Could it be he was trying to give the impression that he owed his tailor and in doing so he was “aping” the upper classes where owing your tailor was alleged to be the done thing.
Maybe the chap in the well cut suit is a successful crook trying to come over all respectable by becoming a club member, he would certainly not want his home address know to anyone, the other two standing on his left probably are his bodyguards, I’m not sure but I think the one smoking is lighting his cigarette from the butt of the other chaps smoke, gentlemen never do that so they must be ‘respectable’ thugs. The bald man sitting down with the newspaper is looking very suspiciously at him too, he might be a high ranking police officer.
It is a bit of a puzzle though.
Thank you Victorsmate and Jem for your input. I like to see other people’s reactions to these cartoons. More please!
1932: Our Little Nest
Most readers of Punch would have described themselves as upper middle class. Many jokes revealed a tendency to look down on those beneath them. There is no indication of a corresponding tendency to look up to those above. On the contrary the fabulously wealthy, whether newly or inherited rich, were frequently lampooned. This is such an example and I don’t see any sympathy being extended here.
The ‘little nest’ would probably be demolished after the contents had been sold off at an auction. It was just possible that the fabric would be recycled as an hotel or a boarding school. I doubt whether the National Trust would have been interested, particularly as they usually expected some sort of endowment to help defray the cost of future upkeep.
1932: Fair Means or …
The solicitor is not pleased at the suggestion that his intervention is classed as the opposite of fair means. That isn’t very funny but the detail in the drawing is more interesting than the joke itself.
We are shown exactly what a Scottish solicitor’s office looked like over 80 years ago. Although there are many books and papers in the room it cannot be described as untidy. The lawyer is suitably dressed with a bow tie and a wing collar. I would guess that this attire was somewhat old-fashioned at the time though not unduly so.
Our attention is drawn to the young (indeed very young) lad who is sitting near the window listening in. He too wears a wing collar though his tie is not of the bow variety. He will be an articled clerk which means that he is a legal apprentice.
His training would be largely on the job though he would later go on to attend evening classes in order to qualify as a solicitor himself. He could have entered this office straight from school which in 1932 means that he could have been as young as 14. The drawing suggests that this may well have been the case. I don’t think that at that time any educational certificates would have been required to become an articled clerk. These days it is very different. I imagine that a degree in law is needed and they are all called trainees now.
As I understand it the articled clerk was not paid a salary at all at that time. Instead his parents paid a premium to the solicitor. The effect of this was that the sons (and very occasionally the daughters) of only well off people could enter the profession in this way. Social mobility did not figure as an aspiration in the 1930s. I doubt whether the expression was then in current use.
Incidentally the lawyer is holding his rimless glasses in his right hand and the client is conforming to the fashion of wearing her hat at the back of her head.
1932: The Great Unwashed
Punch’s readers could be relied upon to sympathise with the lady of the house although we might feel that she could look less disdainful and speak more tactfully to the plumber. She isn’t bothered about her cigarette ash falling on the floor. She certainly isn’t going to have to sweep it up.
The plumber and his mate are shown as downright unkempt. If either of them really have bath nights it couldn’t happen soon enough. The mess of pipework shown past the bathroom door suggest that the two are not only scruffy but also incompetent.
The lady is almost certainly accustomed to bathe at least twice a day – once on rising and again before dressing for dinner. Bathnight indeed!
Re. Fair Means or… (104)
When I began my apprenticeship at 14 to a goldsmith in 1959 I had indeed heard that former apprentices (up until 1955) had to pay the employer for the privilege, my own ‘wages’ for the first year was 15 shillings a week, it was a seven year apprenticeship then involving a year of night classes.
Thank you for that post, Jem. I always find it interesting when seeing a link between the present and the past.
1932: I’m Not Snobbish But They Are
Note the implied sequence – ‘first they ask me then they ask the duchess.’ She revels in it.
The attention to detail is noteworthy. Apart from the opulent furnishings we can see the upright posture of the hostess, the tilt of her head and the way in which she is holding her teacup. The visitor is equally pleased with herself. Note the dog asleep on a little table with a ribbon around the neck.
