1. OliverLewis
1
Punch political cartoon close reading assignment
Punch magazine wasa radical Victorianperiodical firstpublishedin1841 that commented ontopical
social events andpolitical movements throughthe mediumof cartoons. Bythe 1850s Punch’s
ideology became slightlymore conservativetoremainpopularwiththe mainly middle class
readership.Despite this,itstill tookaradical perspective on revolutionisingthe nation’s perspective
of publichealth,mostnotably,cholera. JohnLeech’s‘A CourtforKingCholera’ (1852) depictsan
overcrowded streetwithaprominentpile of waste inthe foreground,outliningthe influx of people
and poorsanitaryconditionsasa consequence to industrialisation. AnotherLeechcartoon, ‘Father
ThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’ (1858), depictsrevulsionatwhatthe
RiverThameshasbecome.Althoughthe cartoon featuresthe fictional caricature of the filthyriver,
FatherThames,italso mirrorsa topical historical event.Publishedinthe unusuallyhotsummerof
1858 it parodiesThe GreatStink,the closure of the Housesof Parliament until winterdue toan
unbearable stenchcomingfromthe sewage saturatedThames. Leechusesbathos, ananti-climax
whichcreatesa comic effect,toconstructa specificpathwayforreaders tofollow the pocketsof
actionwithin‘A Courtfor KingCholera’. Bydoingthis,he isable toengage readerswithhistorical
contextof germtheoryuntil ‘KingCholera’isfound. WithinbothcartoonsPunch portraysLondon
opento trade and travel as vulnerable,as foreignthreatsappeartobe a factor inthe spreadof
disease. ApplyingMikhail Bakhtin’sdefinitionof the grotesque,which“exaggeratesandcaricatures
the negative,the inappropriate ... [distinguishing]fromthe clownishandfromburlesque”(306)
bothcartoons use this technique toaccentuate the toxicityof London. A genderedreadingof ‘Father
ThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’ suggeststhe doomednature of
feminisedLondon. Followingfromthisbothcartoons trivialiserepresentationsof death,using
imageryof the burlesque to suggestthatinitscurrent state Londonisa doomedcity. Although both
cartoons use a range of comicdevicestoprovoke humour oreven invoke laughter,itpromptsa
political afterthoughtthrough social satire.
2. OliverLewis
2
Punch’sspecificwordchoice of the title of ‘A Courtof KingCholera’becomescomicthrough
bathos, as connotationsof a king’scourtevoke imagesof grandeur,yetinstead the settingissimply
a busycity street. Withno‘KingCholera’ ininitial sight, Leechsetsupa visual journeywithinthe
cartoon as readers attempttofindhimwithinthe pocketsof action. Leechdoesthisbyloadingthe
image withmultiplereferences outliningpopularfactorsand causesto the spreadof cholera,each
the depictionof one progressivelymore disturbingthanthe last.Startingonthe leftside of the
cartoon, a washingline withclothesdriftinginthe wind actsas a hinttowardsthe widelybelieved
miasmatheory, asillnesswascontractedthroughbeingsubjectedto‘badair’. Similarly, the crowded
mass of people inthe centre of the cartoon makesanindirectreference tothe contagiontheory of
disease, whicharguedthe transmissionof illness occurredbetweenpeople throughdirectcontact.
The depictionof the crowdis troubling asLeechembellishesthe compositionof the woodetching,
usinglinestoshade charactersand consequentlyblur figuresintoone another. Thisrepresentation
of an overwhelmingmassmovementof peoplepresentsasense of city-lifechaos, asbothcharacters
inthe cartoonand its readersare unable to fully understandthe scene with clarity. Finally,readers
encounterthe true representationof ‘KingCholera’beingcarriedintothe image fromthe rightside
of the frame:a coffin.The effectof thisvisual journeyrichlyfilledwith medical hearsay buildsupthe
expectationsof readers,onlytobe disappointedwhentheysee andacknowledgethe deadly
consequencesof cholera.
