Daily evening star. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1852-1854, 1854-03-31
DAILY EVENING STAR.
InHz emss tcoaapslckyrrEpo
HUGGING POLKA. 81.

III "a T1 4. E esEES Il oA1tA s-sff <rArol
- HUGGING POLKA. -,
MEssRs EDTToRs Who can inform the
public theorigin fthe Husging Polar
" hat could have been the peculiar cbars
acteristics of the inventive genius of that
dancing master, who should so boldly
venture to systeinatize huggiNg with. q
view to public exhibition. aoH ii hsdsf. /.
Let us1consider for q momentthis sub
lect with a proper view to its Importance.
Philosophically speaking, 81 itshuggingh is
OF no special interest, except teotwo per-
sons, the persons actually engaged in II.
We will not speak Of motives, for they
are So various in origin and in kind; We
Will not speak Of passions. for they, are
but innate Instincts, and answer to the
diversified purposes of physical being:
We will not speak of individual prefer
ences, for they inhere in the social pre-.
negatives of society, which cannot be in
vaded without violence to nature. Rather
let our attention be directed to the refine
ments of society. Is the dance which
excites the speculation of the vulgar, tie
censure of the modest, the ridicule of the
satlrlst, and the Indignation of the lovers
OF true dignity, calculated to advance the
refinements of life ! go a--a,r M ....
1t may be said that husband may so
dance with his wife,, a brother with his
sister, or sister with sister. All this is
an implied admission of the indecency of
which we complain, That some make
this distinction and practice in harmony
with its acquisitions, and refuse to do
otherwise, is evidence that they are either
ashamed to participate in such dance,
On account of what it really is, or are
willing to furnish ocular demonstration
that by inference. at least, they some
times are willing to hug their wives or
their sisters at home. q .a:.-T ....
!. If bodily proximity be no violation Of
propriety in dancing, why should it be
III sitting or in walking 2 Why may we
not hug our neighbor's wife or daughter
IN the public streets 9-in the church or
theatre lin the social circle or in the
cars!
Observe, for a moment, the couple
moving to the time of the musician s
beat. The arm of the gentleman around
the waist of the lady, the bodies in con-
tact, check almost touching cheek, breast
to breast, and eyes reading eyes, or bent
with a commendable sense of shame upo n
the sightless and senseless floor. The
beginning and the end of the dance indi-
cate instructive hesitation and concealed
doubt of propriety. The natural lam
guage cannot be disguised and when a
fashion is favored against nature, it en-
genders indifference to, the proprieties OF
life, and encourages either habits of vul-
garity, or modes of thought Incompatible
with that purity Of conception which be-
longs to the dignity of exalted modesty.
If it be proper to encourage hugging
by couples, there could be no impropriety
in making it prominent feature in the
cotillon. A new call would then be
added to the list. Back to back, side to
side, front to front, cheek to cheek, arm
to waiste-huql But, Messrs. Editor, we
grow dizzy in this whirl of speculation,
and although we have no special obiec
ton to legitimate hugging, yet we can
discover no good reason why 1t should be
made public. On the contrary, We are
among those who, would irown upon all
Smiles not dignified by propriety of man
ner, all movements not graced by the
retinements Of true modesty.
These remarks are written at a large
hotel, in the midst of the din and music
of a" hop, and with no purpose to les
Sen proper amusements, but to condemn
an indecent fashion. 1 .'7
' A QUIET OBSERVER,