In the advance of human society towards a finished state, there are two distinct emancipations to be achieved; that which liberates Truth and Reason from the constraints of force, and that which liberates Beauty and Taste from the fetters of fashion. In our modern doctrines of intellectual and religious liberty, we see the first named stage already passed. The other we shall reach in due time. And, when it comes, it will be a more magnificent revolution than many have begun to suspect. As the first opens a daylight of knowledge and science on the world, so the other will add a charm to every thing on which the daylight falls, revealing new forms of beauty in the outward life, new manners and sentiments; banishing, on the one hand, what is rude and unbecoming, and reducing, on the other, the high-born conventionalisms and misnamed elegancies, which have heretofore disfigured society. The last and finishing stage of human advancement, as any reflecting person may see, must be accomplished by the discipline of Taste-it must be that stage in which Beauty descends from heaven to be the clothing of spiritual intelligence and the grace of Christian piety. Zeal and be Vol. I.

20

nevolence must learn to put on beauty, and society must be charmed to coalescence in that simple justness of feeling, and grace of conduct, which free our outward state of all its annoyances, and fill it with pleasing ornament.

Hitherto Taste and Beauty, we have said, are under the slavery of Fashion. And yet it is remarkable, that a great part of mankind do actually suppose Taste and Fashion to be very nearly the same thing. This, in fact, is the slavery of Fashion, that it is able so to tyrannize over the intelligent perceptions of men, as even to extirpate the distinct idea of Taste, and take the whole empire to itself. Idolatry is not more opposite to religion, or tyranny to government, or falsehood to truth, than Fashion to Taste, and yet a large part of mankind are scarcely able to distinguish between them, or believe that there is any distinction. Taste, they even think, is Fashion, and what is fashionable is of course tasteful. Sorely too do they pay for their error. It is one that disfigures their mind; afflicts, drudges and degrades their life; and lays them under the power of an oppression more uncomfortable and real than any that modern liberty has risen upon, and cloven down with arms.

Here then is a great idea to be realized-the emancipation of Tasteto enforce a recognition of its distinctness, in all high points, from fashion; and the right it has, in its own nature, to have an undivided sway. Let it not be supposed that we are about to forget all discretion, in a useless and hopeless crusade against existing fashions. We shall not throw ourselves under the wheels of this idol. We fully accord the wisdom of Johnson, when he declares that "few enterprises are so hopeless as a contest against fashion." We seek no sudden remedy. We would only endeavor, as far as it lies in us, to produce a just opinion of the merits of fashion, and also a just opinion of the merits of taste; such as will incline us more towards the latter, and give us a growing disrelish of the former, as undignified and pernicious. The good we expect to realize, is not by raising a rebellion, but by cutting off the king's resources.

Fashion is like sin; no merely expulsive effort can destroy it. It can be expelled only by a higher love. When the eloquent old monk Connecte went through England, preaching down the steeple headdresses, the ladies were even persuaded to go out of the churches and make a bonfire of their capitals. And so strong was the feeling excited against these absurdities, that the people would even stone them down in the street. What was the result? "The women," says Paradin, "that, like snails in a fright, had drawn in their horns, shot them out again as soon as the danger was Over."

They had tried themselves to give up the obnoxious ornament, and the people had tried to have them, but it could not be done. So vain is the endeavor to preach out fashion, without preaching in taste. If the good old monk had been able in a day, to preach into the minds of the English women a cultivated intellect, a refined criticism, a true

modesty, all that we include in men. tal beauty, he need not have said a word about the head-dresses.

To prevent misunderstanding, we may as well say too, that it is not merely with fashion, as bearing rule in dress, that we are to be concerned. Fashion extends its power not only to dress and the modes of society, but it exerts a pernicious sway over architecture, furniture, gardening, music, the domestic relations, literature, opinions, moral feeling, religious prejudices-every thing in fact, which belongs to the creative and voluntary power of

man.

We are to speak of fashion as a POWER, and not of its particu lar manifestations, any farther than these are necessary to characterize it. The most convenient illustrations of fashion are found in the article of dress, and such we shall not scruple to use. Our opinion on this particular head, is not that we are to spurn all conformity to the current modes of dress and forms of society. The conformity, however, should only be slow and partial, or with such variations as to show that taste is consulted, and that the submission yielded is yield. ed not to fashion, but as a courtesy due to society. There must be current modes of dress and intercourse. It is not more necessary that our coins should be stamped, to show for what they are to pass, than that we ourselves should be. But the difficulty is, that where the current stamp is given by the arbitrary ap pointment of fashion, it signifies nothing; the lowest and most truly vulgar in character, can receive the stamp as well, and wear it as confi dently as the most elevated. Let the current style be adjusted by taste, and then the wearer will sig nify plainly enough who he is, and show himself into the grade where he belongs. The individual characteristics of society will appear too with a picturesque and lively effect, and yet there will be as little

room for oddity and absurdity as now, and probably less; for the mutual taste will be ever drawing towards certain forms of inherent beauty and convenience.