The representationsof trade andtravel become synonymouswith distrustandthe
grotesque body. Bythe 1850s the Thames wasusedas a majortradingpost,signifiedbythe factory
inthe background of ‘FatherThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’,powered
by flowingwatertoincrease importandexportopportunities. The smogfromthe smoke stacks
creatingan ominous tone, asLeechemphasisesthe dangersof industry. The illustrationof Father
Thames’offspring emergingfromthe pollutedriver isironic, aseachof the figuresdisplaysymptoms
of the diseasestheyare namedafter. Scrofulaisportrayedasmalnourishedwithaswollenstomach,
whilstDiphtheria’supperrespiratorytractisaccentuatedasFatherThameschokesher. These
3. OliverLewis
3
imageswouldconformtoMikhail Bakhtin’sstyleof the comicgrotesque,attributesincluding
“exaggeration,hyperbolism[and] excessiveness”(303). Choleraisthe onlyfigure unable tostand
and appearsto be drowningacreature in the process.Thisbecomesbothironicandgrotesque,as
symptoms of cholerainclude severe dehydrationandexplosive diarrhoea. Throughthisitbecomes
clearLeechutilisesgrotesque imagerytoinvoke laughterandsatirise the illnessesthatare causing
pandemicsacrossEurope. Althoughthe depictionof FatherThamesisalsogrotesque,itismuch
more sinisterthanhisoffspring. Bakhtinelaboratesfurtheronthe construction of the grotesque
bodyas “a bodyinthe act of becoming.Itisneverfinished,nevercompleted;itiscontinuallybuilt,
createdand buildsandcreatesanotherbody”(317). Usingthistheoryitbecomesclearthat Leech
portraysFatherThamesas a metonymyof the toxicstate of the river, lackinganylegsas his
poisonousbodydissolvesintothe river. Grotesqueimageryismore subtlewithin ‘A CourtforKing
Cholera’, foundinthe twocharacters whose backsare turnedfromthe readerspointof view
creatinga sense of distrust.Thisreading isdevelopedevenfurtherbytheirclothing,asboth
characters appearto wearbandanasand eye patches,suggestingtheyare pirates.Bakhtin’s
grotesque theorysuggeststhisisanattemptbyLeechto keepthe cartooncomic as “the eyeshave
no part inthese comicimages;theyexpressanindividual sotospeak. . . whichisnot essentialtothe
grotesque”(316). Thoughconcealingthe characters eyesthroughcostume couldbe an attemptto
conformto the grotesque ideal inordertobecome comic,analternative readingdeviatesfrom
Bakhtin’sclassification.Usingstereotypicalcostume associatedwithpirates,readersare able to
identifyand treatthese characterswithcaution,asLeechusesthe grotesque asan allegoryfor
xenophobia. Thisisfurthersupportedbythe deliberate positioningof the characters,standingbelow
a signthat states“LOGINS FORTRAVELLERS”, creatingthe suggestiontoreaders thatforeign
travellersormerchantsare the cause for the publichealthepidemics,importingcholeraandother
diseasesintoLondon.
A genderedreadingof the ‘FatherThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof
London’cartoon suggestsLeech exploitsgenderpowerdynamicsto portray the feminineLondon
4. OliverLewis
4
violatedby the masculine FatherThames. Leechestablishesthese powerspheres throughastark
visual opposition,LadyLondonpresented asawhite-clad,pure andcrownedfemale,symbolsof
purity. Hercrown represents the highestsocial classof the city, likelytobe QueenVictoria. Her
clothingisreminiscentof aclassical Greekdeity,asshe becomesthe epitomeof “fair”femininity.
Leechimbuesincongruityhercharacter,althoughherhandgesture depictshow she isrepulsedby
whatshe iswitnessing,LadyLondonlookshernose downatthe creaturesemergingfromthe
Thames. Thismay have beenincludedtoechothe nonchalantattitude of upperclassestothe lower
classconcern of poor publichealth.IncomparisontoLadyLondon,the depictionof FatherThamesis
one of active violence,demonstratedashe stranglesDiphtheria.Hisdecrepit,oilyanddistorted
featuresbecome threateningtothe “fair”woman, whotransforms intoa figure of vulnerability.
