Satire and the Medical Profession

William Hogarth, "The Reward of Cruelty" (1751), The Works of William Hogarth, from the Original Plates.  London:  Baldwin and Cradock [1837-1848]. Rare and Distinctive Collections, CU Boulder Libraries.

Denis Diderot, with Robert Benard, engraver, "Anatomie, Les Arteres," Encyclopédie, ou, Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers.  Geneva: Chez Pellet, 1777-1779.  

The Reward of Cruelty is the final piece of a four engraving series titled The Four Stages of Cruelty. The engravings depict the story of an incredibly cruel man named Tom Nero who abused animals and murdered his pregnant lover. In The Reward of Cruelty, Nero’s recently executed body lies in the middle of a room while medical professionals do anatomical research on him. His body is brutally cut up, with his eyes being gouged from their sockets and his organs being used as dog food. In 1751, when The Four Stages of Cruelty was created, using the body in this manner was seen as disrespectful. However, due to Nero’s heinous crimes, he forfeited his right to have his body respected. As a result, he is “rewarded” for his crimes by having his body used for medical research (The Four Stages of Cruelty, 1751).

The Four Stages of Cruelty was created by an English man named William Hogarth. Although he used many different art styles, his success primarily came from his satirical work. By the 1730’s, Hogarth was well-known for his paintings of portrait groups and conversation pieces. However, he grew bored of this work and struggled to maintain enough finances for himself and his family, causing him to switch lanes. He called his new and unique style of art “modern moral subjects,” which consisted of a series of paintings that told stories of everyday life. Due to their relatability across all social classes, Hogarth’s paintings were massively successful, and were eventually turned into engravings that sold in large quantities (Bindman, 2009).

William Hogarth’s engravings were aimed at the issues plaguing the lower classes in London. He made sure to use the cheapest artistic medium possible so that even the poorest of people could see his work. Animal abuse in eighteenth century London was a serious issue, and The Four Stages of Cruelty was meant to send a message about the consequences of cruelty. Due to the controversy surrounding body research, that consequence was likely terrifying. Hogarth included text in each of the engravings to further solidify his message. The text is written as follows:

Behold the Villain's dire disgrace!

Not Death itself can end

He finds no peaceful Burial-Place

His breathless Corse, no friend.

Torn from the Root, that wicked Tongue,

Which daily swore and curst! 

Those Eyeballs from their Sockets wrung, 

That glow'd with lawless Lust! 

His Heart expos'd to prying Eyes,

To Pity has no claim;

But, dreadful! from his Bones shall rise,

His Monuments of Shame.

The text states that crimes like this ensured that there would be no peace after death, and that the criminal’s reputation would forever be disgraced. Instead of being mourned, the criminal’s body would be used to benefit those that they had harmed. The punishment will be so extreme that their bones would be used as a monument of their atrocities, their tongue will be cut from their mouth, and their eyes will be gouged from their sockets. Essentially, they will receive no mercy. 

Anatomical research was often performed on criminals in the 18th century. In fact, The Murder Act of 1752 enforced public dissections of executed criminals (Mitchell, 2011). The use of criminal bodies in anatomical research took place during The Enlightenment, which was a period that sought to challenge traditional religious beliefs through science and rationale. Considering that plague had only recently occurred, and that many people believed that plague was a punishment from God, this type of scientific thinking about health and disease represented a significant departure from traditional religious beliefs (Duignan, 2023). 

In contrast to William Hogarth’s satirical work, Denis Diderot was a French philosopher who created scientific engravings designed to educate. Diderot was an important figure during the Enlightenment, especially because he was one of many participants in creating the Encyclopedie, ou dictionnaire raisonne des sciences, des arts et des metiers (1751-1772). The encyclopedia was made with the intention to enlighten the public, and Diderot hoped that this encyclopedia could contain all of the knowledge acquired in the world. However, unlike Hogarth’s work, the encyclopedia was expensive, only allowing wealthier people to have access to it (Introduction to the Encyclopédie). 

Diderot’s anatomical engravings (1777-1779) focus on the skeletal, muscular, and vascular systems. Additionally, one of his engravings shows the tools used for surgery at this time. The images all contain numbers that highlight specific regions of each body system, much like anatomy images that were created in modern times (Encyclopedie, Anatomie Plate VIII). 

- Margaux Reifman, Spring, '23

William Hogarth, "The Four Stages of Cruelty (1751), The Works of William Hogarth, from the Original Plates.  London:  Baldwin and Cradock [1837-1848]. Rare and Distinctive Collections, CU Boulder Libraries.

