Readings for Rural Life

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

May 7th, 1864

Two Kinds of Women

Perhaps the secret of Catherine’s fascination lay in those strange eyes of hers, which seemed to wake in all who came near her a trembling and a stir as of wings, a sudden yearning for forgotten good or for noble aims. Few professed  to lover her, fewer still to admire her; but they came to her when they were perplexed for counsel, when they were sorrowful for comfort. Instead of making love to her, they loved her; instead of talking to her of the idle things of the world, they were silent, and thought of heaven. Such a woman made a man forget that she was woman and he man. He remembered only that souls answereth out the hidden things of the spirit. Such a woman was not likely to have many lovers. The wicked inspire passion more easily than the good. It is they who are the most hotly loved, the most madly suffered for. It is they who make men easy dupes to their deceit, and victims to the perjury. They accept hearts as they would bonbons; they trouble a man’s peace as idly as they would throw a stone into a pool; they stir up a devil within him, and show him the very depths of anguish. Happy for their victims if they, do not leave desolated homes, seething madness, and death in their track. Thrice happy is he who, escaping from the net of such a one, even through great bitterness and suffering, shall shake himself from the bonds like Samson, and recover his strength. It is useless to rage against such a woman. They never understand what they have done, what they are doing, nor what they will yet live to do. Becky Sharp is the type of them all, and she thought herself clever to the end.

 

Published in: on May 7, 2014 at 6:06 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

Readings for Rural Life

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

April 30th, 1864

Wherewithal Shall We be Clothed

I was much pleased with an article in the Rural (March 26th,) on hook skirts, but I should have been more so if so sensible a person, as a writer evidently is, had told us what (in her opinion) woman should wear. I can not think the former custom of wearing a half dozen skirts to make a figure to come up to the fashionable standard, less objectionable as regards health. Then what are we to wear? There is certainly a great need of a revolution in ladies’ clothing, especially farmer’s wives and daughters; and I think it would have been effected long since, but that ladies of wealth and fashion have not felt it so much an encombrance as they would if they were mechanically employed, and, as Faith Wayne says, but for its increasing their capacity to carry fantistic adornments; therefore the custom has become so prevalent and deeply rooted over most parts of the  civilized world, that to dress in any thing but flowing robes is considered indelicate, unfeminine, bold, &c.

What a fuss was made over the Bloomer dress! How the dear press did deride and caricature it, and yet, (though not acquanted with all its details except the short skirt and pantalettes,) it was a health-giving device, and the originator should be honored among mankand [sic], and held in grateful remembrance by all posterity.

I confess I cannot do the subject the justice its magnitude merits; but I feel impelled to lift my voice in favor of a radical change. For years I have considered myself a slave of my dress, hoops or not; and if there is a farmer’s wife or daughter who have not felt the same inconvenience in the performance of their domestic duties, from their skirts, they must be more of a philosopher than I am.

How many times a day do we go up stairs and down cellar, each time carrying half of what we otherwise could if we had not to carry our dress in one hand; and even then one will step on the dress sometimes, and then the ugly rent must be mended. It may do for those who have nothing else to do to have the care and carry their swaddling clothes or hire others to do it, but for us, – the working bees of this world – away with it; it is nothing but slavery to fashion as ancient as the Heather Mythology, of more ancient still for what I know.

I recently saw in a Hamilton, Canada West, paper and editorial (!) commenting on the ladies’ style of dress, and enumerating the different articles of gentlemen’s apparel the ladies’ had apprpriated to themselves; and concluding with the fear that they next would be confiscating the pants, and calling on gentlemen to resist, to the death, any such effort. Now, I have no doubt but this is the sentiment of most men; and this forces me to the conclusion that the gentlemen are afraid of losing this last vestige of their sovereignty – hense they are enjoying a distinction of authority they have no right to, else why care? But, gentlemne, we don’t want your pants, we only want our own. We sould like to be as conveniently and comfortably clad as yourselves, and I bellieve there are many ways to do so and still make a wide distinction in the dress of the two sexes.

If I were to name a fitting dress for woman in all the varied walks of life, I should give them as great latitude, in regard to their upper garments, as their tastes should dictate or fashion demand; but I should insist on two point to be always observed in their general costume, namely: – long hair, confined or not, and warm, loose pants confinded at the ankle by a band. I hope to see this subject agitated until not a yard of cotton (to say nothing of silk or other costly fabrics,) shall sweep the universe except in the shape of mops.

