Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,507
|
Post by Foggy on Dec 5, 2020 6:22:11 GMT
Benn. I guessed at Powell, was uncertain about Foot, who's Shore? and isn't that a Gilbert & Sullivan play?
I knew it couldn't have been because he only entered Parliament decades later, but I thought it looked a lot like Michael Fabricant.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,531
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 5, 2020 11:52:24 GMT
If I recall, Heffer withdrew from the contest, then treated his supporters to him reading his victory speech if he had won My source however is Robert Kilroy Silk He - and you - recall incorrectly. Heffer duly stood and finished a poor third in the 1983 leadership contest - but still beat Peter Shore, which the left were pleased about.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Dec 6, 2020 16:22:45 GMT
I immediately recognised all of them. and it doesn't seem that long ago they would have been among the most instantly recognisable politicians of their age. Sic gloria transit mundi! Only Mikardo caused me any difficulty, though Powell is very poorly drawn. Of the five, I thought Foot was the least certain - the shape of the glasses is not quite right.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 6, 2020 17:40:00 GMT
If I recall, Heffer withdrew from the contest, then treated his supporters to him reading his victory speech if he had won My source however is Robert Kilroy Silk He - and you - recall incorrectly. Heffer duly stood and finished a poor third in the 1983 leadership contest - but still beat Peter Shore, which the left were pleased about. I recall the leadership/deputy leadership contest in 1983. Neil Kinnock and Michael Meacher were flagged up as the ‘Dream Ticket’. On the other hand there was Eric Heffer and Gwyneth Dunwoody who were labelled as the ‘Nightmare Ticket’!
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 6, 2020 18:10:29 GMT
can anyone find me a link to the famous cartoon from the 1975 EEC referendum, published by the In campaign, it showed an Orangeman, a Nazi, a kilted Scotsman ands a communist all marching for Out. This one? It is an appalling cartoon. Very badly drawn. I did recognise all on the front row despite this. The drawings of Powell and Foot are particularly poor. The rest are rather crude stereotypes.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Dec 6, 2020 18:14:51 GMT
Jak was the second worst cartooonist of his era. Only Cummings was worse.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 6, 2020 19:17:42 GMT
Jak was the second worst cartooonist of his era. Only Cummings was worse. I would nominate Mac (Stanley McMurtry) as being even worse.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,607
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Dec 7, 2020 2:05:38 GMT
This one? It is an appalling cartoon. Very badly drawn. I did recognise all on the front row despite this. The drawings of Powell and Foot are particularly poor. The rest are rather crude stereotypes. These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 7, 2020 2:23:05 GMT
It is an appalling cartoon. Very badly drawn. I did recognise all on the front row despite this. The drawings of Powell and Foot are particularly poor. The rest are rather crude stereotypes. These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn. But Harold Wilson was not being portrayed at all. That is unless the image I assumed to be Ian Mikardo is supposed to be Harold Wilson. I do take your point about glasses or the pipe or the cigar as a lazy cartoonist's cue The one you don't appear to recognise is probably the best drawing (of a bad bunch) on the sheet and obviously Peter Shore. I had the work the rest out by elimination. Enoch Powell was probably the worst.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,607
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Dec 7, 2020 2:28:26 GMT
These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn. But Harold Wilson was not being portrayed at all. That is unless the image I assumed to be Ian Mikardo is supposed to be Harold Wilson. I do take your point about glasses or the pipe or the cigar as a lazy cartoonist's cue No, Wilson is obviously not in the picture, what I mean is a sketch of Wilson would emphasis the pipe, you see the pipe and often the mac, it;s Wilson. Cigar, bald, bowtie, it's Churchill. It's a women, it's Thatcher. Skinny spiky woman, Theresa May. Teeth, Blair. Even more teeth, Cherie Blair.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,607
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Dec 7, 2020 2:30:38 GMT
No, Wilson is obviously not in the picture, what I mean is a sketch of Wilson would emphasis the pipe, you see the pipe and often the mac, it;s Wilson. Cigar, bald, bowtie, it's Churchill. It's a women, it's Thatcher. Skinny spiky woman, Theresa May. Teeth, Blair. Even more teeth, Cherie Blair. Here we are, perfect:
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,540
|
Post by john07 on Dec 7, 2020 2:48:50 GMT
Who the hell is the one between Churchill and Major?
Is it supposed to be Gordon Brown? Or is it Teresa May? That was by process of elimination!
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Dec 7, 2020 2:52:03 GMT
It is an appalling cartoon. Very badly drawn. I did recognise all on the front row despite this. The drawings of Powell and Foot are particularly poor. The rest are rather crude stereotypes. These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn. I am rather puzzled by the amount of confusion and uncertainty being expressed by various people about this cartoon. I think that the four people in the front row are very obviously, easily, immediately and unambiguously recognisable as Peter Shore, Tony Benn, Ian Mikardo and Enoch Powell. The skill of the cartoonist in drawing them is not necessarily at an excellent standard, but it is good enough to make them clear and unambiguous. The only one I hesitated on slightly was Michael Foot at the end, because the glasses and hair are not quite right. Any suggestion that the middle one might be Harold Wilson or Eric Heffer is ridiculous, as is the impertinence of the tiny minority of young whippersnappers who are incorrectly not old enough to remember Peter Shore as being a very prominent and famous politician.
