| Show much has bees been said or he bic subject of drass since q dress in in ancient ilie flie days of of the ancients and and modem times one cannot help hut but compare the fashions of today by B W HUGHEY manopoli Ma napoli anol with the dress of 2000 A years ago they of the era before christ wore reaching down to thee the feet and only a little pulled up at the girdle it was a very large oblong piece of woven cloth equal to about one and one half lengths of the body tho the overhanging part of the cloth was folded around the chest and back from the neck downward the upper edge being arranged around the neck and the two open corners clasped together on one shoulder on the open side therefore the naked body was visible often the dresses were transparent these diaphanous dresses clinging close to the body and allowing the color of the skin and veins reins to be seen have been frequently imitated with astonishing ishin skill by y greek sculptors and painters this all belonged to antiquity many persons are agreed that there is nothing 0 more beautiful than a womans comans figure but civilization has demanded a covering for this beauty if we admit such a thing as lasciviousness of dress then the transparent bodices and diaphanous skirts of today must be wrong and being wrong their effect must be bad if the women could hear the ugly remarks to which their attire gives rise they might eliminate the aforementioned detriments to good morals their plea would no doubt be that the evil remarks emanate only from evil minds and that the higher male looks bonwith on with approval but does lie he can that which debases the morals of the one elevate those of the other ido I 1 do not wish to see women back in wider sk skirts arts for I 1 lay claim to an artistic temperament and the style of the skirt today is in my opinion as pretty as it ever was my ily only concern is for the youth of today and I 1 plead that dress suggestiveness be rigidly tabooed by those women who have allowed themselves to become the slaves of fashion |