Mrs. Smith. Saltfleet, C.W. 1864

 

Published in: on April 30, 2014 at 6:00 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: , ,

Vulgarity is often clothed in a silken garb

Moore’s Rural New-Yorker

February 2nd 1861

Over-Dressing, Again

It is well that the Rural has opened its pages to discussion upon this subject, for extravagance in dress has become the national sin of American women, and notwithstanding Linda’s spirited defense, they are without excuse.

The fact that husbands are often bought by an expensive toilet, is the very reason that over-dressing should be avoided, for what true women would wish to marry a man who wedded only for wealth. However, that class is small which, in seeking a bride, places of wealth before personal attractions, and when introductions are solicited to “that little butterfly of a coquette, made radiantly beautiful by silks and laces,” in nine cases out of ten it is something in the look, word, manner, or in the taste displayed that is the chief feature of attraction; and, generally speaking, an elaborate and showy wardrobe does little to assist in gaining admiration. On the contrary, (if we dress to please the gentlemen,) they must often be displeased, if not disgusted at the low standard by which we judge their taste in our extravagant attire. I am sure they would be better pleased, if the fair ones used a little more common sense, becoming women of America in the nineteenth century.

Linda says that “personal beauty is rarely appreciated, except it be assisted with the elegance of dress.” In good society at present, personal beauty in simple but tasteful array in appreciated more highly than plainer features associated with rich apparel. But few things have a great bearing upon our success in society than dress, which depends not so much upon its elegance, as its grace and fitness. Expensive attire may usually be dispense with, but taste and neatness can never be omitted. I know a beautiful lassie who was woed and won in a corn-colored print, and whose suitor was highly educated and refined, moving in the first circles in our great metropolis. Her beauty was none the less appreciated because of her simple dress. Vulgarity is often clothed in a silken garb, but refinement cannot be mistaken in tasteful though unassuming garments.

“And often the chief attraction of the handsome face is dependent on some peculiarity of style, or shade of color in dress, which is made the subject of study by those who know the secret of their power in society.” It is the duty and privilege of woman to make her dress a subject of study, and adopt that which is most becoming. Every delineation of form and feature should be taken into consideration, and from among the great variety of styles in fashion, that one selected which will enable her to appear to the best advantage. Expensive and superfluous dress is not necessary to produce a pleasing effect. It is good judgement and skill in every department of the toilet, however minute. If I were to appear an evening in company with a view to charm an ideal admirer, I should certainly choose the dress which would give the best effect, though it were of plain material, rather than the most elegant, if it were deficient in any particular. Let the clothing be fashionable and faultless, but it need not be superfluous to be admired.

Certainly, American gentlemen do not prefer the stolid English, the phlegmatic German, or the plain features of the French, to our fair and spirited women, with all their sin of dress; but if the dear little wife who presides in the sweet vine-wreathed the sober colors of the English, would study more perfectly the true science and art of dress, in which the French excel, she could, with less inconvenience, be arrayed becomingly in the style her husband most dearly loves to see, which is oftener the tidy print, or the robe of plain material. Is it not, gentlemen? As we like to please the fastidious of the other sex, let us hear their views upon this important subject.

Jane E. Higby. Piffard, N.Y., Jan., 1861

For the continued disucssion of dress and over-dress, please click: Following the question

Published in: on April 26, 2014 at 6:40 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Readings for Rural Life – The Amiable Woman Photographed

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

April 23rd, 1864

The Amiable Woman Photographed

Mrs. Bland is an exceedingly popular personage, indeed, esteemed quite a model by herself; and also by that class of highly respectable and incomparable individuals who congratulate themselves upon having the ability to please the whole world in consequence of possessing that wonderfully desirable trait of character – amiability.

