Punch: Punch (38.1860)

Mabch 31, I860.]

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI

133

THE FROLICS OF FASHION.

P A V? Y all accounts the ladies
are growing very flori-
cnltural. Lovely woman
has often been compared
to roses, and tulips, and
violets,and other flowery
emblems, not omitting
“the pink of perfec-
tion ; ” but we little
suspected that she would
become so closely asso-
ciated with the beautiful
objects that adorn the
plate-glass shops in
Covent Garden Market,
that it would be a matter
of impossibility to say
where the flowers began,
or the woman ended.
The object of the pre-
sent fashion seems to
be to identify the one
with the other in inse-
parable harmony toge-
ther, so that the two
shall form but one large
jleur animee, as graceful
as any that ever blossomed into life under Granville’s poetic pencil. Here is a
specimen of this new animated flower, that we have culled from one of the
numerous fashion-books that idly nrofess to teach women the difficult art of making
themselves more beautiful:—

“One dress we will describe. It was composed of white tulle bouillonnte. At the lower part of
the skirt it had three skirts of double tulle, each caught up by ribbons of white taffetas, embroidered
with bouquets of flowers, producing a fresh and charming effect. Nine bouquets of flowers were
placed at the end of these ribbons, no two alike. The body was in the same style as the skirt. Upon
each shoulder a bouquet of flowers formed an epaulette."

An epaulette of flowers is a sweet notion! Was the sash, pray, of the same
material ? But what a walking bouquet, the lady attired as above, must have
been. Her dress must have been a kind of Floral Hall, of which she herself was
the centre ornament and grand illumination. The only parallel we know to it is
the Jack-in-the-Green on the three glorious days of May; but he is a companion
too dark to be placed by the side of such a cluster of bright colours and fragrant
associations. Four skirts and eleven bouquets of flowers, at least (for in this cal-
culation the lower tier of bouquets is not included) are not bad for one dress. We
doubt if the goddess Flora herself would have had more, when she went in state to
one of her grand flower-shows. Why, each waltz must have been a shower of
roses!

But the ladies are growing horticultural, also. Their dress is so attractively
arranged as to appeal to every sense. Flere is another description, that quite
brings the water into one’s mouth:—

“ Another was also made of white tidle, with eleven small flounces, bordered with a purple
ribbon, embroidered with gold. At each breadth the flounces were put on in festoons. Over tnis
was placed a white crape skirt. Wide purple ribbon, embroidered in flowers of gold, twisted
like a scarf, and held at the hips by a bouquet of pomegranates. The wreath for the hair was formed
of pomegranates and rings of gold.”

With cherries on her lips, a peach on each cheek, and pomegranates round her
hair, such a fruitful combination is enough to make a vegetarian even pay his
devoirs to one so tempting!

But a lady does not draw all her brightness from the earth—-she can be celestial
as well. We put before the non-credulous reader a glittering proof of it:—

“ Another of these elegant dresses was made of azure tulle—all bouillonnee—with stars of gold
worked on the tvile. These were not all of one size, but varied, like those of the planetary system.”

Thus, a lady is alike floricultural, horticultural, and astronomical. Both heaven
and earth send their choicest contributions to adorn her. What the joint effect
could be, we should be afraid to contemplate. We lean ungallantly to the vulgar
belief, that probably we should admire her more with a smaller quantity of flowers
and fruits and stars about her. We should like a little more of Nature and con-
siderably less of Art. Fearless of competition, why does not Lovely Woman trust
1c her own charms ?

We shall leave off with the above compliment, for fear of saying anything rude
that might spoil the effect of it. Otherwise, we were about to notice in the
above descriptions the singular absence of jewellery, only we reflected in time,
that no lady ever thinks now-a-days of wearing jewellery, unless it is occasionally
two or three hundred diamonds, with the view of imitating the effect of “the
planetary system.” Who is to blame her, unless it be some one who does not
possess diamonds ?

A DISAGREEABLE WIRE.

Mr. Whitworth’s three-pounder cleaus itself out. One of the many objec-
tions to Lord John’s six-pounder is, that it is very likely to lead to the use of
the sponge.

LOUIS NAPOLEON CONSULTS THE GREAT
POWERS.

What ! France take Savoy ?

To Europe’s annoy,

And in open defiance of treaties.

Not to say protestations
In last year’s proclamations—

(One’s own words most unpleasant to eat ’tis.)

I should cry “ culpa mea,”

If such an idea

Had e’er to my mind found an entry:

Though ’tis perfectly true.

My dear Powers, that for you,

I feel ou the Alps I stand sentry.

So with your approbation,

And consent of the nation,

Perhaps you will make no objection.

Should Savoy and Nice
(To keep Europe at peace)

Place themselves ’neath our Eagles’ protection?

N. B. I may mention.

Should it be your intention,

To raise any hitch in the matter.

That King Yictor and 1
Made it all cut and dry—

May or June last—(I think ’twas the latter).

If you’ll do me the favour
To approve my behaviour,

I shall highly respect your opinions ;

If you won’t, I’m most sorry :

But for this territory,

It’s now part of th’ Imperial dominions.

MODERN FRENCH SLIPSLOP.

*

French diplomatic slang is becoming a great nuisance.
Who can read the subjoined specimen of this modern slip-
slop without irritation? It comes in the shape of a tele-
gram from Paris, referring to an article by M. Grand-
guillot in the Constitutionnel, on “Universal Suffrage and
Public Order in Europe.” We are told that—

“ M. Grandqcillot think3 it necessary to explain the limits of the
doctrine of national sovereignty now invoked against the imperial
policy to the advantage of certain combinations which, his Majesty
cannot protest against, although, prepared without his inspirations."

What M. Grandguillot thinks it necessary to explain,
he states with a degree of perspicuity which corresponds
exactly to the clearness of mud. What sense is to be made
of “the doctrine of national sovereignty,” or any other
doctrine, “invoked against the imperial policy to the
advantage of certain combinations ? ” Is not this jumble
of abstract expressions worse than any metaphysics, even
than such metaphysics as philosophers talk when they are
drunk? And then what is meant by combinations “pre-
pared” without the inspirations of Louis Napoleon?
By his “inspirations” we suppose we are to understand
his suggestions, or his hints ; but why use the word inspi-
rations instead of the plainer term ? The Emperor op
the French is said to patronise spiritual manifestations,
but be is not a spirit himself; at the best he could possibly
be no better than a medium, and cannot, with any propriety,
be said to inspire people in preparing combinations.

There is also a vile French word which has come into
common use—the word prestige. In its proper and original
sense, it is a legitimate word enough; the meaning which
it has acquired is what renders it base and offensive. Em-
ployed to signify magical illusion or jugglery, it is a correct
expression, but it is a most unhappy one when substituted,
as it now is, for credit or renown. Attributed, lor instance,
to a nation, an army, or an individual, it means imposing
reputation; a character for good fortune, power, invincibi-
lity, greatness, knowledge, or wisdom, magnified by people’s
imagination; a celebrity in which there is something of
humbug. The French, if they please, may describe the
influence which they exercise in any respect as prestige j
but let us not borrow from them a term which is most cor-
rectly applicable to the impostures of a charlatan, to denote
the greatness of England. If they like to impute prestige
to their Emperor let them; but let the British public,
sticking to propriety, purity, and honest nomenclature,
ascribe reputation to Punch.