The herald and mail. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 1873-188?, 1874-11-20
FHE RAGE FOR SHOW.
UnbrIdIed Extravaganza in Modern so-
cfaI Life.

THE RAGE FOR SHOW.
UnbrISIed Extravaganza in Modern So
cfaI Life.
We hear a great deal in these days o.
the extravaganza of women, especially
of women who aim TO be fashionable
Much of the present feminine extrava
gance is owing, no doubt, TO a spirit oi
rivalry in the sex. One woman wants
this or that, because another woman has
it, or has it not, and ON account OF this
| disposition to equal and excel, raimen-
tai improvidence is encouraged, sus'
| tanned and increased.
One of the greatest causes of this is
to be found in the metropolitan stage.
For some years past the three distinc-
tive comedy theatres, Wallack's, Days
Fifth avenue and the Union square,
| have been particularly distinguished for
feminine toilets. Each house has tried
to exceed the others in this particular.
| Consequently, each season has been an
! advantage upon the previous season so
that, at present, the actresses are glorl-
fed through their sumptuOus gowns.
In "The Sphinx" for instance, Char
lotte Thompson and Clara Morris are
newly and magnificently attired in each
act the things they wear awaking the
admiration and envy of seven-aishths of
the women in the audience. Their COS
tunes for that play alone are said to
have cost from $1,000 TO S12 600, jew
els of course excepted. When they
portray new parts they will have new
dresses, and these must be equally ele-
giant and expensive. Whatever an ac-
tress wears is so carefully examined,
with the aid of lorgnettes, from the
feminine front of the house, that she
could not wear it again during the same
season without its certain recognition.
Fanny Davenport, as Lady Teazie. IN
he "School for Scandal" which has
Just been withdrawn from the Fifth av-
enue, shines resplendent in five cos
TUNES, composed of the richest silk,
satin, laces and embroidery. Her en-
tire Lady Teazle robes and their accom-
paniments could not have been pur-
chased for less than $780, 900.
There are very few New Workers,
however wealthy, who can afford TO
dress their wives and daughters as the
actresses of the city theatres dress.
How can members of the dramatic pro-
fession indulge in extravaoance which
millionaires cannot? Clara Morris, ,popu-
lar as she is, does not receive, 1t Ia like
lv, over $500 week, and Fanny Dhven-
port has not robaby more than $50 a
week. Since neither of them plays but
eight or nine months in the year, the
price of the stage clothes for single
piece often exceeds their annual earn
ings. Bv what elastic sort of finance
and arithmetic do they manage their
affairs
The explanation seems to he that the
manager paws for certain portion of
their magnificent wardrobe, and the
houses that furnish them make liberal
discount for the advertising they re-
ceive on the play bills. Otherwise so
profuse an expenditure would not be
possible.
The first woman on the stage to gain
a distinct reputation for her clothes was
Mrs. Hoey, at Wallack's. She could
do that sort of thing because her hus-
hand, John Hoey, superintendent OF
Adams express company, is very rich
and was glad to crafty his wifes
luxurious taste.
Madeline Henriques, now Mrs. u. j.
Jennings, was the next apostle of the
dry goods drama. She, too, had veal
Uhy relatives, and was wont to say that
her salary did not keep her in boots and
gloves, which was, no doubt, entirely
true.
Since then, particularly since DAILY
became a theatrical manager, actresses
have far outstripped Mrs. Hoey and
Miss Henriaues in vestmental display.
What these ladies wore would to-day
appear quite plain and ordinary.
If this eXtravsgance of dress continue
to grow as it has grown, husbands will
be compelled to yield the greater part
of their incomes to the adornment OF
their wives, while whole months re-
ceipts of theatre will be required to
buv a single gown for an actress.
Women in society will never be willing
to be outdressed by women on the stage.
SO long as these glitter in plumes so
radiant, 80 long will those insist, at
least, in keeping even with their his
trionic sisters. Nowadays $4,000 is |
not thought to be an extravagent sum |
to invest annually in a feminine ward |
robe, provided, of course, you have |
the money to invest. What becomes of |
the wretched woman whose natural |
masculine protectors cannot allow them |
more than 81, 900 or $4,000 for clothes |
is too distressing subject to contem-
plate.