AlthoughLady Londonownsa shield,embellishedwiththe coatof arms of London,she doesnot use
it to defendagainstthe creaturesemergingfromthe Thames.Instead,possibly paralyzedoutof
shockshe submissivelyholdsit,puttingLondonatriskas a consequence. Thissubmissionbecomes
the tragic downfall of London,as FatherThamesintends to“introduce”hisoffspringtothe restof
the city. The pollutedriverbankbatheticallyunderminesthe image of afathershowingthe gloriesof
Londonto hischildrenasLeechturns thisintoan image of horror. St. Paul’sCathedral risingbehind
Lady Londonoverlooksthe Thamesactsas an iconicrepresentationof the centre of Londonsince its
initial constructionin604 AD.It appearsto be sealedoff forFatherThamesandhis“offspring”as
Lady Londonacts as a feminine andultimately futile defence tothe city.Thisinterpretation,like the
image of the dense smogchokingthe city,createsan ominous political commentwithinthe cartoon.
It seemsinevitable thatall of Londonwill be infectedbythe destructionof Father Thamesandhis
offspring, asthe “faircityof London”becomesa batheticnostalgia.
In the forefrontof ‘A Courtfor KingCholera’awomanscavengesforfoodina large pile of
waste. The pile isheavily shaded,evokingconnotationsof blacknessandwithit,decay.Following
fromthisinsight,the energeticchildperformingahandstandontopof the pile becomesa
subversive figure of incongruity.Placingthe childontopof the pile of rottingwaste whilstothers
5. OliverLewis
5
playon the floorLeechsymbolicallycreatesatone of nonchalantacceptance,suggestingthatlife will
be wasteddue to the appallingcityconditions. Similarly,deathwithin‘FatherThamesIntroduceshis
Offspringtothe FairCityof London’alsoappearsto be an accepted fate withinLondonasthe
cartoon featuresseveraldeadcreaturesfloatingwithinthe Thamesoronthe riverbank.The cartoon
couldbe read as burlesque,caricaturingthe government’s apathetic‘laissez-faire’approach to
findingamandatoryand wide-spreadsolutiontothe issue of publichealth. Asthe cartoonis littered
withcorpses floatinginthe Thamesreadersmaycreate an alternative meaningtothe cartoon’stitle:
contrastingto the three figuresof disease,the actual “offspring”of FatherThamesisinfact death.
Notevenplantlife cansurvive the contaminated streetsof London,poignantlyepitomisedbythe
small flowerpotabove the signfortravellerswithin‘A CourtforKingCholera’.Lackinganyleavesof
flowers,all thatremainsisashrivelledstem. The drasticconnotations evokedfromthistinydetail
are colossal,asevennature cannotsurvive the murkycitystreets.Thisinturnacts as a subtle focal
pointof industrial decay,presentingLondonasa toxicand unnatural place,home onlytoan ailing
society.
As bothcartoonssatirise filthyLondon,readersmaybecome sickenedasthe laughterturns
to bitterpolitical commentary.Theoriesonlaughtercanopenthisconceptfurther,as Martin
Gardner citesReinholdNiebuhrwhotheorisesitssocio-political effect:
Laughter. . . is a kindof no man’slandbetweenfaithanddespair.We preserveoursanityby
laughingatlife’ssurface absurdities,butthatbitternessandderisionisdirectedtowardsthe
deeperirrationalitiesof evil anddeath (15)
Applyingthistheorytothe twocartoonsit becomesclearthat Punch utilisesthe comictechnique of
the grotesque toengage itsreadership,makinglightof topical issues. Throughthisthey are able to
create an afterthoughtbyinvoking laughter,unveilingapublicfurore atthe lackof legislationto
improve publichealthinthe city. Developingthisinterpretation furtherthe facial expression of
Diphtheria,whichisinthe centre of the cartoon,gainsa sense of ekphrasis isitinfactmirrors a
reader’sinitial facial expressionof shockatthe pollutedstate of London. Throughthislaughteris
6. OliverLewis
6
codedwiththe intentionof causingavisceral reactionforPunch’s readers,promptinga
revolutionaryreaction. Punch takesahighlycritical perspective atthe lackof reformfor public
health,assix yearssince the publicationof ‘A CourtforKingCholera’the issue of publichealth
appearsto have gottenworse.Londonnotonlyfacesthe threatof cholerabutalsodiphtheriaand
scrofulatoo,as depictedin‘FatherThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’.
