This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
If you have access to this resource, or if you need to verify a citation from this reference, check out WikiProject Resource Exchange.Resource ExchangeWikipedia:WikiProject Resource ExchangeTemplate:WikiProject Resource ExchangeResource Exchange articles
There has been a back-and-forth between me and another about Thomas Nast being the originator of the overly exaggerated political caricature. It was cited that Daumier and Cruikshank were earlier caricaturists — but not on the order of Nast. And they were feriners, Nast really represented the American political scene. There is not as much exaggereated flair in their cartooning as was depicted by Nast and is now a popular style of political caricaturization. Magi Media14:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Magi Media[reply]
Harper's Weekly was not unusual among American publications of its day in its racial attitudes; it wasn't Der Stürmer, although a reader unfamiliar with the subject might get that impression from the visual evidence in our article. The jpg depicting comparative profiles in particular is a problem, as its provenance is uncertain; the image documentation alleges that it comes from Harper's Weekly (no year specified) and from a book by H. Strickland Constable, Ireland from One or Two Neglected Points of View, 1899. According to worldcat, Strickland Constable's book was published in 1888 and possibly again in 1899. The illustration is reproduced on
page 146 of George Bornstein's book Material modernism: the politics of the page (Cambridge University Press, 2001) with a caption that says that it comes from Strickland Constable's book. Elsewhere on page 146, Harper's Weekly is mentioned as the source of the Thomas Nast illustration (figure 31) printed on page 147; perhaps this caused the confusion.
