - -in another letter, Washington Irving writes to a friend: “There are -beautiful women in Seville as ... there are in all other great cities; -but do not, my worthy and inquiring friend, expect a perfect beauty to -be staring you in the face at every turn, or you will be awfully -disappointed. Andalusia, generally speaking, derives its renown for the -beauty of its women and the beauty of its landscape, from the rare and -captivating charms of individuals. The generality of its female faces -are as sunburnt and void of bloom and freshness as its plains. I am -convinced, the great fascination of Spanish women arises from their -natural talent, their fire and soul, which beam through their dark and -flashing eyes, and kindle up their whole countenance in the course of an -interesting conversation. As I have had but few opportunities of judging -them in this way, I can only criticise them with the eye of a sauntering -observer. It is like judging of a fountain when it is not in play, or a -fire when it lies dormant and neither flames nor sparkles.” - -Byron, in _Childe Harold_, waxes enthusiastic over the Spanish woman’s -“fairy form, with more than female grace”— - - “Her glance how wildly beautiful! how much - Hath Phœbus wooed in vain to spoil her cheek, - Which glows yet smoother from his amorous clutch! - Who round the North for paler dames would seek? - How poor their forms appear! how languid, wan, and weak!” - -But in a letter from Cadiz Byron notes the weak as well as the strong -points of Spanish women. “With all national prejudice, I must confess, -the women of Cadiz are as far superior to the English women in beauty, -as the Spaniards are inferior to the English in every quality that -dignifies the name of man.... The Spanish women are all alike, their -education the same.... Certainly they are fascinating; but their minds -have only one idea, and the business of their lives is intrigue.... Long -black hair, dark languishing eyes, clear olive complexions, and forms -more graceful in motion than can be conceived by an Englishman used to -the drowsy, listless air of his countrywomen, added to the most becoming -dress, and, at the same time, the most decent in the world, render a -Spanish beauty irresistible.” - -“Their minds have only one idea,” is an exaggeration, for the Andalusian -women are famed for a considerable amount of innate wit, rivalling the -brightness of their eyes. Yet of deeper intellectual interests there are -none. Of the total population of Spain only a quarter can read and -write; for although schools exist in abundance, they are very generally -neglected; and the estimation in which teachers are held is seen from -the fact that out of 15,000 one half receive an annual salary of less -than twenty pounds sterling. - -Mental Culture avenges itself bitterly on the women of Spain, as of -other Southern countries, for this neglect of its claims. While the -freshness of youthful Beauty remains, all is well, for then the sensuous -charms are so great that intellectual claims can be ignored. But when -this freshness fades, then it is that the features begin to show a lack -of mental training. Intellectual apathy masks the face, and gives it an -expression of vacuity; exercise is neglected, and indolence, combined -with excessive indulgence in fattening food, soon destroy the lovely -contours of the figure and the fairy-like gait. “A Spanish woman of -forty appears twice as old,” says Goltz. - -Thus we see that for perfect and permanent Beauty _all_ its sources must -be kept open and utilised. - -Attention must finally be called to one feature of Andalusian Beauty -which all tourists emphasise, namely, the small stature of the women, to -which they largely owe their exceptional grace of gait. And there are -reasons for believing that the perfected woman of the millennium will -resemble the Andalusian Brunette, not only in complexion, hair, eyes, -gait, and tapering plumpness of figure, but also in stature. In other -words, it seems that Sexual Selection is evolving the _petite_ Brunette -as the ideal of womanhood. - -Among the ancient Greeks who were not swayed by Romantic Love, Amazons -were greatly admired, as previously noted; and Mr. Gladstone remarks -that “stature was a great element of beauty in the view of the ancients, -for women as well as for men; and their admiration of tallness, even in -women, is hardly restrained by a limit.” - -From this Greek predilection modern æsthetico-amorous Taste differs, for -several weighty reasons. The first is that a very tall and bulky woman, -though she may be stately and majestic, cannot be very graceful; and -Grace, as we know, is as potent a source of Love as formal Beauty. -Again, there is something incongruous and almost comic in the thought of -a very large woman submitting to Love’s caresses; and _le ridicule tue_. -Thirdly, great stature is rarely associated with delicate joints and -extremities. But the principal reason why the modern lover disapproves -of Amazonian women, mental and physical, is because they are -quasi-masculine. Romantic Love tends to differentiate the sexes in -stature as in everything else. True, Mr. Galton, after making -observations on 205 married couples, came to the conclusion that -“marriage selection takes little or no account of shortness and -tallness. There are undoubtedly sexual preferences for moderate -contrasts in height; but the marriage choice appears to be guided by so -many and more important considerations that questions of stature exert -no perceptible influence upon it.... Men and women of contrasted -heights, short and tall or tall and short, married just about as -frequently as men and women of similar heights, both tall or both short; -there were 32 cases of one to 27 of the other.” - -But Mr. Galton’s argument is rather weak. He admits that “there are -undoubtedly sexual preferences for moderate contrast in height”; and his -own figures show 32 to 27 in favour of mixed-stature marriages, in most -of which the women must have been shorter, owing to the prevalent -feminine inferiority in size. And in course of time the elimination of -non-amorous motives of marriage will assist the law of sexual -differentiation in suppressing Amazons. - -The modern masculine preference for _petite_ female stature is, -furthermore, attested by an irrefutable philological argument which will -be found in the following citation from Crabb’s _English Synonymes_: -“_Prettiness_ is always coupled with simplicity; it is incompatible with -that which is large; a tall woman with masculine features cannot be -_pretty_. _Beauty_ is peculiarly a female perfection; in the male sex it -is rather a defect; a man can scarcely be _beautiful_ without losing his -manly characteristics, boldness and energy of mind, strength and -robustness of limb; but though a man may not be _beautiful_ or _pretty_, -he may be _fine_ or _handsome_.” “A woman is _fine_ who with a striking -figure unites shape and symmetry; a woman is _handsome_ who has good -features, and _pretty_ if with symmetry of feature be united delicacy.” - -Burke believed that it is possible to fall in love with a very small -person, but not with a giant. There is, indeed, a natural prejudice in -the modern mind against very tall statue even in men. Thus, we read in -Fuller’s _Andronicus_: “Often the cockloft is empty in those whom Nature -hath built many stories high”; and Bacon is reported to have said that -“Nature did never put her precious jewels into a garret four stories -high, and therefore that exceeding tall men had ever very empty heads.” -An apparent scientific confirmation of this belief is found in Professor -Hermann’s _Nervensystem_ (ii. 195), where we read that “when the body -becomes abnormally large, the brain begins to decrease again, -relatively, as Langer found in measuring giant skeletons.” And, another -sign of regression is found in the fact that tall men are apt to have -relatively too have jaws. - - - - - GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN BEAUTY - - -Although the Germans of to-day are by no means a pure and distinct race, -they are less thoroughly and variously mixed than most other European -nations; and this is one of the main reasons why Personal Beauty is -comparatively rare in the Fatherland. It is rarest in the northern and -central regions, where the original Blonde type is best preserved, and -becomes more frequent the nearer we approach the Brunette neighbours of -Germany—Italy, Austria-Hungary, and Poland—whose women have been aptly -called “the Spaniards of the north.” France forms an exception. There, -thanks to the imprisonment of Cupid, ugliness is so rampant that -intermarriage only intensifies the natural homeliness,—a fact of which -any one may convince himself by spending a few days in the borderland -between France and Germany. - -Partly owing to this lack of variety in the national composition of the -Germans, partly to the custom of chaperonage, Romantic Love has not as -wide a scope of selective action as elsewhere; and as if these -impediments to the increase of Beauty were not sufficient, they are -augmented in a wholesale fashion by the parental illusion that the -Love-instinct is a less trustworthy guide to a happy marriage than -“Reason,” _i.e._ the consideration that the bride has a few thousand -marks and belongs to the same social clique as the bridegroom. Like -their French neighbours, the Germans in these cases forget the claims of -the _grandchildren_ to Health and Beauty—_i.e._ the harmonious fusion of -the complementary parental qualities by which Love is inspired. - -But in regard to the third source of Beauty—Mental Culture—the Germans -surely are pre-eminent among nations, it will be claimed. In one sense, -no doubt, they are. Almost all Germans can read and write, and no race -equals them in special erudition. But erudition is not culture. The -German system of education is exceedingly defective, because it -cultivates too largely the lowest of the mental faculties—the Memory. -The number of scientific, historic, and philological facts a German -schoolboy knows by heart is simply astounding; but he has not digested -them, and cannot apply them practically. No attempt is made to cultivate -his higher faculties—his imagination, originality, or the gift of -expressing a thought in elegant language. Were a candidate to show the -wit and brilliancy of a Heine or a Shakspere, it would not add one grain -to the weight his pedantic professors attach to his work. They will not -favour the growth of qualities in which they themselves are so -conspicuously deficient. Note, for example, the vast contempt with which -the pedants of the University of Berlin look down on “the German -Darwin,” Professor Haeckel, because he dares not only to be original, -but to write his books in a language clear as crystal, and adorned with -wit, satire, and literary polish. - -Other nations are proud of their great men _even before they are dead_; -not so the Germans. Nor are the Germans really a literary nation, as a -whole. Many books are written there, but they rarely come under the head -of _literature_; and their circulation, on the average, is not one-tenth -that of English, French, and American books. Beer is more popular than -books. - -No, the pedantic erudition, which alone is officially honoured in -Germany, is not synonymous with Mental Culture. It does not vivify the -features sufficiently to mould them into plastic shape. Hence the -prevalence of the “spongy features” and Teutonic “potato-faces” referred -to by a German artist quoted in the chapter on Italian Beauty. “The true -national character of the Germans is clumsiness,” says Schopenhauer; and -again: “The Germans are distinguished from all other nations by the -slovenliness of their style, as of their dress.” And the Swiss -Professor, H. F. Amiel, remarks in his _Journal Intime_ that “the notion -of ‘bad taste’ seems to have no place in German æsthetics. Their -elegance has no grace in it; they cannot understand the enormous -difference there is between distinction (which is _gentlemanly_, -_ladylike_) and their stiff _Vornehmheit_. Their imagination lacks -style, training, education, and knowledge of the world; it has an -ill-bred air even in its Sunday dress. The race is poetical and -intelligent, but common and ill-mannered.” - -It must be admitted, however, that the Germans have made great progress -in external refinement and manners since their late war with France, one -of the greatest advantages of which to them was that it destroyed the -mystic halo which had for many generations surrounded the important -Parisian Fashion Fetish. What the Germans need now is a period of -Anglomania. They have already ceased to laugh at the Englishman for -travelling with his bath-tub, and have found it worth while to provide -him with that commodity in the hotels. In course of time bath-tubs in -private German houses may be expected to become more common than they -are now; and after a generation or two shall have given proper attention -to skin-hygiene, freckles and other cutaneous blemishes will be less -prevalent than at present. In their houses the Germans are really as -tidy as any nation; but their indifference to the appearance of their -collars and cuffs often leads one to suspect the contrary. - -The next thing the Germans ought to learn of the English is greater -gallantry toward the women, who are too apt to be looked upon as -household drudges, whom it is not necessary to educate or amuse. -Especially ruinous to female Beauty is the hard field labour required of -the women who have the misfortune to belong to a nation which has not -yet outgrown its condition of mediæval militarism. A German physician, -quoted by Dr. Ploss, notes the fact that the beauty and bloom of youth -last but a short time with the working classes of North Germany: “The -hard labour performed before the body is fully developed too easily -destroys the plumpness, which is an essential element of beauty, draws -furrows in the face, and makes the figure stiff and angular. Often have -I taken a mother who showed me her child for its grandmother.” - -The author of _German Home Life_ remarks in a similar vein: “German -girls are often charmingly pretty, with dazzling complexions, abundant -beautiful hair, and clear lovely eyes; but the splendid matron, the -sound, healthy, well-developed woman, who has lost no grain of beauty, -and yet gained a certain magnificent maturity such as we in England see -daily with daughters who might well be her youngest sisters—of such -women the Fatherland has few specimens to show. The ‘pale unripened -beauties of the North’ do not ripen, they fade.” And no wonder, for -either the girls belong to the poorer classes and lose their beauty -prematurely from overwork; or, if they are of the well-to-do classes, -they get no Beauty-preserving exercise at all. “German girls,” the -Countess Von Bothmer continues, “have no outdoor amusements, if we -except skating when the winter proves favourable. Boating, riding, -archery, swimming, croquet—all the active, healthy outdoor life which -English maidens are allowed to share and to enjoy with their brothers is -unknown to them.... Such diversions are looked upon by the girls -themselves as bold, coarse, and unfeminine.... It is in vain that you -tell them such exercises, far from unsexing them, fit them all the -better for the duties of their sex; it is difficult for them to hear you -out and not show the scorn they entertain for you.” - -German men, as a rule, are much handsomer than their sisters, and they -owe this superiority partly to the fact that their minds are not so -vacant, and partly to the prolonged physical training which is the one -redeeming feature of their military system. Nevertheless, especially in -South Germany, the men too often lose their fine manly proportions in an -enormous _embonpoint_, the penalty of drinking too much beer. Nor is the -acquisition of a turnip shape the only bad result of the German habit of -spending every evening in a tavern. The air in these beer-houses is so -filthy, so soaked with vile tobacco smoke and nicotine, that after -sitting in it for an hour the odour haunts one’s clothes for a week, and -poisons the lungs for a month. It is this foul atmosphere, combined with -the stupefying effect of the beer, that accounts for German heaviness -and clumsiness in appearance, attitude, gait, and literary style. - -These disadvantages might be to some extent neutralised if, on returning -to his bedroom, the German would spend the rest of the night, at least, -in fresh air. But no! He dreads the balmy night air as he would a -dragon’s breath, although Professor Reclam and other great authorities -on Hygiene have told him a million and sixty times that night air is -more salubrious than day air, except in swampy regions. - -Tourists in Switzerland often wonder why it is that the natives, -notwithstanding their glorious Alpine air, are, with rare exceptions, so -utterly devoid of Beauty. Partly this is due to the hard labour and -scanty food to which most of them are condemned; but the main reason is -that they enjoy their health-laden air only in the daytime and in -summer. At night and in winter they close their windows hermetically, -and in the morning the atmosphere in such a room is something which no -one who has ever breathed it will ever forget. - -When the Germans visit Switzerland they carefully imitate the example of -these ignorant peasants, thus depriving themselves of all the benefits -of an Alpine tour. An eye-witness last summer told me of the following -encounter in a Swiss hotel between an English lady and a German. The -dining-room being hot to suffocation, the English lady opened a window, -whereupon the German immediately got up and closed it. The English lady -opened it again, and again it was closed; whereupon she pushed her elbow -through the glass, and thenceforth enjoyed the fresh, fragrant air, to -the horror and indignation of the assembled Teutons. - -All these remarks of course apply to the Germans only in a very general -way. Among all classes in Germany specimens of Beauty may be found that -could hardly be surpassed anywhere else. Pretty faces are more frequent -than elegant figures, which commonly are too robust and masculine. -German girls are the most domestic and amiable in the world, and it is -their amiability and depth of feeling that gives their mouth such a -sweet expression and refined outlines. When German girls are educated, -as often they are in America, their faces beam in irresistible beauty. -The most beautiful non-Spanish eyes I have ever seen belonged to a girl -in Baden; and the most roguish blue eyes I have ever seen, to a -Würtemberg girl. Regular Italian features are not uncommon in Bavaria, -although snub-noses are most frequent there. The Bavarian complexion, -though somewhat too pale, is beautifully clear; and I have almost come -to the conclusion that this is in some way connected with the national -habit of drinking beer three times a day. It might be worth while to -inquire whether there is a beautifying ingredient in beer which might be -obtained without its stupefying effects. - -The Germans commonly consider the maidens along the Rhine their most -favourable and abundant specimens of Beauty; but Robert Schumann, who -had a fine eye for feminine Beauty, emphasized the amiability rather -than the beauty of these maidens in the following passage from one of -his private letters: “What characteristic faces among the lowest -classes! On the west shore of the Rhine the girls have very delicate -features, indicating amiability rather than intelligence; the noses are -mostly Greek, the face very oval and artistically symmetrical, the hair -brown. I did not see a single blonde. The complexion is soft, delicate, -with more white than red; melancholy rather than sanguine. The Frankfort -girls, on the other hand, have in common a sisterly trait—the character -of German, manly, sad earnestness which we often find in our quondam -free cities, and which toward the east gradually merges into a gentle -softness. Characteristic are the faces of all the Frankfort girls: -intellectual or beautiful few of them; the noses mostly Greek, often -snub-noses; the dialect I did not like.” - -Concerning the peasant women of Saxony, Mr. Julian Hawthorne remarks in -his _Saxon Studies_: “Massive are their legs as the banyan root; their -hips are as the bows of a three-decker. Backs have they like derricks: -rough hands like pile-drivers.” And again: “Handsome and pretty women -are certainly no rarity in Saxony, although few of them can lay claim to -an unadulterated Saxon pedigree.” “We see lovely Austrians, and -fascinating Poles and Russians, who delicately smoke cigars in the -concert gardens. But it is hard for the peasant type to rise higher than -comeliness; and it is distressingly apt to be coarse of feature as well -as of hand, clumsy of ankle, and more or less wedded to grease and dirt. -Good blood shows in the profile; and these young girls, whose faces are -often pleasant and even attractive, have seldom an eloquent contour of -nose and mouth. There is sometimes great softness and sweetness of eye, -a clear complexion, a pretty roundness of chin and throat. Indeed, I -have found scattered through half a dozen different villages all the -features of the true Gretchen; and once, in an obscure hamlet whose name -I have forgotten, I came unexpectedly upon what seemed a near approach -to the mythic being.” - -One thing must be admitted. The Germans are the most systematic and -persevering nation in the world. They took music, for instance, from her -Italian cradle, and reared her till she developed into the most -fascinating of the modern muses. They lead the world in scientific -research; and within a few years they have terrified the English -monopolists by a sudden outburst of thorough-going Teutonic industrial -activity and world-competition. Let but the Germans once make up their -mind that they want Personal Beauty, and lo! they will have it in -superabundance. The Professorships of Hygiene, which are now being -established at the Universities, will doubtless bear rich fruit. If -Bismarck discovered the full significance of Anglo-American Courtship, -he would forthwith order an hour of it to be added to the daily academic -curriculum; and if he realised the importance of racial mixture, he -would order shiploads of South American and Andalusian brunettes to be -distributed among his officers as wives. Nor would female education be -any longer neglected, were it fully understood how essential it is to -Personal Beauty and true Romantic Love, the basis of happy conjugal -life. - -What _can_ be done with German stock if it is duly mixed with Brunette -ingredients, is shown at Vienna, which, by the apparently unanimous -consent of tourists, boasts more beautiful women than any other city in -the world. Austria has about ten per cent more of the pure Brunette and -fourteen per cent more of the mixed types than Germany. The dark blood -of Italians, Hungarians, Czechs, flows in Viennese veins, and there is -also a piquant suspicion of Oriental beauty. The Viennese woman combines -Andalusian plumpness of figure and grace of movement, with American -delicacy of features and purity of complexion. The bust is almost always -finely developed and rarely too luxuriant; and the joints are the -admiration of all tourists and natives. Speaking of England, Mr. Richard -Grant White says that “Plump arms are not uncommon, but really fine arms -are rare; and fine wrists are still rarer. Such wrists as the Viennese -women have ... are almost unknown among women of English race in either -country.” And the Countess von Bothmer thus describes the neighbours of -Germany:— - -"Polish, Hungarian, and Austrian women, whom we, in a general, -inconclusive way, are apt to class as Germans, are ‘beautiful -exceedingly’; but here we come upon another race, or rather such a -fusion of other races as may help to contribute to the charming result. -Polish ladies have a special, vivid, delicate, spirited, haunting -loveliness, with grace, distinction, and elegance in their limbs and -features that is all their own; you cannot call them fragile, but they -are of so fine a fibre and so delicate a colouring that they only just -escape that apprehension. Of Polish and Hungarian _pur sang_ there is -little to be found; women of the latter race are of a more robust and -substantial build, with dark hair and complexion, fine flashing eyes, -and pronounced type; and who that remembers the women of Linz and Vienna -will refuse them a first prize? They possess a special beauty of their -own, a beauty which is rare in even the loveliest Englishwomen; rare, -indeed, and exceptional everywhere else; a beauty that the artist eye -appreciates with a feeling of delight. They have the most delicately -articulated joints of any women in the world. The juncture of the hand -and wrist, of foot and ankle, of the _nuque_ with the back and -shoulders, is what our neighbours would call ‘adorable.’ - -“But alas that it should be so! The full gracious figures—types at once -of strength and elegance—the supple, slender waists, the dainty little -wrists and hands, become all too soon hopelessly fat, from the -persistent idleness and luxury of the nerveless, unoccupied lives of -these graceful ladies.” - - - - - ENGLISH BEAUTY - - -Like the Viennese, the English afford an illustration of what can be -done with Teutonic stock by a judicious admixture of dark blood. -Although the mysteries of English ethnology have not been completely -unravelled, the original inhabitants of the British Islands appear to -have been “composed of the long-headed dark races of the Mediterranean -stock, possibly mingled with fragments of still more ancient races, -Mongoliform or Allophylian” (Dr. Beddoe). In the later history of the -race Romans, Germans, Danes, and Normans added their blood to this -mixture. The Celtic-speaking people who in the time of the Roman -Conquest inhabited South Britain, partook, according to Dr. Beddoe, -“more of the tall blond stock of Northern Europe than of the thickset, -broad-headed, dark stock which Broca has called Celts.” But the true -Blonde invasion of Britain did not occur till towards the beginning of -the fifth century, when the Low-Dutch tribes, the Angles and Saxons, -came over from the river Elbe and the coast region, and drove the -Britons to the west of the island, where they were called the Welsh, -which is an old German appellation for foreigners. - -The inference naturally suggests itself that the predilection for -Blondes shown in English literature up to a recent date (as noted in the -chapter on Blondes and Brunettes) may be traced to this fact that the -conquering race was fair, and that consequently dark hair and eyes -stigmatised their possessor as belonging to the conquered race. This -condemnation of the Brunette type (on _non-æsthetic_ grounds, be it -noted) is forcibly illustrated by the following lines of the shepherdess -Phebe in _As You Like It_— - - “I have more cause to hate him than to love him; - For what had he to do to chide at me? - He said mine eyes were black and my hair black, - And, now I am remember’d, scorned at me.” - -But when this temporary aristocratic ground of preferring the Blond type -was neutralised through the lapse of time, and Romantic Love, that -potent awakener of the æsthetic sense, appeared on the scene and opened -men’s eyes to the inferior beauty of that type, then began the reaction -in favour of Brunettes, which has been going on ever since. This view is -strikingly confirmed by the following remarks of Mr. Charles Roberts in -_Nature_, January 7, 1885:— - -“American statistics show that the blonde type is more subject to all -the diseases, except one (chronic rheumatism), which disqualify men for -military service, and this must obviously place blondes at a great -disadvantage in the battle of life, while the popular saying, ‘A pair of -black eyes is the delight of a pair of blue ones,’ shows that sexual -selection does not allow them to escape from it. It is more than -probable, therefore, from all these considerations, that the darker -portion of our population is gaining on the blond, and this surmise is -borne out by Dr. Beddoe’s remark that the proportion of English and -Scotch blood in Ireland is probably not less than a third, and that the -Gaelic and Iberian races of the West, mostly dark-haired, are _tending -to swamp the blond Teutonic of England by a reflex migration_.” - -Obviously, the ideal Englishwoman of the future will be a Brunette. -Thackeray had a prophetic vision of her when he described Beatrix -Esmond: “She was a brown beauty: that is, her eyes, hair, and eyebrows -and eyelashes were dark; her hair curling with rich undulations, and -waving over her shoulders” [note that]; “but her complexion was as -dazzling white as snow in sunshine; except her