Talk:Four Times of the Day

Comments on the article

A very enjoyable and carefully written article; I would certainly vote support if it went to FAC. I love Hogarth and have read every word of Uglow's biography, a dense but absorbing read. The close analysis here seems well referenced and accurate, although one could go on analysing Hogarth's satirical stuff forever. I jotted down the following notes: please feel free to ignore them, of course.

• Some of the pictures don't have a source.

• Influences: I felt these could be more fully and crisply listed and explained. The "Times of day" tradition is mentioned twice in close succession. Although there are references to classical mythology throughout the analyses ("in the centre of the picture the icy goddess of the dawn in the form of the prim churchgoer is followed by her shivering red-nosed pageboy, mirroring Hesperus, the dawn bearer"), there's no direct reference to the influence of classical satire, particularly Horace and Juvenal, on Augustan satire, the tradition in which these paintings were couched (which included the works of Swift and Pope). When "pastoral" is mentioned, it is not really defined in terms of its revival in Hogarth's time. I think the influences might be better presented in historical order, starting with classical satire, moving through the Flemish renaissance genre of points du jour, then to Poussin and Lancret, and finally to the Augustan pastoral and satirical tradition.

  I have a bit on Swift to add, so I was thinking of rearranging this section slightly. Although there is clearly classical influence, the problem comes with finding a reliable source that comes straight out and says it. I'll have another search.

What about this [1]?

(Google Books links are very volatile, so if the page doesn't come up for you, I can give you a summary. It would reference the influence of Horace and Juvenal and link it directly to that of Swift, Pope and the general trend.)

Uglow, in my opinion, does a good job of briefly tracing the specific classical tradition up to Hogarth's time. She says: "The four paintings look at first like a comic documentary of London and they have often been celebrated, from the late eighteenth century onwards, as illustrating Hogarth's originality, translating the tropes of pastoral poetry into city life. In fact they are yet another instance of his buoyant adaptation of artistic, rather than literary, conventions. The classical "Times of Day" tradition of Greece and Rome, celebrating the gods while registering the transience of human life, had been humanized in Michelangelo's four great sculptures for the Medici Chapel; in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries this theme was a favourite of Dutch and German engravers and it crept into French engravings too, in the early eighteenth century, in charming allegorical fétes galantes. qp10qp 16:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe I've never seen that book. I can't get to the page in Google books, but I'll get a copy sent out. Yomangani^talk 00:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I found a bit in Paulson, and have added some references to specific links to Swift and Gay in the commentaries on the prints to reinforce the connection. Yomangani^talk 17:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

• "...while the upper classes tend to provide the focus for each scene there is little of the moral comparison seen in some other of his works."

• "They are sometimes seen as parodies of middle class life in London at the time, but the moral judgements are not as harsh as in other of Hogarths's works and the lower classes do not escape ridicule either."

I think the middle classes would be closer to the mark (for the upper classes, I'd go to Marriage à-la-mode), though there is a posh lady in the first and a judge or two in the last. The Huguenots are surely too recently arrived to fit into the class system (and as the article says, they established themselves as tradesmen and artisans); while the couple visiting Sadlers Wells appear not to have a servant with them. To my eyes, there are moral comparisons in the pictures, particularly in the first two. Of course, it's not for me to analyse, and if the remarks above are sourced, all well and good.

I meant "upper" as in above "lower", but I knew that would cause difficulties. I'll have to think of some way of rewording it.

• Do we know why the images are mirrored? It must be something to do with the process, and it would be interesting to have that noted.

Yes, the engraving is copied from the painting and then the process of printing from it reverses the image. I'll add a bit on it.

• "A trail of peculiar footprints shows the path trodden by the woman on her pattens to avoid putting her good shoes in the filth of the street."

I expect that is sourced; but it strikes me as more likely that the snow was a greater consideration. Original thought by the reader counts for nothing, of course, so I merely record that I raised half an eyebrow at that juncture in the analysis. And why are the footprints peculiar? Because of the parallel patten marks or because they go under her dress at a right angle?

I think this probably came form the catalogue of the Tate exhibition. We'll have to wait for ALoan to return, unless I can get hold of a copy.

• "Although Strolling Actresses Dressing in a Barn was not connected to the other prints, it seems that Hogarth always envisaged selling the five prints together, adding the Strolling Actresses as a complementary theme just as he had added Southwark Fair to the subscription for The Rake's Progress."

What does "complementary theme" mean here? The article does not explain how the theme is complementary (not obvious to me, I must say).

I think I explained this better in the Strolling Actresses Dressing in a Barn article. I'll pull a sentence or two over.

• "Hogarth contrasts their fussiness and high fashion with the slovenliness of the working classes on the other side of the road."

Once again, I am not convinced that "class" is the point here. Is "working classes" an appropriate term in this context, since Hogarth wouldn't have used it and at least some of these Huguenots must have been artisans and tradespeople?

Problematic. I was going to use English, but the black guy isn't any more than the Huguenots are. I might just use "group" or some other non-specific term.

• "bagged up"

Is that worth a phrase of explanation? It may just be my ignorance, but I don't know what it means (was he wearing some kind of hair net?).

Yes, I'll see what I can do on that.

• Gordon, Paulson, Ireland, etc.

Might it be worth adding their first names at first mention? "Ireland" is particularly disorientating, given that it is also the name of a country.

Good point.

• Is it worth mentioning that Hogarth had his studio in Covent Garden for a time?

Might be possible to squeeze it in if I can connect it to something. Maybe I'll add it as a footnote.

• "Hogarth was later arrested as a spy while sketching in Calais, and made a more direct attack on continental fashions in Marriage à-la-mode."

Given the mention of Calais and the context of eating, I wonder if this sentence might better end with a mention of Hogarth's print for The Gate of Calais ("A print design'd and engrav'd by MR HOGARTH, representing a Prodigy which lately appear'd before the Gate of CALAIS. O the Roast-beef of Old England, &c."). Uglow says: "The print helped to establish him as a prime representative of the dauntless, innocent, beef-eating Brit."

I'm going to write that article next week, so I'll link it then.

• "The series lacks the moral lessons that are found in the earlier series and Marriage à-la-mode, and its lack of teeth meant it failed to find an enduring audience, although at the auction of 1745 the paintings of Four Times of the Day raised more those of the Rake, and Night, which is generally regarded as the worst of the series, fetched the highest single total. Cunningham comments sarcastically: "Such was the reward then, to which the patrons of genius thought these works entitled."

For me this passage didn't quite hang together and make a unified point. There might be three separate points here, by my reckoning. I looked up the quote in context (the whole book is on Google Books), and I don't think the use given to it here is exact enough. Cunningham is criticising the buyers for undervaluing the work Hogarth was selling and not referring to the worst of the four paintings selling for the highest price (the way I read it, anyway).

I was trying to make a coherent paragraph rather than having a series of random sentences on the reception, but it obviously needs work. I read it as both criticising the buyers for undervaluing the other works and mocking them for putting the highest price on Night. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

• "...but he also notes it as another nod to the country pictures, where instead of soaring above the fields it hangs impotently on the church wall."

I wasn't clear what "the country pictures" are here. Does this refer to the pastoral tradition? Also, the "where" slightly confuses the sentence, in my opinion.

Yes, it does refer to the pastoral paintings, but I thought I had "here" there, rather than "where" (which does confuse it).

Well, I have really enjoyed spending some time with this article and these pictures. qp10qp 03:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your (as always) insightful comments. Yomangani^talk 12:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Re sources (did you see my comments archive here incidentally?) - most of my recent additions are from the exhibition catalogue or from here. The pattens note comes from that website, although other sources make similar comments:

Lichtenberg: "The impressions which we observe in the foreground come from the iron mounting of small wooden shoes (pattens) which were then worn by the female population, and enabled them to glide, to the advantage of shoes and feet, a few inches above the mud of the streets." -- ALoan (Talk) 17:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I keep forgetting about that site. Lichtenberg is a bit batty on with some of his commentaries but this one seems spot on. I'll add it in after lunch. Yomangani^talk 17:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Great article! I enjoyed reading this alot. Awesome work guys, and fully deserving of the front page. Dxco 03:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I was reading this article, and in the Night section it says Shaving, bleeding, and teeth drawn with a touch, and get teabagged by Howard Stern for free! That teabagging thing isn't supposed to be there, is it?24.80.227.3 09:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of the word 'class'

This is not a comment that I am expecting definite action on, but on reading the article I was struck by the use of various class-based social descriptions through out, viz: 'upper and middle classes', 'middle class life', 'lower classes' (twice), 'slovenliness of the working classes'. While I'll agree that this is a useful, quick way of describing the social relations in Hogarth's works, it is arguably a bit anachronistic to say that eighteenth century England had the modern upper/middle/working system of class divisions, or that contemporaries like Hogarth would have viewed society as being partitioned in this way. I don't think grouping the black man, reasonably well dressed woman and the ragged-clothed street urchins in 'Noon' all as 'working class' gives a particularly accurate impression of eighteenth century social relations, for example. (Although it could be argued that Hogarth meant to imply this through the simple left/right division of the picture.)

At this stage, when we're talking about an encylopedia article a few thousand words long, I don't think this is especially important, as the article is a concise summary rather than a full, academic treatment. Nonetheless it would be nice, in the long run, if a more nuanced treatment of social relations could be developed, so that unfamiliar readers are not led into uncritically thinking that such class categories were as defined then as they are now. Ycdkwm 19:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have changed one of those instances before noticing this. The difficulty, as you point out, is that "class" is a useful shorthand even if not entirely accurate, and avoids the need to go into a complete discussion of the social structure of the 18th century or the need to phrase the sentences in such a way as to deliberately avoid using "class", which can look clumsy. That said, I agree in principle. Yomangani^talk 13:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Reception and auction prices

The 'Reception' section talks about the 1745 auction, but not the prices. I had to search back through the rest of the article to find the prices in the 'Background' section. Is it possible to repeat the prices (and give the total) in the later section? Carcharoth 12:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You want me to add up in old money?! I'll look at adding that (I'll try and get the totals for the Rake and Harlot too for comparison) Yomangani^talk 13:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Careful, I might ask for an idea of whether these auction prices were expensive for the time or not... :-) Carcharoth 13:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

What a wonderful article!

Thank you for writing and featuring this article, Featured articles editors. ---Sluzzelin talk 07:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Question

I have a couple of the original prints in the attic. Anyone know if they are worth anything?--BozMo talk 09:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

"By whom" tag

The recent tagging of "said" in this sentence:

The figure of the spinster is said to be based on a relative of Hogarth, who, recognizing herself in the picture, cut him out of her will.

seems unnecessary to me; the sentence is cited to Jenny Uglow and the attribution is no doubt described there. I don't see a need for further clarification. If the details of why this is thought to be the case are of interest, then they could be added, but there seems nothing wrong with the current version. Hence I have removed the tag. Mike Christie (talk) 12:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Four Times of the Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930024755/http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/hogarth/modernmorals/fourtimesofday.shtm to http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/hogarth/modernmorals/fourtimesofday.shtm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)