We do not mean amiability as defined by Webster, but as understood by the class referred to; who should certainly be appreciated in “these degenerate days.” They are so excessively punctilious. And how entertaining and instructive! In their society one fears no wounds from keen, sparkling repartee, from scorching, dazzling wit, of meteor- like brilliancy. Nor is there danger of experiencing that uncomfortable feeling – envy. Nor do their genius, talents, individuality, or intellectual attainments, tempt to a violation of the seventeenth commandment; neither are they so deplorably ignorant as to call things by their proper names, unpleasant morals being known in their vocabulary; nor do they adhere to an opinion longer than is perfectly convenient. Neither have they the bad taste to insist upon the possession of their own souls! (granting they have any, which some uncharitable people doubt,) but seem quite ready to humbly beg pardon for committing the impropriety of entering the world at all.

True, they cannot understand lofty principle, nobility of soul, immutablility of opinion, speaking for the oppressed, and, if need be, battling for the right. But do they not veer round to all points of the compass to please? With consciences India-rubber-like, avowing loyal sentiments to the loyal union man loving his contry next to God, and the next moment agreeing with a vile, slimy, creeping copperhead, a rank secessionist, hissing forth treason and venom.

Their motto is, – be always popular; for if a man, there is the hope of office; if a woman, the prospect of matrimony. For do not many of the generous, liberal-minded, and discerning “Lords of Creation,” prefer a gentle, plastic, creature, an artificial nonentity, to a noble, whole-souled, high-minded woman, lest the contrast between them be too suggestive? One with intellect of Lilliputian order, seldom fancies have a wife’s colossal.

So anxious mamas desire their daughters to copy Mrs. Bland, who never offends Mrs. Grundy, and is too amiable to possess strong feelings, but whose limited stock is invariably called into exercise if a woman ventures to have an opinion, or, far worse, has the audacity to express one at variance with old, pre-conceived notions. And, if so “unwomanly” as to differ from a “gentleman,” she witheringly exclaims, “I had before supposed Miss Lawton was an amiable young lady!”

And did not this pattern for imitation, – this woman, par example, when her parents wished, break the engagement existing between herself and a poor young man, though with all her capacity loving him, when a merchant (who had failed, and was therefore rich) solicited her hand, and she married him, while attached to the other. For, as she remarked, “there is nothing like having all one’s friends satisfied.”

True, the poor young man soon after attained high eminence, and, in a pecuniary point of view, (as well as every other,) was a more desirable match than Mr. Bland; but that could not be forseen, and Mrs. Bland is far too amiable, if she feels any regrets at the irrevocable step, to express them. Lancilotte. Southold, Suffolk Co., N.Y. 1864.

 

Published in: on April 23, 2014 at 6:06 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

Readings for Rural Life

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

April 16th, 1864

High Dresses

We are thankful for at least one of the dame Fashion’s freaks: she has turned her back upon low-necked dresses, and rather insists that collar-bones and shoulder-blades shall be covered. It is certainly a great improvement – not only because the study of anatomy in private parlors is not desirable, and that American damsels are apt to run to bone as some tall flowers do to seed., and because spinsters of uncertain age, fearful of being outdone by the nieces, presented such vast expanse of yellow neck and shoulder to the view at evening parties as were calculated to alarm nervous people seriously; but because since custom obliges us to wear garments, there can certainly be no reason why we should leave the most delicate portion of our frame without protection. Plumb shoulders and arms are pretty. But so (let us whisper) are plump legs. The mother who should fail to provide her daughter with stockings would be considered a cruel wretch, yet a year ago she might neglect to cover her chest and arms with impunity. We trust this state of things is over. We hope that the wisdom which causes every prudent parent to protect the pretty shoulders of her little girls with comfortable woolen sacques or capes will be appreciated; that sense will conquer vanity, and that in a little while it will be as absurd to say a woman in a low-necked dress as it would to-day to see a man in low-necked coat. – Sunday Times.

 

Published in: on April 16, 2014 at 6:00 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Readings for Rural Life – High Dresses

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

April 23rd, 1864

Working Dresses.

It is not my province to dictate any particular form of dress; but when, as is often the case, I see wives and daughters doing their necessary housework with crinoline and long skirts, or in other words, in full dress, I am led to inquire why will they not use their good judgment in this as in other particulars, and accommodate their dress to their duties.

