FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264  
265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   >>   >|  
ure alone. Not a single feature, from the feet to the eyeballs, has escaped the uglifying process. "Nothing is too absurd or hideous to please them," writes Cameron. The Eskimos afford a striking illustration of the fact that a germ of taste for ornamentation in general is an earlier manifestation of the esthetic faculty than the appreciation of personal beauty; for while displaying considerable skill and ingenuity in the decorations of their clothes, canoes, and weapons, they mutilate their persons in various ways and allow them to be foul and malodorous with the filth of years. One of the most disgusting mutilations on record is that practised by the Indians of British Columbia, who insert a piece of bone in the lower lip, which, gradually enlarged, makes it at last project three inches. Bancroft (I., 98) devotes three pages to the lip mutilation indulged in by the Thlinkeet females. When the operation is completed and the block is withdrawn "the lip drops down upon the chin like a piece of leather, displaying the teeth, and presenting altogether a ghastly spectacle." The lower teeth and gum, says one witness, are left quite naked; another says that the plug "distorts every feature in the lower part of the face"; a third that an old woman, the wife of a chief, had a lip "ornament" so large "that by a peculiar motion of her under-lip she could almost conceal her whole face with it"; and a fourth gives a description of this "abominably revolting spectacle," which is too nauseating to quote. DE GUSTIBUS NON EST DISPUTANDUM (?) "Abominably revolting," "hideous," "filthy," "disgusting," "atrocious"--such are usually the words of observers in describing these shocking mutilations. Nevertheless they always apply the word "ornamentation" to them, with the implication that the savages look upon them as beautiful, although all that the observers had a right to say was that they pleased the savages and were approved by fashion. What is worse, the philosophers fell into the pitfall thus dug for them. Darwin thinks that the mutilations indulged in by savages show "how different is the standard of _taste_"; Humboldt (III., 236) reflects on the strange fact that nations "attach the idea of beauty" to whatever configuration nature has given them; and Ploss (I., 48) declares bluntly that there is no such thing as an absolute standard of beauty and that savages have "just as much right" to their ideas on the subject as we have to
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264  
265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

savages

 

beauty

 
mutilations
 

ornamentation

 
revolting
 

indulged

 

displaying

 
observers
 

standard

 

disgusting


feature

 

spectacle

 

hideous

 
shocking
 

filthy

 

atrocious

 
describing
 

Nevertheless

 

Abominably

 

description


motion
 

peculiar

 
ornament
 
conceal
 

GUSTIBUS

 
nauseating
 

fourth

 

abominably

 

DISPUTANDUM

 

configuration


nature

 

attach

 

nations

 
Humboldt
 

reflects

 

strange

 

subject

 

absolute

 

declares

 

bluntly


pleased

 

beautiful

 
implication
 

approved

 

fashion

 

Darwin

 

thinks

 

pitfall

 

philosophers

 
considerable