Features Podcasts Family Video Comics Music Tech Science Books Film & TV Games ✚

Jill

Cruel kids in A.B. Frost cartoon

Mark Frauenfelder at 7:51 am Tue, Dec 6, 2011

— FEATURED —

Book Review

The Man Who Laughs: grotesque Victor Hugo potboiler was the basis for The Joker

Feature

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

Book Review

The Twelve-Fingered Boy - mesmerizing YA horror novel

— FOLLOW US —

Boing Boing is on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to our RSS feed or daily email.

 

— POLICIES —

Except where indicated, Boing Boing is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution

 

— FONTS —

Tweet
Kindle
Scamps

David Apatoff of Illustration Art writes about illustrator A.B. Frost (1851 - 1928). As an example of Frost's work, Apatoff included this series about "local scamps who torment a homeless man looking for food." The caption reads, "While the dog keeps him pinned down, the boys have fun pelting the man with their slingshots." I wonder if readers of the day thought this was as heartbreaking as we do.

A.B. Frost

Mark Frauenfelder is the founder of Boing Boing and the editor-in-chief of MAKE and Cool Tools. Twitter: @frauenfelder. Come and hear Mark speak at the ALA conference in Chicago on July 1.

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

  • urizon

    No; they laughed. This sort of thing is tied up in Calvinist belief, in that being poor was a sign of ones sinful nature. Only the “elect,” i.e., those who achieved wealth in the corporeal world, would attain heaven’s kingdom. They were rewarded by god in this world, because they were so virtuous. So, throwing rocks at bums is actually doing god’s work, it goes to follow. Funny. All Ayn Rand did was to strip away the religious dogma. Never really looked at it that way before.

    • Guest

      Yeah, because nobody is dogmatic about Ayn Rand. 

      • C W

        BUT THEY ARE OBJECTIVISTS THEREFORE OBJECTIVE. And it’s impossible to be dogmatic and atheist therefore…

      • urizon

        I certainly wasn’t suggesting that Randians aren’t dogmatic. They are, and quite tediously so. But I think we can agree that they are an irreligious bunch, which may be their only redeeming quality.

        • Guest

          I disagree. I believe they have supplanted God with themselves, with predictable outcomes for all who do not believe that to be so. 

        • C W

          “they are an irreligious bunch, which may be their only redeeming quality”

          Not how they go about it. What use is irreligious, when you worship a State, or an ideology, and replace everything good with the same attitudes that rot the others’ brains?

    • JohnBerry

      Odd how they could have this belief, supposedly gleaned from the bible, and yet the bible contains the phrase: “harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle”. Then again, people can explain away just about anything.

    • VerySincerely

      a) I’ve studied Calvinism and I’ve never heard of this view of the poor. Perhaps you could provide a citation? 

      b) Why are we assuming Frost’s audience are Calvinist? 
      c) “Throwing rocks at bums is actually doing god’s work, it goes to follow.”  It certainly does not follow. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the Bible wouldn’t make such an ignorant statement. You don’t have to like religion, but try to keep this kind of ignorance to yourself. 

  • irksome

    Haha. Homeless.

  • petz79

    These remind of the works of german caricaturist Wilhelm Busch, especially “Max and Moritz” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_and_Moritz. It’s available on Project Gutenberg as a PDF with images. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17161
    19th century “comics” could be really cruel indeed.

    • retepslluerb

      But Max and Moritz, at least, got the death penalty for their hijinks.  They were clearly not presented as role models. 

  • awjt

    I dig the accumulating cheering/jeering/slingshotting kids at the fence.

  • EvilSpirit

    Neither “homeless” nor “looking for food” are present in the actual illustrations, though they are valid interpretations of what might be going on.

    • http://dougsamu.wordpress.com doug rogers

      The captions are clipped from the images posted here.

      Ooops, my sorry. Apatoff says as much, but there are no captions.

    • s2redux

      Here’s “homeless” and  “looking for food” from another Frost illo, titled “A Handful of Feathers,” from 1884.

      1884 was a bit of a tumult for USAians — the lingering shadows of Reconstruction, the Panic of 1884 (sweet spot of the 1882-1885 Depression with over-extended banks needing to be bailed out and the like), renewed Eastern European immigration, massive railroad layoffs, rise of organized labor, the Mugwumps, Cleveland’s bastard child, etc. “Hobos,” along with many other folks living in the margins of the struggling WASP culture, were a convenient target for the frustrated readers of publications like Harper’s Weekly (“Journal of Civilization”).

  • jarmstrong

    I need more context.  It looks like Apatoff decided that the man was both homeless and looking for food.  If he intended harm to the kids, I don’t mind their self-defense.

    On a different note, that is one mean looking pitbull.  I shudder to think what happened next.

  • jparkuntz

    In Gilded Age America, the homeless were victims of an extensive xeonphobia. It was during this period that countless communities enacted vagrancy and anti-peddling laws. One theory is that the numbers of homeless Civil War vets caused this, but more likely it was the frequent economic recessions.
    …and some of our current politicians are nostalgic for the policies of this period…

    • rwmj

      Yeah, damn those noble gases.

  • Lobster

    Oh those little scamps!

  • iorek

    Frost worked in an era known for its strong work ethic and its intolerance of vagrants and hoboes, but I still think Frost is making fun of those horrible little boys. 

  • milkman

    What’s more heartbreaking is that we now acknowledge terrible it is, but this type of stuff continues anyway.  So now instead of it being terrible and we laugh – now its terrible and we feel bad.  I’m not sure that we can really hop of the “look how advanced we are” train just yet.