Now, just take some of those long dresses that have become faded at the bottom and in front, take out the front breadths, leaving about five, tear off the bottom leaving the skirt long enough to come half way from the knees to ankle joints, use the parts taken out for pants, prepare skirts to suit the length of the dress, running “shurs” in one for three or four hoops from the discarded skeleton, and with good thick-soled shoes or bootees you are well, becomingly dressed for any and all kinds of work that may fall to your lot. And, if called to help fill the place of a father, husband, brother or son, who has nobly gone to the defence of his country, you have nothing to hinder you in this arduous yet noble extra toil. Such toil and such dresses show our hearts true to the interest of our country; and though the future looks dark, there is no way to make it light but to throw off the shackles false price and false delicacy have trammeld us with, prepare our heats for every trial by entire consecration to, and trust or faith in, God, our bodies with proper dress and care; and lay hold on every duty presented to us with an energy and courage that knows defeat, and will not listen to the doubts of the croaking.

Sisters, let me entreat you, do your duty faithfully, and when those dear ones return, you will not only meet a reward in their kind welcome and approving smiles, but will learn that useful exercise and refreshing breezes, and now and then a day in the hot sun, have brought light to your eyes, roses to your cheeks and a thrill of life to your veins that were never yours before.

True, you have given (or allowed to go) to the rescue of your country your support and home; but don’t wait for these to return and find you in sorrow, listlessly waiting for them, or some movement of Providence to bring light out of darkness, or hope out of despair; but arise, don the costume at once graceful, becoming and useful, and help to work out the salvation of our country, ever praying to, and trusting in, God, who is the author of our faith.

This is no fancy advice; ‘tis wrought out by experience of near two years, and my health is better. I can endure far more fatigue and enjoy life far better, for I have the consciousness of knowing that I have toiled and sacrificed for the good of my country; and when my husband returns our joy will be mutual, that we have together helped her rid of her enemy, slavery. May this be our privilege. Go thou and do likewise. Mrs. C.H.

EDIT: Additional Related Clips:

Clip Excerpt from The Prairie Farmer, Clip Short dress March 1855 Clip The Oneida Circular The Ohio Cultivator 1854 b The Ohio Cultivator 1854Clip Miseries later

This whole book is worth a download. It is on Google Books.Clip Watercure 54 aClip Watercure 54 bclip Punch

Published in: on April 9, 2014 at 6:01 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: ,

Readings for Rural Life – Young Women and Soldiers

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

April 2nd, 1864

Young Women and Soldiers.

The Testimony of a Soldier

Eds. Rural New-Yorker: – Not withstanding a long acquaintance with your paper has taught me that it is now opened to local complaints or derogatory personalities, I am here at your sanctum asking for space in the Rural to enter a complaint against an individual. The fact is, I have been misused, – yes, misused, neglected, – to be explicit, and that, too, by a young lady.

I found an advertisement lately in the Waverly Magazine, inserted by a young lady, soliciting correspondents in the army. This young lady deeply regretting the custom that debarred her from “sharing the hardships of the camp and field,” was “willing to do anything that would lighten the burdens of the noble ones who went so readily to the rescue of our dear country,” and proposed to do “what little her contracted sphere” would admit of, by corresponding with “the brave soldiers of the Union.”

Now, I had always looked upon this practice of advertising for correspondents as having a rather dubious tendency. But having an ardent admiration, and, as I venture to believe, a pretty good appreciation of the spirit of patriotism- whether exhibited by the sons or daughters  of our excellent country – I could not but encourage it wherever I saw its manifestations. Accordingly I sent this patriotic young lady my compliments, with the assurance that, in my opinion, there could be no more laudable motive to action than patriotism, and that America had great reason to be proud of her daughters. “And as for your commiseration for the soldier’s lonely lot,” I wrote, “it is, indeed, noble and philanthropic.” I then attempt to inspire her with a conception of the great measure of happiness that I derived from anticipating the reception of a letter from her. As her object was declared to be “mutual pleasure and improvement,” I proposed as the subject of her first letter one of the following: – Woman’s sphere – her duties, etc. The relationship of the sexes. The origin and destiny of man. The operations and organic laws of the human mind. A criticism on Edward’s Philosophy of the Will; or, if she did not incline to any of these, to take some ordinary subject likely to be fraught with interest to a soldier, shut out as he is from the society of the good and learned. Then, having closed with an earnest appeal to her not to disappoint me, nor keep me long in suspense, I inclosed [sic] this in an envelope and directed it according to instructions, and marking it “Soldier’s Letter,” dropped it into the mail box and went about my duties “rejoicing.”

