Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-11-17
THE PERFECT FIGURE.
aaron Won Humboldt and His The.
DRY on the Subject.

Baron Won Humboldt, who had stud
led men and women in every quarter O
the habltable globe, used to saw that the
notlon that the female figure was of bet
Ter proportions and more graceful outline
tnan That OF the male was a deIusion
women did not believe it, ayerred the
great scientist, and men only said so oui
OF gallantry. The Philadelphia RECORD
says:
humboldt was right on a great many
points concerning which his views were
secuted by the wise men of his day. and
perhaps he was equally correct in Tins
attrlbutlng superior physical beauty to
men. But since his time nobody has
ventured to urge or defend his theory.
and It has naturally fallen into disrepute.
BESIDES, the modern world really has no
use Ior pretty men," as such. They
may be counter-jumpers and animated
tallors' blocks, and infest the public
promenades and places of general resort.
but the present masculine fashion fayors
the strong, square built, quick-witted and
agile fellow who never thinks for an in
slant whether he conforms to the model
OF the Apollo Belvidere or not.
With the softer sex the question of
form is another affair. The possibilities of
dress have been developed to such an ex-
tent that within reasonable limitations.
woman may take on pretty much what
ever outward shape seems best and most
becoming for her, While the creations
OF the modiste have stimulated a taste for
the beautiful, they have ministered also
to The love of admiration and harmless
instructive vanity appertaining to every
feminine nature. They have also created
Ideals OF contour that are decidedly at va
rance with classical ideas of perfection:
and these departures from antique stand.
ard have been to many of the theorists and
a few otherwise sensible women source
of profound disquiet. There has been. it
Is affirmed. departure from the "class-
lcal figure" that is as disfguring as it is
reprehensible; and in many quarters are
heard pleadings, more or less cogent,
Tor return to the lines of beauty wrought
by Phidias and Cleomenes long before
physical distortion became fashionable
art.
American maids and matrons have
thus been led to study the requirements
and measurements of the perfect female
figure, with results, if current draperies
correctly indicate, altogether distasteful
to the classicists who point with pride to
the master works of ancient sculptors as
embodying the beautiful in feminine con-
tour. A living counterpart of the Venus
de Medici would be less than 5 feet in
height, while wearing No. 25 corset and
a No. shoe. The Popular Science
Monthly, in a recent issue, descends to
particulars, and affirms that to meet the
requirements of classic figure the
proper dimensions should be: Height,
5 feet AZ inches; bust. 80 inches; waist,
"A inches; armpit to waist, inches.
This is further improved upon by giving
the proportions of a :'queenly" figure,
thus: Height, 5 feet inches; bust, 81
inches; waist, 261a inches; over the
hips, 30 inches. These figures are inter-
esting only as they illustrate the vagaries
and contortions of the purely scientific
mind when floundering through the
realm of taste. 1t will be difficult to per-
suade ladies of ali inquiring turn that the
scientific constructor of these classic pro-
portions has not been endeavoring to per-
petrate solemn joke upon the select circle
of literary females whom he addresses.
The "queenliness" of a tall woman with
a hollow chest and exceedingly thick
waist is an attribute likely to be discov-
cred only by an observer whose head is
perpetually among the stars
Many correspondents have of late been
the Record to state what the
of the perfect figure really
are. We do not know; and if we did,
the knowledge should remain concealed,
lest some of our readers, whose dimen-
sions may be beyond the costumer's art,
should suffer an inward pang of regret
and disappointment. Let it be sufficient
that for true man the perfect figure is
that of woman who loves him best, and |
in whose smile he finds perpetual delight.
There is no better criterion, after all.
whatever the classicists and pragmatic
may say.