I now wonder whether she actually has a grander house than her grace, the duchess.
1932: Two Nations in the Department Store
This artist again is at the halfway point between the traditional elaborate drawing and the more modern way which is to emphasise the main theme and remove almost all of the clutter in the background. Here the cartoonist hasn’t removed it – he simply hints at it sketchily.
As for the joke itself this sort of thing was very common in the 1930s. It would be nice to think that it was being told at the expense of the rather superior floorwalker at the department store. However, I really doubt it. Note that the customer has dropped her aitch. I regret to say that she isn’t seen to be reproving him for talking posh. Instead she is being shown as ignorant. She doesn’t even know what millinery is.
Our modern view is that he ought to remember that his relatively large salary comes out of the purses of people like the woman he is patronising. It wouldn’t have hurt if he had varied his usual patter and said ‘Hats, madam.’
1932: The General Didn’t Watch His Tongue
Of course he didn’t mean to cause offence. His error was not to vary his small talk to take account of his current audience. In this particular context the expression ‘old woman’ was unfortunately tactless. What he seemed to be saying was ‘You are all old women therefore I have joined you.’ It wasn’t like that in the Senior Officers’ Mess. There his word was law.
The old softie is also wearing spats. Perhaps they remind him of the puttees that he used to wear when in uniform
1932: Hunting
By 1932 hunting scenes had become quite rare in Punch cartoons. This one, however, ignores the Depression completely and shows us a glimpse of life among the really wealthy. The words would not have looked out of place 50 years earlier although the style of the drawing would have been different.
It seems that Old Buster goes hunting with two horses. This means that when his current horse gets tired he can summon up his spare horse. I am assuming that some underling gently rides along with the spare horse so as to keep it fresh for the exertions of carrying OB to whom such extravagance is of no real consequence.
The cigar smoking huntsman on the left confides in the lady riding next to him. It seems that the first horse is not really tired at all but that its rider has emptied the flask (containing neat whiskey?) that was attached to the saddle. I don’t suppose that being drunk in charge of a horse has ever been an indictable offence.
Note that the lady is riding side saddle which she is confidently doing with poise. I seem to recall reading that this would have been called having a ‘good seat.’ It would be a long time before a hunt would break with tradition and decree that ladies should ride astride while wearing jodhpurs. I don’t expect that it would have been a decision left to the individuals concerned. Riding side saddle has, I think, long been consigned to the past.
1932: Blotting out the Landscape
The hostess is the lady smoking through a long holder. She prides herself in being ‘very modern’ and we can see the results of her efforts. It rankles her that her window reveals a world outside that refuses to conform to her preferences. Her solution is to blot out this depressing view and get someone to paint an avante garde picture onto the glass.
She chooses to describe the unsatisfactory view as ‘Victorian’. That is what the Modernists were reacting against. I recall that in the early 1960s I was telling my future father-in-law that his daughter and I were going to a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta in the near future. He said quite apologetically that his generation would not have done that since they were reacting against anything that was Victorian.
Now of course there is quite a cult of Victoriana and Gilbert & Sullivan is frequently revived in London’s West End.
1932: The Old School Tie
Here is another burglary joke. The artist here belongs to the more modern school of cartoonists though the picture is not so sparse in details. It is also a joke about public schools.
The perception of public schools is today rather different to what it was in the 1930s. For example, politicians nowadays seeking election don’t make a point of mentioning this aspect of their education, although quite a number of them still have received that education. In the 1930s this fact would always appear prominently in the election leaflet, irrespective of party. This high esteem was by no means always deserved. Some of these schools could be pretty ropey. Novels and autobiographies of the time would show that some of them had more than their fair share of social misfits on the staff – if not something even worse. Nevertheless most people believed in the benefits of a public school education.
In this cartoon the householder has surprised the burglar in the process of placing his loot in a suitcase now lying open on the table on the right of the picture. Threatened with a pistol the intruder has surrendered. The police have been called and the constable has now handcuffed the burglar.