Now I have waited these five weeks for an answer, and lo! It cometh not! And I say it is really too bad for this young lady to treat me so. But can any one, male or female, phrenologist or moral philosopher, bachelor or “matrimonially inclined” widower, tell my why it is that I have been so used? –if so, let him now speak of for ever hold his peace.

Some hair-brained fellow may presume to insinuate that to have insured the “consummation I so devoutly wished” I should, at least, have paid the postage on the letter I sent, if not inclosed [sic] a stamp to pay return postage. But such a suggestion would be in very good keeping with the reputation of its author.

Such a course would manifest a depreciation of the young lady’s patriotism. It would evince a lack of faith in her modest and praiseworthy pretensions, and would, therefore, be as unkind as it would be unprofitable. No, no! it cannot bet his, for I have no doubt that she would willingly pay postage both ways as an evidence of her devotion to – her country! But oh! I fear the Fates are against me.

But of this enough. I wish now to say a few words seriously to the noble and patriotic daughters of America who read the Rural. This practice of advertising for correspondents in the army is indeed dangerous. I have no doubt that many well meaning and really worthy young women are caught in this snare, by the belief that they are rendering the brave soldiers and important service in that way. But let me tell you that you are egregiously mistaken. I am a soldier, and write what I know to be so. Whatever may be the spirit thrown into the letter the soldier writes, he does not write in good faith, nor does he look upon you as virtuous women, worthy of his respect. And this is the very reason why he pledges so freely his fidelity and his honor, while he seeks to lead you on step by step. That there may be exceptions to this I will not deny, but this is the general rule. I could not desire to say anything to lower the esteem of our brave boys in the army; there are many of America’s noblest sones in the ranks; but it is not the young men of worth that insert, or reply to, advertisements of this character. The soldier’s life is indeed a hard one. Its many privations and exposures make it quite a contrast to the lives we were leading at our pleasant home are to crest of old Mars cast its ominous shadow upon our land, and it is the earnest wish of every true soldier that “when this cruel was is over” he may receive every acknowledgement of respect and appreciation to which his worthy deeds shall entitle him, from the fathers and mothers, and, most of all, their virtuous and patriotic daughters. But don’t think us any the better now for being soldiers, for when we do our best we are only doing our duty.

If you really want to relieve our sufferings, there are many ways in which it can be done; but don’t deceive yourselves with the belief that you are doing any good by advertising yourselves as correspondents of soldiers, or by replying to any of the many advertisements inserted by them in the columns of some of the unprincipled papers. So far is it from being a benefit, that it is directly the reverse – an actual injury. It is a temptation to the soldier to try experiments, while it exposes you to any insults his unhallowed purpose my recommend; for, I repeat, her does not respect you as a woman “safe in her virtues.”

The monotony and idleness of camp life, with the consequent restlessness, beget much mischief within the soldier’s mind. Add to this the love of adventure that the life begets, and you will have the prive secret of the looseness of morality in the army. Go to New York, Elmira or Washington, and behold the thousands of soldier’s wives (I) there, and take warning, and be discreet.

Does my writing thus plainly deserve and apology? I would not have you think, fair daughters of America, that I look upon your virtues as being all in jeopardy. But this evil is already wide-spread, and has set on foor a work of woe and despair. This eivil is a monster “who stole the livery of the Court of Heaven to serve the devil in,” and is, therefore, doubly to be guarded against.

Stockade Camp, Va, March, 1864. Max Kipp.

 

Published in: on April 2, 2014 at 6:00 am  Comments (2)  
Tags:

Readings for Rural Life – The Hoop Skirt

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

March 26th, 1864

The Hoop Skirt

Fashion kills more women than toll and sorrow. [Scalpel.]

It is a wonder that men and women endowed with the noble faculty of reason, have so little gratitude for the good gift, that they can carry it a willing sacrifice to their worse than heathen goddess. Better might they hide it in the ground, than give it to support the wanton destroyer of their race.

I feel “moved” to speak a contradictory opinion to that of the editor of the Scalpel, expressed in an article recently published in the Rural, on the benign blessings of the modern hooped skirt. But I do not intend to apply to him all I have written above, in retaliation of saying “No sensible person can fail to appreciate its benefit to the young girl or woman.”