|
|
|
Post by michael2019 on Dec 7, 2020 6:53:21 GMT
I think Ian Mikardo is now fairly obscure now for most people under say about 60 even for political "obsessives" (sorry well-informed) on this forum as while doing some googling about him as I didn't know much about him I found that he was clearly an influential Labour MP but he was never a minister unlike the others. People here might want to know that David Butler's book on the 1975 European Referendum has been scanned in online and his available at www.eureferendum.com/documents/1975referendum1.pdf which I found via thefrogsalittlehot.blogspot.com/2015/08/1975-referendum-book-scanned.html after doing a Google Image search on the cartoon (the book reproduces it)
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Dec 7, 2020 8:22:19 GMT
These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn. I am rather puzzled by the amount of confusion and uncertainty being expressed by various people about this cartoon. I think that the four people in the front row are very obviously, easily, immediately and unambiguously recognisable as Peter Shore, Tony Benn, Ian Mikardo and Enoch Powell. The skill of the cartoonist in drawing them is not necessarily at an excellent standard, but it is good enough to make them clear and unambiguous. The only one I hesitated on slightly was Michael Foot at the end, because the glasses and hair are not quite right. Any suggestion that the middle one might be Harold Wilson or Eric Heffer is ridiculous, as is the impertinence of the tiny minority of young whippersnappers who are incorrectly not old enough to remember Peter Shore as being a very prominent and famous politician. Agree. Peter Shore was spoken of as a future Labour leader/PM. He, Powell and Benn never reached their full potential. Foot did. Mikardo would be great for 24/7 news were he around today.
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Dec 7, 2020 8:45:07 GMT
Who the hell is the one between Churchill and Major? Is it supposed to be Gordon Brown? Or is it Teresa May? That was by process of elimination! It's Brown (not very good likeness) and Cameron is partially obscured.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 7, 2020 9:14:04 GMT
These sorts of cartoons rely on emphasising characteristics to identify the people being portrayed, eg, emphasis Harold Wilson's pipe or Churchill's cigar. But that relies on the characterisation reflecting reality. I was convinced the one on the right wasn't Foot as the hair was too long, and he looks too tall. Powel looks like a bad Geoffrey Palmer. I thought the middle one might have been "eyebrows" Healy, but I never remembered him being associated with a pipe. And the one at the left is a complete unknown. Only Benn is characterised in a way reflecting realities, pipe, staring eyes, that haircut => Benn. But Harold Wilson was not being portrayed at all. That is unless the image I assumed to be Ian Mikardo is supposed to be Harold Wilson. I do take your point about glasses or the pipe or the cigar as a lazy cartoonist's cue The one you don't appear to recognise is probably the best drawing (of a bad bunch) on the sheet and obviously Peter Shore. I had the work the rest out by elimination. Enoch Powell was probably the worst. I lived through the period so the personalities and the accepted images were all easy to recognize except for Powell. Everything was wrong with him. Face is to fleshy, body too bulky and clothes don't fit well enough, and no cold penetrating stare. The Mikado is good and so is the Shore. Benn and Foot are OK. Overall looks to be hurried and against a deadline perhaps after an editorial request and suggestions?
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,607
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Dec 7, 2020 9:23:28 GMT
Who the hell is the one between Churchill and Major? Is it supposed to be Gordon Brown? Or is it Teresa May? That was by process of elimination! That was my immediate thought. What's some French or Italian chap doing there? Oh, it must be Gordon Brown. *That's* Gordon Brown???
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Dec 7, 2020 9:27:40 GMT
I am rather puzzled by the amount of confusion and uncertainty being expressed by various people about this cartoon. I think that the four people in the front row are very obviously, easily, immediately and unambiguously recognisable as Peter Shore, Tony Benn, Ian Mikardo and Enoch Powell. The skill of the cartoonist in drawing them is not necessarily at an excellent standard, but it is good enough to make them clear and unambiguous. The only one I hesitated on slightly was Michael Foot at the end, because the glasses and hair are not quite right. Any suggestion that the middle one might be Harold Wilson or Eric Heffer is ridiculous, as is the impertinence of the tiny minority of young whippersnappers who are incorrectly not old enough to remember Peter Shore as being a very prominent and famous politician. Agree. Peter Shore was spoken of as a future Labour leader/PM. He, Powell and Benn never reached their full potential. Foot did. Mikardo would be great for 24/7 news were he around today. But - we talk about Powell and Benn because they both opted to be mavericks. I think in that sense they fulfilled their potential but in a different way. Shore has been forgotten but his opposition to the EU was far more robust and theoretically developed than anyone else on the left. Mikardo was a character and yes, he would be interesting to have around today. He was at the time a strong Zionist but I'm not sure what he would think now. His name came about because his father found that no one could spell or pronounce the very long Eastern European surname so he decided to choose something English. The Mikado was showing at a theatre so he chose that name but spelt it wrong adding the extra R when he registered the name change!
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Dec 7, 2020 9:29:01 GMT
Who the hell is the one between Churchill and Major? Is it supposed to be Gordon Brown? Or is it Teresa May? That was by process of elimination! That was my immediate thought. What's some French or Italian chap doing there? Oh, it must be Gordon Brown. *That's* Gordon Brown??? I thought it was Nigel Lawson
|
|