IS DEMOCRACY EXTRAVAGANT?

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1021, 10 January 1911, Page 9

IS DEMOCRACY EXTRAVAGANT?

HOW MONEY HAS SET THE PACE. J| —; v: HOW'IT AFFECTS THE ARISTOC- ~ RACY. J, —: ii "The advocates- of democracy at the present day have a habit of assuming 0 that under a democracy sterner and simof life would become univer- C sal," says the writer of a very inter- t! esting 'articlo in tho "Times" Woman's n Supplement on "Aristocracy and Extra- (1 vagance." "They speak of aristocracies r as extravagant and ioiul of display, idle, pleasure-loving, inconsiderate of" those j who are not so fortunately placed as a themselves. ;i "Tlicy take for granted that' if aristoc- I racies could be dono away with and dem- i: ocratic institutions flourish undisturbedly, wo should all live simple, austere £ lives, dress in plain and inexpensive ], clothes, and have consequently far moro : r time and energy to devote to tho service „ of tho State.' j. Democracy and Luxury. f "Some readjustment -of theso ideas,- ? however, would seem to bo necessary, for, ( while democracy makes swift an<l ? rapi'd ( strides,- tho progress of luxury keeps f Sace with it. All round lis we sec evi- t cnces of this—in tho gorgeous, luxurious t hotels, and the brilliant and expensive * restaurants, each trying to outdo its predecessor, in the splendour ,of it-\ equip- ; ment—in the sumptuous sale-rooms ot the ( modern dressmakers, where prices are ; asked and given for a single garment r which a hundred years ago would have ] represented - the year's pin-money for a ] laay of fashion—in the dazzling shopwindows of tho jewellers—in the throng j of motors in tho streets. , "And yet every day wo grow .more democratic—'more. Americanised," we hear it said, which is another way of saying -the ( same thing. ] The Democratising of Society. ] ."The 'democratising' of society has < been going on apace iii the last years, i Fifty or a hundred years ago London So- i ciety was almost entirely aristocratic, i and was like a largo family party where every ono knew every one else and was | related oue to tho other. 1 . Now it is a | vast, inchoate agglomeration of hetero- . geneous eleinents, unitedly no connect- j ing links, divided up ' into numerous j groups and coteries wnich mix ; and mill- ] gle toul separate again like tlio bubbles j on soapy water. In most of these differ- j ent groups and coteries members of tho ; old aristocracy ore to bo found in greater or smaller numbers, and in all they ex- , erciso a certain fitful sway., For, strange- , ly enough, these invaders of their old , liatmts and usurpers -of their privileges j still give them a kind of pre-eminence, . and would, wo bolioye, givo t'hom yot ] moro' if they, themselves, knew better t how to grasp and keep the opportunities , they still. possoss. "Atateriafism—that terrible menace of I the future—has come upon us in tho last few,years, with swift and silent tread, ~ and has come in the wake of dtinccracy, ' as malaria in tho wake of, tho mos- , quito. Aristocracies, with all their many j and .patejit faults, arc not nearly ,so , prone to it as democracies.. They caro greatly . for consideration, but much • less for personal comfort. "The richer members of the old aristocracy are hot very much affected by the new state of things. Although tho ■ standard, of luxury with tli'em, too, has risen, they are hot conscious of having altered their habits of life in any important particular. It is true that they burn elcctric light' instead of oil and gas, uso motors instead of horses, pay higlKT wages to their servants and more for their clothes tlian : " their fathers and mothers did, but none 'of thesa things marks,, for them special chango in the composition'bf^sijeidtyJ' Tho Poor Aristocrat and the Monoy Race. . "But the poorer members, more, especially women, aro often disastrously affected by it. Their purses'will not'expand to meet : the new demands which aro made on them, they cannot compete with the new members of society either with regard to their clothes,: their cooks, or their carriages. They see hosts of strangers in Paris olotilos and priceless jewels 'crowding'tho doors and blocking the. staircases of houses which usetl.'to.. be full of' familiar faces, -and where eve/y-.other guest:was--a near'relation. Thc'style of living to. which they havo always been accustomed, and which they were wpnt-.to 'think adequate and digni- . fied, suddenly seems .old-fashioned,' restricted, even: a little sordid. They may try to console themselves with the sense of their innate superiority, but . nover- , thelcss they feel discouraged and out of countenance. , t. "They remember sadly the days when society "was a close ring of people all related "or connected with each other, when' ; the rich people were not very numerous and regarded themselves as under an ob- , ligation to help their less fortunate roi lations. Sons and Daughters of Philistines. "It-must be said that/the position of (lie poorer aristocracy nowadays is a very- ' .If the charmed circle had never been' broken, tho sacred precincts never invaded, it would have been another thing altogether. Outside the Philistines might havo raged in their diamonds ..and their motors. Inside, it ! would' have been comparatively easy to have carried on the same old way of life, ignoring all beyond. But there ■ have been traitors within tho gates who '' for tho sake of immediate gain havo sac- ' rificed tho interests of the whole. "The sons and daughters of the Philistines have been admitted to inato with the children of " the elect, and through > 'the doorway which has opened for them • many others have pushed in. The only i clianco lay ill complete solidarity and re- ■ eistance to Invasion. As .things are. 'society,' in the old sense has long ceased to exist. No one knows now whcro.it i begius,or ends, who are the Ariginal mem- • bers or.who ara outsiders, Modern Society's Question', . "Doubtless the present state of things I had inevitably to come, and has certain I compensations. Modern society is on tho whole more varied, and in a, senso more human, than the Old exclusive arista- • oralis type of society. But it has the greflt drawback-that'in'it money seems, io be -the only criterion by which every-' , body and everything is judged, just - formerly birth was the criterion. Even the clever and distinguished people who I are made so much 6f now seem to be appreciated on account of, tho money value ! of their talents or brains. Of everyone now in society the question seems tacitly: to be asked,' What do you contribute 1 ,io the general fund?' And woe to those ' who can give no satisfactory reply! The result is a constant' sense*,of competition in the,ail'— competition in hospitality, in clothes', jewels, and motor-cars, in brilliancy of company or novelty in the manner of entertaining.. , I Where the Aristocracy Failed. "What is certain is that the result of the present rule o{ democracy in society —and a bad result—is. the standardisation , of life, the effort on the part of cvoryi ono to live like everyone else. This means a great straiji on the people with , small incomes, for the standard set is the standard of rich people, and (hough the conforming to it is generally more ii ! appearance flian in fact, still the strain is considerable. ' "It is a pity in many ways that the aristocracy have surrendered so quickly and completely. Had they kept I heir charmed circle unbroken and allowed no one who was'not entitled Ijv blood to enter, except for some very special and i sufficient reason entirely unconnected with ? money, they could have set the fashion l of simplicity and economy." 1