The readers of Punch will not be surprised that the householder went to a public school. But what is this? The burglar also did and amazingly it was the same school as the man he was trying to rob. This burglar we see looks like a gent. Apparently he wears his old school tie even when out on a job. This of course is pure fantasy. The cartoonist doesn’t expect us to believe that this would actually happen. It is surely the kernel of the joke. The arrested man is looking very contrite. No doubt he is thinking that he has not only let the school down but, worst of all, he has let himself down.
The joke now reaches an extra level of absurdity. The clean-limbed young constable, far from being a PC Plod type, also went to the same school. How impossibly unlikely and how utterly hilarious!
1932: American Motoring Tourist Confronts London Bobby
Unlike the previous cartoon this scenario is entirely plausible. The cartoonist has carefully studied these tourists with regard to their clothes, their spoken words and their body language.
I can remember a time when visiting Americans used to say that London’s policemen were wonderful. I suppose they were comparing their respectful demeanour with their American equivalents. In this instance I assume that Miss de Grass has fallen foul of some quaint rule such as speeding or illegal parking. It may be that she has made the quite common mistake of thinking because Brits also speak English then all the regulations must be identical to those she had known back home.
The policeman’s posture suggests that he is being both polite and officious at the same time. How unlike his counterpart in the US of A.
1932: Ask Another Silly Question
We recently looked at a cartoon by the same artist where a policeman was asked whether the strap on his helmet was there to keep it on his head. This time the answer to the new question is obvious: a catastrophic accident. So the bus conductor picks on an outrageously silly answer.
Note again that the two workaday participants are drawn in great (and convincing) detail while the rest of the scene is only hazily hinted at.
1932: An Alternative Silent Service
This charming little scene could no doubt have been replicated all over the country at the time. The constable on the beat has been invited to rest his feet and consume a welcome cup of tea. This is probably something that the maid’s employer would not permit. On the other hand a policeman is eminently respectable and furthermore there is no reason why anyone should find out.
She tries to draw him out and he manages to be reticent and yet claim the credit at the same time.
I remember the first visit I paid to the UK (London 1964) and one thing struck me as odd, it was the size of the policemen, some of them were very small compared to the Dublin coppers, and you had policewomen, unheard of here then, you had to be at least 5’11” to even be considered for the force over here at that time. It’s changed now of course.
1932: You Can’t Get the Staff
The boss is trying to shame the typist into producing better work. She is getting her own back by praising the grammar. That would be his responsibility when dictating the copy.
A One-One Draw?
There is a petulant look about this quite seedy boss and she isn’t exactly thrilled to be working for him.
1932: A New Treatment for Gout
I think that this cartoon was aimed at the various forms of ‘faith healing’ that abounded at this time. Christian Science in particular was very fashionable. Instead of going to a doctor you were expected to visit a Christian Science Practitioner who would ‘heal’ you by prayer and meditation. I understand that this service is still available but I don’t think that it has anything like the hold that it had in the 1920s and 30s. From the article on the subject in Wikipedia I gather that a consultation with a C.S. Practitioner is considered an allowable medical expense by the United States Inland Revenue Service. Only in America!
At the time faith healing gave rise to the debunking limerick:
There was a faith healer from Deal
Who said ‘though it’s not pain that I feel
When I sit on a pin
And it goes right in
I don’t like what I fancy I feel.’
The general is furious at the suggestion that his gout can be wished away and the nurse is deeply shocked. Gout was then a common complaint among the affluent.
1932: You Still Can’t get the Staff!
The artist here is George Belcher who was famous for his innovative style of drawing. But surely this joke was not new in 1932. It not only has whiskers but it also has a long white beard.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there existed a four thousand-year-old Sumerian baked clay tablet with the following text inscribed in cuneiform script:
Master: “Thou shouldst have been here in the scriptorium within the hour after sunrise”.
Apprentice scribe: “Indeed noble master? Pray tell me what amazing event would I have witnessed”?
Unfortunately it is no longer possible to employ a truly diligent scribe.