The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-03-16
"BROTHER JONATHAN"
Why This Typical American Is Repre-
scented in Queer Dress.

Boston Transcript.
A correspondent wants the Listener to
tell, if he can, where the conventional pic
torial representation OF Brother Jonathan,
as long-legged, lank man. with angular
race came from ana why II is aanet r o. 10 10:
from Punch, of London, but he wonders
why American cartoonists follow forever
the mistaken English notion or Brother Jon,
athan with only slight variation from year
to year. He says that the conventional rep
resentation of the people of any race usu-
ally bears some resemblance to the typical
person of that race-John Bull, for instance,
being much like ain ordinary stout English
man-but that he has never seen men like
the conventional Brother Jonathan in the
country districts of New England, nor yet
in Boston, New York or washington. IN
short, the question is, Where did the pic
tured Brother Jonathan come from? The
correspondent makes no inquiry about the
term Brother Jonathan" the assumed his
tory of it is in every dictionary and hand
book. But he wants to know about the
physical type of the man and about his
singular costume.
The Listener is not prepared to give an
account of the first appearance of the pic.
tured Jonathan. However, the evolution OF
the figure seems to be natural and exphca-
BILE enough. Everybody knows that the
typical American is a leaner man than the
typical Englishman, with longer and thin-
ner face. There are lots of tall and lean
Englishmen and lots of short and tat
Yankees but the effect of the American CHI
mate on the English type has been, on the
whole, elongating and desiccatinS. The first
requisite of a cartoon is that 1t snail De
funny and consequently, characteristics
are always exaggerated in cartoons. me
artist expresses the difference between
Americans and EngliShmen by making the
American longer and thinner than he neeo
be and the EngliShman shorter and fatter
AS the typical Englishman is supposed TO
be pig-headed and arrogant, the pictured
John Bulls face expresses THESE duaIleigis -
supposed to be ShreWd and CALCULATING
Though Kipling says he really isn't. 1t is
necessary to eXaggerate these qualities in
t11re good.
within these requirements there is a gooo
deal of latitude. Some caricatuTists, no
doubt animated by patriotic motives, try TO
fiatter Brother Jonathan, and give him a
noble and sentimental countenance. Ihey
only make him and themselves RIDICULOUS
They take all the fun and all or the PONY
out of the representation. Sometimes Puncn
mades John Bull similarly and grandly RI
diculous. This kind of patriotic hattery al
WAYS misses it's mark.
The tyne of the incarnated nationality
may change slowly, and evolve IN years
into something different from It's neglnI IN $
| conventional form is absolutely necessary
| This principle explains the costumes OF
| Brother Jonathan and of john Bull. Inc
| nractice of necessarily making pictures of
| Brother Jonathan dates only from the time
| when tight trousers. with straps passing
| under the hollow OF the foot to prevent
| them from working up, were worn; Wneh
| rolling coat collars We're in vogue, ana oell-
| crowned, fuzzy tall hats we're In 1asnlon.
| Such was the cut of the original Jonathan $
garments, simply following the fashion or
| the time; and such the cut Of them remains
| with slight variations. AS to the starry
| and striped material of the garments, that
| is. of course a little satire on the undenla-
| BILE American habit of Wanting the nag on
all occasions. Nothing in the whole range
| of caricature was ever more pat and proper
| than the dressing of Brother Jonathan in
| the stars and stripes. The patriotic Amer
| lean bourgeois has so supersuuouS a regard
| for his flag that he often values the SYM
| boil above the thing symbolized; in fact, he
| sometimes forgets the symbolized thing al
| together Brother Jonathan dressed in any
| thing but his starry and striped garments
| would not be Jonathan at all.
| The John Bull picture seems to have
crystallized into it's present shape as the
result of the skill of John Leech and Cruik-
| shank-Or possibly some caricaturiSt Just
before them. Johns costume is practlcaIly
deed John Bull is Mr.. Pickwick made a
| little more canny and a little less amable:
The fiat stiff hat ana the other articles sol OF
were actually worn by Englishmen early
| in the present century. OF course the use
| of that term John Bull as personihcatlon
| of the English nation goes back into the
| eighteenth century, but the practice of car
| looming was not common and incessant
| enough then to crystalline the form and
| costume Punch and John Leech did that.
| Once crystallized, the type remains, which
| is proper enough. We could not spare any
| detail either of John Bull or Jonathan.
But the interesting fact remains that
! practically no other people caricature them
| selves in Just the way that the English and
| the American people do. Frenchmen, in
| deed picture a great many kinds of Tidicu-
! lous Frenchmen, and Germans make abb
| surd Germans in large variety, and so on.
| Frenchmen not infrequently depict the
| Gallo cock and give us representations of
! the idealized France in female guise, as we
| also have Columbia and Britannia But
! Frenchmen do not readily adopt our
! Johnny Crapaud as the type of their race,
nor do Germans take kindly to our modern
| lied Gambrinus as their proper representa-
/ tive The Anglo-Saxon race appears to have
| a sort of knocking self-consciousness all it's
! own John Bull and Brother Jonathan are
! admirable developments of this conscious
ness and are not likely to die soon.