If I am entitled to the doubtful compliment, I will bear the honor meekly, but it shall not restrain me from confessing that I do fail to see what he has so happily discovered. ‘Perhaps it is all in consequence of not seeing the matter in a “professional” light; but mine is the “light of experience” which is quite sufficient to enable me to judge of its health-giving properties to my own satisfaction. Of its artistic ones, it is hard telling who is able to judge. The word artistic applied to woman’s dress, has such and India-rubber signification, that it may be one thing, or its opposite, according as it is looked upon by persons who consider the consistency of adaptation to natural requirements, or by those who merely take a fancy to the article, or the lady who wears it. Fashion so changes out aesthetic taste into prejudicial notions, that it is nearly impossible for us to tell whether we judge from the true or an artificial standard. However it may be with myself, evidently it is not fashion that has formed my notions in regard to the hoop skirt, one of which is, that God designed for woman a “skeleton,” and I cannot rid myself of the idea that He must have considered it quite sufficient for her needs; and we might reasonably expect it to be an “admirably artistic and health-giving device,” but Fashion and her devotees have denied it the former property, and after sacrificing the latter through persevering ages, to make some appearances of it possession, til, discouraged of ever arriving at any permanently satisfactory result, they have at last compromised the difficulty with the Devine Artistic, by doing the best they can with shaping a portion of His production so as not to shock too severely the refined sensibilities of humanity, and have disguised the remainder of it by hiding it within a new device, modeled after the most artistic designs of a cooper’s shop.

After such a nice adjustment of things, gentlemen who are intensely susceptible to the influences of the beautiful in nature and art, may be well distressed at any indications of the abandonment of their perfected ideal, which is doubtless appreciated not only because it embodies the most symmetrical proportions in its passive state, but is capable of changing into ever-varying artistic figures: such as those assumed in ascending high places and descending to lower ones, in entering carriages, sitting down in arm chairs, and especially in arising therefrom, in walking in the dew, dust, mud, rain and snow – in short, in being comformable to the demands of any emergency.

Women, without her second skeleton, has no more dignity than a wilted cabbage leaf. It gives her an air of majestic stiffness, so fascinating in a moving object; enabling her to rival the gracefulness of the mud-turtle; besides, it increases her capacity to carry fantastic adornments, which is such a commendable way of disposing of wealth in a country over-burdened with prosperity and comfort.

In regards to health, the editor merits the thanks of woman for his candid and instructive reasoning, but he makes compromises with her follies and weaknesses, instead of advising her to forsake them altogether, that she may secure the fullest measure of the blessings of health. He first inscribes himself within a circle whose circumference he dare not, or will not, over-step, and then does the best lie can within his limits. If he had taken for his theorem, The hoop skirt is injurious, and ought to be abandoned, he would have had some excellent arguments for a demonstration.

I was not aware that “its end is to insure the unrestricted use of the limbs in walking” (why not add in skating also.) If it has such pretensions it is a decided humbug, for everybody has learned that that liberty is not attainable while there is one within sight; and most especially is it true of the person whose every step is measured by a boundary which suggest, “thus far shalt thou go and no farther.” If it is meant to insure that use of them to itself, it is a very pertinent remark, and included both hands, of course. Its “benefit to the young girl” in climbing trees and fences, and doing all other necessary romping, has, probably, some signification not at first apparent.

It is thought to be more healthful than the old style of wearing heavy skirts, but I have heard eminent physicians pronounce it even more injurious; confining a body of cold air about the lower portions of the body, causing unequal circulation, and consequent congestions of the organs in the upper portion. But it is not so very light a load for delicate woman to carry thirty metal hoops, and as many yards of cloth, for a genteel covering, which must be so long as not to expose the feet, or it is offensive to good taste, suggesting a lack in the accomplishment of an intended deception. It is more pleasing to fashionable taste to drag it a few inches or more.

Really, I don’t see how a physician, or any other “sensible person,” can fail to see that crinoline, with its train of evils, is injurious to health, to temper, to the free development of mind as well as body, and a monstrous distortion of the beauty of the human form.

