Category: Absurdist, Unintentional

JF Ptak Science Books  Quick Post

Nature (September 13, 1924) posted a long one-paragraph description of the work of Dr. William.S. Inman (1876-1968), who published an article in the Lancet on the causes of left-handedness, stammer, and squint, which he found were related in one form or another, and globally.  Just in case you were wondering, Dr. Inman located the causes of the problems of left-handnedness, and his were devoted “to mental causes”:

• Left-handedness, stammering, and squinting are all caused by emotional stress;
• “too severe parenting” can be the cause of stammering, and left-handedness, and squinting;
• each of these “defects runs in families”;
• a family predisposed to one is so with the other two;
• one can become lefthanded as “an unconscious revolt against authority”.

So, there. 

This at least seems like a gentle and inquisitive approach to left-handedness, which, it seems, was a “defect” that historically was dealt with by corporal punishment.  For example, in the first book I can find in the global library catalog WorldCat that mentions “left-handedness”–a work by Thomas Lutpon with the long and languid title of A Thousand Notable Things containing modern curiosities. Viz. Divers Rare and Experienc’d Physical Receipts… To Educate Children to learn languages speedily…Also a new help to discourse, and directions to read, write, indite and speak languages readily and speedily…, a note is found with the description of the book saying “21st edition of this book of secrets, first published in 1586, it contains “A New Method to Educate Children” pp. 153-163 with a woodcut of alphabet cubes. The 20th edition appeared in 1706./ Some of the recipes are innocuous, others simply terrifying — in spite of this, the author’s instructions for educating children are surprisingly humane — no corporal punishment and notably, no beating to correct left-handedness”.  Now the purpose of that very long and not-so-pretty sentence was to get aross the idea that for long periods of time left-handedness was treated as something that could be beat out of someone, physically.  That at least is one very disturbing way of teaching someone how to write with their right hand.  

JF Ptak Science Books  Post 2308

Here’s another classic of ingenuity mixed with out-of-context accidental absurdist visualisations: the classic (I think) “hat conformator” from the Scientific American in 1878.  

Which is a detail from:

[Source: Scientific American, March 9, 1878.]

The $100 instrument (a wide sum in 1878, equal today in buy power to several thousand dollars) was an instrument of use not only to hat makers but to the anthropological and medical professions as well–head shape and its influence on behavior still being a concern to some, the conformator found some occasional use in relating meaning to shape.  That sort of effort would continue for some decades to come.  

As a classic illustration the fron page showing the conformator is generally shown when shared online or written about in paper, but I don’t think I’ve ever noticed the posting of the head shapes themselves coming a few pages later. The short chart features the axial view of some famous 1870’s heads–I would say more about this if there was anything useful to say, but really I think there isn’t so I won’t. 

The 1878 conformator is not unique in the history of head measurement for hats, evidently: “My invention relates to a device to be placed about the head and adjustable to conform to the anatomy thereof”, so states the very wordy originator of another patent device for a “hat-conformator” in 1921–no doubt there are a number of different ways of taking head measurements for a custom-made hat, but I think none are prettier than the 1878 version.

And another–no doubt from a field of conformator richness: 

JF Ptak Science Books   Quick Post      

I do enjoy infographic presentation that employ well-known and/or iconic bits from the environment as measuring implements.  Like using the Eiffel Tower for gauging heights, as shown earlier in this blog (see The Eiffel Tower as a Unit of Measurement, here) and St. Peter’s  cathedral for showing the depths of oceans (here). This surprising images appears in a simple pamphlet called The Conquest of the Desert (and which starts with a quote from Herodotus), published in 1910, and written on the subject of the Shoshone Dam (the Buffalo Bill Dam), which was opened in that same year.  It was a monster at 328′ high, and one of the best ways for the author to show what 328′ tall mean was to compare it to something very well known–and at thee time one of the most famous skyscrapers in the world was the Flat Iron Building in NYC, which stands three feet shorter.  And I’m pretty sure I’ve not seen too many images of famous buildings out-of-context and out-of-place as this.  

In 1910, in the heady just-getting-started days of skyscrapers coming into full view, and with structures like the Singer building topping out at over 600′, it ws legislated in Washington D.C. that no building in the city would be taller than the Washington Monument, for fear of the thing strapped with teh shadow of something larger.  That’s about the only thing that came to mind seeing this alternative measurement of the Shoshone Project dam:

[Source: http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/ReclamationDamsAndWaterProjects/Buffalo_Billl_Dam.html]

JF Ptak Science Books  Quick Post

In my bsuiness and leisure I get more than the common share of exposure to old magazines and images, musty old-book-smelling-cologne old books, basically every day. And in whatever memory shelters I have in my brain that aren’t already closed up and away to the seashore, there is one that is waaay down the hall, and it gets excited when unusual early advertising pops up.  I’ve noticed that at least in the mid/late-19th century that ads for personal improvement items were not shy about their claims and what they did and who it was for and what it would do, and it made me wonder about when the idea of subtlety sneaks into the arena of sales.  I have no data, just a collection of images, but it does seems as though the idea of the undersell comes into being in the U.K. at least in the second decade 20th century–and I say this because I’d notice how unusual it was to see an advertisement where it was not immediately apparent what the ad was selling.  Dunlop tires was one such example.  

In any event, opening this volume of Harper’s Weekly to the June 1, 1878 issue, the ANTI-FAT ad struck me immediately as something in the Most Robust Presentation of an Idea in Advertisement category.  It gets right to the mostly-imaginary point, quotes Hippocrates as their medical authority, and that’s that.  

JF Ptak Science Books  Quick Post

There was perhaps nothing so satisfying to a fellow in America in 1878 than to have a massive moustache–or at least the idea of one, a call to high fashion in hairstyles for men. But since not everyone could produce a garden on their upper lip there was always someone around to take advantage of the necessity of hope–in this case, the hope was provided by Smith & Co of Palatine, Illinois. They sold a concoction of some sort that promised (on three applications) to produce a heavy moustache and/or beard with ‘no injury”.  

The detail from the following snippet, which is actually a tiny detail from a full-page sheert of ads (see below):

A little research reveals the packet for the miracle-grow:

[Source, Historic New England site]

I’m sorry now that I didn’t collect these before-and-after images, as I’ve seen dozens over the years–this one was a little too beforey-and-aftery to pass up.