We come now to the question, What is fashion? What is taste? Let us endeavor to search out the root of our distinction.

In its higher and more sovereign manifestations, fashion is rooted in a desire of caste. Accordingly, in those countries where caste is made an article of religion, and can not therefore be encroached upon, the modes of dress and ceremonies of social life undergo no change, for none is here necessary to keep imitation at a distance. But, in the western countries of the old world, the liberty enjoyed so far endangers caste, that the only way to keep distance, is to lead off in a perpetual round of change in the dress, equipage, and social forms of life. Some new fashion is started, in a quarter entitled to lead. The example is then followed by others in the higher circle, not in the way of imitation, but rather in the way of pride, and under a sort of tacit agreement in the circle, to keep distance and preserve caste. But the new style soon grows common, descending upon a second class called the vulgar, by the circle just named; for a feeling of caste also strays down to these, and they are ambitious to be as like as possible, to what is forever on the stretch to be unlike them. Or, perhaps, the new style becomes so associated with elegance, that they are constrained to suffer it as a model of taste. By this time the fashion has, of course, gone by in the circle where it began.

Truth obliges us to add that what we call fashion in our country, is almost wholly of the second circle. We originate no fashion, unless it be in matters where some kind of false taste is stereotyped and prop

agated by an over zealous admiration. Accordingly, the term fashion carries a sense of imitation with it, on this side of the Atlantic, which is far less prominent on the other. Fashionable people are, with us, a caste-like people for the most part, such as covet the air and show of caste, whatever may become of the substance. They watch the modes of noble dandyism and royalty, on the other side of the water, hasting to receive the very things which the originators invent to put them at a distance, and wearing them, not to give their assent to the insult, as we might think, but with the highest satisfaction or even pride!

Such is the general history of fashion. When you come to ask where the legislature of fashion is, or who it is that originates a given fashion, it will be more difficult to answer. It may be in the French court, or in the lady patronesses of Almacks, or in some new Brummel, who is just now raging as the dogstar of fashion in London. According to Montaigne, the French fashions, at least in his day, were controlled with absolute sway by the court. "Whatever," he says, "is done at court, passes for a rule throughout the rest of France. Let the courtiers but discontinue those tun-bellied doublets, that make us look like I know not what, those long effeminate locks of hair, and you will see them all presently vanished and cried down.'

If we go on farther, to ask what it is that leads the originator of a fashion to adopt this rather than some other, no certain answer can be given. Sometimes, though seldom, it is a real effort of taste. Sometimes it is the mere caprice of a tailor, or a milliner; or this tailor or milliner may have been bribed by some great manufacturer to start the style in question, and give him a market for a particular kind of goods. Or the object may be to

compliment some prince. Henry VIII, for example, being exceeding ly corpulent, suddenly saw himself surrounded by corpulent ministers, and a corpulent people-the whole male nation was stuffed from the shoulders downwards; and so far was the extravagance carried, that an act of Parliament was passed, forbidding the use of stuffing, under certain specified names. An amusing story is related of the manner in which the law was evaded, which shows, at the same time, to what a pitch of absurdity the fashion was carried. A certain person was arrested, who proved that he had used no one of the cloths named in the law, by showing that he used, instead, a pair of sheets, two tablecloths, ten napkins, four shirts, a brush, a glass, a comb, night-caps, &c. &c. Sometimes a fashion originates in the effort to hide some deformity. Thus the long bag-wigs are said to have been invented to relieve the hunch back of the Duke of Brunswick. The huge sleeves lately worn by the ladies, were an excellent disguise for a bad arm, and were probably invented for that object.

On the whole, we can do no better, as regards the origin of fashions, than to say that they are chosen without any regard to the inherent beauty of nature's forms, and sacrifice, if it so happen, all comfort. They are the work of caste, which goes dodging through so many modes of absurdity, to escape imitation and maintain exclusive position.

Having thus distinguished the radical idea of fashion, we will next inquire what we are to understand by

taste.

