“Parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism in the Nineteenth-Century Press.”

Thomas J. Tobin
The William Morris Society in the United States

Introduction

	[SLIDE 1] Beginning with William Fredeman’s Bibliocritical Study of Pre-Raphaelitism in 1965, academics have increasingly seen the Pre-Raphaelite movement as a typically understated British counterpart to the social and political unrest that swept Europe during the late 1840s. While the continent was embroiled in revolution and cultural struggle, England experienced its own radical changes, especially in the world of arts and letters, as it responded to the pressures of Chartism, Socialism, Darwinism, Marxism, and pairing an orange velvet waistcoat with purple trousers. 
	Because the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood was born alongside other revolutionary movements in 1848, the British press often projected onto the fledgling art movement its own fears about the potential for England to become less English: Pre-Raphaelitism was seen as regressive, continental, and Roman Catholic, and was often parodied during the second half of the century, even well after the movement had died out, re-flourished, and died out again.
	This talk will examine the time line of Pre-Raphaelitism, compare it to the historical and political trends of its day, and demonstrate how parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism in the press operated to expose and assuage British xenophobia through ridicule of a “straw man,” Pre-Raphaelitism. This image is Frederick Sandys’ A Nightmare, which parodies John Everett Millais’ Sir Isumbras at the Ford, replacing the horse with a donkey, the knight with Millais, the children with Dante Rossetti and William Holman Hunt, and the sword with a maul stick and sloshing paint bucket.  This image exemplifies the parodic response to Pre-Raphaelitism during the later 1800s; however, it’s time now for a short quiz.

A Pre-Raphaelite Parody Quiz

[SLIDE 2]

1. During what nineteenth-century decade did the most parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism appear in the British press?

a. 1850s
b. 1860s
c. 1870s
d. 1880s *
e. 1890s
f. none of these

2. Which member of the Pre-Raphaelite circle of painters and poets was most often parodied during the nineteenth century?

a. Dante Gabriel Rossetti
b. William Holman Hunt
c. John Everett Millais *
d. Algernon Charles Swinburne
e. Christina Rossetti
f. Thomas Woolner

3. What periodical published the most parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism during the nineteenth century?

a. Punch, or the London Charivari
b. Fun *
c. Temple Bar
d. The Light Green: A Superior and High-Class Periodical
e. Household Words
f. Westminster Review

4. Name the painting: “The boy, advancing with the bowl of water, exemplifies a splendid case of rhachitis, or rickets; and the osteological distortions of his frame have been correctly copied from the skeleton. The child in the centre is expressively represented with the red hair, light eyebrows, and mottled complexion, which betoken the extreme of struma. . . . The drawing of the figures evinces minute study in the demonstration-room.”

a. Christ in the House of His Parents, John Everett Millais, 1850 *
b. The Surgeon’s Hands, John William Turner, 1852
c. A Scene from Country Life, John Atkins Hunt, 1854
d. The Omnibus, John MacInnis, 1856
e. The Hireling Shepherd, William Holman Hunt, 1858
f. Purely Pre-Raphaelite, Anonymous, 1860

5. Most parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism were written anonymously or under pseudonyms. Which person, later to become a supporter of the movement, actually signed his or her parody?

a. Frederick George Stephens, in the Athenaeum
b. Charles Dickens, in Household Words *
c. Mary Braddon, in Belgravia
d. Matthew Jones, in Fun
e. Arthur Clement Hilton, in The Light Green: A Superior and High-Class Periodical
f. Tom Taylor, in Punch

6. In what periodical does the shortest textual dig at Pre-Raphaelitism appear?

a. Journal pour Rire
b. Pall Mall Gazette
c. Fraser’s Magazine
d. Punch
e. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle *
f. The Knicker-bocker

7. Which of these qualities did “The Comic Physiognomist” (Fun, 1867) NOT say was indicative of a Pre-Raphaelite painter?

a. “His ladies are taller than anyone else’s, their hair is more red-hot, . . . their drapery straighter and more scratchy.”
b. “He has invented a school of his own (without pupils, it is true).”
c. “At [depicting] a brick wall and in faithful rendering of a gorgeous drawing-room paper, he is unrivalled.”
d. “His perspective is more outrageous, his foliage yellower and browner than any other’s.”
e. “He ‘goes in’ for painting what he sees, and he alone sees what he paints (for his pictures are never hung).”

