Jump to content

Talk:Thomas Nast

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Excessive emphasis on tweed ring and irish power: He attacked others

[edit]

Nast wasn't only against the Irish. The article doesn't even mention his repeated cartoons campaigning against "socialism, communism and anarchy", whom he drew as a characteristic skeleton (which continuously advocated for "free love", not making that up. Several times this communist skeleton (we know he is communist because he wears a ribbon with the "Communist" word inscribed, such subtletly) is seen threatening families, going so far as ytrying to kill a group of cougars because he opposses "family ties". Furthermore he called the new California constitution as confiscating capital for the "universal brotherhood" (scary, apparently). All the cartoons are in the public domain so there is no reason not to include any of them (in regards to A LOT of the irish-themed ones being there). Also more than one cartoon about "civilizing" American Indians by having an US politician figure forcing them to "work or starve" and "dig or starve" (sic) being the only choice. The article falsely paints Nast as some sort of progressive figure when he was a hardcore lutheran conservative. --181.26.41.141 (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

more?

[edit]

where can you get more thomas nast political cartoons


You can find plenty on the Thomas Nast Website. Check the external links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.92.152 (talk) 03:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC) also try ThomasNastCartoons.com Manny here I personally scan and art in the public domain[reply]

Nast and the Democratic Donkey

[edit]

According to Stephen Hess and Milton Kaplan's "The Ungentlemanly Art" the attribution of the Democratic Donkey to Nast is incorrect.

Slavery Clarification

[edit]

In regard to this quote: "In general he was well known in his time for his political cartoons supporting American Indians, Chinese Americans and advocating abolition of slavery."

As to advocating abolition, wasn't Nast only a teenager when the Civil War ended? Can anyone verify the last part of this line? If it implies anything else (or is not localized to the US) it should be clarified; otherwise, removed.

I don't think he ever "supported" american indians. He advocated for them to "work or starve" by force and said they should cease to be "Nations" and become States and be taxed and subject to the gallows. As regards to the Chinese he just supported them in contrast to "socialism, communism and anarchy". --181.26.41.141 (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't Nast a teenager? Um, check the entry right after his name for the pertinent dates -- of course you know already know when the Civil War took place, right? TresÁrboles 05:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly do know; I think I was having a slow moment when I wrote that and calculated his age as ten years younger -- thanks! AdamantlyMike 05:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nast's Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Irish Bigotry

[edit]

It would be worthwhile to note that in an effort to discredit the Democratic Party, Nash published cartoons that played upon the old Know-Nothing aversion to immigrants and Catholicism. File:AntiIrish.gif

Nast and Stereotypes.

[edit]

The main article states that Nast supported both Native Americans and Chineese Americans. This, for the most part, isn't true. While drawing in support of what was termed the "skeleton army" on the frontier, Nast usually drew Native American either as drunk savages or raging brutes out to kill as many settlers as possible. Through out his career, Nast was anti-immigration, and treated Asian immigrants no differntly than he did the Irish, always drawing them with stereotypical pigtails and robes. His blind support for Grant and radical Republican policy led him to savage Greely, Johnson, and anyone who opposed punishing the south to the fullest extent (contrary to what Lincoln wanted). Nast continued to give the Grant administration the benifit of the doubt until the scandals finally were too much to ignore.

That said, even though Nast did have blinders on sometimes, it is impossible to deny his impact. He was a genius, and his drawings still carry a powerful impact. Even the cartoons that have gross stereotypes, taken in context of the time period they were drawn, never fail to deliver their message. He was very influential in derailing the campaigns of Greely and Blaine, and probably helped get Johnson impeached. This greatest contribution, the distruction of the Tweed ring, should always be remembered as an example of the good the media is capable of. ________________________


His great grandson attended the Governor Dummer Academy in the late 1960s where he was an underground cartoonist, among other things. Tom Cod


Nast was a self-hating ignoramus who could draw. There's no need to glorify him beyond this. He hated "immigrants" because he was one; he hated Catholics because he was raised Catholic; he hated the famine Irish because they hated him, and bullied him, and he evidently never got over it. Nast sympathized with victim groups -- Chinese, Natives, blacks, etc -- because of his own sufferings, and spent his entire career advocating for their acceptance while directing all of his pent-up aggression at various groups of whites.

"Nast usually drew Native American either as drunk savages or raging brutes out to kill as many settlers as possible."

That would be ironic considering one of the most dominant and influential groups of settlers of the Western frontier was the Famine Irish he despised so much. There is no evidence to support a view that Nast was something other than a sympathetic pen-piece for non-white minorities.Jonathan f1 (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhh... How much of Nast's work have you seen? The vast majority of it is sympathetic to the respective plights of Native Americans and African Americans. You might want to check out "The Art and Politics of Thomas Nast" by Morton Keller. I cannot believe nobody referenced this book in the Nast page Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 07:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Response to "Nast and Stereotypes"

[edit]

Uhhh... How much of Nast's work have you seen? The vast majority of it is sympathetic to the respective plights of Native Americans and African Americans. You might want to check out "The Art and Politics of Thomas Nast" by Morton Keller. I cannot believe nobody referenced this book in the Nast page. Ivangeotsky

Nast Article Nds. Wrk.

[edit]

There is a ton of material available regarding Nast's working methods, cultural influence, and historical import. Why is the Nast article so meagre? (No offense intended to the authors who've worked on it.) Ivangeotsky

German-American?

[edit]

Conservapedia thinks Nast was American, not German-American - see their "Example of Bias"; it might be appropriate discuss it?

Thanks, Drum guy (talk) 22:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Such hyphenated forms are used in many WP article ledes. It (or similar formulations such as "German -born American" or "American artist born in Germany") seem calculated to inform, not to introduce bias. I'm not sure what bias Conservapedia thinks WP guilty of--are we pro-German? Judged by their own standard, Conservapedia must be pro-Russian; check their description of naturalized US citizen Vladimir Nabokov for a laugh. Ewulp (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But you raise a good question, which is addressed with some ambiguity at WP:MOSBIO, where it states that the subject's nationality "In the normal case ... will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable." Nast certainly was not notable until he came to the US. But on that same page (in the "Academic titles" section) the Isaac Asimov lede, which describes him as a Russian-born American, is presented as a model. So the wording here seems to be in compliance with WP guidelines arrived at by consensus, although these can be interpreted different ways. Ewulp (talk) 06:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Nast and The End of Reconstruction

[edit]
A Republican Form of Government and No Domestic Violence
a political cartoon about the (Wheeler) Compromise in Louisiana
by Thomas Nast
published in Harper's Weekly
March 6, 1875

Thomas Nast work A Republican Form of Government and No Domestic Violence call attention to what he thought was an unwise compromise--Looktothis (talk) 18:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In the section on notable works, shouldn't we link them to the actual drawings? I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure where to find them. 72.197.74.80 (talk) 03:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Year Errors?

[edit]

Hello, there seems to be a typo in dates somewhere. In the "Youth and Education" section, it claims that Nast enlisted in 1846, and joined his wife and children in New York in 1849. But his birthdate is listed as 1840. Which means he enlisted at age 6, and had children by age 9. Can anyone verify these dates? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.147.67.12 (talk • contribs) 13:46, September 15, 2008 (UTC)

You've missed a crucial detail: Nast was born in 1840, the son of a German trombonist, and it is the elder Nast who enlisted in 1846 and emigrated 3 years later. Ewulp (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did miss that, thanks for rewording the entry to make it more clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.126.129.176 (talk) 16:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nast and Imperialism?

[edit]

Since I'm doing a DBQ for a AP USHistory Class, I'm wondering if Nast had any significance/notability on his views towards imperialism in the cartoon "The World's Plunderers" to be mentioned. I have no idea myself, so I will refrain from adding mention of it as it is solely connected to my schooling. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Entomology of the word nasty?

[edit]

Did the word nasty stem from this guy or was it already in existence etc.? 12.106.237.2 (talk) 16:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

While trying to move images around to fix bunching, I had a hard time finding an arrangement that both eliminated edit link bunching and preserved the association of images with their relevant section. I wonder if it might be best to move all of the cartoons to an image gallery?HarryHenryGebel (talk) 22:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Father at 9?

[edit]

"He sent his wife and children to New York City, and at the end of his enlistment in 1849 he joined them there." At the beginning it says he was born in 1840, does that mean that at the age of 9 he already had a wife and a kid? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.90.31.221 (talk) 13:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah now i see i was wrong there, but could somebody rewrite it to make it more clear that it talks about his father not him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.90.31.221 (talk) 13:16, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First appearance together of the Democratic donkey & Republican elephant...

[edit]

According to this commercial website...

Item # 174414

December 27, 1879

HARPER'S WEEKLY, New York, December 27, 1879

An ideal issue for any political junkie as it contains the famous Thomas Nast print with the first appearance together of the Republican elephant & Democratic donkey. Thomas Nast was the creator of these two famous political symbols making this a very significant print. The caption reads: "Stranger Things Have Happened."

  • See cartoon image here.

I don't want to overload the article with tons of cartoons but I think maybe this one would be okay due to it's historic significance. I hesitate only because I have no reliable source to verify this is indeed the first such cartoon. Can anyone help? 66.97.209.215 (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support for this comes from the Albert Bigelow Paine book, where it is reproduced with the comment, "In this cartoon the Donkey and Elephant symbols first appear together, bearing their respective labels" (Paine 419). Probably the only way to squeeze it into the article is to add a gallery. Ewulp (talk) 03:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Thomas Nast. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thomas Nast. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 11:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency

[edit]

The lead states that "Contrary to popular belief, Nast did not create ... Columbia (the female personification of American values)" However the Legacy section lists Columbia as one of his contributions with no source. If nobody objects I will remove Columbia from the Legacy section. Razorhawk4595 (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thomas_Nast&oldid=1252176238"