AlthoughJohnLeechisthe cartoonistforboth images, the magazinestreatmentof disease
drasticallyaltersinbetweenpublicationof both cartoons. While ‘A CourtforKingCholera’suggestsa
numberof factors that couldcontribute tothe spreadof the disease,‘FatherThamesIntroducinghis
Offspringtothe FairCityof London’ whichwaspublishedlateralludingthatdirtywatercan be the
source of cholera.HisassumptionisbackedbyJohnSnow’smedical findingsin1854, provingthat a
waterpumpcontaminatedwithsewage inBroadStreet,Sohowasthe sole cause of choleradeaths.
Thisdemonstrateshow Punch activelyengagedwithupcomingmedical knowledge andtheories,
withthe aimof identifying anaccurate long-termsolution toresolvethe threatpublichealthposed
to society.
![OliverLewis
1
Punch political cartoon close reading assignment
Punch magazine wasa radical Victorianperiodical firstpublishedin1841 that commented ontopical
social events andpolitical movements throughthe mediumof cartoons. Bythe 1850s Punch’s
ideology became slightlymore conservativetoremainpopularwiththe mainly middle class
readership.Despite this,itstill tookaradical perspective on revolutionisingthe nation’s perspective
of publichealth,mostnotably,cholera. JohnLeech’s‘A CourtforKingCholera’ (1852) depictsan
overcrowded streetwithaprominentpile of waste inthe foreground,outliningthe influx of people
and poorsanitaryconditionsasa consequence to industrialisation. AnotherLeechcartoon, ‘Father
ThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’ (1858), depictsrevulsionatwhatthe
RiverThameshasbecome.Althoughthe cartoon featuresthe fictional caricature of the filthyriver,
FatherThames,italso mirrorsa topical historical event.Publishedinthe unusuallyhotsummerof
1858 it parodiesThe GreatStink,the closure of the Housesof Parliament until winterdue toan
unbearable stenchcomingfromthe sewage saturatedThames. Leechusesbathos, ananti-climax
whichcreatesa comic effect,toconstructa specificpathwayforreaders tofollow the pocketsof
actionwithin‘A Courtfor KingCholera’. Bydoingthis,he isable toengage readerswithhistorical
contextof germtheoryuntil ‘KingCholera’isfound. WithinbothcartoonsPunch portraysLondon
opento trade and travel as vulnerable,as foreignthreatsappeartobe a factor inthe spreadof
disease. ApplyingMikhail Bakhtin’sdefinitionof the grotesque,which“exaggeratesandcaricatures
the negative,the inappropriate ... [distinguishing]fromthe clownishandfromburlesque”(306)
bothcartoons use this technique toaccentuate the toxicityof London. A genderedreadingof ‘Father
ThamesIntroducinghisOffspringtothe FairCityof London’ suggeststhe doomednature of
feminisedLondon. Followingfromthisbothcartoons trivialiserepresentationsof death,using
imageryof the burlesque to suggestthatinitscurrent state Londonisa doomedcity. Although both
cartoons use a range of comicdevicestoprovoke humour oreven invoke laughter,itpromptsa
political afterthoughtthrough social satire.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/4f0dcb52-e528-4bcc-8118-7a0b1f130413-151220180724/85/Punch-political-cartoon-close-reading-assignment-1-320.jpg)