Timeline

	[SLIDE 3] The Pre-Raphaelite movement, unlike many other art and literary movements, seems always to have been somewhat amorphous, resisting definition and changing itself as the nineteenth century went along, adding and subtracting members, philosophies, and styles. Because it was so malleable, it retained the impression of its surrounding society especially well. Just so our terms are clear, here is a capsule treatment of important dates in the movement.
	Between 1848 and 1855, the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, or P. R. B., was active. The original seven founders of the movement—led by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Holman Hunt, and John Everett Millais—were painting, producing poetry, and publishing their art ‘zine The Germ. By 1855, however, the members of the original movement were either no longer practicing its tenets, had quit painting and poetry all together, or had moved far away to pursue individual work.
	From 1857 to about 1870, the “second wave” of Pre-Raphaelitism gained momentum when Edward Burne-Jones and William Morris, two students at Oxford, looked up Rossetti and started another movement, this time based on Arthurian and Scandinavian mythological history, rather than on German, French, and Italian models. It is during this second wave that the original Brotherhood and several younger artists all claim to be Pre-Raphaelites, thus diluting the definition of the term.
	Between 1870 and 1882, several of the “second wave” followers of Rossetti-inspired Pre-Raphaelitism began to adopt the practices of the growing Aesthetic and Arts and Crafts movements; while both hearkened back to the Pre-Raphaelites as their prototypes, neither was parodied in the press like the PRB had been. By this time, we see the rise of painters like Edward Burne-Jones and Frederick Leighton, who widen the classicism inherent in the early movement to include ancient Rome and Greece. Dante Rossetti continues to reinvent his works, while William Morris begins his socialist experiments, and John Everett Millais stops painting in a Pre-Raphaelite way all together when he is elected to the Royal Academy.
	By the 1890s, Pre-Raphaelitism is definitely finished. Since many of the original artists are by now dead or very old, the movement is seen in a historical light, and few critics use it in any way other than to contrast it with the “new” movements of the day, such as Impressionism. Algernon Swinburne and Oscar Wilde typify the Aesthetic artists who hearken back to the “simpler ways of the Pre-Raphaelites,” without actually being Pre-Raphaelites themselves. John William Waterhouse, among many artists, paints Pre-Raphaelite subjects, but does not adopt the tenets of the early movement.

Trends in the Nineteenth Century

	Oh, yes, the quiz! [SLIDE 4]
	Let’s take a look at the answers and see how they help to demonstrate the way in which parodying the Pre-Raphaelites became a sort of cultural watermark, referring to current events and national concerns in a sub rosa manner.
	Question 1 asked when the most parodies appeared. Based on the timeline, if you thought that the movement needed a few years to catch on, and the “second wave” also needed time to become ingrained in the public mind, you’re right. Pre-Raphaelite paintings quickly became such an integral part of the English visual vocabulary that parodic representations were often un-labeled, assuming viewers’ familiarity with the original images. Although parodies began almost immediately, it was during the 1880s (choice d.) that the most were published.
	Question 2 about who was most often parodied can be answered by asking which artist had the longest and most public career: John Everett Millais (choice c.) began painting professionally at fifteen and rose to the presidency of the Royal Academy; by the 1870s, he had stopped painting in the Pre-Raphaelite style, but was called a Pre-Raphaelite by the press until well into the 1890s. The image is from Punch in 1881 and contrasts Millais as a PRB with his later image as a sober academician.
	Question 3’s answer is choice b., Fun, because they published regular parodies of Millais’ works for every Royal Academy exhibition in which he participated (this one is a parody of Une Grande Dame entitled “Une Grande Damn, or the Big, Big D—sad in one so young”). By the way, parodies did appear in Punch, The Light Green, and Household Words, but not in the sober-sided Temple Bar or the Westminster Review (I put those in to see who’s paying attention). More on this later.
	The painting so scathed by Punch in Question 4 is by Millais, Christ in the House of His Parents, often known as The Carpenter’s Shop (choice a.). One of the major criticisms of Pre-Raphaelitism was that they consciously sought “real” models as opposed to “beautiful” or ideal ones. Early Pre-Raphaelitism also tended toward Italian and French Catholic iconography, and their minute detail evoked continental German and Italian practices—a neat trifecta of philosophical, religious, and cultural xenophobia that mirrored the social upheaval and isolationism that marked England after the continental revolutions of 1848.
	Dickens published “Old Lamps for New Ones” in Household Words (Question 5, choice b.) in order to protest the backward-looking focus of the Pre-Raphaelite movement, saying that 
The Pre-Raphael Brotherhood, Ladies and Gentlemen, is the dread Tribunal which is to set this matter right. Walk up, walk up and here, conspicuous on the wall of the Royal Academy of Art in England, in the eighty-second year of their annual exhibition, you shall see what this new Holy Brotherhood, this terrible Police that is to disperse all Post-Raphael offenders, has “been and done!”
Dickens goes on to posit the formation of a Pre-Newtonian Brotherhood that would reject the laws of gravity, and a Pre-Gower-and-Pre-Chauce-Brotherhood (or P.G.A.P.C.B.) that would reject the “modern luxury” of printing and get rid of all books made after Shakespeare. Of course, Dickens’ point is well taken—in turning away from artistic practices after Raphael, the P. R. B. seemed purposely to embrace antiquated models of technique and subject.
	The answer to question 6 (choice e.) appears on the screen. By 1859, scarcely more than a decade after the movement began, Pre-Raphaelitism had become a familiar-enough term that even American newspapers could make bad puns assured that their readers would have at least heard of Pre-Raphaelitism.
	Question 7 asks you to apply your own parodic tastes, and, as such, is a trick question [SLIDE 4 RE-CLICK]. The image on the screen is of an “artist who never got on,” and it is interesting to note that although the author of the parody describes Pre-Raphaelitism very well (the reference to wall paper is for William Morris, the brick wall comes from Millais’ A Huguenot, and pick your Rossetti painting for tall ladies), the name of the movement does not appear in this 1867 parody. The parody contains digs at typically Pre-Raphaelite minute treatment of detail, contemporary subject choices, and overtly didactic aims (and at the fact that Dante Rossetti seldom exhibited), and the cartoon image resembles William Holman Hunt, but Fun assumes that its readers recognize the “shorthand” characteristics of Pre-Raphaelite visual tropes.

