We now come to the famous series entitled _The Bottle_ (1847) and its
sequel _The Drunkard's Children_ (1848). Both these works were printed
from glyphographic blocks and have as little charm as a stentorian
oration in a small chapel. The story they tell, told also in verse by Dr
Charles Mackay, is the ruin of a working man and his family through
drink. The appeal of _The Bottle_ is simple enough to appal the
aborigines of Africa, to say nothing of the East End: the bottle is a
"Ju-ju," an evil fetish; the impulse of the beholder is to smash the
bottle rather than to spill and waste its contents. Yet when the eye
succeeds in detaching itself from this pompously evident bottle, it
perceives that the artist has cared also for details less immediate, but
of a finer eloquence. The liberally filled mantelshelf of plate 1 is at
least not a mere labour of memory, though no one exceeds George
Cruikshank in the pictorial multiplication of domestic details. This
mantelshelf is a symbol; symbols, too, are the open cupboard, so well
furnished that a less industrious artist would have shut it, and the
ill-drawn but well-nourished felinity by the fire. In plate 2 the
cupboard holds naught but two jugs; the lean cat prowls over the bare
table; an ornament on the mantelshelf lies on its side. Had an artist
and not a missionary composed plate 3, we might have been spared the
indecency of a bottle in Lucy's lap when the furniture is distrained to
pay the bottle's debt. Yet with what horrid strength does the maniac in
plate 7 clutch the mantelpiece, whose bare ledge is lit by a dip stuck
in a bottle, while all the neighbours stare at something whose face we
cannot see! The artist has shouted till he was hoarse, but his story is
in our marrows.
_The Drunkard's Children_ contains one masterpiece: plate 7, the boy's
death on the convict-ship. The convict who closes his eyes has the
sagacity of a sentient corpse; the shadow he casts on the screen which
two convicts draw around the bed is, in effect, a creature to startle
us, and the visible half of the chaplain's top-hat lying on a bench in a
corner of the drawing is an irony which seems to belong to a later age
than Cruikshank's.
_The Bottle_, employed as an argument by Mr William Cash, converted
Cruikshank to teetotalism. The result has been to present the artist to
modern hedonists in the light of a ludicrous bore. Certain it is that in
his version of _Cinderella_ (1854) he causes the dwarf to inform the
King that "the history of the use of strong drinks is marked on every
page by _excess which follows, as a matter of course, from the very
nature of their composition_," the italics being Cruikshank's, though
they might well be mine. Teetotalism needs talking and writing, and
Cruikshank was happy to oblige. He possessed a fluent pen, and delivered
lay sermons with enthusiasm and originality.
[Illustration: (_a_) THE GLASS OF WHISKEY AFTER THE GOOSE. From "The
Glass and the New Crystal Palace," 1853.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account