It has now been seen that beauty results from the perfection, chiefly of external forms, and the correspondence of that perfection with superiority of internal functions; on the more or less perfect perception of which, love, intermarriage, and the condition of our race, are dependant.
This mode of considering the elements, the nature, and the consequences of beauty, is equally applicable to the two s.e.xes; but, in woman, the form of the species presents peculiar modifications.
In this work, it is the form of woman which is chosen for examination, because it will be found, by the contrast which is perpetually necessary, to involve a knowledge of the form of man, because it is best calculated to ensure attention from men, and because it is men who, exercising the power of selection, have alone the ability thus to ensure individual happiness, and to ameliorate the species; which are the objects of this work.
Let it not be imagined that the views now taken are less favorable to woman than to man. Whatever ensures the happiness of one ensures that of the other; and as the variety of forms and functions in man requires as many varieties in woman, it is not to exclusion or rejection with regard to woman that this work tends, but to a reasoned guidance in man"s choice, to the greater suitableness of all intermarriages, and to the greater happiness of woman as well as man, both in herself and in her progeny.
But notwithstanding the importance of any work which is in any degree calculated to promote such an object, some will tell us that the a.n.a.lysis of female beauty, on which it can alone be founded, is indelicate.--I shall, on the contrary, show that decency demands this a.n.a.lysis; that the interests of nature, of truth, of the arts, and of morality, demand it.
Our present notions of s.e.xual decency belong more to art than to nature, and may be divided into artificial and artful decencies.
Artificial decencies are ill.u.s.trated in the habits of various nations.
They have their origin in cold countries, where clothing is necessary, and where a deviation from the degree or mode of clothing const.i.tutes indecency. They could not exist in hot climates, where clothing is scarcely possible.
In hot climates, natural decency can alone exist; and there is not, I believe, one traveller in such countries whose works do not prove that natural decency there exists as much as in cold countries. In exemplification of this, I make a single quotation: it would be easy to make thousands. Burch.e.l.l, speaking of the Bushmen Hottentots, says: "The natural bashful reserve of youth and innocence is to be seen as much among these savages, as in more polished nations; and the young girls, though wanting but little of being perfectly naked, evinced as just a sense of modesty as the most rigid and careful education could have given them."
In mild climates, the half-clothed or slightly-clothed people appear to be somewhat at a loss what to do. Fond of decorations, like all savage or half-civilized people, they seem to be divided between the tatooing and painting of hot climates, and the clothing of cold ones; and when they adopt the latter, they do not rightly know what to conceal.
The works of all travellers afford the same ill.u.s.trations of this fact. I quote one. Kotzebue describes the custom among the Tartar women of Kasan, of flying or of concealing their countenance from the sight of a stranger.
The necessity of conforming to this custom threw into great embarra.s.sment a young woman who was obliged to pa.s.s several times before the German traveller. She at first concealed her face with her hands; but, soon embarra.s.sed by that att.i.tude, she removed the veil which covered her bosom, and threw it over her face. "That," adds Kotzebue, "was, as we say, uncovering Paul to cover Jacques: the bosom remained naked. To cover that, she next showed what should have been concealed; and if anything escaped from her hands, she stooped, and then," says Kotzebue, "I saw both one and the other."
In colder or more uncertain climates, the greatest degree of covering const.i.tutes the greatest degree of artificial decency: fashion and decency are confounded. Among old-fashioned people, of whom a good example may be found in old countrywomen of the middle cla.s.s in England, it is indecent to be seen with the head unclothed; such a woman is terrified at the chance of being seen in that condition; and if intruded on at such a time, she shrieks with terror and flies to conceal herself. In the equally polished dandy of the metropolis, it is indecent to be seen without gloves. Which of these respectable creatures is the most enlightened, I do not take upon me to say; but I believe that the majority of suffrages would be in favor of the old woman.
So entirely are these decencies artificial, that any number of them may easily be created, not merely with regard to man or woman, but even with regard to domesticated animals. If it should please some persons partially to clothe horses, cows, or dogs, it would ere long be felt that their appearing in the streets without trowsers or ap.r.o.ns was grossly indecent.
We might thus create a real feeling of indecency, the perception of a new impurity, which would take the place of the former absence of all impure thought, and once established, the evil would be as real as our whims have made it in other respects.