There is a demand for earnest discussion in regard to the momentous question, wherewithal shall we be clothed? and we are always obliged to gentlemen for taking an interest in our welfare; but it will be better, if they will please remember in their advice, that what would be poison to them is not likely to be healthful food for us; and they need not fear to speak contrary to the mandates of Fashion, for potent as she is with our vain sex, their admiration is ten times more so. Faith Wayne. Barre, Orleans Co., N.Y., 1864.

 

Published in: on March 26, 2014 at 6:00 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Readings for Rural Life – The Unprotected Female

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

March 19th, 1864

The Unprotected Female

Editors Rural New-Yorker: – Here are a few thoughts, suggested by reading a part of a letter in the fourth number of the Rural, signed M.J.C. She says: – “The unprotected female, sitting among her boxes and bundles in some bustling depot, is, or ought to always to be, the subject of interest. Made up as she is, of nerves, inefficiencies, headaches, cold feet, anxiety and skepticism, she has a title clear, my dear sir, to you candid opinion, as to whether the cars are moving east or due west, or even to express her conviction that they are stationary and surrounding objects are marching on.”

“The unprotected female!” Will M.J.C. please tell us why a female, unprotected, should demand any more interest or sympathy than an unprotected male? Has not her Creator endowed her with the same instinct for self-protection, and given her reason to guide it? Has He not bestowed upon her the same number of limbs for purposes of locomotion, and given her two hands with which to provide for her wants, and protect herself, the same as he has the male?

“Sitting among her boxes and bundles.” What business has a woman to load herself, or any one else, with such rubbish? It is that she may keep two or three men standing, while she has the satisfaction of seeing said boxes and bundles occupying the seats which, by right, if not by custom, belongs to them? I agree that a woman thus situated ought always to be the subject of kindly interest, – so had a man who carries with him such an unmistakable evidences of an unsound mind. Who can look at woman through the clear glasses of reason, instead of the colored ones of fashion, and not see that she is deficient in either education or independence. Her appearance clearly denotes hat she is an object slave, who is either ignorant of the fact, or considers it an honor that she is such, and is unwilling to appear, at least before strangers, unless surrounded by unmistakable evidences of her servitude. If she goes from home for a visit of a few days, she needs a baggage wagon to carry what she deems necessary for the display of her master’s power.

If she is compelled to carry anything in her hands she is really to be pitied, for women, clothed as this class are, have not even one hand that they can properly claim for any use except to guard their badges from injury. They are arrayed in a manner that makes it actually unsafe for them to enter or leave a car or carriage, unless they have both hands free to prevent their skirts from being caught by one of the projections that seem made expressly to torment poor women – or being entangled by the feet of their fellow travelers. Why, unless they are proud of their servitude, will they consent to be thus shackled, while men go about unencumbered? Their hands are free, never being required to keep their clothes from dragging on the dirt, or being trodden upon by the feet of their companions. Their “boxes and bundles,” even for a long journey, are all stowed in one satchel or valise which they can easily carry in one hand, thus leaving the other free to grab the hand of a friend, or assist some unprotected female who has ventured from home to spend a few days, but is already wishing she was back again; for how is she to change all this baggage from the depot to the cars without breaking her neck or tearing her dress?

“Made up as she is, of nerves, headaches, cold feet, anxiety and skepticism.” Poor things! How much suffering is combined in this sentence. Yet who of the sufferers will allow even their best friends to tell them why they are thus made? I will write [sic] although I will admit that I have not a friend who suffers from these afflictions that I should dare to speak my mind freely to, lest they should consider me an enemy to right, because they consider these an affliction of Providence which it would be sacrilegious to see to escape.

Women have no more “nerves” than men, and they would be no more nervous, where their bodies as healthy, and their nerves a little less taxed by petty cares and little accidents. As to “inefficiencies,” supposed you try the experiment of dressing a strong man in trailing skirts, well extended by hoops! Pin his waist so tight as to prevent his stooping with ease, and only allowing him the use of the upper portion of his lungs. Then oblige him to look after the many boxed and bundles that we unprotected females are required, by fashion, to be encumbered with, and see who is the most inefficient! I would pronounce him a model of patience if he did not swear at the many hindrances and annoyances that he would be subjected to on account of his change of clothing, and consequent baggage.