William Hogarth, born on November 10, 1697, Smithfield, London's Bartholomew Close, was an English painter and engraver, pictorial satirist, and social critic. His parents, Richard Hogarth, a writer and schoolteacher, and his wife Anne Gibbons raised three children (including) William (Bindman). William was the oldest amongst all his siblings (“Frederic George Stephens, 11 vols.”). William's father, Richard Hogarth, was an author and schoolteacher who relocated to London in the late 1680s. From 1703 till 1707–1708, the Hogarth family struggled financially when William’s father was sent to jail after an issue with his work had taken place. Richard's great but doomed aim was to create a Latin dictionary, an undertaking that resulted in him being mistreated by printers and booksellers. Richard was interred at St. Bartholomew's after passing away on May 11, 1718 (Bindman). William's life was significantly impacted by the hardships and premature death of his father, Richard Hogarth. William's family's difficulties prevented him from attending college or obtaining professional training. The family's financial struggles forced William to "shift for himself" and undergo a menial apprenticeship (Bindman). William was employed from February 1714 until perhaps the beginning of 1720 at Ellis Gamble's silver workshop located on Cranbourne Street in Leicester Fields, London. Despite his early setbacks, William Hogarth demonstrated a strong will to succeed in life (Bindman). The difficulties his family experienced may have contributed to his subsequent irascibility and resoluteness, specifically in William Hogarth's early years are illuminated by this in-depth account, which offers details about his upbringing, early hardships, and the events that molded his personality and professional path. This hardship and cruelty are seen in Hogarth’s "Four Stages of Cruelty," a printed engraving collection, based on a fictional character named Tom Nero, who was suspected to be a portrayal of Hogarth himself (“William Hogarth: The Four Stages of Cruelty.”)

The “Four Stages of Cruelty” A manuscript sheet is pasted to the front pastedown entitled "A catalog of the prints contained in this volume which are chiefly first, and all, fine impressions." The list comprises the titles of the prints, numbered 1 - 90 (1. William Hogarth). These pieces were meant to be a moral critique, a satire in medicine, of the social problems that London's society was facing in the eighteenth century. Each plate depicts a different stage in the life of the fictional Tom Nero's life. There are four engravings presented in the collection: "First Stage of Cruelty," (1751) Figure 1. The "Second Stages of Cruelty," Figure 2. "Cruelty in Perfection," Figure 3. and "The Reward of Cruelty," Figure 4. Are the four pieces in the collection referred to as "plates". Hogarth was known for his attention to detail and the use of visual storytelling. Viewers can follow the narrative by examining different elements within the engraving, providing a layered and nuanced exploration of the theme. 

James Gillray, "The Cow-Pock_or_the Wonderfull Effect of the New Inoculation," 1802.  Rare and Distinctive Collections, CU Boulder Libraries.

The creator of this cartoon James Gillray was a well-known English caricaturist from London who rose to popularity in the 1780s for his satirical political caricatures. Gillray partnered with media companies and political activist groups to create thousands of images that communicated different political messages through images (McConnell et al, 2018). To create this specific image Gillray used print-etching, a technique where the artist uses acid to etch lines into a metal plate and then transfer them onto paper (Huphery, 2023).

“The cow-pock,-or-The wonderful effects of the new inoculation!” by James Gillray was published by the Anti-vaccine Society in 1802 (Morgan et al, 2007). The image depicts a man giving a concerned woman a cowpox vaccination at the forefront of the image. At the time the cowpox vaccination was a controversial and transformative medical discovery. The man administering the vaccine is said to be Edward Jenner the doctor who discovered that cowpox could be used to protect people against smallpox (Morgan et al, 2007). This image expresses skepticism of cowpox vaccination depicting people who have received the vaccine sprouting cows' or cows' physical features as a result of receiving the vaccination. The image is intended to scare the public from receiving the vaccination, because of the potential side effects. Images like this one were very popular “Cartoons were widely circulated giving expression to such anxieties by portraying vaccine recipients sprouting horns from their skulls as they undergo a bestial metamorphosis before the eyes of horrified spectators and the hapless vaccinator”(Snowden, 2020). These cartoons arose after the “British Parliament declared vaccination one of the great discoveries in the history of medicine” (Snowden, 2020). People had little trust in the government or in Edward Jenner.

This image was intended for the general public. Jenner's vaccination research was published in 1798 it was not taken seriously or widely used until 1799 and in 1802 the British Parliament publicly acknowledged the vaccine (Riedel, 2005). This public recognition from Parliament created some public outcry as Gillrays image and the British Parliament's announcements were both in 1802. High society overall was the least accepting of the vaccine Elizabeth Fry broke through the chains of prejudice by being one of the first mothers to vaccinate their child in high society London (Bennett, 2008). This provides evidence that the higher social class had more skepticism of vaccination, leading to an inference Gillarys image was created by the upper class. We can infer that vaccination was a split issue, at the time of Gillray's image and the information on Jenner's trouble publishing but ultimate acceptance. Overall Gillray’s engraving is still relevant to how vaccines are not always accepted even in today's society. This piece reflects the sentiment of the cox pox vaccination while also reflecting today's society's feelings towards the COVID-19 vaccine. The image can be seen as a timeless example of the fears of vaccination.

- Joey Landeryou, Spring, 23'

Gillray's engraving captured the fear of vaccinations. Edward Jenner’s discovery that cowpox injected into humans was met with mixed feelings. On the surface the smallpox vaccine was effective, but as the painting displayed there was fear of mixing nonhuman biology with human biology. The characters in the painting start to display animal likeness and a human hybrid appearance. Gillray’s piece can also be interpreted as a satire against the anti-vaccination movement. In reality there were no changes to people that took the vaccination so the artist expression can be viewed as an expression of unjustified paranoia. The average person of the time would be focused on the authority of the doctor in the painting as he coldly gives out the vaccine to the commoners in the room. Gillray’s painting can be interpreted as both pro and anti-vaccination depending on the viewers preconceived opinion on smallpox vaccinations.

Regardless of which side Gillray was attacking or supporting, the broader population was at the whim of the government. Gillray used this raw emotion to draw attention to his painting. Fear of a cow mutation was more powerful than logical belief in science, as “Jenner is seen delivering a rather vicious gouge to a woman’s arm with his lancet as all around her the previous vaccine recipients undergo horrible transformations” (Eisen, 2021). The painting never clearly says the doctor is Jenner, but it is implied. Jenner is visually associated with the terrors and fears of the common people. Given his status as a doctor and believer in science, he is an easy target for Gillray to use as a focus of his satire.  Gillray covered many political controversies.  As Godfrey Pearlson noted, “He is widely regarded as the father of political cartoon. He also lampooned social events and familiar characters of the day” (Pearlson, 2015). Since there was limited visual communication at the time, Gillray’s painting was more impactful than it would be today given the broad media we now have. Gillray’s painting would have long-term consequences as it gave a visualization for the fear. The publics' to refusal to voluntarily take the vaccine led to a mandatory smallpox vaccine program in 1853 with the Vaccination Act (Isaacs, 2021). According to Isaacs, 10 million people died mainly in Africa and India from smallpox. Luckily scientists eliminated smallpox in 1978 (Isaacs, 2021). Gillray’s painting seems out of place in current society as science is now understandable. However, the painting is relatable as it pulls on fears of side effects which stop many people even today from getting various vaccinations. Gilray’s painting was meant to be a satire of government control and science, but making comedy out of death is not easy. Vaccinations continue to be a topic of heated debate.  "These reproductions of satirist cartoons from the Becker library ‘s archival collection of smallpox caricatures represent public concern over the effects of smallpox vaccination in early 19th century Europe and serve as a historical counterpart to today’s equally inflammatory and hyperbolic anti-vaccination memes” (Chase 2018). This article was written before COVID 19 and shows that Gillray’s painting is relevant to many time periods.

James Gillray, "Dr. Sangrado Curing John Bull of Repletion," 1803.  Rare and Distinctive Collections, CU Boulder Libraries. 

James Gillray, "The Cow-Pock_or_the Wonderfull Effect of the New Inoculation," 1802.  Rare and Distinctive Collections, CU Boulder Libraries.

The image above is called “Doctor Sangrado Curing John Bull of Repletion [Bloodletting], 1803,” a satirical print from The British Museum, the situation involves a man named John Bull who is sitting down, while allowing another man is performing a medical procedure called bloodletting. The satirical print is a political commentary about John Bull, who symbolizes Great Britain, being drained of life by then British Prime Minister Henry Addington, who encourages: "Courage John Bull - Courage!!!" The cariacature shows Napoleon (the short man in the foreground with the sword) collecting the blood. The creator, James Gillray, is trying to point out the ineffective policies of the current Prime Minister during the time comparable to the medical procedure of bloodletting (Gillray n.d.). The cartoon-like-print tells the reader the feelings about the medical practices of bloodletting as an ineffective treatment comparable to a political folly: Ineffective and draining of life. James Gillray was a popular political satirical artist that often would point out social issues within Great Britain society. Gillray also produced a similar satirical print about the novel treatment of inoculation-or-cowpox vaccine called “The cow-pock -or - the wonderful effects of the new inoculation, 1802” (image below) from The British Museum, Gillray making a social statement about the mistrust in vaccines with pig parts sprouting out of people’s bodies that were exposed to the cowpox vaccine.

The creator, James Gillray, had many political and satirical prints during the period of 1792-1810. Despite being made during the age of enlightenment for political thinking and scientific reasoning, medical advancements, such as: Germ theory and surgical procedure were not yet discovered. Instead, the medical field during this period relied upon Galen and Hippocratic teachings that upon reflection were often the cause of making illnesses worse, for example, Galen and Hippocratic teachings suggested that diarrhea and upheaval of bodily fluids was the natural reaction of the body trying to rid itself of poisonous materials within and the treatment suggested included: bloodletting and providing powerful emetics and cathartics (Snowden, 2019, 240). The social and political world of the 19th century struggled with new ideas about treatments and procedures, while disapproving of past treatments including bloodletting. This can be interpreted by the criticism of the cow-pox vaccine by James Gillray in the image made in 1802, only for Gillray to criticize bloodletting by comparing the procedure to an ineffective political action in “Doctor Sangrado Curing John Bull of Repletion [Bloodletting], 1803.” The assumption is that while the distrust of new medical treatments may have been prevalent in this time, so were the old methods. The overall impression is that the common folk were distrustful of most medical practices (along with their political leaders), as visiting the doctor was the last resort and most likely meant death was eminent. 

- Ashley Jessen, Spring '23