OLIVE SCHREINER AND ISADORA DUNCAN
I hope that no one will see in the
conjuncture of these names a mere wanton fantasy,
or a mere sensational contrast. To me there is
something extraordinarily appropriate in that conjuncture,
inasmuch as the work of Olive Schreiner and the work
of Isadora Duncan supplement each other.
It is the drawback of the woman’s
movement that in any one of its aspects (heightened
and colored as such an aspect often is by the violence
of propaganda) it may appear too fiercely narrow.
That women should make so much fuss about getting
the vote, or that they should so excite themselves
over the prospect of working for wages, will appear
incomprehensible to many people who have a proper regard
for art, for literature, and for the graces of social
intercourse. It is only when the woman’s
movement is seen broadly, in a variety of its aspects,
that there comes the realization that here is a cause
in which every fine aspiration has a place, a cause
from which sincere lovers of truth and beauty have
nothing really to fear.
Mrs. Olive Schreiner stands, by virtue
of her latest book, “Women and Labor,”
as an exponent of the doctrine that would send women
into every field of economic activity; or, rather,
the doctrine that finds in the forces which are driving
them there a savior of her sex from the degradation
of parasitism. In behalf of this doctrine she
has expended all that eloquence and passion which
have made her one of the figures in modern literature
and a spokesman for all women who have not learned
to speak that hieratic language which is heard, as
the inexpressive speech of daily life is not heard,
across space and time.
Miss Isadora Duncan stands as representative
of the renaissance in dancing. She has brought
back to us the antique beauty of an art of which we
have had only relics and memento in classic sculpture
and decoration. She has made us despise the frigid
artifice of the ballet, and taught us that in the
natural movements of the body are contained the highest
possibilities of choregraphic beauty. It has been
to many of us one of the finest experiences of our
lives to see, for the first time, the marble maiden
of the Grecian urn come to life in her, and all the
leaf-fringed legends of Arcady drift before our enamored
eyes. She has touched our lives with the magic
of immemorial loveliness.
But to class Olive Schreiner as a
sociologist and Isadora Duncan as a dancer, to divorce
them by any such categories, is to do them both an
injustice. For they are sister workers in the
woman’s movement. They have each shown
the way to a new freedom of the body and the soul.
The woman’s movement is a product
of the evolutionary science of the nineteenth century.
Women’s rebellions there have been before, utopian
visions there have been, which have contributed no
little to the modern movement by the force of their
tradition and ever-living spirit. No Joan of
Arc has led men to victory, no Lady Godiva has sacrificed
her modesty nay, even, no courtesan has
taught a feeble king how to rule his country without
feeding the flame of feminine aspiration. But
it is modern science which, by giving us a new view
of the body, its functions, its needs, its claim upon
the world, has laid the basis for a successful feminist
movement. When the true history of this movement
is written it will contain more about Herbert Spencer
and Walt Whitman, perhaps, than about Victoria Woodhull
and Tennessee Claflin. In any case, it is to
the body that one looks for the Magna Charta of feminism.
The eye that is to say is
guarantor for the safety of art in a future regime
under the dominance of women; and the ear for poetry.
These have their functions and their needs, and the
woman of the future will not deny them.
It is the hand that Olive Schreiner
would emancipate from idleness. She knows the
significance of the hand in human history. It
was by virtue of the hand that we, and not some other
creature, gained lordship over the earth. It
was the hand (marvelous instrument, coaxing out of
the directing will an ever-increasing subtlety) that
made possible the human brain, and all the vistas
of reason and imagination by which our little lives
gain their peculiar grandeur.
And this hand, if it be a woman’s
in the present day, is doomed to the smallest activities.
