This is not a new joke. I have drawn attention to a number of burglary jokes in Punch in different years. No doubt this was drawn afresh but asking the victim to decide on the share out of the loot has appeared in a previous cartoon. I suppose the editor just didn’t spot it.
Surely the senior beautician isn’t saying that Madam is wasting her time (and her husband’s money) in seeking to avoid the effect of time on her appearance? This would be quite unlikely at any time and especially so in 1938.
The alternative explanation is that she is talking in abstract terms and when she says ‘man’ she really means ‘mankind’. That too would be rather implausibly philosophic but would have the merit of being quite amusing under the circumstances.
A scene in which toffs and plebs democratically play cricket together appears in many books and films in the first half of the Twentieth Century. The example that comes most immediately to my mind is in The Go-Between.
C.B. Cochran was the Andrew Lloyd Webber of his day. We see here a view of the ‘media’ folk of the time. It is not particularly flattering. Everything adds up to a view of ‘modern’ young men. They smoke and drink and don’t do very much. Their clothes and the scruffy prints of contemporary art on the wall suggest that their artistic pretensions are just a façade.
The point about Cochran is that if the speaker were sure of success then he would certainly buck up his idea and do the work.
It was then normal to persuade left handed children to write with their right hand. Cases are recorded of children having their left arm strapped to their sides to encourage them to write ‘correctly’.
I don’t know this for a fact but I have the impression that this attitude is no longer considered correct. Left-handed Presidents of the United States have included Harry S. Truman, Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
Statistically it is quite likely that a number of people on this forum are also left-handed. Does anyone care to comment?
Peters does not relish having to decide whether it is preferable to annoy the General or his wife. I suspect that the General is the one who is going to be annoyed. We see at least five house maids waiting to serve the lunch. There seems to be a war scene being illustrated on the wall behind them. In it, it is presumably the General himself (in his younger days) who we see on horseback (during World War One!) charging the enemy with sword in hand with the Tommies following behind. This serves as a contrast to his now subordinate status.
Presumably the Royal Navy does not concern itself with such trifles as the fisherman’s livelihood. Such incidents would be more common with World War Two which was just round the corner.
The two medical men have been involved in the same traffic accident. Their cars have suffered severe damage but they both have miraculously escaped any injury at all. They immediately examine each other and reach the same diagnosis.
This artist is clearly influenced by a contemporary school of art, although I don’t know what to call it.
Now that I think about it, I haven’t seen pavement artists for many years although there used to be plenty around. I would guess that there are now bylaws in place to prevent this form of busking.
While the wives are having an agreeable conversation the male visitor instantly manages to annoy his host. Whereas the host is certainly not an ‘arty’ the guest is very much a ‘hearty’.
Well we can all make our own deductions. Personally I think that the ‘rough’ man is exactly what the hostess is talking about. Bear in mind that she is replying to a question from her guests. They would not be asking questions about the elegant man on the left. However I do see that that one is more interested in the garden than in the other guests.