  • urpBurp

    Little Rascals…
    The Yellow Kid…
    Little Nemo…
    Katzenjammer kids…
    Etc…

    Times were rougher and people were too. So also, was their humor.

    The youth of yesteryear could lay some serious hurt on today’s pampered, spoiled, overprotected children.

    • PaulDavisTheFirst

       yeah, but when the cyberbullying starts up, the little rascals won’t know what hit them. and you know what they say about words, sticks and stones …

    • Antinous / Moderator

      Little Rascals…The Yellow Kid…Little Nemo…Katzenjammer kids…Etc…

      Times were rougher and people were too. So also, was their humor.

      I wonder if future internet commenters will use the Powerpuff Girls as examples of what children were like in a previous decade.

      • urpBurp

        Certainly… because relating circle-headed, monstrous-eyed,
        basic-geometric-shape-bodied, animations with unlimited superpowers is exactly the same thing as relating Little Rascals or the Yellow Kid to pre-depression and depression era kids.

        Plus, I’ve seen Idiocracy… and the way things are going… Yes, they will.

      • kaijan

        Or (shudder) Kevin McAllister from HOME ALONE. That kid was vicious!

    • cdh1971

      Yeah….so true. 

      24 is the new 12…complete with university-age  _supposed-but-not-really-adults_  harbouring a bizarre level of ‘strangoe-dangoe’.

      Good Grief!

    • L_Mariachi

      Little Rascals…
      The Yellow Kid…
      Little Nemo…
      Katzenjammer kids…

      One of these things is not like the others… Although come to think of it, Nemo’s mother berating him for falling out of bed due to crazy dreams isn’t exactly an enlightened modern approach to parenting.

  • Saltine

    It IS sad. But my mom’s family were sharecroppers, and the reminiscences of aunts and uncles lead me to believe that the people owning the garden may have been in equally marginal circumstances. Additionally, homelessness was slightly different at the time, or so I’ve picked up from a friend’s doctoral work. “Itinerate” or “masterless” may be better terms. Plenty of equally impoverished people were stationary, had dwellings. I’m not doing a good job of explaining myself. I’m trying to work my way toward the idea that the hobo represents anarchy and lawlessness and a threat to values of work/property that are as likely to legitimate as they are to be creepy, especially as the “hobo” wouldn’t be likely to steal from middle- and upper-class neighborhoods as they would be to steal from rural or rail-side dwellings. But, yeah, anyway, cruel kids: http://pbfcomics.com/106/

    • EH

      Your middle third reminds me of what my mom says about OWS.

    • kaijan

      Perry Bible Fellowship always likes to turn something on its head. “Mean old farmer Ben,” indeed!

  • kaijan

    It looks like someone about to break into a home and steal something. It looks like a bunch of poor kids — EVERYONE was poor back then — trying to defend their home using the only tools they had against a full-grown man. Having had my house broken into once when I was a kid, it’s hard for me to feel much sympathy for anyone in the act of committing a crime — especially poor against poor.

    Now, if the context was changed, and this was somewhere in the woods, it would look like the kids are ganging up on an innocent stranger. But the context here shows that man was up to no good. And what these cartoon kids are doing here is still tamer than the antics in a typical Warner Bros cartoon.

    • umbriel

      He definitely looks menacing to me in the first frame.  One might criticize that depiction as insensitive, but that brings even more political baggage to the interpretation.

  • s2redux

    I guess someone has to say it — Kudos to the scamps’ parents for raising free-range kids! ::ducking::

  • Mister44

    They left off the last two panels where the guy whips out a knife, stabbing the dog. Then you see him eating the dog on a spit while the kids behind him are crying.

    • RJ

      I love a happy ending.

    • Bushbaby

      Actually, the last 2 panels show the bum surrendering and being paraded around the neighborhood carrying a sign that says “Nocked (sic) out by the Gang.” All the while the pit bull is slavering at his calf.

    • cdh1971

      Wow…I just did quick search and you’re right – the last two panels really were like this.

  • SomeGuyNamedMark

    And those boys grew up to be the Koch brothers.

  • http://ok-cleek.com/blogs cleek

    today, those kids would be recording this scene on their cell phone cams, then uploading the results to YouTube. they’d get 2M views in a week, countless editorials excoriating the event, and a handful of right-wing asshats explaining how this was all Obama’s fault.

    • cdh1971

      No…no. You’re right except for the right-wing asshats…they would be praising  the kids for doing this.

  • Rich Keller

    It’s really too bad he didn’t go to Aunt Fritzi and Nancy’s house. He would have at least got some pie out of it.

  • ill lich

    Solution: if the kids want some of the old ultraviolence, then give it to them.   The tramp/hobo should step forward and let the dog maul him to death in front of the youngsters and watch their grins turn to horror.   More than you bargained for, eh kids?  Now you can go explain to mom why the guy she paid a plate of corn muffins to paint the shed is bleeding all over her petunias.

  • Henry Pootel

    People often sic their dogmas on others, especially at those that can’t defend themselves.

  • JonCarter

    I think he’s fixin’ to steal the chair.

  • kaijan

    It indeed looks like someone about to break into a home and steal something. It looks like a bunch of poor kids — everyone was poor back then — trying to defend their home using the only tools they had against a full-grown man.

    Now, if the context was changed, and this was somewhere in the woods, it would look like the kids are ganging up on an innocent stranger. But the context here shows that man was up to no good.