Re: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

Thank you for that post, Jem. I always find it interesting when seeing a link between the present and the past.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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.

Re: The Pages of Punch

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.’

Re: The Pages of Punch

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