Cap and Bell on Science and Art
Government, Politics, Education, Aesthetics, Class
Derides Ralph Bernal Osborne for his speech in Parliament in which he criticized Henry Cole, the South Kensington Museum, and the 'Grant' for the Department of Science and Art. Explains that while Osborne understood that the latter department, 'with a Museum, and Art Schools, and Professors, and Grants of Money' could inspire 'aesthetical ideas', he insisted that 'the people were very unimpressionable in matters of Science and Art'. Punch agrees with this, but attacks Osborne for claiming that 'it is absurd to try an impress' the people and arguing against using government grants to educate taste. Notes Osborne's criticism of the high salaries drawn by professors of the Science and Art Department and anticipates that in the reformed House of Commons there will be 'more representatives of the working men' who 'best know the needs of the people, in the way of education, and art, and science', who would not tolerate such 'catchers of barren laughs' as Osborne, and who would attack the 'scorners of a science they are innocent of'. Concludes by mocking Osborne for being ignorant of the School of Art in the constituency he represents.
© Science in the Nineteenth-Century Periodical Project, Universities of Leeds and Sheffield, 2005 - 2020
Printed from Science in the Nineteenth-Century Periodical: An Electronic Index, v. 4.0, The Digital Humanities Institute <http://www.sciper.org> [accessed ]