“Our spinning wheels are all broken ...Our hoes
and grindstones passed from us long ago.... Year
by year, day by day, there is a silently working but
determined tendency for the sphere of women’s
domestic labors to contract itself.” Even
the training of her child is taken away from the mother
by the “mighty and inexorable demands of modern
civilization.” That condition is to her
intolerable; and it is on behalf of women’s
empty hands that she makes her demand: “that,
in that strange new world that is arising alike upon
the man and the woman, where nothing is as it was,
and all things are assuming new shapes and relations,
that in this new world we also shall have our share
of honored and socially useful human toil, our full
half of the labor of the Children of Woman.”
And what of Miss Duncan what
is her part in the woman’s movement? In
her book on “The Dance” she tells a story:
“A woman once asked me why I dance with bare
feet, and I replied, ’Madam, I believe in the
religion of the beauty of the human foot’; and
the lady replied, ‘But I do not,’ and
I said: ’Yet you must, Madam, for the expression
and intelligence of the human foot is one of the greatest
triumphs of the evolution of man.’ ‘But,’
said the lady, ‘I do not believe in the evolution
of man.’ At this said I, ’My task
is at an end. I refer you to my most revered
teachers, Mr. Charles Darwin and Mr. Ernst Haeckel ’
‘But,’ said the lady, ‘I do not
believe in Darwin and Haeckel ’ At
this point I could think of nothing more to say.
So you see that, to convince people, I am of little
value and ought not to speak.”
But rather to dance! Yet it is
good to find so explicit a statement of the idea which
she nobly expresses in her dancing. For, as the
hand is the symbol of that constructive exertion of
the body which we call work, so is the foot the symbol
of that diffusive exertion of the body which we call
play. Isadora Duncan would emancipate the one
as Olive Schreiner would emancipate the other to
new activities and new delights.
And if such work is not a thing for
itself only, but a gateway to a new world, so is such
play not a thing for itself only. “It is
not only a question of true art,” writes Miss
Duncan, “it is a question of race, of the development
of the female sex to beauty and health, of the return
to the original strength and the natural movements
of woman’s body. It is a question of the
development of perfect mothers and the birth of healthy
and beautiful children.” Here we have an
inspiriting expression of the idea which through the
poems of Walt Whitman and the writings of various
moderns, has renovated the modern soul and made us
see, without any obscene blurring by Puritan spectacles,
the goodness of the whole body. This is as much
a part of the woman’s movement as the demand
for a vote (or, rather, it is more central and essential
a part); and only by realizing this is it possible
to understand that movement.
The body is no longer to be separated
in the thought of women from the soul: “The
dancer of the future will be one whose body and soul
have grown so harmoniously together that the natural
language of that soul will have become the movement
of the body. The dancer will not belong to a
nation, but to all humanity. She will dance, not
in the form of nymph, nor fairy, nor coquette, but
in the form of woman in its greatest and purest expression.
She will realize the mission of woman’s body
and the holiness of all its parts. She will dance
the changing life of nature, showing how each part
is transformed into the other. From all parts
of her body shall shine radiant intelligence, bringing
to the world the message of the thoughts and aspirations
of thousands of women. She shall dance the freedom
of woman.
“She will help womankind to
a new knowledge of the possible strength and beauty
of their bodies, and the relation of their bodies to
the earth nature and to the children of the future.
She will dance, the body emerging again from centuries
of civilized forgetfulness, emerging not in the nudity
of primitive man, but in a new nakedness, no longer
at war with spirituality and intelligence, but joining
itself forever with this intelligence in a glorious
harmony.
“Oh, she is coming, the dancer
of the future; the free spirit, who will inhabit the
body of new women; more glorious than any woman that
has yet been; more beautiful than the Egyptian, than
the Greek, the early Italian, than all women of past
centuries the highest intelligence in the
freest body!”
If the woman’s movement means
anything, it means that women are demanding everything.
They will not exchange one place for another, nor
give up one right to pay for another, but they will
achieve all rights to which their bodies and brains
give them an implicit title. They will have a
larger political life, a larger motherhood, a larger
social service, a larger love, and they will reconstruct
or destroy institutions to that end as it becomes
necessary. They will not be content with any
concession or any triumph until they have conquered
all experience.