The last stage is the removal of the bindings. The bare lotus, like a bamboo shoot, gradually and completely reveals itself. Its skin is white as frost, its flesh tender and smooth. Its fullness does not hurt the eyes, nor does its thinness expose the bones to view. The heels are well balanced and the toes close to one another. Four toes are thin like bean halves, and the big toes curve upward diminutively like young ginger. Her feet are lukewarm and soft as cotton, but once caressed they become smooth and slippery. Treasure them as you might large jade tokens, love them so that parting with them becomes’ unbearable, so that you can’t help smelling, kissing, biting, and chewing them. The soul wanders to the Great Beyond, ignoring the beginning of dawn.
It is difficult for me in writing these rare words to avoid the criticism of having been lewd. But I had to do this to depict the interest of the lotus. Wasting little ink, I tried to make it as expressive as possible; may the reader understand and forgive. One can discuss the lotus interest inexhaustibly, analyze its details from start to finish, and arrive at these conclusions:
Woman adorns herself for the beloved, and love of beauty is ingrained in her nature. This is true both past and present, in China and elsewhere. Every woman considers beauty glorifying and exalts it as she might a second life. To achieve a beauty’s reputation, she willingly endures starvation and cold, injures her skin and impairs her limbs. Our women anciently regarded as beautiful a broadened forehead with side-locks of cicada-like transparency, silkworm moth-shaped eyebrows, soft fingers, and glossy skin. Their views included the pain of breaking the bones and destroying the veins to acquire the tiny bowed-foot effect. This was considered a dazzling mark of distinction and a competitive quest among beauty lovers. But lewdness was unavoidable, and grasping of the spring bows caused lost souls. Was there divine merit in this?
It cannot be criticized as improper. It was an integral part of orthodox upbringing shared by everyone and an essential aspect of nuptial delight. There was no reason for a pair of lotus hooks in and of themselves to feel shame at being an instrument for exciting lust. When lotus feet flourished, they provided the only “matchmaker” for private meetings between man and woman. The qualities they had for affecting man were those of being thin, small, pointed, bowed, warm, soft, pretty, and elegant. They could be appreciated visually and could bring on feelings of sympathy. She was willing to let him play with them in his hands; who would not find this lovable? Lotus feet were everywhere suitable, in the palms, on the shoulders, by the pillow, or under the coverlets.
But, by way of contrast, how could the foot-long Lotus Boat be held in the palm of one’s hand? And how could one bear to have a heavy pair of ducks alight on one’s shoulders? An encounter with natural feet meant disinterest, for they could not conceivably cause one to lose his soul.
Things which are rare are esteemed. That which is tiny and cleverly contrived is always looked upon as superior. Therefore, while not binding the feet was one alternative, once bound tininess had to be strived for. Tininess was not sufficient in and of itself, but the reduction had to be balanced. This balance was supernaturally achieved and not attainable through human striving. The wondrous lotus was very hard to obtain. Ancients often poetically praised the three-inch golden lotus, but in reality only one in several hundred met this standard. The perfectly proportioned and incomparably elegant tiny foot was a rare worldly treasure, like finding a phoenix hair or a unicorn. It might be accidentally seen but was never a common sight.
A woman’s natural foot and another woman’s feet bound to six inches
A woman’s natural foot and another woman’s feet bound to four-and-one-half inches
I feel that the preciousness of a tiny foot is in its diminutive elegance, which causes the beholder to find it lovable. But a small shape is sometimes clumsy looking. Three to four inches (about four to five Western inches) is considered proper, over four inches is rather looked down upon, while less than three inches is inevitably too small. The three-inch type is first class if the thin and pointed foot has bones, flesh, and surface in harmonious proportion. Women of antiquity regarded the tiny foot as a crystallization of physical beauty; it was not a product of lewd thinking.
Someone asked: “Why not restrict amusement to only playing with the lotus? Why must it be connected with sex?” However, it is only through sex that satisfaction reaches its fullest extent. The lotus has special seductive characteristics and is an instrument for arousing desire. Who can resist the fascination and bewilderment of playing with and holding in his palms a soft and jade-like hook? Who can resist the temptation to try, heart leaping with excitement? Lotus and sex have a reciprocal effect on one another. Lotus depends on sex for its form, while sex depends on lotus for its use. If lotus playing doesn’t culminate in sex, its delight is inexhaustible. If sex doesn’t include the lotus, there is no way in which to reach the extremes of pleasure. The two are vital to one another and each profits accordingly. And there is a strange mystery between them.
Women in the past had good reasons for seriously preventing their lotus hooks from being seen. How could this devotion have been in vain? Yet if every man preferred bound feet, the modern woman would be completely ignored. But this is not so, for tastes change. Today’s natural feet are sought after as much as bound feet were in the past. Preferences vary with the times; beauty or ugliness, right or wrong as invariables are non-existent. Liking becomes a craving which must be shared to be appreciated. The lotus style has become insignificant, and its shadows are suddenly obscured. Old village ladies let out their feet in order to be fashionable, but the swollen limp increases ugliness. How can beauty result, and how can one discern lotus truth through such specimens?
From now on, women will be large-footed immortals, and the spirit of the lotus will be relegated to the historical past. How will a world ignorant of the lotus be able to appreciate the elegance of its shadow and the gracefulness of its walk, or the pleasures that were derived from playing with it? Tiny and bowed shoes will be regarded by posterity as a useless type of shoewear.
To indicate their eminence, wealthy families must have a profusion of dishes at the table when they eat. But the poor villager, ignorant of wealthy tastes, is better off if he fills himself up on pork alone. Knowledge leads to beauty, beauty to love, and love to craving. Craving comes from such depths of love that the source of initial attraction is forgotten. This is true of all things; the lotus is no exception. I am asked: “Do you advocate the lotus foot?” Customs do not spring up overnight, but have deep roots and a hidden strength. But once they change, the rapidity in affecting man is like a swift wind bending the grass. Even a mighty power cannot stop this.
In the former age of autocracy, when our gates were closed to the outside, the lotus custom remained unchanged for a millennium. Even awesome emperors couldn’t eliminate it. Now our form of government has changed, and European ways have come to the East. The natural foot is elevated and flourishes. The change in custom follows our revised aesthetic viewpoint. The golden lotus will never again be mentioned in a discussion of beauty. Only the six-inch rounded foot is considered modern, and it is now universally imitated. How can the lotus still be advocated when its extinction is unpreventable?