Life, 1914-11-19 · page 30 of 44
Life — November 19, 1914 — page 30: what you’re looking at
What you’re looking at
This satirical letter is written as if from a Japanese gentleman named "Togo Rebukes" (likely referencing Japanese Admiral Togo, famous from the Russo-Japanese War). The writer uses broken English and absurd logic to mock *Life* magazine itself through exaggerated complaints. The satire works by having the Japanese character attack *Life's* editorial positions on women, doctors, and disease with contradictory, illogical arguments—thereby defending the very targets *Life* criticizes. For instance, he accuses *Life* of being simultaneously cruel to women for mocking their femininity AND for supporting women's suffrage. The illustration shows a young boy speaking to an adult, captioned "Could you not be less brutal?"—suggesting *Life's* humor is needlessly harsh. The piece is essentially *Life* defending its own satirical approach by creating a ridiculous foreign critic whose complaints prove the magazine's points rather than refuting them. It's self-referential humor about magazine criticism itself.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
gal Eyl ot ge Letters of a Japanese School-boy To Editor “ Life Laughpaper” is sometimes considerable, AR SIR:— D My wife, Miss Sadie Obi, (who expects to be divorced from her fre- quent husband, Mr. T, Oki) have eloped with Arthur Kickahajama, mis- sionary boy, who ought to be shamed because he has twins at home and is therefore a bigami: I have so much mental inflammation from that act that I cannot write you flattery, as usual, but must tell you how much I do not like your paper. Some weeks I wld pay ten cents (toc) not to read “ Life” and be per- mitted to rest my intellectuality from listening to your sneers about all high- up breeds of human nobleness. If Congress should give me 1,000,000$ for start funny paper I could print some- thing which would laugh at every semi- colon. I make giggle to think how ridiculous I could make that printing and yet be serious about telling truth, Yet you are only humoristical when resembling Ana Nearly every- thing what got good in it you stroke down. Similarly you boast up every- thing what should be decomposed. I tell you what I admire less about your print: 1—Your editorials. 2—Your jokes, 3—Your pictures. 4—Your opinions. If you will permit me that dis- courtesy I shall now begin to deride you. Firstly I shall commence with Your Opinions. Could you not be less brutal when talking about Ladies, Doctors and other varieties of Vivisections? If you are friend of dum beasts, why should you continuously saw doctors to pieces without ether? And how you treat Ladies! Nobody in your paper know how to remove his hat properly, ex- cept Hon, Chas. D. Gibson. You cannot permit ladies to be merely. Firstly you Togo Rebukes ‘‘Life”’ “Could you not be less brutal? etc—” make sceptic talk about them because they are feminine, then you rebuke them because they are feminists. You snarrel because they dress in parisite clothes, price 1,000$, yet when they grow suffragistic and wear cheap over- alls you are stillemore shock. How can you be domesticated if you are never satisfied? If Ladies should become angels—which they can be when siffi- ciently irritated—you would hire E, Smartin to write another safe-and- sanitary editorial to warn America that high-fly ladies was another peril in- vented by Progressive Party. I am also inflamed because you have no reverence for disease. Each weekly I hear you make following cross-eyed thought: 1—All Christian S siderable grafts. —All Medical Scientists are siderable grafts. ‘ How could I read you and feel com- fortable when I get a pain in my interne? I ask to know. Sipposedly my appendicitis become suddenly en- raged. What should I do? Nothing! You will get cross and cruel if I call ntists are con- in any Scientist (either X or X Ray). You will not allow anybody to lay hands on me either with prayers or with knives. You say Heelers cannot hellup me by refusing to mention my disease and Doctors cannot ade me by giving it a noble name resembling Pullman car. What then? You per- mit me to die like a worm, without expense and without enjoyment. What you snuggest me do, if you so smart? When I am layed amidst bedding salut- ing death from panemosis of the canal, maybe I can telegraph your editorial writer and find out what next? Maybe I can cure myself by reading book re- views by Hon. Jab Kerfoot. Ah nol! That would be species of New Thought which you are disgusted to admire, You love dum animals and refuse to see their rev. insides approached with scissors, You report that doctors should not practice cut-up on live bait. You snuggest that surgeans can learn how mend broken livers by practicing on statues, vegetables and sirloin stakes. Maybe they can, but could they? I hope you will feel deliciously re- huked from this repartee. Nextly I shall approach your politics. Hon. Hellish O. Jones continuously make columns of smoke in your paper to tell how I, W. W. can beautify sth Ave by blowing it up. On next page Hon. E. Smartin write Senator Pen- rose language to explan how Hon. T. Roosevelt are greater traitor than Hon. B. Arnold, because Hon. Roosevelt up- lifted his country while Hon. Arnold merely threw it down, I am confused. Why should you curse Hon. Roosevelt for inventing renitiative & efferendum while you kiss Hon. Wilson for using that same medicine with all his meals, You are similar to ladies. You seldom kiss those who deserve it. Hon. J. B. Sago, Japanese anarchist, wish to join me in another insult at you. Why should your critics be so critical? Who are “T. L. M.”, that comicbooks.com