The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-08-14

tinctly masculine characteristics. The do
vGlOpment IL has made IL more toward that
ideal type Of beauty that 10 higher than
either the masculine OF the feminine, but
Which ..aIs combines t =, b bsss q .t both .lc....... ~.
larger gift Of beauty" said M. J. Alden
Weir, must b. = question Of individual
taste. Then, too, 1t 10 impossible 70 CON
slider beauty in the human form solely
from the material side. 1he spiritual 10 30
I'm portant . factor that II eliminates the
material.
considering II Hrst from the material
aide. ~ q question Of form and proportions,
the masculine figure has , slight advantage.
IT. proportions are more plsaSing--psrhaps
they are more harmonious, though II II diff
ticnlt, II not impossible. to say why the eye
dads more delight in one than In the other.
but in the human one cannot stop. in
the search of beauty, With the more figure.
For beauty must be always q question Of
the ideal and the spiritual rather than of
the material. and the human body 10 so
illuminated BY the character that the body
itself becomes . subordinate element. A
beautiful soul oan 30 illumine snd trans
figure = plain hgurs TINT it will become
more delightful to the eye than a beautiful
body That has not such . tenant.
woman can be more beautiful in ohar-
actor than man. In the divine quality Of
self she far surpassss him. and
these powers Of love and devotion and self
sacrifice and many others that she possssses
in a superior degree snnoble her type Of
beauty and make il finer and better than
his" "s@ &s. M
II Am afraid l must agree with the con
ventional idea on this qusstion," said Nj.
Willard L. Mstcalf. ''Ihe ideal type Of
beauty ia founded on the female figure, and
thing more beautiful than that figure when
it reaches its finest development. The
masculine figure in its best form IL Ans.
too, exceedingly fine. But the wi can
scarcely be compared with the idsa of say
ing which 10 the more beautiful, because
CHARACTERIZATION 1t il like comparing y
trees Of different kinds, each perfeet Of its
kind. and trying to say which 10 ths finer.
mo, l do not think that the feminine
figure gains anything whom it approaches
the masculine type. Decidedly. I shosid
say that il loses in charm by such Develop
ment. It does not need to borrow nobility
or dignity by initiating the masculine ng-
ure. 1t has q nobility and n dignity that
are all its own. different from those quail
ties in the masculine form, but more har-
monious with the feminine type.
"Ihe nearer the feminine figure stays to
the feminine type the more beautiful and
the more charming il iE. Every step that
it takes in an approach toward the mascn-
line tvpe interfersS just that much with its
harmony OF proportion and helps to de-
attoy the charm. &,
Among the people of the present time I
think there 10 more beauty among men
than among women. Mon have fallen away
from their ideal type of beauty less than
women have from theirs. In the days Of
the Greeks. whence 70 get our ideal types
of feminine lovelinsss, women dressed
more freely han they do now. Their bod
les were unfettered by their clothing, and
all their muscles were given free play.
They reached as nearly . perfect develop
ment as the human figure has ever had.
But in the later times their clothing has
made suoh development impossible. Men
have dressed more BEAUTIFULLY and have
spent more time out of doors, and 10 they
have not lost so much of beauty a. women
have.
but the figures of women have been i'm
proving during the last generation. Per-
haps they dress more sensibly than they
used to do; and they certainly take more
interest in physical development during re-
cent years than formerly. At any rate,
there has been much Improvement in their
figures. And if they keep on in this way
they may once more distance the men and
mako it possible to say of them that in
actual fact as we'll as in ideal type they are
more beautiful than men,"