“Headaches and cold feet” are two severe afflictions; the former generally caused by the latter by imporoper dress in the majority of cases. I have never seen a woman yet, who had not broken out of fashion’s train entirely, that did not dress her feet and lower limbs too thin, her hips too warm, her waist too tight, and carry suspended from her waist, weights, varying according to the season and the caprices of the wearer, from two to fifteen pounds. All these things aid in destroying the circulation of the blood, and the action of all the organs of the body.

That the present suffering of women is a punishment for their sin, I fully believe; but it appears to me that nothing but genuine stubbornness can prompt a continuation of the sins which we know have brought upon us such just suffering. Men, being clothed in substantial goods, made in a manner that allows them the free use of their bodies, and protects them from the cold, do not suffer these many severe afflictions, that are the bane of our lives; except such as they inherit. It would seem that after any class of beings, endowed with reason, had become so enfeebled as the women of the present have, that they would strive in every way possible, to regain their natural powers of body and mind. To do this, the first step should be to adopt a dress that would give perfect freedom to mind and body, instead of one that cripples and deforms the latter, while it exhausts the former to keep it in a condition that will be considered by the rulers as acceptable.

“Anxiety and skepticism” are but attendant evils that will vanish when their causes are removed, which will be when women are not ashamed to be clothed in a manner that will insure them warmth and freedom. I do not believe that there is a woman living in the United States who has reached her sixteenth year, and dressed for the last three years with the least regard to the dictates of fashion, that, when dressed, even loosely, can draw a natural breath at the first trial.

Will women ever learn to consider their bodies as only the dwelling place of their souls, where they are to be fitted for the world to come? If they ever do, we shall cease to hear so much prating about the inferiority of women, and her need of protection. She will then be safe travel anywhere among Christian people unprotected, and will not need “your candid opinion, my dear sir, as to whether the cars are moving east or due west,” and as to “expressing her conviction that they are stationary and surrounding objects marching on,” she will be no more apt to make such expressions then than men will. I have heard many, who call themselves ladies, make remarks that were quite as sensible as that would be; but I consider that their greatest ignorance consisted in no knowing that it is a disgrace for even a lady to be ignorant. Amanda Roberts Keyser. Pekin, February, 1864

 

Published in: on March 19, 2014 at 6:00 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Readings for Rural Life – How to Buy

From Moore’s Rural New-Yorker in Rochester, NY

March 12th, 1864

How to Buy

There is a right time to purchase. That time is when goods are low. Goods are low, as a general rule, when there is the least demand for them. Winter goods are low in the spring and summer. Summer goods are low in the fall and winter. The merchant will sell his winter stock in the spring at first cost. His summer stock in the fall at cost. He commonly sells his goods at least twenty-five per cent above the first cost. If, then, you buy his winter goods in the spring, and his summer goods in the fall, you save the per centage, and get your goods at wholesale, or just as low as the merchant bought them by the quantity. If your family requires one hundred dollars yearly in these goods, the savings will be twenty-five dollars, by buying at the proper time. When winter renders navigation and transportation difficult, groceries and heavy goods are generally higher. Sugar is generally high in fruit and “preserving time.” Watch the markets. When the goods you need are below an average price lay in a supply for some time ahead. Buy your goods by the quantity. Let the market be what it will, you can generally buy a quantity at less figures, proportionately, than small amounts. Sugar will cost you a cent on a pound less; tea, ten cents or a shilling; heavy cloths one t two shillings per yard, and so on to the end of the catalogue. Another consideration is not to be forgotten. A good article is much cheaper in the long run, than a poor one at a much less price. Better pay more for a thoroughly made serviceable article, than buy an inferior one, poorly made, at any price. Ready cash is always better than any man’s credit. A dealer, who understands his business, can and will sell for cheaper for ready money than he will for the best man’s credit. A handsome yearly savings may be made, in any family, depending in amount on the number in the family and the quantity of goods used, by buying at the right   time – buying by the large quantity – buying “good goods,” and paying ready cash. If you have not got the cash, live a little closer, cut off all unnecessary expenses, until you get a little ready money ahead, and are thus ready to take advantage of the markets. The saving that can thus be made in providing for the household, if carefully husbanded, will provide for a “rainy day,” or a competence to make old age comfortable. L.L. Fairchild. Rolling Prarie, Wis., January, 1864.

 

 

Published in: on March 12, 2014 at 6:01 am  Comments (1)  
Tags:
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »