Talk:Punch and Judy

message: That's news to me.  So they're one of those celebrity couples where she's remained Miss Judy instead of Mrs Punch?
Does either puppet have a first name, as far as anybody knows? -- Smjg 11:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Judy is normally a first name, so she's Mrs Judy Punch. We never know Mr Punch's first name.—Preceding unsigned comment added by PeteVerdon (talk • contribs) 12:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  In that case, for consistency it should be called Punch and Punch.  Does anybody call it this in practice? -- Smjg 13:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Of course not. That would be stupid. PeteVerdon 11:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When is Punch ever called "Mr. Punch"? It's Punch and Judy, after all. As far as I know, Punch is his first name (a belief backed by his supposed origin in Pulcinella).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.154.203 (talk) 06:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I think Punch is a first name -- and that we have no idea what Mr. would be.  The Mr. should be eliminated......... I will do that—Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.236.210.82 (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As it was not uncommon for some areas of society to use Mr/Miss with a first name at one time, it is possible this is a semi-formal means of address. Think of the butlers in films, "Young Mr george does like some wine!" (188.147.16.73 (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Mr'' Punch? 

message: Having grown up in Germany I was only ever exposed to the German Kasperl but the shows I've seen lack any wife beating and child murdering. It might be intresting to note that the modern Punch has (atleast in Germany) been toned down quite a bit.
I'm just not sure how or where to add it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.31.20 (talk) 10:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Punch Toned Down?

message: He usually narrates the whole show(at least he does in the show on the front in Llandudno)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.1.72.245 (talk) 22:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  no mention of the golliwog? 

message: Removed a line about "Punch and Judy politics"; I couldn't find a way to make it NPOV. Mostly because, as far as I can tell from its Google hits, it's a fairly vacuous insult and therefore an example of itself.  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 12:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed NPOV comment 

message: :"The figure of Punch derives ultimately from the stock character of Pulcinella."
This is only historical speculation, and has never been confirmed (in fact, it is a theory based entirely on the fact that Pulcinella was later called Punchinello). 24.17.154.203 06:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pulcinella

message: User:200.127.223.146 added the content below to the article, which I've removed based on a couple of concerns.  The first is that I can find no mention of "Gavriel" nor of this poem, bringing up questions of notability as well as, hate to admit it, spamming or copyright violations.  Apart from that, it isn't really encyclopedic-- this isn't a literature repository.  
MrPunch and Judy are playing their games again.
He chases her in their dreamt house
swinging a marotte till she faints. 
Him, hunched and with a crooked nose,
from Naples he came, in London he rose,
no one’s more European than him.
She, blonde and with a freckled face,
 with clear hints of highland ascendance,
they both have a passion for violence
and liquorices sticks with caramel.
The charfering homas sigh in contempt:
“Mr Punch and Judy are playing their games again”
and all the while the swazzling voice spats:
“Take that and that and that and that!”
                    
                                    Author: Gavriel
Thats my two cents.  --mordicai. 18:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:200.127.223.146]]'s Gavriel addition 

message: I don't think this would add anything to the article, but I thought some of you might enjoy this Punch & Judy poster at the Library of Congress:
Sioux City Art Center, 1940.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.142.34.0 (talk) 04:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punch and Judy poster 

message: I am deleting the reference to the Simpsons, it has no relevence to the article, why the Simpsons as opposed to any number of modern day comparisons? If the author asserts that they are they are the best example then that is obviously a fan's opinion and definitely NPOV. 70.91.35.27 (talk) 16:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC
The author replies: The deleter misses the point that we're talking about oddball family slapstick drama - of which 'The Simpsons' is a prime contemporary example. Pointing out that Punch & Judy worked the same patch a few centuries earlier is totally relevant and is something often cited by Punch performers. What other current example  - one as universally recognised -  would serve as well? (And why would any reference to The Simpson's be "obviously a fan's opinion?" Do we have a Simpsonsophobe on the case?)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.80.221 (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete Simpsons reference 

message: I think I've discovered what it is that's wrong with the line about why children enjoy Punch. The violence is a part of it, but it's as funny as it is because it's puppet violence. It's a puppet with a funny voice beating other puppets with a stick. I think we all agree most (?) children wouldn't find an actual man beating his wife to death funny. However, puppet-on-puppet violence-- that's humorous. There are other elements, of course, but would a "live-action" Punch and Judy be nearly so funny? I think the sentence should be changed to something along the lines of "this is greatly enjoyed by small children, possibly because of the puppet-on-puppet violence." Of course, the following sentence would have to altered as well, to flow properly.
I know some of you won't like this change, but if we're supposed to be an encyclopedia, can we really ignore what may be a large part of the humor in the interests of humorous prose? Besides, the article is currently lacking the term "puppet-on-puppet violence."The Luizer (talk) 13:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, methinks "puppet-on-puppet violence" is a term not likely to catch on anywhere, least of all in an encyclopedia! :) However the general point is a good one--discomfort wrought against others is fundamental to humour, eg, as long as they, not I slip on the banana skin. The aggro and discomfort dished out by Punch is masked by his puppet persona and comic costume, but it is very much human aggro, and even quite young children know how Punch is 'brought to life' and can realise the correspondence between their own felt passions and those acted out with puppets and dolls. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 17:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As Mel Brooks once said: "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die." (See also The Three Stooges, or, really, slapstick in general.) Besides, the humor of the prose has – again – long since been mangled away.  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Amend Line

message: The first ever venue to feature Punch and Judy in New York was claimed to be  Niblo's Garden  in 1860 during 'The Santa Claus Festival' on 27th. December. The New-York Daily Tribune ( not  New York Tribune ) advertised the event on 25th. December, 1860, fifth column - and can be viewed here: http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030213/1860-12-25/ed-1/seq-1/ . It's rather interesting that in the same festival advertisement it would also claim the first American appearance of  Aunt Sally  .
In closing my contribution - I wonder what avid fans of Punch and Judy will think of the 'Characters in the Comedy' listed in the advert ? I had to laugh. Isn't Punch and Judy just great!  MZionC (talk) 19:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Niblo's Garden 

message: Found Punch lurking in the background of a painting from 1757 !
We could add this image to the 'History' section ?
--195.137.93.171 (talk) 18:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image for History Section ? 

message: One poster, who contributes exclusively to this page, apparently feels free to delete all other contributors at will. Possibly he (or she) is struggling under the impression that he "owns" the Punch and Judy page. This is a misapprehension. The pages on Wikipedia become, as I understand it, the property of the public, and not one individual. Neither can anyone use Wikipedia to rewrite history to his or her own personal tastes and liking. 
That said, a neutral synopsis of the skeletal outline of the traditional play, as it loosely existed for centuries, is in accordance with the informational, educational and practical purposes of Wikipedia. I will continue to restore the section as it becomes deleted for no logical or impersonal reason. 
(BTW, you're free to provide proof of the Victorian "great change" that "came over the performance" as it "adapted itself to a family audience". You can do this by linking to and/or citing authentic published scripts and sources from the period, just like everyone else would be obliged to do to back up their own claims. That way, we don't have to simply take your word for it. Reference, please...)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.161.192.16 (talk) 20:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: No one "owns" this page

message: The list of characters claims the beadle is only used in historical reenactments, and yet does not consider the same for the Hangman (also a historical character in UK these days). Exactly where does one draw the line at a show with historical characters and a historical reenactment? I have seen the beadle used alongside contemporary figures. (79.190.69.142 (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: List of characters

message: The history section concludes with "Modern British performances of Punch and Judy are no longer exclusively the traditional seaside children's entertainments they had become. They can now be seen at carnivals, festivals, birthday parties, and other celebratory occasions."
However, this is not exactly correct because Punch has never been exclusively a seaside entertainment. The first recorded Punch show (albeit a Pulcinella show)was in 17th Century London at Covent garden. Henry Mayhew's book on London's Poor and Labour, has an interview with a Punch performer who works in the cities, markets and fairs. he also states that he plays children's parties. This was circa 1840. Punch only mkoved to the seaside when the tourists did, but he was always around for children's shows, carnivals etc. (79.190.69.142 (talk) 17:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Punch was never exclusively at the seaside

message: "Punch and Judy" is not the german version of the linked site "Kasper". --77.8.73.237 (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  german side 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Punch and Judy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120113104655/http://chalkhills.org:80/reelbyreal/s_Punch.html to http://chalkhills.org/reelbyreal/s_Punch.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Pictures of Mr Punch, as in the 19th century magazine, always depict him with a dorsal fin, albeit hidden under his jacket, but still evident. Is this a relic of his puppet ancestry? What was it for? 121.44.29.224 (talk) 09:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dorsal Fin 

message: I'd like to propose a new section + rearrangement of this page. There's many references throughout this article (in history section or elsewhere) towards very particular elements of the show itself/general staging.
For example the explanation of the swazzle, role and particulars of the puppeteer/ punchman, marionettes vs. puppets might all belong in this section and give a better understanding to the reader of what the show actually involves (beyond it's comedic plot). I don't have any particular sources to hand but I imagine there'd also be room to discuss particulars of the booth itself and styling of the puppets.
The article would be quite improved as it would make the history section more readable and also decontextualise the history and story/comedy sections in a more grounded way.
Finally I think it's appropriate to rearrange the article in this way because Punch and Judy is a show. It's theatre and issues of staging are quite important.
I'd be keen to go ahead and rearrange the page but it might be a significant change so I thought I'd check in here. U+1f490princess3000 (talk) 14:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section? - Production and Staging