Moral feeling is deeply injured by this subst.i.tution of impure thoughts, however fancifully founded, for pure ones, or rather for the entire absence of thought about worthless things. Artificial crimes are thus made, which are not the less real because artificial; for if aught of this kind is believed to be right, there is weakness or wrong in its violation.
But violated it must be, if it were but accidentally.
To corrupt minds, this very violation of artificial decency in the case of woman affords the zest for the sake of which many of these decencies seem to have been inst.i.tuted; and thus are created the artful decencies.
The purpose and the zest of artful decency are well ill.u.s.trated by coquetry. Coquetry adopts a general concealment, which it well knows can alone give a sensual and seductive power to momentary exposure. Coquetry eschews permanent exposure as the bane of sensuality and seduction; and where these are great, as among the women of Spain, the concealment of dress is increased, even in warm climates. Nothing can throw greater light than this does on the nature of these decencies.
That coquetry has well calculated her procedure, does not admit of a doubt. She appeals to imagination, which she knows will spread charms over even ugly forms; she seeks the concealment under which sensuality and l.u.s.t are engendered; and, in marriage, she at last lifts the veil which gratifies, only to disgust, and repays a sensual hallucination by years of misery.
Ought religion to claim the right of saying grace to such unveiling of concealment and the nuptial rites that follow it? Ought religion to profit by the impurities of s.e.xual a.s.sociation? Marriage is a civil ceremony in other countries, even in Scotland. Such profane and profitable sanctions have nothing to do with primitive Christianity: they are abhorrent to its letter as well as to its spirit. But worldly and profitable religion is connected in business with government, under the firm of Church and State, and drives a thriving trade, in which the junior partner is contented with the profit arising from the common acts of life, while the senior one draws much of his living from other rites.[2]
What is said here, is no argument for living nudity: that, our climate and our customs forbid; and, in so doing, we can only regret that they are unfavorable to natural purity; while perfect familiarity with the figure ensures that feeling in the highest degree.
A distinguished artist informs me that greater modesty is nowhere to be seen than at the Life academy; and it was an observation of the great Flaxman, that "the students, in entering the academy, seemed to hang up their pa.s.sions with their hats." I can, from personal experience, give the same testimony in behalf of medical students at the dissecting-rooms. The familiarity of both these cla.s.ses with natural beauty leads them only to seek to inform their minds and to purify their taste.[3]
Sinibaldi observes, that "nothing is more injurious to morals and to health, than the incitements of the women who in such numbers walk our streets," and that "the laws as to offences against morals ought certainly to affect them the moment their language or actions can be deemed offensive." But it is not to those who are critically conversant with the highest beauty of the human figure, that defective forms, ill-painted skins, rude manners, and contagious diseases, are at all seductive.
Nothing, then, can be more favorable to virtue than the decoration of every house with the beautiful copies of the glorious works of ancient Greece; and it is only humiliating to think that what has been so extensively done in this respect in the best houses, is less owing to our own taste than to the poor wanderers from Lucca or Barga. Experiment on this subject is peculiarly easy in London: let any one spend an hour in the shop of the very able Mr. Sarti, of Dean street, where he will meet the most liberal attention, and let him ask himself, in coming out, whether his moral feeling, as well as his taste, is not improved.
Those who cannot make this experiment, will perhaps be satisfied with the a.s.surance of Hogarth, who says: "The rest of the body, not having advantages in common with the face, would soon satiate the eye, were it to be as constantly exposed, nor would it have more effect than a marble statue." Surely this is decisive enough in its way! Now let them mark what follows. "But," he continues, "when it is artfully clothed and decorated, the mind at every turn resumes its imaginary pursuits concerning it. Thus, if I may be allowed a simile, the angler chooses not to see the fish he angles for, until it is fairly caught." He meant of course--"the _fish_ chooses not to see the _angler_, until it is fairly caught!"
Be it known then to all, even the most aristocratic as to s.e.xual a.s.sociation--I say the most aristocratic, and not the most religious, because religion is in some countries made the pander to aristocracy--be it known that the critical judgment and pure taste for beauty are the sole protection against low and degrading connexions.
Home observes that "the sense of beauty does not tend to advance the interests of society, but when in a due mean with respect to strength.