cheeks, which were a -bright red, and her lips, which were of a still deeper crimson ... a -woman whose eyes were fire, whose look was love, whose voice was the -sweetest love-song, whose shape was perfect symmetry, health, decision, -activity, whose foot as it planted itself on the ground was firm but -flexible, and whose motion, whether rapid or slow, was always perfect -grace,—agile as a nymph, lofty as a queen—now melting; now imperious, -now sarcastic—there was no single movement of hers but was beautiful. As -he thinks of her, he who writes feels young again and remembers a -paragon.” - -Sexual Selection, however, has not limited its efforts to the -improvement of the colour of the hair, eyes, and complexion; the form of -the features and figure has also been gradually altered and refined. An -examination of the portraits in the National Gallery showed to Mr. -Galton “what appear to be indisputable signs of one predominant type of -face supplanting another. For instance, the features of the men painted -by and about the time of Holbein have unusually high cheek-bones, long -upper lips, thin eyebrows, and lank dark [?] hair. It would be -impossible, I think, for the majority of modern Englishmen so to dress -themselves, and clip and arrange their hair, as to look like the -majority of these portraits.” And again: “If we may believe -caricaturists, the fleshiness and obesity of many English men and women -in the earlier years of this century must have been prodigious. It -testifies to the grosser conditions of life in those days, and makes it -improbable that the types best adapted to prevail then would be the best -adapted to prevail now.” - -Yet this improvement in the British figure and physiognomy is far from -universal. The English are beyond all dispute the finest race in the -world, physically and mentally; but the favourable action of the four -Sources of Beauty, to which they owe this supremacy, does not extend to -all classes. The lowest-class Englishman or Irishman is the most hideous -and brutal ruffian in the world. Of Mental or Moral Culture not a trace; -and whereas “the Spaniard, however ignorant, has naturally the manners -and the refined feelings of a gentleman” (_Macmillan’s Magazine_, 1874), -as well as a love of the beautiful forms and colours of nature; the -Englishman of the corresponding class has nerves and senses so coarse -that he is absolutely impervious to any impressions which do not come -under the head of mere brutal excitement. In this class there is no -Mixture of Races, but a worse than barbarian promiscuity; Romantic Love -is of course miles beyond the conception of imaginations so filthy and -sluggish; and Hygienic neglect here finds its most hideous examples in -the Western World. - -In his _English Note-Books_ Hawthorne speaks as follows of “a countless -multitude of little girls” taken from the workhouses and educated at a -charity school at Liverpool: “I should not have conceived it possible -that so many children could have been collected together, without a -single trace of beauty or scarcely of intelligence in so much as one -individual; such mean, coarse, vulgar features and figures betraying -unmistakably a low origin, and ignorant and brutal parents. They did not -appear wicked, but only stupid, animal, and soulless. It must require -many generations of better life to wake the soul in them. All America -could not show the like.” - -“Climate,” he says in another place, “no doubt has most to do with -diffusing a slender elegance over American young women; but something, -perhaps, is also due to the circumstance of classes not being kept apart -there as they are here: they interfuse amid the continual ups and downs -of our social life; and so, in the lowest stations of life, you may see -the refining influence of gentle blood.” - -Taine, in his _Notes on England_, thus sketches the lowest of the -Englishmen: “Apoplectical and swollen faces, whereof the scarlet hue -turns almost to black, worn-out, bloodshot eyes like raw lobsters; the -brute brutalised. Lessen the quantity of blood and fat, while retaining -the same bone and structure, and increasing the countrified look; large -and wild beard and moustache, tangled hair, rolling eyes, truculent -muzzle, big, knotted hands; this is the primitive Teuton issuing from -his woods; after the portly animal, after the overfed animal, comes the -fierce animal, the English bull.” “The lower-class women of London,” -says another French writer, Mr. Max O’Rell, “are thin-faced or -bloated-looking. They are horribly pale; there is no colour to be seen -except on the tips of their noses.” - -Personal Beauty in England diminishes in quality and frequency, not only -as we go from the upper to the lower classes, but also if we leave -London and go to other cities. How far sanitary and educational -differences account for this state of affairs, and how much is due to a -habitual and natural immigration of Beauty to a place where it is most -sure of appreciation, it is not easy to say. Hawthorne thus records the -impression made on his artistic eyes by an excursion party of Liverpool -manufacturing people: “They were paler, smaller, less wholesome-looking, -and less intelligent, and, I think, less noisy than so many Yankees -would have been.... As to their persons,” the women “generally looked -better developed and healthier than the men; but there was a woeful lack -of beauty and grace,—not a pretty girl among them, all coarse and -vulgar. Their bodies, it seems to me, are apt to be very long in -proportion to their limbs—in truth, this kind of make is rather -characteristic of both sexes in England.” - -A French writer, quoted by Figuier, Dr. Clavel, makes a similar -statement: “The level plains, which are as a rule met with in England, -are not favourable to the development of the lower extremities, and it -is a fact that the power of the English lies, not so much in their legs, -as in the arms, shoulders, and loins.... The barely-marked nape of his -neck and the oval form of his cranium indicate that Finn blood flows in -his veins; his maxillary power and the size of his teeth evidence a -preference for an animal diet. He has the high forehead of the thinker, -but not the long eyes of the artist.... In dealing craftily with his -antagonist, he is well able to guard himself against the weaknesses of -feeling. His face rarely betrays his convictions, and his features are -devoid of the mobility which would prove disadvantageous.” - -The Englishwoman, according to the same writer, “is tall, fair, and -strongly built. Her skin is of dazzling freshness; her features are -small and elegantly formed; the oval of her face is marked, but it is -_somewhat heavy toward the lower_ portion; her hair is fine, silky, and -charming; and her _long and graceful neck_ imparts to the movements of -her head a character of grace and pride. So far all about her is -essentially feminine; but upon analysing her bust and limbs we find that -the large bones, peculiar to her race, interfere with the delicacy of -her form, enlarge her extremities, and lessen the elegance of her -postures and the harmony of her movements.... She lacks a thousand -feminine instincts, and this lack is revealed in her toilette, the -posture she assumes, and in her actions and movements.” - -M. Taine also was convinced of the frequent lack of taste in dress and -bearing in Englishwomen. Yet it is noticeable, and cannot be too much -emphasised, that he _goes to Spain and not to France_ for a comparison: -“Compared with the supple, easy, silent, serpentine undulation of the -Spanish dress and bearing, the movement here (in England), is energetic, -discordant, jerking, like a piece of mechanism.” Nor does Taine in other -respects venture to hold up his own countrywomen as models. He -repeatedly refers to the superior beauty of the English complexion: -“Many ladies have their hair decked with diamonds, and their shoulders, -much exposed, have the incomparable whiteness of which I have just -spoken, the petals of a lily, the gloss of satin do not come near to -it.” And though he thinks that ugliness is more ugly in England than in -France, he confesses that “generally an Englishwoman is more thoroughly -beautiful and healthy than a Frenchwoman.” “Out of every ten young girls -one is admirable, and upon five or six a naturalist painter would look -with pleasure.” “Lady Mary Wortley Montague, who came to see the Court -of the Regent in France, severely rallied our slim, painted, affected -beauties, and proudly held up as a contrast ‘the natural charms and the -lively colours of the unsullied complexions’ of Englishwomen.” “The -physiognomy remains youthful here much later than amongst us, especially -than at Paris, where it withers so quickly; sometimes it remains open -even in old age; I recall at this moment two old ladies with white hair -whose cheeks were smooth and softly rosy; after an hour’s conversation I -discovered that their minds were as fresh as their complexions. Even -when the physiognomy and the form are commonplace, the whole satisfies -the mind; a solid bony structure, and upon it healthy flesh, constitute -what is essential in a living creature.” - -That is it precisely. The Englishman is the finest _animal_ in the -world; and it is because other nations so often forget that one must be -a fine animal before one can be a fine man, that the English have -outstripped them in colonising the world, and imposing on it their -special form of culture and manners. As Emerson remarks, in his Essay on -_Beauty_, “It is the soundness of the bones that ultimates itself in the -peach-bloom complexion; health of constitution that makes the sparkle -and the power of the eye.” “We are all entitled to beauty, should have -been beautiful, if our ancestors had kept the laws,—as every lily and -every rose is well.” - -The London _Times_ characteristically speaks of “that worst of sins in -English eyes—uncleanliness”; and it is in England alone of all European -countries that cleanliness is esteemed next to godliness. The -Frenchman’s paradoxical exclamation, “What a dirty nation the English -must be that they have to bathe so often!” is not so funny as it seems. -The English, as can be seen in the uneducated classes, _would be_ the -dirtiest people in the world, thanks to their fogs and smoke, if they -were not the most cleanly. It is the magic of tub and towel that has -compelled M. Figuier to admit that although the Englishwomen “do not -offer the noble appearance and luxurious figure of the Greek and Roman -women,” yet “their skins surpass in transparency and brilliancy those of -the female inhabitants of all other European countries.” - -It is needless to dilate on the other hygienic habits to which the -English owe their Health, notwithstanding their often depressing -climate,—the passion for walking and riding, for tennis, boating, and -other sports, which, moreover, have the advantage of bringing the sexes -together, and enabling every Romeo to find his Juliet. One cannot help -admiring the independence and common sense of the respectable London -girls who go home on the top of the ’bus, enjoying the fresh air and -varied sights, instead of being locked up in the foul-aired interior. -They know very well, these clever girls, that their cheeks will be all -the rosier, their smiles more bewitching, their eyes more sparkling -after such a ride. In countries where there are fewer _gentlemen_ such a -thing would be considered as improper for a girl as it is for a man to -give a girl a chance to choose her own husband. Do the French agree with -the Turks that women have no souls, since, in Taine’s words, a Frenchman -“would consider it indelicate to utter a single clear or vague phrase to -the young girl before having spoken to her parents”? Taine imparts to -his countrymen the curious information that in England men and women -marry for Love, but he does not appear to realise how much of their -superior Beauty—which he acknowledges—they owe to the habitual privilege -of choosing their own wives for their personal charms, instead of having -them selected by their parents for their money value. He does, however, -realise the effect this system of courtship has on conjugal life; for in -his _History of English Literature_ he refers to the Englishwoman’s -extreme “sweetness, devotion, patience, inextinguishable affection,—a -thing unknown in distant lands, and in France especially; a woman here -gives herself without drawing back, and places her glory and duty in -obedience, forgiveness, adoration, wishing and pretending only to be -melted and absorbed daily deeper and deeper in him whom she has _freely -and for ever chosen_.” - -And there is another English custom the value of which Taine realises -and acknowledges: “In France we believe too readily,” he says, “that if -a woman ceases to be a doll she ceases to be a woman.” True, it is only -a decade or two since the superstition that a higher education would -“destroy all the feminine graces” has been successfully combated even in -England; but there has always been a vast amount of home education, and -the girls have profited immensely by the unimpeded opportunity of -meeting the young men and talking with them, and by the fact that the -purity of tone which pervades English literature has made all of it -accessible to them. Hence the charming intellectual lines which may be -traced in an English woman’s face. - -What the English still need is gastronomic and æsthetic training. After -a few generations of sense-refinement the lower part of the English face -will become as perfect as the upper part is now. Cultivation of the fine -arts and freer facial expression of the emotions are the two great -cosmetics which will put the finishing touch on English Beauty. - - - - - AMERICAN BEAUTY - - -England and America—which of these two countries has the most beautiful -women, and which the largest number of them? Few questions of -international diplomacy have been more frequently discussed than these -problems in comparative æsthetics. But as in most cases patriotism has -taken the place of æsthetic judgment in forming a verdict, few tangible -results have been reached. There is too much exaggeration. Many English -tourists have denied that there is any remarkable Beauty at all in the -United States, and Americans have said the same of England. - -If these sceptical Englishmen had only spent an hour on either side of -the New York and Brooklyn Bridge at 6 P.M., they