Teaching & Research Opportunities

	Some of the “wrong” answers in the quiz turn out to be right answers to other questions. Let’s examine four of them. Taken as a whole, the parodic response to Pre-Raphaelitism is a wonderful tool for teaching students about the differences and interstices among parody, satire, burlesque, and farce. For example, the following parodies employ several different tactics: 
	[SLIDE 5] “Purely Pre-Raphaelite” was published in Vanity Fair in November, 1860. Remember that Vanity Fair started out not as the fashion magazine we know today, but as a miscellany much like Punch. The Vanity Fair author writes 
We have much pleasure in presenting our readers, this week, with a sketch from our Young Artist. The boldness and decision of the author of this beautiful production are strong indications that his next will bring Art, in this country, to that height of excellence, which will cause the boasted superiority of the Old World to sink into utter insignificance. . . . The first point in the picture, we should say, is the chiaro-oscuro of the pocket. The absence of all background is an extremely happy idea, as it gives to the picture a naturalness, almost stereoscopic in its effect. . . . We trust our young friend will continue in the path he has marked out for himself, and we predict for him a brilliant future.
This is nearly a word-for-word recapitulation of one of the earliest reviews of John Everett Millais, who began exhibiting in his middle teenage years. The parody is so effective because so little has been changed in the wording, and the author demonstrates that the words can be applied to a child’s drawing.
	[SLIDE 6] Arthur Clement Hilton published The Light Green, itself a parody of The Dark Blue, a literary magazine that catered to discriminating readers. Writing as “Rosina Christetti,” Hilton composed “Ding Dong.” This parody of the poetry in Rossetti’s children’s book Sing Song plays on her focus on simple rhyme, religious piety, and themes from childhood. An excerpt:
Ding Dong, Ding dong,
There goes the Gong,
Dick come along,
	‘Tis time for dinner.
Wash your face,
Take your place,
Where’s your grace,
	You little sinner?
..........
Baby cry, wipe his eye.
Baby good, give him food.
Baby sleepy, go to bed.
Baby naughty, smack his head!
I trust I need not go on.
	[SLIDE 7] By 1878, early Pre-Raphaelite paintings had become such a part of the visual vocabulary of English readers that Fun could parody Millais’ A Huguenot and make a double parody—peace with Germany is depicted as a risky move, both by the caricatures of the prime minister in the role of supplicant and by the reference to the Huguenot in the original painting, who endeavors to remove the badge of safety, just as the cartoon German is removing the peace-band from his arm: a good example of using both the form and substance of the parodied work in the parody.
	[SLIDE 8] Of course, parody can be used to point up social conditions using only the form of the parodied work, as well. The Burne-Jones series of paintings on the Legend of the Briar Rose is good fodder for the “Briar Root” sketch that appeared in Punch in 1890. The evils of opium smoking are delineated by using the elements of Burne-Jones’ paintings; notice, for example, that the knight’s sword in the first panel is transformed into a tendril of smoke from a pipe, and the king’s throne in the second panel becomes a four-poster bed.
	The parodies of Pre-Raphaelitism—indeed, of any art movement—are a rich and untapped resource that deserves further scholarly inquiry. This presentation today has been an overview intended to demonstrate the vast untapped body of literature that sheds light on issues that extend well beyond the facility with which some folks held a paint brush or pen.

Conclusion

	[SLIDE 9] This image is from the Illustrated London News, and depicts a painting by Florence Claxton entitled The Choice of Paris. In this image, we see the Pre-Raphaelite painter rejecting English and classical models of beauty, PRBs turning Raphael, Joshua Reynolds, and Van Dyck to the wall, and, among the padoies of Pre-Raphaelite works on the right of the image, there’s our friend the Pre-Raphalite taking his binoculars to a brick wall in order to get the detail right.
	It is instructive also to see that parodies were not limited to the pages of Punch and Fun. Some of the most eminent writers of the day engaged in parodic wit, and many of the social and political issues of the day that were considered too difficult to examine directly ended up debated indirectly through the critical lampoons aimed at the Pre-Raphaelite movement. Although Pre-Raphaelitism was certainly not the only movement to experience the withering pens of critical pundits, by limiting our scope to this one movement, we can see larger social and political issues writ small. The historical traces of national feeling, xenophobia, worries about empire, and resistance to change are best examined as they interact with, and become disguised in, the critical press in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Bibliography

Numbered entries in this bibliography correspond to the entries in my recent Pre-Raphaelitism in the Nineteenth Century Press: A Bibliography (ELS Press, 2002). This bibliography is presented in chronological order to facilitate examination of historical trends in the data.

1850.120 “The Pathological Exhibition at the Royal Academy (Noticed by our Surgical Advisor)” [Christ in the House of His Parents]. Punch; or, the London Charivari 19 (18 May 1850): 198.
1850.155 (Fredeman 67.01) Dickens, Charles. “Old Lamps for New Ones.” Household Words 1 (15 Jun. 1850): 265-267.
1851.030 “The Prevailing Epidemic.” Fraser’s Magazine 43 (May 1851): 492-509.
1851.055 “The Exhibition as it Might Have Been in Days of Yore: by a Disciple of Retrogress.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 20 (21 May 1851): 12.
1852.025 “Biles, Mary.” “Preparing for the Worst.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 22 (17 Apr. 1852): 169.
1855.110 “Bertall” [Arnoux, Albert]. “Le Salon Dépeint et Dessiné par Bertall (suite)” [parody of Return of the Dove to the Ark]. Journal pour Rire (8 Aug. 1855): n. pag.
1857.197 “Westminster Play” [Latin parody of Pre-Raphaelite movement]. London Times no. 22,870 (22 Dec. 1857): 3.
1858.090 “Calmuck” [cause of libel suit against Dickens by Holman Hunt]. Household Words 17.419 (3 Apr. 1858): 365-370.
1859.093 “Varieties: Passages from the Saturday Press” [Pre-Raphaelitism defined as “pictures painted to be raffled for”]. Brooklyn Daily Eagle 21 Oct. 1859: 2.
1860.050 (Fredeman 82.03) “The Choice of Paris: An Idyll, by Miss Florence Claxton.” Illustrated London News 36 (2 Jun. 1860): 541-542.
1860.090 “Purely Pre-Raphaelite.” Vanity Fair 2 (3 Nov. 1860): 221.
1861.065 “Matthew Jones, Our Pre-Raphaelite Artist.” Fun 1 (21 Sep. 1861): iv.
1861.070 “Woman and Art.” Fun 1 (7 Dec. 1861): 121.
1861.075 “Directions for Visiting the Royal Academy.” Fun 1 (19 Dec. 1861), supplement: 10.
1862.025 “Our Prize Essays. No. 6.—By Mr. J–n R–sk–n.” Fun 2 (1 Feb. 1862): 196.
1862.040 (Fredeman p. 18) B[uchanan], R[obert] W[illiams]. “Lady Letitia’s Lilliput Hand” [chapters I and II]. Temple Bar 4.4 (Mar. 1862): 551-579.
1862.045 “The Pre-Raphaelites.” Fun 2 (22 Mar. 1862): 8.
1862.055 (Fredeman p. 18) B[uchanan], R[obert] W[illiams]. “Lady Letitia’s Lilliput Hand” [chapters III & IV]. Temple Bar 5.1 (Apr. 1862): 114-131.
1862.130 Jones, Matthew. “Try Me!” [parody of Trust Me by J. Millais]. Fun 2 (28 Jun. 1862): 145.
1862.165 “Mary Hann” [parody of A Huguenot]. Fun 3 (2 Aug. 1862): 198.
1863.060 “Painters and Gazers: A Sketch at the Academy.” Fun 3 (16 May 1863): 90.
1864.050 “Bless your ‘art!” Fun 6 (28 May 1864): 105.
1867.017 “The Comic Physiognomist.” “Men We Meet” [parody of Pre-Raphaelite artist]. Fun n.s. 4 (23 Feb. 1867): 246-247.’
1867.021 “The Saunterer in Society.” “Town Talk” [The Scapegoat by W. Holman Hunt passim]. Fun n.s. 4 (9 Mar. 1867): 260.
1867.023 “The Saunterer in Society.” “Town Talk” [J. Millais, A. Hughes]. Fun n.s. 5 (18 Mar. 1867): 100.
1871.123 “Recollections of the Academy—No. 2” [parody of Riverside by E. Barclay: A-Meditating on Pre-Raphaelitism]. Fun n.s. 13 (20 May 1871): 202.
1872.010 “Christetti, Rosina” [Hilton, Arthur Clement]. “Ding Dong.” The Light Green: A Superior and High-Class Periodical 1.1 (1872): n. pag.
1872.015 “Sin-burne, Algernon Charles” [Hilton, Arthur Clement]. “Octopus.” The Light Green: A Superior and High-Class Periodical 1.1 (1872): n. pag.
1872.097 “Vaux, Guido.” “Mr. Guido Vaux’s Blow Up of the Exhibition of the Royal Academy” [Hearts are Trump by J. Millais]. Fun n.s. 15 (11 May 1872): 190-191.
1872.099 “Recollections of the Royal Academy” [parody of Hearts are Trump by J. Millais]. Fun n.s. 15 (18 May 1872): 202.
1872.117 “Recollections of the Royal Academy.—No. 2” [Flowing to the Sea by J. Millais]. Fun 15 (25 May 1872): 212.
1872.133 “Recollections of the Royal Academy.—No. 4” [Marquis of Westminster by J. Millais]. Fun 15 (15 Jun. 1872): 244.
1872.147 “The Royal Academy Soirée” [parody of Hearts are Trumps by J. Millais]. Fun 16 (13 Jul. 1872): 18.
1873.082 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. II” [Early Days by J. Millais]. Fun 17 (10 May 1873): 193.
1873.083 “What’s on the Walls?” Fun 17 (10 May 1873): 194.
1873.084 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. III” [“New Laid Eggs” by J. Millais]. Fun 17 (24 May 1873): 216.
1874.062 “Tymkyns, R. A.” “The Royal Academy, 1874” [parody of Northwest Passage by J. Millais]. Fun 19 (9 May 1874): 193.
1875.098 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. I” [parody of The Fringe of the Moor by J. Millais]. Fun 21 (8 May 1875): 192.
1876.165 “Dream Poem à la Swinburne.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 71 (4 Nov. 1876): 198.
1877.074 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. I” [parody of J. Millais: The Man Who Swallowed the Poker]. Fun 25 (9 May 1877): 182.
1877.083 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. III” [parody of Yes! by J. Millais: A Sweet Thing in Ulsters]. Fun 25 (23 May 1877): 202.
1878.063 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. I” [parody of The Princes in the Tower by J. Millais: The Siamese Twins on the Stare]. Fun 27 (8 May 1878): 192.
1878.077 “Going to the Congress” [parody of The Huguenot by J. Millais]. Fun 27 (12 Jun. 1878): 245.
1879.053 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. I” [parody of Gladstone by J. Millais: Handcuffed]. Fun 28 (7 May 1879): 188.
1880.073 “Recollections of the Royal Academy. No. I” [parody of The Cuckoo by J. Millais]. Fun 31 (5 May 1880): 178.
1880.074 “The R. A. Array.” Fun 31 (5 May 1880): 181.
1880.097 “The Grosvenor Summer Pictures—Sum-mer Them.” Fun 31 (12 May 1880): 191.
1880.098 “Our Extra-Special at the Royal Academy” [John Bright by J. Millais]. Fun 31 (12 May 1880): 193.
1880.103 “Our Extra-Special Amongst the Pictures” [The Cuckoo by J. Millais]. Fun 31 (19 May 1880): 201.
1880.125 “Fred on Pretty Girls and Pictures.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 78 (5 Jun. 1880): 253.
1881.140 “Design for an Aesthetic Theatrical Poster.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 80 (7 May 1881): 215.
1881.145 “Sirens, and Their Little Ways.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 80 (7 May 1881): 210.
1881.155 “G. G. G., or Grosvenor Gallery Guide.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 80 (25 Jun. 1881): 300.
1881.165 “Swinburne and Water.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 81 (23 Jul. 1881): 26.
1882.315 “Grosvenor Gems.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 82 (20 May 1882): 240.
1883.237 “Sketches at the Royal Academy, Without the Kind Permission of the President and Council” [parody The Painter’s Ghost by J. Millais]. Fun 37 (9 May 1883): 196.
1883.243 “Sketches at the Royal Academy, Without the Kind Permission of the President and Council” [parody Une Grande D__n, or, the Big Big D by J. Millais]. Fun 37 (16 May 1883): 206.
1884.063 “Sketches at the Royal Academy, Without the Kind Permission of the President and Council” [parody Cleaning His Teeth: “An Idyll” Monkey Astonishing the Natives by J. Millais]. Fun 39 (7 May 1884): 196.
1890.105 “The Legend of the Briar-Root.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 98 (3 May 1890): 209.
1892.230 “Tantæne Animis Cœlestibus Iræ?” [parody of A. Swinburne]. Pall Mall Gazette 55.8646 (6 Dec. 1892): 2.
1893.180 “A Swinburne!” Punch; or, the London Charivari 104 (13 May 1893): 221.
1900.290 “Mr. Swinburne S’Amuse.” Punch; or, the London Charivari 119 (26 Sep. 1900): 224.