Love in particular arising from a sense of beauty, loses, when excessive, its sociable character: the appet.i.te for gratification, prevailing over affection for the beloved object, is ungovernable, and tends violently to its end, regardless of the misery that must follow. Love in this state is no longer a sweet agreeable pa.s.sion: it becomes painful, like hunger or thirst, and produces no happiness but in the instant of fruition. This discovery suggests a most important lesson, that moderation in our desires and appet.i.tes, which fits us for doing our duty, contributes at the same time the most to happiness: even social pa.s.sions, when moderate, are more pleasant than when they swell beyond proper bounds." Payne Knight says: "When, at the age of p.u.b.erty, animal desire obtrudes itself on a mind already qualified to feel and enjoy the charms of intellectual merit, the imagination immediately begins to form pictures of perfection, by exaggerating and combining in one hypothetic object every excellence that can possibly belong to the whole s.e.x; and the first individual that meets the eye, with any exterior signs of any of these ideal excellences, is immediately decorated with them all, by the creative magic of a vigorous and fertile fancy. Hence, she instantaneously becomes the object of the most fervent affection, which is as instantaneously cooled by possession: for, as it was not the object herself, but a false idea of her raised in heated imagination, that called forth all the lover"s raptures, all immediately vanish at the detection of his delusion; and a degree of disgust proportioned to the disappointment, of which it is the inevitable consequence, instantly succeeds. Thus it happens that what are called love-matches are seldom or ever happy."
Now, nothing can more effectually prevent even the existence of the mania described by these two philosophers than a critical judgment and a pure taste for beauty, which again therefore are the sole protection against low and degrading connexions.
A just sense of this truth will give high encouragement to sculpture and painting--arts which may everywhere be looked upon as the best tests, as well as the best records, of civilization. Such encouragement they need in truth; for the monstrous monopoly of landed property and the acc.u.mulation of wealth in few hands--the great aim of our political economy--renders art poor, indeed.
I am aware that the vulgar among artists think otherwise; from the few rich they obtain employment; and, like the dog with his master, they look not beyond the hand that doles out their pittance. But the rich are few; and their palaces are already filled. A diffusion of wealth alone can give encouragement to art; nor can this ever be while British industry is crushed under the weight of enormous taxation.
Having removed some objections to art, I would add a few words to artists on the cause of the fine arts in Greece, from a paper I, two years ago, contributed to a monthly periodical.[4]
That the mythology of Greece had an influence over its arts, is generally granted; but I am not aware, that it has either been shown to be exclusively their cause, or that its mode of operation has ever been explained.
Religion, I may observe, is as natural to man as his weakness and helplessness. There is not one of its systems, not even the vilest, which has not afforded him consolation. Of its higher and better systems, some are equally admirable for the grandeur and the beauty of the truths on which they are founded, the simplicity and the elegance of their ostensible forms, the power and applicability of their symbols, and their sympathy with, and control over, the affections and the imagination.
These high characteristics peculiarly distinguished the religion of ancient Greece.
By bigots, we are indeed told, that, though Homer is our model in epic, Anacreon in lyric, and aeschylus in dramatic poetry--though the music of Greece doubtless corresponded to its poetry in beauty, pathos, and grandeur--though the mere wreck of her sculpture is never overlooked in modern war and negotiation--though the mere sight of her ruined Parthenon is more than a reward for the fatigue or the peril of a journey to the Eternal city--though these products of art are the test of the highest civilization which the world has witnessed--though to these chiefly Rome owed the little civilization of which she was capable, and we ourselves the circ.u.mstance that, at this hour, we are not, like our ancestors, covered only with blue paint or the skins of brutes--though all this is true as to the arts of Greece, we are told that, by the strangest exception, the religion of Greece was a base superst.i.tion.
That religion, however, was the creator of these arts. They not only could not have existed without it, but they probably could never have been called into existence by any other religion.
