National Republican., 1883-03-22
A Lecture on Legs.


There is an outcry about legs. We are told
that w0 have too much of them at theaters.
We do and say this not because the exhi-
btion is indecent but because it is ugly.
What II woman is expected TO hide and what
TO show is purely question OF convention, |
remember once passing an afternoon lOunging
| about at the Sweet Waters of Asia, on the
Bosphorus. Princesses and other lights of the
harem were being dragged about in bullock
carts. Soon some of them got out of their
cOnvcyances and sat down on the grass.
Among them was girl who l felt convinced
was pretty, and ] sat down near her Her
face was covered with thin veil. Nothing
would have induced her to raise it, but slowly
she pulled her wide trousers up above her
knee and proceeded to scratch her bare leg
This was her idea of mild Irritation with a
Frank, And why not? Her English sister
would go 20 II ball with neck and arms bare !;
or, to put it mare correctly, with about u
quarter of her body concealed only by shoulder
! straps. Am not right, therefore, in saying
that the rule as to what portion of the female
form divine may with propriety be sub
mitted to the eyes OF mankind is local and
not general? Here faces, necks hacks,
shoulders, and arms may be shown; in tho
east legs may he shown while in Zululand,
according to all accounts, the ladies walk
about like Eve before the fall.
But even in England the rule is different in
theatGFs and Ia bail rooms. If II girl were TO
appear at tho latter in II dress only reaching
down to her knees, she would be regarded ils
I peculiar girl whereas she might do this OH
the stage without adverse comment. | make
these preliminary remarks in order to prove
that approach the solemn subject without
prejudice.
Ten or twelve years ago the ballet girls
used to wear skirts which came down little
below the knces These skirts We're made of
muslin, and there We're 80 many of them that
when their wearers were dancing they looked
| like cloud The effect was pretty and grace
iul. But Of late this cloud of skirts has dis
appeared, ana has been replaced by II piece of
silk fitting tightly to the figure, Ike the
trunks " of an acrobat, and which do not
cover any part of the leg, TO emulate this dis
play the principal dancers eschew everything
except one muslin petticoat, and this Is u very
short one What is the result? Exceeding
ugllness, i suppose that 1t may be taken ms q
rule that when II girl has small, thin arms,
she generally has small, thin legs, Any one,
however, has only to look at tho modern
ballet girl Ia perceive that, although her
arms may be sticks her legs are elephantine
in their proportions This is because she
pads the latter and cannot pad the former,
This is how it is done: The girl goes to a
theatrical hOsier; the shape of her leg is
taken, and then pair of tights is made,
| with wool woven into them, as the case NAV
require. A girl with her legs done up in
cotton wool, with small piece of silk drawn
tightly in by band, aud with naked arms
and shoulders, cannot be said to be making
Rn indecent exhibition of herself but she
Is unganly, She shocks no morality but
she does shock good taste. In the name
therefore, Of good taste, let us 40 back TO the
days of cloudy muslin.