MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060301473 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2012.0025

Henry Heath’s The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book

2012· article· en· W2060301473 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brian Maidment

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComicsArtFolioComic stripArt historyReprintVisual artsHistoryLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Henry Heath’s The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book Brian Maidment (bio) Henry heath’s The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book (1840?), a volume reprint of a range of separately published groups of comic images, was published in London, probably in 1840, by Charles Tilt (fig. 1).1 The book forms one of two gatherings of miscellaneous images that Heath published; the other, Tit-Bit’s Selected by H. Heath (fig. 2), published by James Reynolds, was also known by the less jocular but more usefully descriptive title Heath’s Comic Album—Five Hundred Humorous Etchings. Heath was a reasonably well known comic draughts-man, etcher, and engraver, who provided book and magazine illustrations and humorous prints to a rapidly expanding market for graphic images. The standard reference works refer to him, rather disparagingly, as “imitative” and “versatile,” although both qualities were necessary for survival in the roughhouse world of the competitive marketplace for print culture in the 1830s and 1840s.2 Both Scrap Book and Tit-Bit’s were made up of oblong folio sheets of images set on the page in a variety of different ways—a mass of tiny vignettes, a large central image surrounded by smaller satellite ones, or four reasonably large and detailed images laid out on the paper as an upright grid. The images, accordingly, ranged in size from large to tiny. The two immediate impressions given to the reader are of profusion and miscellaneity, the first engendered by the massed presence of tiny and hastily executed sketches on many pages, as well as the “five hundred” images advertised on the title page of Tit-Bit’s, and the second by the apparently inconsequential marshalling of disparate images onto single sheets. Indeed, the potential miscellaneity of Heath’s publications is stressed, and even celebrated, by his chosen titles and subtitles—scraps, tit-bits, and even the more ambitious “omnium gatherum” (fig. 3)—which evoke the diversionary, the trivial, the fun, and the inconsequential. [End Page 13] Click for larger view View full resolution Fig. 1. Title page of Henry Heath, The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book (London: Charles Tilt n.d. [c.1840]). Click for larger view View full resolution Fig. 2. Title page of Henry Heath, Tit-Bit’s Selected by H. Heath (London: James Reynolds n.d. [c.1840]). [End Page 14] Click for larger view View full resolution Fig. 3. Title page of Henry Heath, “Omnium Gatherum,” reprinted as part of The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book. Beyond this immediate sense of unanalyzed and accidental contiguity (a principle appropriate to a scrapbook), organizational categories can be identified. It becomes clear from more sustained scrutiny that the plates of which these two volumes are comprised were first published as short sequences loosely organized by thematic proximity and are here being republished in order to fully exploit their commercial potential. Thus, the six plates that make up the “Nautical Dictionary” sequence all rely on punning visual reinterpretations of common nautical terms—“Gather way” shows an alarmed woman on a runaway horse; “Hulk” depicts a retired sailor who has lost both legs and an eye in service enjoying a pipe and a glass of grog; “Rummage the Hold” shows two muggers going through the pockets of a respectable woman. In images like these, a characteristically Regency delight in visual-verbal puns, in which a comic visual incident destabilizes common vernacular phrases, is maintained but is subjected to a scaling down in the size and satiric energy of the image. There are a number of reasons to regard The Caricaturist’s Scrap Book as marking an important moment in the history of the making and marketing of graphic comedy. First, it offered one answer to an important question that artists and publishers were asking in the 1820s and 1830s—what was to replace the engraved or etched single-plate political caricature as the commodity most likely to succeed in a rapidly growing marketplace for comic images? Second, it suggested, in however fantasized a form, a vision of [End Page 15] reading practices for visual humour that was centred on the family, on domesticity, and on “fun” rather than on satire, wit, and male sociability. Third, The Caricaturist’s Scrap...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian reviewSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207