The personification of _simple_ Beauty, Valor, Wisdom, or Omnipotence, in Venus, Mars, Minerva, or Jupiter, respectively, was essential to the _purity_ and the _power_ of expression of these attributes in the worship of the deities to whom they respectively belonged. The union of absolute beauty and valor in one being, is not more impossible than their union in one expression of homage and admiration. Delicacy, elegance, and grace, were as characteristic of the statue, the worship, and the temple, of the G.o.ddess of beauty, as attributes nearly opposite to these were of the statue, the worship, and the temple, of the G.o.d of war. Thus, were the fine arts in Greece created by the personification of _simple_ attributes or virtues as objects of adoration; and thus is excellence in these fine arts incapable of being elicited by any system of religion in which more than one attribute is ascribed to the G.o.d.
They must be ignorant, indeed, of the wonderful people of whom I now speak, who allege, that the Greeks worshipped the mere statue of the G.o.d and not the personified virtue. Even the history of their religion proves the reverse. It was the tomb which became the altar, and retained nearly its form. It was the expression of love, of regret, and of veneration for departed virtue, which became divine adoration; and, as individual acts and even individual names were ultimately lost in one transcendent attribute, so were individual forms and features, in its purified and ideal representation. Here, then, instead of finding the worship of men or of their representations, we discover a gradual advance from beings to attributes--from mortal man to eternal virtue--and a corresponding and suitable advance from simple veneration to divine adoration.
When, in great emergencies of the state, the sages and the soldiers of Athens, in solemn procession repaired to the temple of Minerva, turned their faces toward the statue of the G.o.ddess, and prostrated themselves in spirit before her--let the beautiful history of Grecian science tell, whether in the statue they worshipped the mere marble structure, or, in its forms and attributes, beheld and adored a personification of eternal truth and wisdom, and so prepared the mind for deeds which have rendered Greece for ever ill.u.s.trious. Or, when returning from a Marathon, or a Salamis, the warriors of Athens, followed by trains of maidens, and matrons, and old men, returned thanks to the G.o.d of victories--let the immortal record of the long series of glorious achievements which succeeded these, tell, whether grat.i.tude to their heroes was not there identified with homage to the spirit or the divinity that inspired them.
True it is, that, whenever physical or moral principles are personified, the ignorant may be led to mistake the sign for that which is signified; but one of the most admirable characteristics of the Grecian religion is, that, with little effort, every external form may be traced to the spirit which it represents, and every fable may be resolved into a beautiful ill.u.s.tration of physical or moral truth. So that when mystic influences, with increasing knowledge, ceased to sway the imagination, all-powerful truths directed the reason.
The natural and poetical religion of Greece, therefore, differed from false and vulgar religions in this, that it was calculated to hold equal empire over the minds of the ignorant and the wise; and the initiations of Eleusis were apparently the solemn acts by which the youths and maidens of Greece pa.s.sed from ignorance and blind obedience to knowledge and enlightened zeal. Thus, in that happy region, neither were the priests knaves, nor the people their dupes.[5]
And what has been the result of this fundamental excellence?--that no interpolated fooleries have been able to destroy it;--that the religion of Greece exists, and must ever exist, the religion of nature, genius, and taste;--and that neither poetry nor the arts can have being without it.
Schiller has well expressed this truth in the following lines:--
"The intelligible forms of ancient poets, The fair humanities of old religion, The power, the beauty, and the majesty, That had their haunts in dale, or piny mountains, Or forest, by slow stream, or pebbly spring, Or chasms, and watery depths--all these have vanished; They live no longer in the faith of reason; But still the heart doth need a language; still Doth the old instinct bring back the old names; * * And even, at this day, "Tis Jupiter who brings whate"er is great, And Venus who brings everything that"s fair."
CHAPTER III.
CAUTIONS AS TO YOUTH.
In relation to _early_ s.e.xual a.s.sociation, it cannot be doubted, that, when the instinct of reproduction begins to be developed, the reserve which parents, relatives, and instructers, adopt on this subject, is often the means of producing injurious effects; because, a system of concealment on this subject, as observed in the preceding chapter, is quite impracticable. Discoveries made by young persons in obscene books, the unguarded language or shameless conduct of grown-up persons, even the wild flights of an imagination which is then easily excited, will have the most fatal consequences.
Parents or instructers ought, therefore, at that critical period, to give rational explanations as to the nature and the object of the propensity, the mechanism of reproduction in various vegetable and animal beings, and the fatal consequences to which this propensity may lead. Such procedure, if well conducted, cannot but have the most beneficial results; because, in order that a sane person should avoid any danger, it is only necessary that he should see it distinctly.