Household words, no. 304, January 19, 1856 : $b A weekly journal — John Shaqi
Household words, no. 304, January 19, 1856 : $b A weekly journal
General
Household words, no. 304, January 19, 1856 : $b A weekly journal
English literature -- Periodicals
During hundreds of years, it was the custom in England to wear beards.
It became, in course of time, one of our Insularities to shave close.
Whereas, in almost all the other countries of Europe, more or less of
moustache and beard was habitually worn, it came to be established
in this speck of an island, as an Insularity from which there was no
appeal, that an Englishman, whether he liked it or not, must hew,
hack, and rasp his chin and upper lip daily. The inconvenience of
this infallible test of British respectability was so widely felt,
that fortunes were made by razors, razor-strops, hones, pastes,
shaving-soaps, emollients for the soothing of the tortured skin, all
sorts of contrivances to lessen the misery of the shaving process and
diminish the amount of time it occupied. This particular Insularity
even went some miles further on the broad highway of Nonsense than
other Insularities; for it not only tabooed unshorn civilians, but
claimed for one particular and very limited military class the sole
right to dispense with razors as to their upper lips. We ventured to
suggest in this journal that the prohibition was ridiculous, and to
show some reasons why it was ridiculous. The Insularity having no sense
in it, has since been losing ground every day.
One of our most remarkable Insularities is a tendency to be firmly
persuaded that what is not English is not natural. In the Fine Arts
department of the French Exhibition, recently closed, we repeatedly
heard, even from the more educated and reflective of our countrymen,
that certain pictures which appeared to possess great merit--of which
not the lowest item was, that they possessed the merit of a vigorous
and bold Idea--were all very well, but were “theatrical.” Conceiving
the difference between a dramatic picture and a theatrical picture,
to be, that in the former case a story is strikingly told, without
apparent consciousness of a spectator, and that in the latter case the
groups are obtrusively conscious of a spectator, and are obviously
dressed up, and doing (or not doing) certain things with an eye to the
spectator, and not for the sake of the story; we sought in vain for
this defect. Taking further pains then, to find out what was meant by
the term theatrical, we found that the actions and gestures of the
figures were not English. That is to say,--the figures expressing
themselves in the vivacious manner natural in a greater or less degree
to the whole great continent of Europe, were overcharged and out of
the truth, because they did not express themselves in the manner
of our little Island--which is so very exceptional, that it always
places an Englishman at a disadvantage, out of his own country, until
his fine sterling qualities shine through his external formality and
constraint. Surely nothing can be more unreasonable, say, than that
we should require a Frenchman of the days of Robespierre, to be taken
out of his jail to the guillotine with the calmness of Clapham or
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account