The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-04-24

possess the earth Is recognized as an indis-
putable proposition. They have no use for
tells her that it is impos.
sible for her to believe herself hand
m The styles of beauty are various.
is devoted to good and sometimes to bad
purposes, but it never fails to have the in
tended effect. The heroes are so consti-
tuted that they cannot resist it's influence,
In q word. the beautiful woman is almost
uniformly represented to be the woman
who brings things to pass. making
men eupremely happy or abjectly
miserable. as she may prefer. She
gift; and other women not thus favored
of the ods, are obliged to let her take
their lovers away from them n play
havoc with all their social plans and ambi-
tions. In some instances, it is true. she
comes to their herolnes in general terms,
leaving particulars to the IMAGINATION. Ho-
mer. for instance, does not give O catalogue
of the charms of Helen: be simply specifies
her remarkable beauty by saying that old
age itself Is astOnished at the sight of her.
and does not wonder that Paris brought a
war on his country for her sake. Ii is the
same with Shakespeare. His heroines are
sketched in outline, and that Is all: we are
peculiar points of fascination, and to find
likenesses of them among the women we
know In actual life.
As q matter of fact, the woman whom q
man loves is always beautiful in his eyes.
He does not consult books for reasons to
justify his conclusion; she is t~ransigured
by his devotion to her, and he cares moth
ing for the views of experts. This is q
gracious provision OF nature. in the interest
of the feminine sex as q sex. regardless of
oil artistic theories and speculations. 1t is
by 40 means sure that Cleopatra was as
handsome to . tragic and melancholy end
but even then her beauty enables her to
triumph at the last moment by being such
o charming corpse that death is Invested of
all it's ugliness-
FAULTY THEORY.
This theory of the superiority of beauty
is all we'll enough as theory; but its &C.
ceptance involves endless clash of opinion
and feeling. We rave no standard OF
beauty by which to adjust rival claims
and make peace between conflicting ele-
ments. When we say of o women that she
is handsome. it is like saying that
q night is splendid; if We under
take TO particularize we are lost
In n vertigo of Rlittering adjectives.
This is the fault of the average author
He takes details from several types and
tries to put them together in vindication
of an arbitrary personal preference. and
tne Iesult Is d composite woman whose
counterpart does not exist. The really
great writer's are wiser III the matter.
They paint every body else as she was
to Antony. The pictures of Nine.
Recamier, celebrated for her beauty even
when she was wintry-haired and grand
motherly, do not seem TO warrant the su-
perlative admiration that she received.
We know that Mime. De Stael was ugly,
judged by ordinary rules. and that her
clothers were always ill-fttiDg; and yet
there were men who commended
that she had beauty. and Napoleon
feared her smiles moro than any
sword. The poets and novelists
assume a privilege. therefore. that does not
belong to them when they insist upon
lowering their heroines with gwen attri-
butes of beauty, and conveying that such
is the only genuine article. 1t is their duty
To deal more considerably with n subject
that presents so many opportunities for
honest and Observation-Disclosures of opinion.
However. &c is not with regard To beauty
alone that the average delineator of women
Is open 10 serious criticism. He is still
more unfair and unkind to the sex in other
relations. II Is his constant delight TO
represent that women Us n class never rea-
son. but trust wholly To impulse: that they
scorn all suggestions OF the value of study
and reflection. and guess their way through
every emergency. The man of experience