The Tyranny of Fashion [pp. 365-367]

18Th.] THE TYRANNY OF FASHION 385
TH E T YR A NVNzY
FA S HIIO N.
0F
14 WONDER," said a handsome young
e, itor to me, one who had just been
considerably lionized at a fashionable water ing-place-" I wonder always at the promi nence of certain sets, the power of certain
leading women, the tyranny offashion. What
does it mean? Why is not one set as good
as another,? why are certain leaders elected
whose dictum is infallible? why do certain
people create an exclusive atmosphere into
which certain other people cannot penetrate?
and why are you women so afraid of each
other? why has Mrs. Brown-Jones's eye a
power which Mrsa. Jones - Brown's eye has
not? I think the one quite as pretty a wom an as the other, quite as clever-what does
it mean?"
"Well," I answered, after due reflection,
"you have asked the most unanswerable of
questions. If I answer you at all, it must be
only approximative; it cannot be conclusive.
For fashion always, from the beginning of
the world to the present moment, has been
an undefinable term. You may say that it
requires wealth, beauty, good position, and
tact, to become a fashionable leader, and yet
I have known a woman holding all these
cards to be not a fashionable leader. Again,
I have known a woman to become a fashion able leader who held none of them. It seems
to' be a sixth sense, a union of certain ad vantages and certain ambitions. A woman
must care to be a leader first."
"But how many care to be, and work very
hard for it, and never succeed!" said he.
"Many, no doubt; you have described a
very large class, and hence that' masquerade
of hate,' which goes on in fashionable society, which is full of baffled ambitions and
disappointed hopes. A woman often embarks more talent, more work, more heart in
her enterprise, than you have invested in
your newspaper, and she utterly fails. Society will not see her; society will not fall
down and worship; society is neither influenced by her nor afraid of her. It neither loves nor fears her. Do you wonder
that she becomes soured, embittered, and
scornful, and abuses that which she cannot
conquer?"
"Yes, I wonder, first, at her ambition;
secondly, at her being baffled."
"Ah! That is because you are a man,
and cannot read the politics of women. You
are a great student of those of men-you have
not studied those of women."
"Because, you know," said the editor,
"the man does not live who can understand
a woman.'
"No; perhaps you would not be so fond
of us if you did."
"I should not have dared to say that."
"I should not have allowed you to-but
'to return to our muttons.' You agree with
me that the formation of a good social position is a very great thing. The woman who
makes her parlor a rallying-point for nice
people is doing a great public service. She
who, in a great city, is a fashionable leader,
is a power in the state. She helps to refine,
elevate, purify our great American conglom erate, where distinction and individuality are
obliged to submerge themselves in the com mon mass, and where a high grade of medi ocrity is obtained, but nothing better. Those
more choice intelligences which, in older
and more aristocratic societies, can stand
on their glass pedestals, isolated from the
common herd, have no existence here; our
institutions forbid them. We are all mixed
together-a sort of social blueberry-pudding,
no one berry any better than any other berry.
"So, you see, it is left to a woman leader
to make this particular pudding in a superior
manner. She must know how to discriminate
between those who are to be let in, and those
who are to be kept outt, for exclusiveness is a
very necessary part of it-in fact, it is the
whole stock-in-trade of one of our most dis tinguished leaders; and then she must know
how, and when, and in what proportions, to
mix her ingredients."
"I wish," said the editor, pensively,
"that she always knew how to seat her com pany at dinner. Why, last evening I was
put between my most intimate friend and my
most intimate enemy, neither of whom did I
wish to speak to. My friend and I had talked
out, my enemy and I wouldn't speak."
"That was ignorance and crass stupid ity," said I; "but both those qualities can
belong to a leader of fashion."
"Then do draw a line-some line. Give
me an imaginary picture of a leader. Do not
keep on drawing'this impossible monster,
whom the world never saw.' Tell me of
some one leader, and why she has suc ceeded."
I saw the editor was getting irritable. He
had eaten many good dinners, had been much
flattered, was up late at night; his nerves
were unstrung. I took pity on him, and de scribed three women:
"One great leader of fashion whom I
knew, formerly, succeeded by cruelty alone.
She, of course, had talent, some money,
some prestige of family name. But she came
to a watering-place with a determination to
succeed, to marry off her young daughter,
and to rule society. She began by being very
agreeable, giving some choice parties, and by
propitiating those persons who, by reason of
their wealth, propriety of conduct, and social position, always constitute what is called
the first circle. Then she began to insult and
injure those who had delicacy, timidity, and
modesty. Thus she made people afraid of
her. It became a question whether Mrs.
Hightowers was going to speak to you or to
throw her fan in your face. Therefore, she
began to be a terror to all the weak people,
of whom there are many in every society.
A want of social courage is a natural defect
in a society which has no defined boundaries.
Mrs. Hightowers went from bad to worse.
She, it was known, could spoil the career of
any young lady at a watering-place if she
chose. She could also make it a success.
This she achieved by impudence, self-confidence, cruelty. Many powerful families in
this country have achieved a high position
by the exercise of similar qualities. Thackeray says:'The way to succeed is to push.
Stamp on your neighbor's foot, and will he
not draw it away?' Such people have allies
in all the modest, the timorous, and the deli cate people who hold themselves too high to
contend with such a nature as Mrs. High towers's. We are at the mercy of all such
people, to a certain extent, because our dig nity forbids our entering such a field, or fight ing such an enemy. So Mrs. Hightowers had
a short success."'
"I am so glad to hear that it was short,'
said the editor; "do get to the end of her,
and tell me about a more agreeable leader."
"Well, there was Mrs. Clavering. She
was a simple, unambitious person, very beau tiful and attractive, and with a gift of exclu sivreness. She would give a ball, and leave
out two or three ambitious aspirants. The
ball would be perfect, for Mrs. Clavering
knew how to do things. Therefore, when
Mrs. Clavering gave another ball, there were
heartaches and headaches, lest the card did
not come. People used to say, on seeing her
and hearing her talk (for Mrs. Clavering was
by no means brilliant),' How can such a wom an be a leader?' But you see she had the
negative qualities.
"Other women, far more clever, would be
too clever, they would be too good-natured; at
the last minute, they would let in the pant ing aspirant, and thus lose the prestige of
refusal. There are only one or two such
leaders as this, but they are the most clever
of all.
"Then comes a third leader, Mrs. Devon shire we will call her. She has wealth, high
position; she is the wife of a dignitary; she
has to receive all sorts of people, but she has
such tact, such goodness, such delicacy, such
discrimination, that her salon never degener ates. She is a duchess always; she works
like a hero; no Joan of Arc ever stormed Or
took a more forlorn hope than that which
this lady perpetually conquers: for she con quers vulgarity, social ignorance, stupidity,
pretension, and fashion-mixes them all into
her pudding, and produces a successful re sult. She creates a salon to which the most
exclusive are glad to be admitted, and in
which the most vulgar and pretentious come
away improved; but, I am sorry to say, such
leaders are not common; I only know one
such."
"I fear you do not," said the editor; "if
there were many such, society would be a
much more fascinating thing than it is. But
I now wish to ask you to define the word
'snob.' I have read Thackeray on the sub ject, and I rise from the perusal still uneducated. Please to define and interpret for
me the conduct of certain individuals who,
at the fashionable watering-place of Fish's
Eddy, court and run after Mrs. Clavering and
her set, and will not know Mrs. Fotheringay
and her set. Now, I dined with Mrs. Fotheringay, found her house charming, her guests wellbred and delightful; her sons and daughters
seemed to have all the accomplishments; they
dressed beautifully; Mrs. Fotheringay herself was a well-bred lady; yet I am told that
they are not fashionable, and'know nobody.' What does that mean?."
"Well, it means that Mrs. Fotheringay
has been in Europe a great deal; she does
I
I
I
THE TYRANNY OF FASHION.
365
18 7,'.1