yesterdaysprint:The Illustrated Book of Manners: A Manual of Good Behavior and Polite Accomplishment

yesterdaysprint:The Illustrated Book of Manners: A Manual of Good Behavior and Polite Accomplishments, 1866So it turns out that this book is real, it was written by Robert de Valcourt, and published in Cincinnati. You can read it here. And here is the rest of the passage (page 33):…Dress, then, is a moral duty — a grave question of right, and these “ minor morals” are matters of some importance. Even the police understand that. The laws insist that every one should be dressed in some way, and a person who is dressed insufficiently, is arrested and punished. The laws even interfere as to the kind of dress to be worn, in some cases, beyond any question of decency. Men or women, wearing the habiliments of the opposite sex, are liable to be arrested. But exceptions are made in favor of fancy balls, and the theatre. In a play, an actress may wear the dress of a gentleman ; Burton may dress up as Mrs. Partington, but let one of the audience try it! Let the danseuse try to walk home in her stage dress, and some policeman would have her in custody. These laws, however, are often senseless and impertinent, and a clear violation of all right.If a woman fancies that she looks better or feels better in men’s clothes, there is no reason why she may not indulge in so harmless a fancy. It is done freely and frequently on the continent of Europe. The author of Consuelo, for years, wore a masculine dress in the streets and cafes of Paris, whenever she chose to do so. Miss Weber, an excellent and highly accomplished woman, in Belgium, in all societies wears no other. Some American ladies of late have done the same, in defiance of the laws. We do not see that any moral or proper legal question is involved in this; or, if the dress is neat and becoming, convenient to the wearer, and pleasant to others, that it is a breach of good manners. It is a simple question of good and evil. If the amount of happiness, immediate or ultimate, is increased by any costume, it is right to wear it.The failure of the Bloomer dress seems to have arise a from the mixed character it assumed, and the unpleasant confusion of ideas it occasioned. It partook of the man’s, the woman’s, and the child’s. A bold assumption of a full male dress, as by Madame Dudevant and Miss Weber, and such as is worn at pleasure by ladies, traveling or on excursions, anywhere on the continent of Europe, would have had a much better chance of tolerance and success. The stage had accustomed us to seeing women dressed as men, but not in so mixed and in- congruous a fashion as the Bloomer. It must, however, be remembered that in some of our free states there are laws against wearing any but the customary dress, and that a lady who takes a fancy to masculine habiliments on an excursion, may find it terminate in the station house.The author of Consuelo was the famous George Sand (Amantine Lucile Aurore Dupin, who upon her marriage became Madame Dudevant). While there were many contemporary critics of her masculine dress and behavior, many people accepted her comportment until they became shocked with the subversive tone of her novels. Those who found her writing admirable were not bothered by her ambiguous or rebellious public behaviour. As Victor Hugo commented, “George Sand cannot determine whether she is male or female. I entertain a high regard for all my colleagues, but it is not my place to decide whether she is my sister or my brother.”’^George Sand^dittoMiss Helen Maria Weber (or Helena Maria Weber, Esq.) was a Belgian feminist who argued that men and women were entirely equal and that “clothes make the man” was correct, insofar as the tailor could make a person a woman or a man based on whether they wore feminine or masculine dress. ^The bloomer costumeBTW, how many people are looking forward to seeing Gentleman Jack? :) -- source link

More pics about