It is much to be regretted that we have, in English, no better word than a mere figure derived from the palate, to signify one of the highest and most divine attributes of the mind. The term asthetic, which the Germans have borrowed from

the Greek, has the same relation to all the senses, which taste has to the palate; and they mean, by the æsthetic faculty, that which distinguishes all beauty. It is the critical power-the power of forms—and is to the clothing of truth, what the reason is to the discovery or elimination of truth. By our very feeble and flat word taste, we mean, or ought to mean, the same thing. It is that which distinguishes the glo rious and fair in all earthly things, and especially their divinely constituted relation to truth and the life of mind.

The highest known example of taste is that of the Almighty, when he invents the forms, colors and proportions, of this visible creation. His conceptions were all original. He did not copy from the sight of previous worlds, but he had all beauty, all the colors and forms of things in his own creative fancy, saw them as distinctly, loved them as much, before he gave them outward reality as after.

"Then deep retired In his unfathomed essence viewed the forms, The forms eternal of created things; The radiant sun, the moon's nocturnal lamp, The mountains, woods and streams, the rolling globe,

And wisdom's mien celestial. From the first
Of days, on them his love divine he fixed,
His admiration, till, in time complete,
What he admired and loved, his vital smile
Unfolded into being. Hence the breath
Of life informing each organic frame,
Hence the green earth and wild resounding

waves,

Hence light and shade, alternate warmth and cold,

And clear autumnal skies and vernal show. ers,

And all the fair variety of things."

The whole fabric of creation is an exertion of taste, and we refer to this high example because we know of no other which is sufficient to evolve our idea. Taste, in man, is every way resembled to this power of form displayed in creation, except that it is a capacity slowly cultivated and matured, and not inherently complete like the divine. It is a power which goes to school,

as we may say, to nature, and by exercise on the forms of natural beauty, is waked into action. But, when awake, it is as truly original as the taste of God, and is one of the highest points of resemblance to him in our nature. It is not coupled with creative force, that is, the power of executing its conceptions by a mere fiat. But the forms it invents, in architecture, dress, furniture, gardening and ceremony, are all original, and are the offspring of the soul's great liberty.

Such being the nature of taste, we make no question that it is one of the highest offices of life to start this power of beauty into full maturity of action. Hence it is, in fact, may we not believe, that so many things needful to our existence here, are left to be fashioned by art. The heavens, the colors, the seasons, the rivers, lakes, mountains, and general surfaces of the earth, have their form given them by nature. But nature builds us no house or tem

ple, spins no dress. She writes no poetry, composes no music, presents us with with no forms of intercourse. Having given out forms enough to beget activity in human taste, she scants her work that we may go on and exert a creative fancy for ourselves.

The wild forests are cleared away, the green slopes are dressed and laid out smiling in the sun, the hills and valleys are adorned with beautiful structures, the skins of wild beasts are laid aside for robes of silk or wool. In a word, architecture, gardening, music, dress, chaste and elegant manners-all inventions of human taste-are added to the rudimental beauty of the world, and it shines forth, as having undergone a second creation at the hand of man. And herein is man to be distinguished from the animals. They can not dress. Their outward form is given them and they must wear it. If they build, it is by a set pattern of instinct, not in the study of pro

portions and varieties. But man is to choose, in a great degree, his own outward appearance, and be, in his person and his condition, what the beauty of his soul permits. Taste is God's legacy to him in life, which legacy he can not surrender, without losing the creative freedom and dignity of his soul.

We perceive already that fashion, in so far as it prevails, proposes to dispense with taste. It is man, or a circle of human conspirators, affecting superiority over the laws of natural beauty, and enacting modes and standards of their own. There is a very striking analogy between the relation of Fashion to Taste and that of idolatry to religion. The laws of taste are the laws of God and nature. But fashion, by a certain sort of impiety, exalts itself above all that is called God, in this respect. The forms of inhe rent beauty are too permanent. It must therefore invent something new, however monstrous, something unknown to the common world. Out of the ugly and the uncomfortable, in despite of all proportion, it makes up new successions of deformed gods, and sets them up to be worshiped. It is scarcely pos. sible to review the absurd fashions which have prevailed in the world, without associating, as you pass on, the grinning, and ugly monsters that figure in the prolific herds of heathen deities. Witness into how many burlesque forms the human person is continually tortured. Now, as in the days of Henry VIII., it is a mere clumsy rotundity. Now, the connection of the upper and lower portions of the body is straitened and attenuated, even down to the point of metaphysical delicacy. A statuary, in the mean time, would as soon think of adorning his figures with wens or hunch-backs, as of thus violating the fair proportions of nature. In the reign of Mary, a proclamation was issued limiting the