The Hickman courier. [volume] (Hickman, Ky.) 1859-current, 1882-01-06
nesnotism of Fashion.

An eminent English writer saws tbot
Americans enjoy less real liberty, Outside
IF political rights, than the people ~
any country in Europe. He saws we
accept our fashions IN everything from
Europe In a blind and slayish acduies-
cenee in marked contrast with our jeal-
ousy of political interference and des.
potism. Even in politics, he says, the
same disposition Is apparent, for a third.
or independent party, IS impossible. Tn
Germany and France there are many
parties, but in great, free America there
is only room for two Independence IN
thinking is rare, and more rarely takes
shape in action. The aesthetic craze has
not developed any American standard OF
taste. From somewhere comes periodi-
cally decree IL fashions, against which
no American woman dare to rebel
However ill-suited to climate or com
plexion, the style Is memorable. The
contest IS simply as to precedence in
acquiescence. No one dares to revolt
Thus upon the American people are
forced fashions IN dress for men. women
and children, house furnishings, md
even house architecture, often most pre-
posterous and barbarous. The cart
wheel style of bonnets occurs as one
VI tAAt ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III NllEhh. a
fragrant violation of good taste as VII
as of the rights of others IN pubic
assemblages.
But somebody must originate t4sse
never ending novelties. Some I'm
has been tortured somewhere to Of
something startling. The wonder ~ 81
the decree IS accepted so uncc q "a
ingly. However preposterous OF a -
there is no remedy. 1t is thisA
subservience of Americans TO the 49,
of fashion which makes the bir =
growth of any real standard of tasrsss
possible. The spirit of discomfort a.
rebellion must precede every sucsshA
revolution. As IN China, the inhelE
spirit of obedience stands square "
the way of every effort ut progrk7
There was "A people once who had IN
dress and architecture, a standard which
has passed unquestloned. 1t did not
fuctuate at the bidding of milliueIs or
clothiers. 1t had a foundation below
the question of dollars and cents. Nothing
more plainly evidences our singular
backwardness in some of the higher at
tributes of civilization than the feet that
we must dress at the dictation of some
imperious and invisible tyrant whose
exact location, tenure of Office, or extent
tions vet which have a national costume.
Any one who has ever attended fan at
Buda-Pesth has seen men and women
from provinces dressed IN most grotesque
outre fashion, but Just as their ancestors
have dressed for ages. The effect is
striking, novel and sometimes beautiful
1t IS a question whether their never
changing fashion Is more iuimical tothe
growth of correct taste than our ever
changing styles. About as much liberty
and discretion Is allowed IN one as the
other. They accept their grandparents
clothes because they were the fashion,
and we often do the same thing because
they viii be The authority IS equally
shadowy and doubtful in both cases. A
woman on the Danube has no more no
ton of making dress to suit her IN
dividual taste and complexion, shape or
stature, differing from her set, than one
here. The goddess there Is as fixed aud
changeless as Brahma. Here, like the
Romans, we naturalize all the gods no
matter how Inconsistent, only stipulating
that any new ones shall come IN like
terms. Indianapolis Journal