would have seen Beauty -enough to bewilder all their senses; and if the American sceptics, next -time they go to London, will spend a shilling in buying penny stamps at -a dozen of those small post-offices so profusely scattered all over the -city, they will see enough feminine Beauty in an hour to make them wish -to stay in London the rest of their life,—especially if they remember -that an advertisement for eleven girls to fill these postal clerkships -has been answered by as many as 2000,—the majority of whom, presumably, -were as good-looking as those who got the places, since postal clerks -are not selected for their Beauty, but for their intelligence and -efficiency. - -A few specimens of the sweeping generalisations of tourists may here be -cited. According to Richard Grant White, “The belief, formerly -prevalent, that ‘American’ women had in their youth pretty doll faces, -but at no period of life womanly beauty of figure, is passing away -before a knowledge of the truth, and I have heard it scouted here by -Englishmen, who, pointing to the charming evidence to the contrary -before their eyes, have expressed surprise that the travelling -bookwriters ... could have so misrepresented the truth.” Yet the same -author indulges in the following absurdly extravagant statement: “Beauty -is very much commoner among women of the English race than among those -of any other with which I am acquainted; and among that race it is -commoner in America than in England. I saw more beauty of face and -figure at the first two receptions which I attended after my return than -I had found among the hundreds of thousands of women whom I had seen in -England.” - -The late Dr. G. M. Beard, though an acute observer, allowed his -patriotism a still more ludicrous sway over his imagination: “It is not -possible,” he says, “to go to an opera in any of our large cities -without seeing more of the representatives of the highest type of female -beauty than can be found in months of travel in any part of Europe!” - -Possibly Sir Lepel Griffin had read these lines when he was moved to pen -the following counter-extravagances: “More pretty faces are to be seen -in a day in London than in a month in the States. The average of beauty -is far higher in Canada, and the American town in which most pretty -women are noticeable is Detroit, on the Canadian border, and containing -many Canadian residents. In the Western States beauty is conspicuous by -its absence, and in the Eastern towns, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New -York, and Boston, it is to be chiefly found. In New York, in August, I -hardly saw a face which could be called pretty.... In November New York -presented a different appearance, and many pretty women were to be seen, -although the number was comparatively small; and at the Metropolitan -Opera House even American friends were unable to point out any lady whom -they could call beautiful. A distinguished artist told me that when he -first visited America he scarcely saw in the streets of New York a -single face which he could select as a model, though he could find -twenty such in the London street in which his studio was situated.” - -Volumes might be filled with similar unscientific generalisations, but -it would be a waste of space. My own general impression is that there -are more pretty girls In America, and more beautiful women in England; -that the average Englishwoman has a finer, healthier figure and colour, -the American greater mobility and finer chiselling of the features. If -English hands and feet are often somewhat large, American hands are just -as often too small,—the greater blemish of the two, because it usually -goes with too thin limbs. Irish girls of the best classes appear to be -intermediate. Some of the finest figures and faces in the world belong -to them; an Andalusian could hardly be more plump and graceful than many -Irish and Irish-American girls. The Scotch, in the opinion of Hawthorne, -“are a better-looking people than the English (and this is true of all -classes), more intelligent of aspect, with more regular features. I -looked for the high cheek-bones, which have been attributed, as a -characteristic feature, to the Scotch, but could not find them. What -most distinguishes them from the English is the regularity of the nose, -which is straight, and sometimes a little curved inward; whereas the -English nose has no law whatever, but disports itself in all manner of -irregularity. I very soon learned to recognise the Scotch face, and when -not too Scotch, it is a handsome one.” - -Comparative Æsthetics is still in its infancy, and many years will -doubtless elapse before it will become an exact science, in place of a -collection of individual opinions based on vague impressions. The -statistics which have lately been collected regarding the proportion of -Blondes and Brunettes in various countries, may be regarded as the -beginning of such a science. The next step should be the collection of a -series of national composite portraits after the manner in which Mr. -Galton has formed typical faces of criminals, etc. If in each country a -number of individuals of pronounced national aspect were photographed on -the same plate, the result would be a picture which would emphasise the -typical national traits, and enable one to judge how far they deviate in -each case from regular Beauty. - -In most European countries it would be comparatively easy to obtain -characteristic composite portraits of this kind. But in America the -difficulties would perhaps be insurmountable. For there the mixture of -nationalities is too great and too recent to have produced any national -type. The women of Baltimore, New York, Boston, and San Francisco—what -have they in common with one another any more than with their cousins in -London? Almost one-third of the inhabitants of New York are -foreign-born, including about half a million Irish and Germans. A fusion -of these has been going on for generations, while others have retained -their national traits; and to look, therefore, for a special type of New -York Beauty would be absurd. Thanks to this large number of -foreigners—not always of the most desirable classes—there is less Beauty -in New York in proportion to the number of inhabitants than in most -other cities of the United States. When people imagine they can tell -from what American city a given woman comes, they are hardly ever -influenced in their judgment by physiognomy or figure, but by -peculiarities of dress, speech, or manner. - -Dr. Weir Mitchell says that in America you may see “many very charming -faces, the like of which the world cannot match—figures somewhat too -spare of flesh, and, especially south of Rhode Island, a marvellous -littleness of hand and foot. But look farther, and especially among New -England young girls; you will be struck with a certain hardness of line -in form and feature, which should not be seen between thirteen and -eighteen at least. And if you have an eye which rejoices in the tints of -health, you will miss them on a multitude of the cheeks which we are now -so daringly criticising.” The notion that there is too much angularity -of outline in New England faces and forms is a wide-spread one, and to -some extent founded on truth; yet many of the plumpest, rosiest, and -most charming American women come from Boston—as if to make amends for -their antipodes, whom Mr. R. G. White describes as “certain women, too -common in America, who seem to be composed in equal parts of mind and -leather, the elements of body and soul being left out, so far as is -compatible with existence in human form.” - -Concerning the multitudinous mixture of nationalities in the United -States one thing may be asserted confidently: that the finest ingredient -in it is the English. Yet it has long been held that the English blood -deteriorates in the United States; that the descendants of the English, -like those of the Germans and other nations and their mixtures, -gradually lose the sound constitution of their ancestors. Hawthorne, in -his _Scarlet Letter_, was probably one of the first to give expression -to this belief. Speaking of the New England women who two centuries ago -waited for the appearance of Hester, he says: “Morally, as well as -materially, there was a coarser fibre in those wives and maidens of old -English birth and breeding than in their fair descendants, separated -from them by a series of six or seven generations; for throughout that -chain of ancestry every successive mother has transmitted to her child a -fainter bloom, a more delicate and briefer beauty, and a slighter -physical frame, if not a character of less force and solidity, than her -own.... The bright morning sun, therefore, shone on broad shoulders and -well-developed busts, and on round and ruddy cheeks, that had ripened in -the far-off island, and had hardly yet grown paler or thinner in the -atmosphere of New England.” - -Yet in his _English Note-Books_, written after the _Scarlet Letter_, he -relates that he had a conversation with Jenny Lind: “She talked about -America, and of our unwholesome modes of life, as to eating and -exercise, and of the ill-health especially of our women; but I opposed -this view as far as I could with any truth, insinuating my opinion that -we were about as healthy as other people, and affirming for a certainty -that we live longer.... This charge of ill-health is almost universally -brought forward against us nowadays,—and, taking the whole country -together, I do not believe the statistics will bear it out.” But why -does he in another place speak of English rural people as “wholesome and -well-to-do,—not specimens of hard, dry, sunburnt muscle, like our -yeoman”? and on still another page: “In America, what squeamishness, -what delicacy, what stomachic apprehension, would there not be among -three stomachs of sixty or seventy years’ experience! I think this -failure of American stomachs is partly owing to our ill-usage of our -digestive powers, partly to our want of faith in them.” - -Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe exclaims that “the race of strong, hardy, -cheerful girls ... is daily lessening; and, in their stead, come the -fragile, easy-fatigued, languid girls of a modern age, drilled in -book-learning, ignorant of common things.” Dr. E. H. Clarke writes in -his _Sex and Education_, which should be read by all parents: “‘I never -saw before so many pretty girls together,’ said Lady Amberley to the -writer, after a visit to the public schools of Boston; and then added, -‘They all looked sick.’ Circumstances have repeatedly carried me to -Europe, where I am always surprised by the red blood that fills and -colours the faces of ladies and peasant girls, reminding one of the -canvas of Rubens and Murillo; and I am always equally surprised on my -return by crowds of pale, bloodless, female faces, that suggest -consumption, scrofula, anæmia, and neuralgia.” - -Dr. S. Weir Mitchell remarks that “To-day the American woman is, to -speak plainly, physically unfit for her duties as woman.” Dr. Allen, -quoted by Sir Lepel Griffin, remarks that a majority of American women -“have a predominance of nerve tissue, with _weak muscles_ and digestive -organs”; and Mr. William Blaikie says that “scarcely one girl in three -ventures to wear a jersey, mainly because she knows too well that this -tell-tale jacket only becomes a good figure.” - -Dr. Clarke relates that when travelling in the East he was summoned as a -physician into a harem where he had the privilege of seeing nearly a -dozen Syrian girls: “As I looked upon their well-developed forms, their -brown skins, rich with the blood and sun of the East, and their -unintelligent sensuous faces, I thought that if it were possible to -marry the Oriental care of woman’s organisation to the Western liberty -and culture of her brain, there would be a new birth and loftier type of -womanly grace and form.” - -There is, doubtless, much truth in these assertions. It is distressing -to see the thin limbs of so many American children, and the anæmic -complexions and frail, willowy forms of so many maidens. What the -American girl chiefly needs is more muscle, more exercise, more fresh -air. A large proportion of girls, it is true, become invalids because -their employers in the shops never allow them to sit down and rest; and -standing, as physiologists tell us, and as has been proved in the case -of armies, is twice as fatiguing as walking. As if to restore the -balance, therefore, the average well-to-do American girl never walks a -hundred yards if a street car or ’bus is convenient; and the men, too, -are not much better as a rule. One of the most disgusting sights to be -seen in New York on a fine day is a procession of street cars going up -Broadway, crowded to suffocation by young men who have plenty of time to -walk home. In the case of the women, the cramping French fashions, which -impede exercise, are largely to blame. - -Fresh-air starvation, again, is almost as epidemic in America as in -Germany. Although night air is less dreaded, draughts are quite as much; -and people imagine that they owe their constant “colds” to the _cold_ -air with which they come into contact, whereas it is the excessively -_hot_ air in their rooms that makes them morbidly sensitive to a -salubrious atmosphere. If young ladies knew that the hothouse air of -their parlours has the same effect on them as on a bunch of flowers, -making them wither prematurely, they would shun it as they would the -sulphurous fumes of a volcano. Why should they deliberately hasten the -conversion of the plump, smooth grape into a dull, wrinkled raisin? - -It is through their morbid fondness for hothouse air and their indolence -that American women so often neutralise their natural advantages: thanks -to the fusion of nationalities and the unimpeded sway of Romantic Love, -they are born more beautiful than the women of any other nation; but the -beauty does not last. - -It must be admitted, however, that a vast improvement has been effected -within the last two generations. Beyond all doubt the young girls of -fifteen are to-day healthier and better-looking than were their mothers -at the same age. It is no longer fashionable to be pale and frail. -Anglomania has done some good in introducing a love of walking, tennis, -etc., as well as the habit of spending a large part of the year in the -country. - -Mr. Higginson, Mr. R. G. White, and many others, have insisted on this -gradual improvement in the health and physique of Americans; and Dr. -Beard remarks in his work on _American Nervousness_: “During the last -two decades the well-to-do classes of America have been visibly growing -stronger, fuller, healthier. We weigh more than our fathers; the women -in all our great centres of population are yearly becoming more plump -and more beautiful.... On all sides there is a visible reversion to the -better physical appearance of our English and German ancestors.... The -one need for the perfection of the beauty of the American women—increase -of fat—is now supplied.” Yet the one cosmetic which 20 per cent of -American women still need above all others is the ability to eat food -which they scorn as “greasy,” but which is only greasy when badly -prepared. It is to such food that Italian and Spanish women owe their -luscious fulness of figure. - -Dr. Clarke’s work on _Sex and Education_ made a great sensation because -he pointed out that the ill-health of American women is largely due to -the brain-work imposed on them at school. Now the superior beauty of -American women is admittedly largely due to the intelligent animation of -their features, to the early training of their mental faculties. Is this -advantage to be sacrificed? Dr. Clarke’s argument does not point to any -such conclusion. He simply contended that the methods of female -education were injurious. “The law has, or had, a maxim that a man and -his wife are one, and that the one is the man. Modern American education -has a maxim, that boys’ schools and girls’ schools are one, and that the -one is the boys’ school.” Girls need different studies from boys to fit -them for _their_ sphere in life; and above all they need careful -hygienic supervision and periods of rest.—Dr. Clarke’s book affords many -irrefutable arguments in favour of one of the main theses of the present -treatise: that the tendency of civilisation is to differentiate the -sexes, mentally and physically. It is on this differentiation that the -ardour and the cosmetic power of Romantic Love depend. Hence the -hopelessness of the Virago Woman’s Rights Cause, especially in America, -where the women are more thoroughly feminine than elsewhere. It is said -that when the first female presidential candidate announced a lecture in -a western town, _not a single auditor_ appeared on the scene. American -women, evidently, are in no immediate danger of becoming masculine and -ceasing to inspire Love. - -Women, however, must be educated and thoroughly, for it has been -abundantly shown in the preceding pages that only an educated mind can -feel true Romantic Love. But their education should be feminine. They -need no algebra, Greek, and chemistry. What they need is first of all a -thorough knowledge of Physiology and Hygiene, so that they may be able -to take care of the Health and Beauty of their children. Then they -should be well versed in literature, so as to be able to shine in -conversation. Their artistic eye should be trained, to enable them to -teach their children to go through the world with their eyes open. Most -of us are half blind; we cannot describe accurately a single person or -thing we see. Music should be taught to all women, as an aid in making -home pleasant and refined, and as an antidote to care. Natural history -is another useful feminine study which enlarges the sympathies by -showing, for example, that birds love and marry almost as we do, -wherefore it is barbarous to wear their stuffed bodies on one’s hat. - -Education, Intermarriage, Hygiene, and Romantic Love will ultimately -remove the last traces of the ape and the savage from the human -countenance and figure. Climate will perhaps always continue to modify -different races sufficiently to afford the advantages of -cross-fertilisation or intermarriage. The remarkable fineness of the -American complexion, for instance, has been ascribed to climatic -influences, and with justice it seems, for, according to Schoolcraft, -the skin of the native Indians is not only smoother, but more delicate -and regularly furrowed than that of Europeans. The notion, however, that -the climate is tending to make the American like the Indian in feature -and form is nonsensical. The typical “Yankee” owes his high cheek-bones -and lankness to his indigestible food; his thin colourless lips to his -Puritan ancestry and lack of æsthetic culture. - -Even if climate did possess the power to modify the forms of our -features, it would not be allowed to have its own way where these -modifications conflicted with the laws of Beauty. Science is daily -making us more and more independent of crude and cruel Natural -Selection, and of the advantages of physical conformity to our -surroundings. Hence Sexual Selection has freer scope to modify the human -race into harmony with æsthetic demands. Perhaps the time will come when -the average man will have as refined a taste and as deep feelings as a -few favoured individuals have at present; that epoch will be known as -the age of Romantic Love and Personal Beauty. - - - - - INDEX - - - About, E.: fashionable disease, 510 - Absence: effect on Love, 256 - Addison: familiarity, 184, 258 - Æsthetic sense: developed from utilitarian associations, 336; - training the, 340; - highest product of civilisation, 409, 479 - Æsthetic suicide, 388, 390 - Affection, impersonal, 11-16; - for dismal scenery, 13 - Affections, Personal: love for animals, 16-19; - maternal love, 19; - paternal, 20; - filial, 22; - brotherly and sisterly, 23; - friendship, 24; - romantic love, 26; - differentiation of, 180 - Age: which preferred by Cupid, 303; - beauty of old, 334; - and decrepitude, 334; - ears in old, 430; - eyebrows, 474; - hair, 489, 493 - Air: fresh, 317; - necessary to Beauty, 186, 319, 397, 426, 446, 447, 492, 515 - Albinos, 468, 501 - Alcock, Dr.: colour of tropical man, 456 - Alfieri: first love, 204, 214 - Alison: on taste, 451 - Allen, Grant: origin of æsthetic sense, 336 - Amazons, 191 - Ambidexterity, 408, 444 - American beauty, 177, 300; - South American, 319; - quadroons, 321; - rapid development of, 326; - feet, 362; - frank gaze, 481, 531, 535-543; - complexion, 542 - American Love: courtship, 118; - flirtation, 122, 126; - Gallantry, 158; - and Beauty, 177; - at eighteen, 193; - replaces German and French courtship, 288, 294-301 - Amicis, E. de: Spanish beauty, 517 - Amiel, H. F.: on Germans, 523 - Animals: love for, 16; - ignored in Christian ethics, 18; - love among, 33; - jealousy, 39, 128; - kissing, 227, 229; - as tests of Beauty, 331; - arctic, why white, 456 - Apes, caressing, 225; - kissing, 225, 228; - ugliness of, 333; - feet, 355, 359; - gait, 357; - legs, 371; - abdomen, 385; - arms, 402; - hands, 405; - jaws, 409; - nude patches, 487; - hair, 492 - Apollo, 490 - Arabian beauty, 516 - Aryan Love, ancient, 72 - Asceticism and ugliness, 314 - Augustine, St.: love and jealousy, 128 - Austrian beauty, 319, 516 - - Bach, A. B.: chest-exercise, 399 - Bachelors, 194 - Bacon: friendship, 25; - amorous hyperbole, 162; - celibacy and genius, 197; - love and genius, 207; - employment _versus_ love, 257 - Bain, Prof., 225, 341, 346. - Baldness, 492 - Ballet-dancing, 370 - Ballrooms: unhealthy, 364, 402; - for birds, 365 - Balzac: prolonging Love, 218; - how his love was won, 252; - hand of great men, 405 - “Bangs,” 388, 495 - Banting, 384 - Bathing, 461, 518, 524, 534 - Beard, G. M.: diet, 384; - eyeball, 476; - American beauty, 536, 541 - Beard, the, 489 - Beauty, in flowers, origin of, 8; - dependent on Health and Cross-fertilisation, 10 - Beauty, Personal: the æsthetic overtone of Love, 32; - admiration of, by animals, 43; - by savages, 59; - among Hebrews, 72; - Hindoos, 74; - Greeks, 83; - Romans, 88; - mediæval, 108; - feminine _versus_ masculine strength, 115; - arouses jealousy, 133; - when only skin-deep, 155; - and intellect, 155; - refines Love, 177-180; - feminine, in masculine eyes, 177; - masculine, in feminine eyes, 178; - neglected after marriage, 185; - lost prematurely, 186; - “skin-deep,” 190; - elimination of ugly and masculine women, 190; - fatal to bachelors, 194; - physical, a source of Love, 303; - facial, 304; - dependent on Health, 310; - independent of utility, 311; - Greek, 313; - increased through Hygiene, 316, 335; - effect of crossing on, 318; - Jews, 320; - quadroons, 321; - increased through Love, 322, 323; - as a fine art, 329, 417; - tests of, negative, 331; - positive, 338; - human less frequent than animal, 391; - lost in degradation, 333; - and age, 334; - expression _versus_ form, 349; - proportion, 354; - feet, 355, 361; - value of exercise, 362, 403; - lower limbs, 371; - Hygiene and civilisation, 372, 394; - lacing fatal to, 381, 382; - corpulence, 383; - rare, 387; - chest, 394, 396; - increased by deep-breathing, 399; - neglect of, a sin, 400; - neck and shoulder, 400; - finger-nails, 406; - jaw, 408; - characteristic, 411; - dimples, 412; - lips, 413; - cheeks, 423; - colour and blushes, 425; - ears, 429; - noses, 440; - Greek, 440; - arm and hand, 405, 408; - cosmetic value of gastronomy, 446; - of fragrant air, 447; - of sunlight, 460, 462; - skin, 453, 458, 488; - eyes, 464 _et seq._, 516; - beards and moustaches, 489; - sexual selection preserves hair, 492; - sensuous, of eyes, 480; - of hair, 492, 493; - _versus_ Fashion, 387, 496; - Brunette _versus_ Blonde, 496; - national traits, 505; - race-mixture and Love, 508; - and mental culture, 324, 520; - stature, 520; - beautiful and pretty, 521 - Beauty-sleep, 317 - Beauty-spots, 452 - Beddoe, Dr.: brunettes and blondes, 499; - races of Britain, 529 - Beer, 525, 526 - Beethoven: Love-affairs, 210, 212, 217 - Bell, Sir Charles: the lips, 227; - Greek beauty, 349; - woman’s gait, 373; - facial expression, 414; - beards, 490 - Bella donna, 504 - Berlioz: love-affairs, 199, 206 - Birds: affections of, 35; - intermarriages, nuptial mass meetings, 37; - courtship, 38; - love-dances, 39, 52; - jealousy, 39; - coyness, 40; - choice of a mate, 42; - source of colours, 44; - love-calls, 51; - female seeks male, 51; - display of ornaments, motives of, 52; - æsthetic taste of, 53; - murdered for vulgar women, 150; - billing, 230 - Blackie, Prof.: Goethe’s love-affairs, 212 - Blaikie, W.: American physique, 540 - Blind, why love is, 164, 202 - Blonde _versus_ Brunette, 496, 529 - Blushes, 425; - eyes of Albinos, 468 - Bodenstedt: Oriental women, 185; - Georgian women, 325 - Bones, 410 - Bothmer, Countess von: French Love, 269, 270; - German women, 283; - English flirtation, 293 - Brain, the, 449, 522 - Brandes, Georg: feminine Love at thirty, 193, 197 - Breath, offensive, 423 - Breathing, healthy, 380; - deep, magic effects of, 397, 447 - Brinton and Napheys, 379, 421, 432, 444, 484 - Brotherly and sisterly love, 23 - Browne, Lennox: corset ruins grace, 382; - consumption, 399 - Brunette _versus_ Blonde, 305, 496, 513, 520, 526, 529 - Bryant, 254 - Büchner, L., 534 - Bulkley, Dr.: care of skin, 460; - removing hairs, 493 - Bunyan: kissing, 284 - Burke: delicacy, 343; - smoothness, 344; - neck and breasts, 394; - love and stature, 521 - Burns: Love and cosmic attraction, 6; - amorous hyperbole, 162; - first love, 205; - ardour of his love, 208; - fickleness, 211; - undercurrents, 213; - a lover’s dream, 220; - kissing, 231 - Burton, 4, 259 - Bustle, the, 375, 494 - Buxton, 259 - Byron, Lord: affection for mountains, 13; - epitaph on dog, 17; - woman’s Love, 121; - waltzing, 129; - the coquette, 142; - Romantic Love, 163; - love-affairs, 202; - first love, 204; - a poet’s love, 210; - Swift, 210; - kissing, 236; - refusals, 241; - how to win love, 243, 252; - sarcasm on marriage, 259; - money and “love,” 263; - Italian Love, 274; - Love inspired by inferior beauty, 305; - black eyes, 498; - Italian beauty, 512 - - Calderwood: on affection, 11 - Calisthenics, 397 - Campbell, Sir G.: Aryan cheekbones, 424 - Camper’s angle, 449 - Canada: Love-matches and Beauty, 178, 373, 510 - Capture of women, 56 - Caresses, 225 - Carew, 256 - Celibacy: mediæval notions of, 92; - bachelors, 195; - and genius, 197 - Cervantes, 202, 280 - Chamfort, 224 - Chaperonage: in Greece, 77; - Rome, 87; - mediæval, 103; - modern, 119, 126, 174, 181, 186, 192; - in France, 193, 266 _et seq._; - England, 268, 293; - Italy, 274; - Spain, 277; - Germany, 285; - America, 294, 296 - Characteristic, the, 410 - Cheeks, 423; - colour and blushes, 425 - Chemical affinities, 3-6 - Chest, the, 304, 394, 397 - Chesterfield: birth of “flirtation,” 124; - flattery, 245 - Children: head, 449; - eyes, 480 - Childs, Mrs,: Love and marriage, 122 - Chin, 412 - China: Love in, 118; - jealousy, 129, 133; - aristocracy of intellect, 210; - standard of Beauty, 328; - mutilation of the feet, 352; - dancing, 366; - cheeks, 423; - eyes, 473, 483, 485 - Chiromancy, 406 - Chivalry: militant and comic, 98; - poetic, 101 - Choice, sexual. _See_ Individual Preference - Chopin: musician for lovers, 170 - Christianity and Love, 97; - sympathy, 149; - and Beauty, 323 - Circassian women, 320, 427 - City air, 447; - city life, injurious to health, 372 - Civilisation: and Beauty, 424; - and noise, 434 - Clarke, E. H.: American Health and Beauty, 539; - sex and education, 541 - Clavel, Dr.: English Beauty, 532 - Cleanliness, 96, 364, 533 - Climate, 542 - Clough, 227 - “Colds,” 540 - Coleridge: fruitless Love, 121; - best marriages, 190; - virtue and passion, 218; - compliments, 245; - love and absence, 256 - Collier, Miss M.; Italian Love and Hygiene, 512 - Collier, R. L.: English and American courtship, 292 - Colour: a normal product, proportionate to vitality, 44; - Typical and Sexual, 44; - Protective and Warning, 48; - means of recognition of species, 49; - complementary, 172, 345; - in cheeks, 425; - ears, 432; - skin, 453, 488; - of man’s skin, original, 456; - eyes, 465, 478 - Complementary qualities: colours, 172; - guide Love, 272, 305 - Complexion: white _versus_ black, 453; - Scandinavian and Spanish, 459; - cosmetic hints, 460; - freckles, 462; - brunette _versus_ blonde, 500, 526; - English, 533, 534; - injured by hot air, 540 - Compliments, 244 - Confidence, value of, to lovers, 239, 242 - Conjugal love: among animals, 34; - savages, 182; - Hebrews, 69; - Greeks, 75; - Romans, 86; - troubadours, 102; - self-sacrifice, 160; - in France, 162; - differs from Romantic, 180 _et seq._; - modern, 182; - essence of, 183; - feminine deeper than masculine, 186; - and friendship, 258 - Constable, 167 - Consumption, nurseries of, 399 - Coquetry: in birds, 40; - and flirtation, 122; - historic excuse for, 124; - essence of, 142; - masculine, 142; - and high collars, 242 - Corpulence, 304, 382; - how to reduce, 384; - in old England, 530 - Corset: fatal to Beauty, 379 _et seq._; - causes corpulence, 382, 385; - ruins chest, 400 - Cosmetic hints (_see_ also Hygiene and Exercise): how to refine the - lips, 421; - ears, 431; - odours, 445; - complexion, 460, 464; - electricity, 464; - eyelashes, 484; - eyes, 485; - hair, 491; - scalp, 493; - colour of eyes, 504; - fresh air, 513 - Cosmic attraction, 3-6 - Costume, study of, 495 - Court-plaster, 452 - Courts of Love, 103 - Courtship: among animals, 37; - facilitated by love-calls, 50; - display of ornaments, 53; - among savages, 56; - Hebrews, 70; - Greeks, 77; - Plato on, 78; - advice to mediæval girls, 106; - definition and value of, 118; - playing at, 122; - modern, 125, 126, 173; - mediæval, 239; - French, 268; - Italian, 275; - Spanish, 278; - German, 282; - American and English, 288, 292, 294, 299; - the object of dancing, 364; - needed in France, 509; - Germany, 527 - Cousins: Love and kissing, 235; - as chaperons, 297 - Coyness: an overtone of Love, 30; - among animals, 40; - among primitive maidens, 64; - Hindoos, 74; - Greeks, 77; - mediæval, 100; - modern, 114; _et seq._; - a feminine weapon, 115; - disadvantages of, 118; - lessens woman’s Love, 119; - displaced by flirtation, 122; - of fate, 170; - after marriage, 185; - varies, 253; - how to overcome, 254; - needed in Germany, 285 - Crimes, against Health and Beauty, 400, 419 - Criminal types, 324 - Crinoline craze, the, 376 - Cross-fertilisation: advantages to Health and Beauty, 8, 318 - Crossing, 306; - a source of Beauty, 318 - Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 274 - “Cunning to be strange,” 115 - Cupid’s arrows, 84 - Curing Love, art of: 154, 196, 255; - absence, 256; - travel, 257; - employment, 257; - contemplation of married misery, 257; - of feminine inferiority, 260; - focussing her faults, 262; - reason _versus_ passion, 263; - Love _versus_ Love, 264 - Curvature, 341, 355, 371, 379, 381, 393, 396, 400, 413, 473, 474 - - Dancing: love-dances of birds, 39, 52; - and grace, 364; - and courtship, 365; - birds, 365; - Greeks and Romans, 366; - why men no longer care for, 367; - evolution of dance-music, 367; - dance of Love, 369; - ballet, 370 - Dante, 2, 109, 168, 198, 201, 215, 420 - Darwin: on flowers and insects, 7; - benefactor of animals, 18; - birds, 35; - animal jealousy, 39; - coyness, 40; - sexual selection, 43; - love charms and calls, 50; - birds displaying their ornaments, 53; - English Beauty, 145; - female tenderness, 150; - masculine females, 190; - expression of Love, 224; - amorous desire for contact, 225; - origin of kissing, 229; - feminine inferiority, 260; - taste, 326; - symmetry in nature, 338; - bird dances and courtship, 365; - Hottentot bustle, or steatopyg, 375; - jaws and hands, 409; - lip mutilations, 416; - expression of emotions, 418; - Siamese notions of Beauty, 423; - blushing, 427; - Albinos, 501; - movements of ears, 430, 433; - point of, 431; - mutilations, 432; - the nose, 436; - sense of smell, 446; - Indian heads, 450; - movements of the scalp, 452; - complexion, 455; - eyebrows, 474; - loss of man’s hair, 486 - Darwinism, new proof for, 389 - Decrepitude, 334 - Deformity: fatal to Love, 304; - elimination of, 323 - Degradation: a cause of ugliness, 333 - Delicacy, 343, 410, 413 - Depilatories, 492 - De Quincy: inferiority of feminine imagination, 261 - Diagnosis of Love, 254 - Diderot: effects of Love, 242 - Dimples, 405, 412 - Disease: kills Love, 304; - a cause of ugliness, 334, 341; - resulting from tight shoes, 354; - from lacing, 380, 381; - hollow eyes, 473; - and Fashion, 510, 541 - Display of ornaments, by animals, 52 - Don Juans, among birds, 36 - Draughts, stupid fear of, 317 - Drayton, 167 - Dress, improprieties of, 380; - woman’s for woman, 388; - in France, 510 - Dryden: on Love, 89, 166; - Love _versus_ Love, 264 - Dühring, Dr.: German money-marriages, 282 - Dürer, 481 - - Ears: a useless ornament, 429; - physiognomic theories, 432 - Eckstein: antiquity of Love, 1 - Education of Girls, 156; - the right kind, 195, 261; - effect of on Beauty, 324, 541, 542 - Egypt: Love in, 67 - Electricity, as a cosmetic, 464, 493, 505 - Eliot, George: on first Love, 138 - Elopements, 61, 188 - Elson, L. C.: Troubadours and Minnesingers, 104 - Emerson: poetry and science, 9; - lovers’ sympathy, 31; - on lovers, 134; - amorous hyperbole, 163, 165, 241; - balm for rejected lovers, 255; - ocular expression, 475; - Health and Beauty, 533 - Emotional differentiation, 180 - Empedokles, 3, 180 - Engagements, 293; - broken, 300 - English Beauty, 145; - feet, 359, 362; - open-air games, 373; - mouths and chins, 419; - nose, 442; - beards, 489; - Brunettes gaining on Blondes, 499; - physique, 507, 509, 528 _seq._ - English Love: courtship, 118; - flirtation, 122, 126, 193, 196; - kissing, 233, 237, 288-294; - Goldsmith on, 299 - Epicures: why handsome, 446 - Erasmus: kissing in England, 233 - Erotomania, 222 - Evolution of Love, 111, 173, 180, 181; - of Beauty, 327; - of taste, 327; - great toe, 359 - Exaggeration: characteristic of bad taste, 61 - Exclusiveness: amorous. _See_ Monopoly - Exercise: effects on Beauty, 186, 313, 372; - reduces fatness but increases muscle, 384, 403; - in France, 509, 520, 525 - Exogamy, 56 - Expression: improves form of features, 155; - facial, of Love, 224; - of lips, 227; - of Beauty, 327, 347-352; - mouth, 409; - facial, 414, 458; - of vice, 418; - of lust, 418; - ears, 433; - eyes, 470, 475; - dog’s tail, 491; - Italian, 513 - Eyes, 164, 262; - smiling, 415; - the most beautiful feature, 464; - colour of, 465; - lustre, 469; - form, 472; - lashes and brows, 474, 503, 483; - expression of, 479; - movements of iris, 475; - of eyeball, 480; - of lids, 482; - of brows, 484; - “making eyes,” 491; - dark _versus_ light, 503; - Spanish, 516, 517 - - Face, the, 411, 448, 490 - Factories: unhealthy, 400; - whistles, 434 - Fashion: the Handmaid of Ugliness, 328; - a disease, 352; - mutilates the feet, 352, 360; - frustrates advantages of dancing, 365; - prescribes absurd hours, 367; - its essence vulgar exaggeration, 375; - crinoline craze, 375; - wasp-waist mania, 379; - lacing, 380; - Fashion Fetish analysed, 385; - and Darwinism, 389; - repeats itself, 389; - ludicrous features, 390; - masculine, 391, 393; - disgusting pictures, 393; - deforms the breasts, 395; - finger-nails, 406; - gloves, 407; - right-handedness, 408; - teeth, 415; - powders and paints, 425, 458, 459; - ears, 432; - noses, 436, 443; - _versus_ Taste, 437; - forehead, 431, 450, 451; - court-plaster, 452; - eyebrows, 474; - hollow eyes, 483; - mutilates eyes, 485; - head-dresses, 494; - tyranny of ugliness, 496; - in France, 509; - and bad manners, 510 - Fat, cosmetic value of, 120, 132 - Feet, the: size, 351; - fashionable ugliness, 352; - tests of Beauty, 354; - not enlarged by _graceful_ walking, 362 - Feminine Beauty: in masculine eyes, 177; - prematurely lost, 186, 312; - rarer than masculine, 313; - greater than masculine, 342; - bosom, 342, 394, 400, 403; - face, 411; - nose, 441; - forehead, 388, 448, 496; - wrinkles, 451; - skin, 488; - beard, 489, 521 - Feminine Inferiority, 260, 262, 274 - Feminine Love: less deep than masculine, 120, 273; - desire to please, 159; - dynamic, not æsthetic, 178, 253, 303; - at thirty, 193; - expression of, 224; - lessens delicacy, 254; - Fichte on, 284, 401 - Feminine virtues, 98; - mediæval culture, 105; - cruelty, 150; - devotion, 160 - Femininity, standard of, 290 - Fichte: feminine Love, 284 - Fickleness of genius, 210 - Figuier, 458, 506, 509, 511, 517 - Figure: a good, inspires Love, 154; - Oriental, 540; - plump, 541 - Filial Love, 22 - Finger-nails, 406 - Fletcher, 167 - Flirtation and coquetry, 122; - definition of, 123; - _versus_ coyness, 123; - in France, 273; - in Spain, 278; - Germany, 285; - England, 293; - with the eyes, 484, 491 - Flower love and beauty, 7-11 - Flower, Prof.: walking, 358; - toes, 359; - nose-rings, 443 - Forehead, the, 388, 411; - Beauty and brain, 448; - fashionable deformity, 450, 496 - Fragrance, a tonic, 447 - France: the source of vulgar Fashions, 352 - Franklin, B.: early marriages, 189; - advantages of large families, 189 - Freckles, not caused by sunshine, 462, 500, 524 - French Beauty: rare as Love-marriages, 272; - feet, 362; - ugly fashions, 389; - brunettes and blondes, 499; - general 506; - in America, 510; - compared with English, 533 - French Love: Chivalry, 99; - Troubadours, 102; - no flirtation, 123, 126; - grandchildren sacrificed, 162; - lower classes, 176; - feminine, at thirty, 193, 196; - killed by ridicule, 243, 265-274, 341, 508 - French, T. R.: nose-breathing, 445 - Freytag, G.: mediæval German marriages, 281 - Friendship, 24; - among animals, 34; - female, in Greece, 81, 180; - advantages over conjugal love, 258 - Fringe, 388, 495 - - Gait, graceful, 357, 363; - defects in woman’s, 373, 375, 376; - in Spain, 518, 520, 533 - Gallantry: an overtone of Love, 30; - among animals, 39; - among savages, 66; - birth of, in Rome, 91; - crazy mediæval, 100, 157; - modern, 157; - conjugal, 185; - extravagant forms of, 221; - feminine, 244; - flattery in actions, 245; - Italian, 274; - Spanish, 278; - German, 283; - American, 298; - true, 388; - why on the wane, 495 - Galton: on Coyness, 124; - callous feelings, 148; - morals and large families, 189; - heredity of genius, 201; - woman’s senses less delicate than man’s, 261; - ancestral influences, 306; - criminal types, 324; - stature and marriage, 521; - change in English physiognomy, 530 - Gastronomy: cosmetic value of, 446; - England, 535; - America, 539 - Gautier, Th.: woman has no sense of beauty, 124 - Genius: emotional, 2, 90, 110; - and Health, 179; - and marriage, 197; - and Love, 201, 217; - modern, abundant, 203; - in Love, 204; - amorous precocity, 204; - ardour, 207; - _versus_ rank and money, 209; - fickleness, 210; - multiplicity, 213; - and Monopoly, 214; - fictitiousness, 215 - Georgian women, 60 - German Beauty: 144; - Bavarian corpulence, 385; - Brunettes gaining on Blondes, 499; - physiognomy, 514; - general, 522-528 - German Love: chivalry, 99; - Minnesingers, 103; - in Folksongs, 105; - word for courtship, 118, 126; - in novels, 143, 196; - gallantry, 240; - compared with French, 266, 280-288 - Girls: of the Period, 119; - plain, chances of getting married, 154; - pretty, apt to be spoiled, 155, 200; - wrong education, 156, 261; - cages _versus_ nets, 185; - hints on men, 187; - American and English, 188; - best education for, 195; - easily duped, 224; - in France, 267; - Germany, 283; - know when they are ugly, 307; - should skate, 373; - how to acquire a fine figure, 385, 404 - Gladstone: Greek hair, 496, 498; - stature, 520 - Godkin, E. L.: true character of milliners, 387 - Goethe: _Elective Affinities_, 5; - affection for nature, 15; - ancient love, 116; - first love, 136; - intellect and Love, 157; - love affairs, 202, 206, 212, 213; - unhappy marriages, 258; - transitoriness of Love, 287; - aversion to noise, 435 - Goldsmith: on Love, 116, 165; - his first love, 211; - English Love, 299 - Grace, where found, 308, 343; - of gait, 357; - acquired by dancing, 364; - destroyed by corsets, 382; - movements of the head, 401; - French, 507; - Italian, 514; - Spanish, 518, 520 - Gradation, 42, 339, 355, 371, 394, 400, 404, 459 - Grandchildren: sacrificed to money-marriages, 160, 162, 245, 260 - Gratiolet, 479 - Greek Beauty, 83; - sources of, 313; - animals as ideals, 332; - no expression, 348, 349; - feet, 356; - gymnastics, 384; - hands, 406; - chin, 413; - lips, 414; - ears, 430, 433; - beards, 489; - arrangement of hair, 495; - colour of hair, 495; - stature, 520 - Greek Love, 75, 116, 157, 180, 191 - Griffin, Sir L.: French women, 506; - American women, 536 - Grose: noses, 437 - Grote, G.: Platonic love, 80; - Greek Beauty, 83; - Amazons, 191 - Gymnastics: among Greeks, 384 - Gypsy, Spanish, 516 - - Haeckel, Prof., 431, 523 - Hair: how to wear, 388, 530; - on the arm, 403; - cause of man’s nudity, 486; - how to remove, 491; - preserved by Sexual Selection, 492; - æsthetic value of, 494; - blonde and brunette, 496, 501; - red, 503 - Hamerton, P. G.: Love and age, 138; - feminine sympathy, 156; - embers of passion, 264; - French Love, 267, 271, 272 - Hammond, Dr. W.: Delirium of Persecution, 220; - erotomania, 222 - Hand, 402, 405, 408 - Handel, 199 - Harrison, J. P.: length of first and second toes, 359 - Hartmann, E. von: pleasure and pain, 168; - masculine and feminine Love, 284 - Hats, tall, 393; - hideous French, 388, 494 - Haweis, Mrs.: Fashion _versus_ Beauty, 494; - turban, 495; - hair-powder, 503 - Hawthorne, N.: a love-letter, 250; - English Beauty, 531; - American physique, 538 - Hawthorne, Julian: German Beauty, 526 - Haydn, 198, 206 - Hazlitt, 258 - Head, the deformities of, 328; - and hair, 492 - Health: correlated with Beauty in flowers, 8, 10; - in animals, 46; - men and women, 178; - source of Love, 303; - source of Beauty, 310-317, 331, 534; - and delicacy, 344; - exercise, 372; - lacing, 380; - sins against, 419; - and colour, 347, 453, 458; - and lustre, 469, 477; - eyelids, 473; - and sunshine, 500; - in Italy, 512; - England, 534; - America, 538. - Hebra, Prof.: freckles, 462 - Hebrews: Love among ancient, 69; - sense of beauty, 72; - absence of jealousy, 129; - beauty and ugliness of, 320; - noses, 438, 440 - Hegel: colour of the skin, 453 - Heine: flower and butterfly love, 10; - the word love, 11; - joy and torture, 32; - persiflage of coyness, 118, 120; - jealousy, 130, 132; - on first Love, 137; - his marriage, 157; - poet for lovers, 170, 202; - his first love, 205; - his true love, 208; - æsthetic love, 211; - multiplicity, 213; - wedding music, 259; - woman’s character, 259; - curing Love with Love, 264; - French Love, 267; - an emotional educator, 286; - Italian Beauty, 515 - Helmholtz: overtones, 29 - Herder: Love, 71; - eyes of great men, 482 - Heredity: of genius, 201 - Hetairai, 79 - Higginson, T. W.: sexual likeness, 174; - American physique, 541 - Hindoo Love maxims, 73 - History of Love, 67 - Holland, F. W.: morals and large families, 189 - Holmes, O. W.: feminine barbarity, 151; - refined lips, 419 - Homer: Helen’s Beauty, 314 - Honeymoon, 164, 188 - Horwicz, 16, 21, 240 - Hottentots: notions of Beauty, 376 - Howells, W. D.: monogamy, 133; - feminine self-abnegation, 259; - Italian courtship, 275-276; - broken engagements, 300; - playful flattery, 301 - Hueffer, F.: Troubadours, 102 - Hume: uncertainty augments passion, 124; - mixed emotions, 172 - Humphrey, Dr.: walking, 358 - Hungarian Beauty, 319 - Huxley: female education, 261; - ape’s foot, 358 - Hygiene, modern: a source of Beauty, 316; - of the feet, 362; - legs, 373; - chest, 397, 398; - fatal consequences of neglect, 399; - eyes, 485, 527; - hair, 493; - in England, 534 - Hyperbole: emotional, an overtone of Love, 32; - in ancient Aryan Love, 74; - modern, 162-166; - after marriage, 184; - pathologic analogies, 219, 221; - contact, 225; - and genius, 243; - in America, 301 - - Indians, American: wooing, 173; - standard of Beauty, 327; - muscular power, 371; - deformed skulls, 450 - Indifference, feigned: value to lovers, 241 - Individual Preference: an overtone of Love, 30; - among animals, 42; - savages, 57, 59; - Hebrews, 70, 78; - Greeks, 79; - Romans, 87; - mediæval times, 94, 112; - modern, 173-177, 188; - in France, 268; - Italy, 275; - Spain, 278; - Germany, 282; - England, 288, 535; - America, 300; - Schopenhauer on, 310 - Individualism _versus_ Fashion, 389 - Individuality, 174; - and nationality, 300, 350, 482, 508 - Individuals: sacrificed to species, 302, 308 - Insanity and Love: analogies, 218; - erotomania, 222 - Intellect and Beauty, 61, 155, 217, 324, 326, 534 - Intellect and Love, 61, 74, 79, 83, 90, 122, 154, 157, 193, 203, 209, - 216, 285, 299, 304 - Intoxication, amorous, 163, 197 - Iris, 466, 479 - Irving, Washington: transient Love, 211; - intellect and Beauty, 324; - Spanish Beauty, 519 - Italian Beauty: 274, 276; - feet, 359, 361; - nose, 437; - hair, 497, 502; - complexion, 501; - general, 511-515 - Italian Love: chivalry, 101; - no word for courtship, 118, 196, 274-277, 512 - - Jaeger, G.: personal perfumery, 446 - James, Henry: American women, 158; - Daisy Miller, 295 - Japan: jealousy, 129, 133 - Jaws, the, 408 - Jealousy: an overtone of Love, 30; - among animals, 39; - moral mission of, 62; - occasional absence among savages, 62; - Greek, 77; - mediæval, 103; - modern, 127-133; - retrospective and prospective, 131; - aroused by Beauty, 133, 172; - conjugal, 184; - Oriental, 185; - morbid, 221 - Jeffrey: on Taste, 328; - theory of Beauty, 335 - Jews. _See_ Hebrews - Johnson, Dr.: second Love, 135; - marriage and Love, 258 - Jowett, Prof.: Sokrates, love and friendship, 258 - - Kant: women ensnared by counterfeit lovers, 243; - value of smiles, 421 - Karr, A.: Woman’s Love, 259 - Keats: amorous hyperbole, 163; - paradox, 168; - Beauty and Love, 177; - love-letters, 246-248 - Kissing, 142, 227; - among animals, 227; - savages, 228; - origin of, 229; - ancient, 232; - mediæval, 233; - modern, 234; - love-kisses, 235; - art of, 237; - varieties of, 414; - on the ears, 432; - cheeks, 425 - Knight: Beauty and utility, 336, 340 - Knille: Italian Beauty, 514 - Kollmann, Prof.: feminine Beauty, 342; - walking, 371; - muscular development, 373; - gait, 374; - breasts, 395; - face, 411; - nose, 436; - hair, 502; - results of crossing, 320 - Koran, the: on woman’s soul, 94 - Krafft-Ebing: Insanity and Love, 173, 222 - - La Bruyère: how to win love, 244; - on use of paint, 459 - Lacing: fatal to Beauty, 379 - Lamartine: genius and Love, 210; - love-affairs, 252 - Lamb, Chas.: amorous paradoxes, 166; - love-affairs, 212 - Language of Love: words, 223; - facial expression, 224; - caresses, 225; - kissing, 227 - La Rochefoucauld: Love and friendship, 26; - and absence, 256 - Lathrop, G. P.: Love-making in Spain, 278; - Spanish Beauty, 518 - Laughter, 421 - Lavater: chin, 412; - ocular lustre, 470 - Lawson, F. P.: effect of education on Beauty, 324 - Leanness, 304, 382; - how to cure, 384 - Lecky: on kindness to animals, 18; - family affections among Greeks, 75; - asceticism and chastity, 93; - feminine devotion, 160; - southern type of Beauty, 501 - Lenau: love-letters, 248; - music and Love, 257 - Leo, Judah: on Love, 4 - Lessing: every woman a shrew, 259 - Life: prolonged through hygienic care, 316 - Lips, 227, 231; - expression of scorn, 410; - refined, 413; - lip language, 414; - effect on, of æsthetic culture, 419 - Liszt, 199 - London, 435 - Longfellow, 264 - Love-charms (and calls): among animals, 50; - for women, 250, 426 - Love-dramas, among flowers, 9 - Love-maxims: Hindoo, 11 - Love, Romantic: a modern sentiment, 1, 180; - superior to friendship, 26; - to maternal love, 27; - secures to man the benefits of cross-fertilisation, 28; - overtones of, 29; - a great moral, æsthetic and hygienic force, 28, 97; - among animals, 33; - savages, 54; - Egyptians, 67; - Hebrews, 69; - ancient Aryans, 72; - more traces of modern in Indian poetry than in Greek and Roman, 73; - among Greeks, 75; - origin of, 85; - among Romans, 86; - Mediæval, 92; - wooing and waiting, 101; - dependent on refinement, 101; - maid _versus_ married woman, 105; - birth of modern, 109; - order of development proved, 111; - at the altar, 113; - in novels, 113; - pleasure of pursuit, 115; - value of procrastination, 116, 118; - coyness lessens woman’s, 119; - masculine deeper than feminine, 120, 259, 272; - modern jealousy, 127; - passion or admiration, 130; - is transient, 135, 180; - is first best? 136; - Heine on first, 137; - first is not best, 137; - individual _versus_ the species, 139; - coquetry, 142; - opposed by rank, 143; - intensifies emotions, 147; - stimulates social sympathy, 149; - selfish aspect of, 151; - at first sight, 38, 152; - inspired by a fine figure, 154; - by sympathy, 156; - responsible for general growth of Gallantry, 158; - refines men, 159; - impels toward self-sacrifice, 159, 161; - in France, 162; - emotional hyperbole, 162, 175; - intoxication of, 163; - honeymoon, 164; - mixed moods and paradoxes, 166; - course of true, 170; - lunatic, lover, and poet, 172; - and conjugal, 173; - individual choice, 174; - and culture, 176; - idealised by Beauty, 177-180; - responsible for Beauty, 177; - differs from conjugal, 180; - elements of, in conjugal affection, 184; - makes men embarrassed, 187; - free choice does not always imply Love, 188; - eliminates ugly and masculine women, 190; - inspired by Beauty, 194; - a duty, 196; - must be mutual, 196; - genius is amorous, 201; - _a creative impulse_, 202; - imagined is real, 203; - arouses genius, 204; - precocious, 204; - most intense in men of genius, 208; - fickle, 210, 216; - loving two at once, 213; - “sublimed” by Beauty, 218; - pathologic analogies, 218; - erotomania, 222; - language of, 223; - facial expression of, 224; - caresses, 225; - kissing, 227; - how to win, 237-255; - feminine, and genius, 242; - effects of, 242; - compliments, 244; - love-letters not necessarily slovenly, 247; - extracts from, 247-250; - charms for women, 251; - masculine, and vanity, 252; - opposed to viragoes, 252; - proposing, 253; - signs and tests of, 254; - how to cure, 255; - effect of absence on, 256; - effects of marriage on, 257; - poisoned by humiliation, 263; - _versus_ Love, 264; - chances of recovery, 265; - national peculiarities, 265; - massacred in France, 266; - Italian, 274, 276; - Spanish, 277; - German, 280; - English, 288, 299; - American, 294; - a cause of Beauty, 280, 301, 309; - points out woman’s sphere, 292; - obedience to, a moral duty, 286; - Schopenhauer’s theory of, 301-310; - sources of, 303; - complementary, explanation of, 307; - leads to happy marriages, 309; - a source of Beauty, 322; - displaces cruel Natural Selection, 323, 424; - is inspired by grace, 344, 357, 362; - more concerned with form than with colour, 347; - guided by subtle signs, 349; - individualisation and “beauty-spots,” 350; - neglects no detail of Beauty, 351; - the object of dancing, 365; - killed by fashionable deformity, 380; - feminine and masculine, 401; - maintains æsthetic proportion, 412; - related to Health and Beauty, 415; - beautifies the face, 324, 418; - special expression of, 418; - beautifies the lips, 420; - the cheeks, 424; - and fresh air, 426; - and blushes, 429; - inspired by a musical voice, 435; - beautifies the nose, 440; - eliminates high feminine foreheads, 448, 450; - method of amorous selection, 458; - awakens the sense of beauty, 458; - banishes rouge, 459; - inspired by eyes, 464, 482; - beautifies the eyes, 469; - eyebrows, 474, 485; - large pupils, 479; - _musculus amatorius_, 482; - killed by sunken eyes, 483; - preserves the hair, 492; - favours brunettes, 305, 497, 529; - eye-lashes, 503; - and Beauty, 508; - favours small women, 520; - _versus_ reason, 522; - and Beauty in England, 534; - sexual differentiation, 541; - in America, 541; - age of, 542 - Lovers: selfish bores, 135, 147; - quarrels, 170; - musician and poet for, 169; - falsetto, 224, 436 - Love-sickness: real, 222 - Love-stories; none in Greek literature, 76 - Lubbock, Sir J.: on flowers and insects, 8; - absence of certain emotions in savages, 55; - kissing, 228 - Lungs: hygiene of, 398 - Lustre, 345; - in eyes, 469, 476 - Luther: and marriage, 97 - Lynn-Linton, Mrs.: Girl of the Period, 187 - - Macaulay: Petrarch’s love, 216 - Madonna, Sistine, 481; - blond, 497 - Magnus, Dr. Hugo: colour of the eye, 469; - lustre, 470; - expression, 475; - portraits, 481; - individuality, 481 - Manicure secrets, 407 - Manners: essence of good, 495; - Spanish, 530 - Mantegazza: on courtship, 118; - caresses, 226; - Esquimaux nose, 437; - Italian noses, 437, 444; - wrinkles, 452; - Italian Beauty, 512 - Manu, laws of: on woman, 72 - Mariolatry: influence on woman’s position, 97 - Marlowe: amorous hyperbole, 165; - half-kisses, 238 - Marriage: among animals, 36, 37; - Egyptian trial, 68; - modern ideal of, 68; - in Greece, 78; - in Rome, 93; - and chivalry, 99, 103; - Love _versus_ expediency, 112; - maiden _versus_ wife, 115; - through accident, 139; - men becoming cautious, 156; - Love not a motive in France, 162; - of men of genius, 164, 197, 199; - money _versus_ Beauty, 177; - “the sunset of Love,” 181; - conditions of happy, 182; - nets and cages, 185; - of love, _versus_ “reason,” 186, 522; - hints, 188; - chances for ugly women, 191; - age for, advancing, 192; - misery of, 257-260; - in France, 268; - Germany, 281; - America, 301; - based on Love, 302; - and dancing, 367; - and noses, 436; - and complexion, 459; - Albinos, 501; - and stature, 521 - Masculine Beauty: in feminine eyes, 177; - more common than feminine, 312, 348, 397, 400, 403; - face, 411; - nose, 441; - forehead, 448; - wrinkles, 451; - beard, 489, 490, 521; - in Germany, 524 - Masculine Love; deeper than feminine, 120, 259, 273; - coquetry, 142; - Gallantry, 158; - beautifying impulse, 179; - insincerity, 187; - comic expression of, 224; - won _vid_ Vanity, 252; - increases delicacy, 254; - _versus_ feminine, 284 - Masculine vanity, 252 - Masculine women: eliminated as old maids, 190, 253 - Massage, 403 - Maternal Love, 19; - among animals, 34, 183 - Mediæval Love, 92; - celibacy, _versus_ marriage, 92; - woman’s lowest degradation, 93; - negation of feminine choice, 95; - Christianity and love, 97; - chivalry, militant and comic, 99; - poetic, 101; - female culture, 105; - Personal Beauty, 107; - Spenser on Love, 108; - Dante and Shakspere, 109 - Mediæval Ugliness: causes of, 315 - Meditation beautifies the face, 480 - Mental culture: a source of Beauty, 324; - France, 509; - Italy, 513; - Spain, 519, 520; - Germany, 522; - England, 534; - America, 541 - Middleton, 167 - Mill, J. S.: female self-denial, 161; - companionship in marriage, 184; - woman’s sphere, 194 - Milliners’ cunning, 387 - Milton, 107, 198 - Minnesingers, 103 - Mitchell, Dr. W.: American physique, 538 - Mitchell, P. C.: monkeys’ kisses, 228 - Mixed Moods and Paradoxes of Love, 32, 166, 185 - Mixture of races (_see_ also Crossing): and Love, 508; - in France, 508; - Italy, 511; - Spain, 515; - Germany, 522; - England, 516, 528, 538 - Modesty: a source of Coyness, 115; - and blushes, 164 - Monogamy: favours the development of Love, 64; - in Egypt, 68 - Monopoly: an overtone of Love, 30; - among savages, 63; - in ancient Aryan Love, 74; - modern, 133-141; - and genius, 213; - three are a crowd, 221; - in Lenau’s love-letters, 249; - masculine and feminine Love, 284, 504 - Montagu, Lady: on woman, 259 - Montaigne: on marriage, 259; - Italian Beauty, 274 - Moore, T.: genius and marriage, 197, 200; - first love, 204 - Moral impressions: confounded with æsthetic, 479 - Mormons, 63 - Mountains: feelings inspired by, 12 - Mouth: muscles of, 413; - self-made, 420 - Muscles: development of, 303; - use and disuse, 327; - the plastic material of Beauty, 384; - of an athlete, 403; - facial, 417; - mouth, 418 - Music: of male birds, does it charm the females? 50; - dance-music, 103; - Chopin’s funeral march, 170; - fans love, 257, 330, 339, 408, 419, 480 - - Nationality: and Beauty, 505; - and Love, 266 - Natural Selection: a cause of Beauty, 42 _seq._; - replaced by Love, 323, 424; - blushes, 426; - complexion, 455; - eyebrows, 475; - loss of hair, 486, 492 - Neck, 400 - Negroes: African, strangers to Love, 55; - American, can they love? 66; - ugliness of, 319; - standard of Beauty, 328, 331; - feet, 355; - legs, 371, 405; - teeth, 415; - lips, 416; - cause of blackness, 456; - complexion, inferiority of, 458; - eyes, 464, 467, 468, 483; - hair, 492 - New York: a silly fashion in, 390; - noise in, 435, 447; - effeminate men, 541 - Nordau, Max: love in Germany, 176 - Norton, C. E.: on Dante, 109 - Nose, the: shape and size, 436; - evolution of, 437; - Greek and Hebrew, 440; - fashion and cosmetic surgery, 442; - important functions of, 445 - Nose-breathing: importance of, 398, 445 - Novels: Love in, 11 - Novelty: and first Love, 140 - Nudity: cause of man’s, 486 - - Odours: cosmetic value of, 446 - Old Maids, 190 - O’Rell, Max: French chaperonage, 269; - English degraded women, 531 - Origin of Love, 85 - Ornamentation: non-æsthetic, 328 - Ovid: on tricks of Gallantry, 1; - rarity of Beauty in Rome, 88; - art of making love, 90; - Gallantry, 92; - conception of Love, 118; - enduring a rival, 129; - estimate of, 201; - loving two at once, 213; - how to cure love, 255, 257, 262 - - Paradoxes of Love, 166-173, 210 - Parasols, 463 - Pascal: self-conscious lovers, 220 - Paternal love, 20; - animals, 34, 107, 183 - Pepys: Spanish wooing, 278 - Perfume: personal, 446; - cosmetic value of, 446 - Pessimism, erotic, 302, 310 - Petrarch: as a love-poet, 215 - Photographs: why inferior to portraits, 348; - why so often bad, 482 - Physiognomy: comparative, 331; - ears, 433; - colour of the eyes, 478; - variety in, and Love, 508; - language of passion, 153 - Pity and Love, 150 - Planché: wasp-waists, 379 - Plato: on Courtship, 78, 295; - “Platonic” Love, 80; - origin of Love, 85; - pre-matrimonial acquaintance, 127; - mixed mood of love, 168; - irrational love, 218; - feminine inferiority, 260; - Love and Beauty, 322 - Pleasure and pain, 168 - Ploss: love-charms, 251; - Germanic marriages, 281 - Plumpness: inspires Love, 304 - Polish Beauty, 528 - Polygamy: among animals, 36; - conducive to Jealousy, 63; - among Hebrews, 69; - in India, 72; - neutralizes conjugal love, 181 - Portraits, 348, 480; - typical, 537 - Pretty: definition of, 521 - Pride: in paternal love, 22; - in Romantic Love, 31; - and vanity, 141-145; - in conjugal love, 184; - masculine vanity, 215; - wounded, cures Love, 263 - Procrastination, 116 - Proportion, 338; - facial, 448; - stature, 449 - Proposing, 70, 142, 152, 242, 253 - Prudery, 125, 388 - Purchase of wives, 58 - Puritans: sins of, against Health, 419 - - Quadroons: beauty of American, 321; - graceful gait, 361 - - Railway whistles, 434 - Raleigh: deep love, 224, 258 - Rank: an enemy of Love, 143, 269 - Raphael: on Beauty, 512 - Realism: emotional, desirable in novels, 68 - Reclam, Prof.: dust in lungs, 445; - night air, 317, 525 - Richardson, W. B.; the ideal city, 316 - Right-handedness, 408 - Roberts, Charles: brunettes and blondes, 529 - Roberts, J. B.: nasal deformities, 444 - Rochefoucauld, La: women, love, and friendship, 26; - pleasure of love, 196 - Roman Beauty, 88; - hair, 497 - Roman Love, 86-92 - Rousseau: on woman’s Love, 120; - his last love, 206, 252 - Rückert: kissing, 236 - Ruskin: poetry and science, 9; - love of dismal scenery, 13; - amorous paradoxes, 167; - woman’s work, 291; - health and beauty, 311; - and utility, 311; - happiness essential to beauty, 315; - intellect beautifies the features, 324; - taste of savages, 330; - beauty and utility, 332; - degradation and ugliness, 334; - wild scenery, 337; - symmetry, 338; - curvature, 341; - colour, 345, 347; - moderation, 378; - expression in the mouth, 410; - virtue and Beauty, 421; - Greek features, 440; - turban, beauty of, 495; - southern Beauty, 501 - Russian old maids, 193 - - Sappho: as a Love-poet, 81 - Savages: development of maternal love, 20; - parental love, irregular, 21; - filial love weak, 22; - strangers to Romantic Love, 54; - inferior to birds, 54; - courtship, 56; - regard for beauty, 60; - Jealousy and Polygamy, 62, 128; - Gallantry, 157; - masculine women, 174; - notions of Beauty, 179, 328; - conjugal attachment, 182; - kissing, 229; - sense delicacy, 231; - inferior to us in Health, 312; - taste, 327, 409; - tests of Beauty, 331, 485; - ugliness of, 333; - dancing, 365; - muscular development, 371; - noses, 437; - paint, 458 - Scalp: movements of, 451 - Scandinavian complexion, 459, 500 - Scherer: on mediæval German Love, 105 - Scherr, J.: on witchcraft trials, 94; - Wieland in love, 213; - Petrarch, 216; - mediæval courtship, 239; - mediæval Spanish women, 277 - Schiller: Minnesingers, 104 - Schopenhauer: on the Will, 3; - æsthetic enjoyment, 13; - final cause of colour in animals, 50; - love at first sight, 152; - self-sacrifice, 161; - torments, 169; - celibacy and genius, 197; - genius and woman’s love, 242; - unhappy marriages, 259; - theory of Love, 301-310; - animal Beauty, 332; - masculine and feminine beauty, 343; - small feet, 354; - the unæsthetic sex, 386; - noise and culture, 435; - noses and marriage, 436, 443; - Germans, 523 - Schumann, R.: 162; - love-affairs, 214; - on German Beauty, 526 - Schweiger-Lerchenfeld: Italian women, 275; - Spanish love-making, 278 - Schwenninger cure for corpulence, 383 - Scotch Beauty, 537 - Scott, Sir W.: on Dryden and Love, 89; - and marriage, 198, 217; - masculine vanity, 252 - Seeley, Prof.: Goethe on Love, 287 - Selden: marriage, 261 - Self-sacrifice: an overtone of Love, 31, 131, 157; - conjugal, 160, 188; - in feminine Love, 284; - Schopenhauer on, 301, 309 - Sellar, Prof.: Ovid, 201 - Seneca: Beauty, 259 - Sensuality and Romantic Love, 76 - Service for a wife, 58 - Sex: the unæsthetic, 386; - and education, 541 - Sexual differentiation, 174, 489, 520, 541 - Sexual Selection (_see_ also Love and Individual Preference): among - animals, 44; - primitive men, 59; - effect on chest, 394; - loss of hair, 403, 486; - blushes, 426; - ears, 429; - noses, 440; - complexion, 455; - eyes, 464, 465; - masculine and feminine, 489; - preserves hair on head, 492; - action uncertain, 493; - _versus_ Natural Selection, 542 - Shakspere: treatment of Love, 2, 111; - invests inanimate objects with human feelings, 3; - on Beauty, 32; - coyness and modesty, 115; - woman’s Love, 120; - amorous hyperbole, 162; - course of true love, 170; - what inspires love in women, 178; - marriage of, 198; - amorous character of, 201; - blind love, 202; - lunatic and lover, 218; - kissing, 236; - winning love, 238; - refusals, 241; - flattery, 244; - unsought love, 254; - tests of Love, 255; - love never fatal, 255; - reason as Love’s physician, 263; - hereditary Beauty, 322; - feet, 351; - the beautiful and the characteristic, 410; - poet of Love, 421; - blushes, 426; - expression in the eyes, 475, 483; - love inspired by eyes, 482; - Blondes and Brunettes, 496, 497 - Shelley: paradox of Love, 167; - loving and being loved, 196; - amorous disposition of, 202, 217 - Shoes: tight, objections to, 353; - improvements in, 363 - Shoulders, the, 400 - Simcox, G. A.: on Gallantry, 92; - mediæval ugliness, 315; - noses, 442 - Sisterly love, 23 - Skating: effects on Beauty, 373 - Skin. _See_ Complexion. - Sleep: and noise, 317, 434; - refreshing, 398 - Smoothness, 344, 394, 403, 432, 488, 490 - Soap: should be used in the face, 452, 462; - good and bad, 461 - Solomon’s Song, 70 - Sources of Love, 303 - Southey: woman’s faith, 259 - Southwell, 167 - Spanish Beauty: feet, 362; - grace, 374, 518, 533; - chest deformed by Fashion, 395; - lips, 419; - mantillas, 388, 510; - complexion, 501; - general, 515-522; - refinement, 524 - Spanish Love: chivalry, 99; - falling in love, 152, 196; - extravagant Gallantry, 221; - ardour, 275, 277-280 - Spencer, Herbert: on primitive paternal love, 21; - filial love, 22; - analysis of Love, 31, 33; - money-marriages, 113; - woman’s sphere, 195; - origin of kissing, 229; - irregular mixture of ancestral qualities in children, 306; - individuals _versus_ the species, 308; - female savages uglier than male, 312; - intellectual and physical beauty, 320; - evolution of Beauty, 327; - muscular power of savages, 371; - laziness of savages, 372; - masculine Fashion, 392 - Spenser: Love and friendship, 108 - Staël, Mme. de: on Beauty and intellect, 32; - Love _versus_ parental dictation, 273 - Stanton, Mrs. E. C., 97 - Stature and Beauty, 520 - Stays: for deformed women, 385 - Steatopyga, 375 - Steele: kissing, 227; - love-letters, 247 - Stenches and noises, 435 - Stendhal: Love and age, 138; - Love in France, 176; - humiliation poisons Love, 263, 266 - St. Jerome: on the education of girls, 96 - Stockings: best kind, 363 - Suckling: lovers’ pallor, 225 - Suicide: from Love, 121 - Sunshine: good for the complexion, 454; - does not cause freckles, 462; - and Health, 500, 512, 515 - Surgery, cosmetic, 432, 443 - Swift: marriage, 185; - love-affairs, 210 - Swiss, the, 525 - Symmetry, natural tendency to, in flowers, 10, 73, 180, 216 - Symonds: on Italian Love, 101; - formal code of Love, 106; - Petrarch, 216; - Shelley, 217 - Sympathy: and affection, 73; - an overtone of love, 31, 145-157; - development of, 147; - in conjugal love, 183 - - Taine, H.: English Beauty and Love, 532 _seq._ - Taste: æsthetic theories of, 327; - disputing about, 339, 409, 417, 423; - _versus_ Fashion, 437; - sense of, 446; - non-æsthetic standard, 529 - Teeth: 409, 411, 415; - care of, 422 - Tennyson: kissing, 235 - Tests of Beauty: negative, 330; - positive, 338 - Thackeray: advice to lovers, 126; - Love, 168; - to women, 252; - simpering Madonnas, 315; - dark heroines, 498; - French physique, 506 - Thaxter, Mrs.: women and birds, 151 - Thomson, 218 - Toe, great, evolution of, 359 - Topinard: early decrepitude of savages, 312; - life prolonged in France, 316; - crossing, 318, 320; - nose, 437; - deformed skulls, 450; - dark races, 501; - French nation, 508 - Tourgenieff: on a dog’s love, 17; - first love, 204 - Trollope, A.: American Gallantry, 298 - Troubadours, 102, 221, 222 - Trousers, 392 - Turks, 319 - Tylor, E. B.: the ape’s gait, 357; - arms, 402; - negro’s finger-nails, 406; - blushing, 427; - ears, 433; - nose, 437; - skulls, 450 - Tyranny of ugly women, 387, 496 - - Ugliness: follows ill-health in animals, 46; - in women, 186; - no bar to marriage, 191; - mediæval, 314; - due to simian resemblance, 331; - savage features, 333; - degradation, 333; - decrepitude and disease, 334; - tyranny of, 387; - due to indolence, 397; - a sin, 400; - “beauty-spots,” 452 - Use and disuse, effect of, on organs, 327 - Utility and Beauty, 332, 336 - - Veils, 463 - Vice: destroys Beauty, 418, 478 - Viragoes, 175, 190 - Virchow, Prof.: Brunettes and Blondes, 499 - Virgil: Love-episode, 89 - Vogt, Carl: sexual divergence, 174; - negro’s feet, 356; - females and animals, 360; - thighs, 371 - Voice, a musical, 435 - Voltaire: on ancient and modern friendship, 26; - standard of taste, 327 - - Wagner, R.: leading motives, literary application of, 114; - analogies between Love and music, 140; - feminine devotion, 160; - marriage, 198; - a musical kiss, 237, 330, 414 - Waist, 378 - Waitz: Magyars, 319; - Chinese complexion, 454, 457; - decrease in number of blondes, 498 - Walker, A.: 259; - woman’s gait, 375; - French Beauty, 506 - Walking, 357, 364 - Wallace, A. R.: on choice exerted by animals, 43; - Natural _versus_ Sexual Selection, 43-50; - beauty correlated with health in animals, 46; - sources of colour in animals, 48; - chest of Amazon Indians, 396; - hair on arm, 403 - Waltz: the dance of Love, 369 - Warner, Chas. D.: women and birds, 151 - Wasp-waist mania, the, 379, 494 - Wealth, vulgar display of, 387 - White, R. G.: blonde type, 497; - Viennese Beauty, 528 - Wieland: love-affair, 213 - Wife: capture, 57; - purchase, 58; - service for, 58; - capture and coyness, 114; - selling, 289 - Wilde, Oscar, 392 - Winckelmann: Greek Beauty, 314, 332; - curvature, 342; - breasts, 395; - Greek chest, 397; - hand, 405; - chin, 413; - dimples, 413; - lips, 415; - ears, 431; - nose, 436; - eyes, 473; - hair, 496, 502; - dark complexion, 500, 501; - Italian Beauty, 514 - Winning Love, art of: 1, 41, 75, 115, 126, 129, 237-255; - brass buttons, 238; - confidence and boldness, 239; - pleasant associations, 239; - perseverance, 241; - feigned indifference, 241; - compliments, 245; - Love-letters, 246; - for women, 250; - proposing, 253; - how to meet coyness, 254; - spicing flattery with burlesque, 301 - Witchcraft, trials for, 94 - Woe, ecstasy of, 168 - Woman: weak in impersonal emotions, 16; - strong in conjugal and maternal love, 19; - inferior to man in Romantic Love, 19, 120; - prefers manly to handsome men, 60; - position in Egypt, 67; - among Hebrews, 69; - in India, 72; - ancient Greece, 77; - Rome, 87; - mediæval degradation, 93; - proverbs about, 96; - oasis of culture, 105; - position in France, 107; - cruelty to birds, 150; - intelligent, 155; - in public life, 160, 175; - loses Beauty prematurely, 186; - employment problem, 195, 290; - uniform worship, 237; - discourages deep Love, 242; - inferior to man, 259; - Huxley’s ideal, 261; - in mediæval Spain, 277; - indifferent to loss of Health, and the consequences, 312; - superior in Beauty to man, 342; - deplorable conservatism, 367; - penalty of indolence, 385; - has no sense of beauty, 385, 388, 396, 401, 494; - needs no stays, 385; - deficient in taste, 386; - duped by sly milliners, 387; - object of dress, 388; - needs æsthetic instruction, 389; - riding hat, 392; - fashion preferred to good manners, 495 - Wooing. _See_ courtship - Woody, S. E.: electrolysis for removing hairs, 494 - Wrinkles, 406, 451 - - Yankee, 542 - Young, 198 - - Zimmermann, O.: Ecstasy of woe, 168 - Zola, 420 - - THE END - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note - -Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and -are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original. -The following issues should be noted, along with the resolutions. - - 27.27 the lover[’]s concentrated affection Restored. - - 53.20 at their [b/h]oly places Replaced. - - 53.26 in displaying their beauty.[’/”] Replaced. - - 55.28 Letourne[a]u, in his _Sociologie_ Inserted. - - 63.1 ‘the means of causing enmity’[”] Probable - closing. - - 64.11 monog[o/a]my is the only marital relation Replaced. - - 67.26 mere passion linked with opportunity.[”] Added. - - 133.44 Prior[-]ity of discovery Removed. - - 138.12 as a woman of twenty-eight;[”] Probable - closing. - - 138.18 the gay and thoughtless first love.[”] Added. - - 163.9 B[i/y]ron really feels Replaced. - - 178.19 their energy[,] courage, and manly prowess Added. - - 205.1 really attached since[’/”] Replaced. - - 241.18 Who listens once will listen twice[;] Added. - - 252.39 was promptly accepted.[”] Probable - closing. - - 271.38 where they do not marry.[’/”] Replaced. - - 273.19 And power of love.’[”] Added. - - 272.4 not knowing wh[e/i]ther she was going? Replaced. - - 285.38 [“]O love, O fire! once he drew Added. - - 288.30 but the brigh[t]est of all is this Inserted. - - 323.4 [‘/“]with the ugly Eros Replaced. - - 393.19 considered fashionable[.] Added. - - 394.26 under the arm.[”] Added. - - 406.19 modified to their advantage[.] Added. - - 407.17 but glycerine [don’t] agree with every one _Sic_ - - 424.43 have supplanted natural selection[.] Added. - - 459.34 An emphatic [“]No” is the answer. Added. - - 487.14 the ancient Egypt[ai/ia]ns Transposed. - - 506.19 in these words: [“]National vanity Added. - - 516.6 the central part of the peni[u/n]sula Inverted. - - 521.39 [“]A woman’ is _fine_ Added. - - 522.3 said that [“]Nature did never Added. - - 539.6 in the atmosphere of New England.[”] Added. - -The punctuation of the Index is occasionally irregular, and has been -silently standardized. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Romantic Love and Personal Beauty, by -Henry Theophilus Finck - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ROMANTIC LOVE AND PERSONAL BEAUTY *** - -***** This file should be named 60054-0.txt or 60054-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/0/0/5/60054/ - -Produced by KD Weeks, Turgut Dincer and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |