david_h wrote:
Artificial fish had to be coloured by someone and if the form asked the question it's reasonable answer.
There was only a contention that the answers were "curious". Does not "Colorist of artificial fish" qualify as a curious occupation? All the more so, because it's put so formally; could be s/he worked as a finisher in a fishing lure enterprise.
"Curious" only really becomes a euphemism for "spurious" in light of truly opaque entries like "Fatuous pauper" or "Count as female". Others more easily invite interpretation: you have "Knight of the Thimble" (probably a tailor), "Running about" (a courier, perhaps?), and other seemingly but not-so-obviously preposterous answers, so IMO the author of the blurb intentionally left wiggle-room in using the word. I'm unconvinced that everything on that list was meant to be dismissed as rubbish, but they undeniably are curious all, with many to be read into rather than taken at face value: "Turnip shepherd" is a lot more curious - and amusing - than "Produce farmer". "Grape dryer" I'm less sure of; was raisin production ever an industry in the UK? IIRC, it's normally pretty damp there; Cornwall, perhaps.
david_h wrote:
... 'knockers up' were still working in my parents' younger days and I only heard them referred to as that - who else would they be waking up for their shift at the factory?
See, that one caught my attention; I found the concept entirely plausible because the adjustable alarm clock wasn't patented until 1847, so in 1881 (and no doubt for some time afterward) they were probably yet to be cheaply mass-produced so as to be affordable for most average people. So, professional upknockers. Nevertheless, from a modern perspective it too qualifies as a curious occupation.
BTW, did you know that in the States, "knock up" means to make pregnant? Should a Right Ponder cheerily utter "Knock you up in the morning!" over here, it takes on a whole new character, and hilarity is bound to ensue even if we duly consider the source.
david_h wrote:
Was 'workpeople' a 19th century term?
Unsure of your drift, here. Is that supposed to be a rhetorical question? But to answer it on its own merits: I have no idea.