Some countries overthrow their politicians. Some endure them. In Britain, they just laugh at them.
The renowned British sense of humor is on display in a new London exhibition that charts 300 years of the anarchic artistic spirit that produced the political satire of William Hogarth and Spitting Image — as well as the sheer silliness of Benny Hill.
Rude Britannia, which opens Wednesday at the Tate Britain gallery, is a feast of irreverence and bad taste that asks whether there is a distinctively British sense of humor, and examines how humor is intertwined with the country’s cultural and political history.
“This isn’t necessarily about ‘funny ha ha,’ although there are jokes,’’ Tate Britain director Penelope Curtis said Monday. “It’s about how the comic is used to do things we can’t do in other ways. Often the comic artist is making a very serious point about something that can’t be said openly.”
Curator Martin Myrone said there has long been a belief that “a distinct British character — informal, humorous, sarcastic’’ has produced a strong seam of comic art.
He said that while arguing for national character in art is problematic — and not all the artists in the show are British by birth — “humor has had a very important role to play in the way the story of British art has been told.’’
While European artists like Jacques-Louis David were striving to create a high-minded new classicism 200 years ago, in Britain the likes of Thomas Rowlandson, James Gillray and Hogarth were using their talents to satirize and caricature the politicians of the day.
The exhibition begins in the 17th century, when printing technology first allowed the mass production of cartoons and political broadsides. Then, as now, cartoonists took aim at politics, the economy and social ills.
One of the earliest works shows Oliver Cromwell, who overthrew the monarchy, donning the regalia of a king. The more things change, many of the artists here seem to say, the more they stay the same.
Some of the images are tastelessly timeless, like the anonymous 18th-century etching Idol-Worship or the Way to Preferment, which shows gentlemen kissing the enormous posterior of Robert Walpole, a politician widely regarded as Britain’s first prime minister.
Throughout the exhibition, crass toilet humor intertwines with the political. The crude slapstick of TV’s Benny Hill Show or the Carry On movies is as central to the British comic tradition as the exalted Hogarth.
One of the show’s six themed rooms is devoted to explicitly bawdy art, from 200-year-old erotic etchings to the saucy seaside postcards of Donald McGill, full of plump, smiling figures emitting double entendres that may even cause blushes among readers today.
They are on display still attached to the index cards kept by a disapproving public prosecutor, who amassed a thick file on McGill.
The exhibition’s centerpiece is a room devoted to politics, showing how artists have skewered politicians from Napoleon Bonaparte to Adolf Hitler and former prime ministers Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair.
British political cartoons are often much more vicious and visceral than their North American counterparts. In one of the milder instances, the Guardian’s Steve Bell invariably depicted prime minister John Major wearing his underpants over his trousers.
Another editorial cartoonist, Martin Rowson, has shown post-Iraq war Blair drenched in blood.
In the 1980s, satirical puppet show Spitting Image depicted Thatcher as a butcher with a bloody cleaver. Cartoonist Gerald Scarfe turned her into a prehistoric predator: the pterodactyl.
Today, Scarfe acknowledges affection for the Iron Lady as a subject, despite their political disagreements.
“Mrs Thatcher was great, because she was a strong woman and she produced strong images,’’ he said.
“The cartoon comes from the character. You can’t make weak people strong.’’ Many of the works on display mock, but some also appeal for change. Hogarth’s 1751 Gin Lane and George Cruikshank’s 1862 The Worship of Bacchus are both savage depictions of the damage done by excessive alcohol that helped change social attitudes.
In the 1930s, David Low’s cartoons of Hitler helped turn British feeling against appeasement. Posters used by protesters against the invasion of Iraq unsuccessfully exhorted Blair to Make Tea, Not War. Scarfe, whose work appears in the Sunday Times newspaper, said at the best of times comic art “can produce a kind of rallying point around which people can gather and think, ‘That’s what I was feeling but couldn’t put into words.’
“I hope it helps sum up people’s feelings and hopefully eventually it can become a movement.’’
Scarfe is, however, realistic about the limits of satire’s power.
He says many politicians secretly enjoy being caricatured, and often ask if they can buy cartoons of themselves.
And after centuries of satire, Britain officially remains a monarchy with its upper class firmly intact. Laughter has not led to revolution.
“Perhaps we haven’t had a revolution because of the safety valve provided by that satirical art,’’ Myrone said. “So it can be quite a conservative force.’’
Rude Britannia is at Tate Britain until Sept. 5.
ON THE NET: www.tate.org.uk/britain
June 23 to June 29 After capturing the walled city of Hsinchu on June 22, 1895, the Japanese hoped to quickly push south and seize control of Taiwan’s entire west coast — but their advance was stalled for more than a month. Not only did local Hakka fighters continue to cause them headaches, resistance forces even attempted to retake the city three times. “We had planned to occupy Anping (Tainan) and Takao (Kaohsiung) as soon as possible, but ever since we took Hsinchu, nearby bandits proclaiming to be ‘righteous people’ (義民) have been destroying train tracks and electrical cables, and gathering in villages
Swooping low over the banks of a Nile River tributary, an aid flight run by retired American military officers released a stream of food-stuffed sacks over a town emptied by fighting in South Sudan, a country wracked by conflict. Last week’s air drop was the latest in a controversial development — private contracting firms led by former US intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world’s deadliest conflict zones, in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts. The moves are roiling the global aid community, which warns of a more militarized, politicized and profit-seeking trend
The wide-screen spectacle of Formula One gets a gleaming, rip-roaring workout in Joseph Kosinski’s F1, a fine-tuned machine of a movie that, in its most riveting racing scenes, approaches a kind of high-speed splendor. Kosinski, who last endeavored to put moviegoers in the seat of a fighter jet in Top Gun: Maverick, has moved to the open cockpits of Formula One with much the same affection, if not outright need, for speed. A lot of the same team is back. Jerry Bruckheimer produces. Ehren Kruger, a co-writer on Maverick, takes sole credit here. Hans Zimmer, a co-composer previously, supplies the thumping
Dr. Y. Tony Yang, Associate Dean of Health Policy and Population Science at George Washington University, argued last week in a piece for the Taipei Times about former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) leading a student delegation to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that, “The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world” (“Ma’s Visit, DPP’s Blind Spot,” June 18, page 8). Yang contends that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has a blind spot: “By treating any