by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
Graphic art such as posters, paintings and film can be and often are considered works of art. Can propaganda using these mediums be considered art? Propaganda posters are considered art by many and in the design industry “propaganda” is considered a style all its own. Consider these examples and decide if you think they constitute art as well as propaganda.
Join the Turley Force as we discuss yet another facet of propaganda!
This means you!
As the last instalment in this series discussed, not all propaganda is verbal. Some propaganda images have become iconic parts of our culture. Rosie the Riveter is a perfect example of an image created as propaganda that has moved on to become something else altogether in our cultural subconscious. Images, like words, have both denotative and connotative value. The imagery, iconography and symbolism of the subject matter can influence your thinking on a subject as surely as words do and such choices as color, composition and fonts can have an even subtler but equally profound psychological effect on the viewer.
World War I and World War II were pinnacles in the use of the propaganda poster. Most of these examples come from American, British and Russian propaganda from those eras. One of the first thing that becomes apparent when studying the history of propaganda in this medium is that there are thematic commonalities. Join the military (as the gallery at the beginning of this article illustrates), support the troops/bring them home, commemoration of a date or event, buy war bonds, careful to who you talk to and what about, strength through unity, save materials for use in the war effort, the soldiers are protecting you and/or threatened, the bad guys are really bad (possibly even sub-human). This is not an all inclusive list of themes to be certain, but the following galleries contain examples of propaganda posters grouped by like theme. Some of them are graphically appealing in their design on a purely aesthetic level. Some of them are direct. Some are appeals to emotion. Some are appeals to nationalism. Some work to define “the Other”. They all carry a message.
Commemorative Messages:
Buy War Bonds:
Be Careful What You Say And Who You Talk To:
Save Materials:
Produce To Support The Troops:
These Are Really Bad Guys:
Does the fact that they carry a message negate their artistic merit? If you answered yes, consider the last instalment of this series on architecture as propaganda and ask yourself that question again. Does the propaganda power of the Great Pyramid or Abu Simbel automatically negate their artistic merit? I think the only reasonable answer is no. Both are not only amazing works of architecture, but artfully done as well. Now ask yourself does the content of the message matter in your evaluation? Does remoteness in time change your willingness to see propaganda as art? Consider these examples of Nazi propaganda posters.
Can you consider these works on artistic merit or does the message – and its attendant closeness in time – prevent you?
What if a noted and famous artist produced a propaganda painting? Is that art simply because of the creator’s bona fides in the art world? Consider the work of famous American painter Thomas Hart Benton. Titled “The Sowers”, it is part of an eight piece series of paintings Benton did in the 1940’s depicting the violence and barbarity of fascism. From 1942, it is the portrait of a brutish, monster-like man sowing not seeds, but skulls:
To further demonstrate the style in and of itself, what about propaganda posters designed as a tie-in to entertainment or as direct advertising?
Faux-Propaganda Posters for the (excellent) 2003-2008 television series “Battlestar Galactica”:
Candy Marches On!:
Mass media changed the face of propaganda. Mass produced newspapers, film, radio, television and the Internet all changed the way those with a message they wanted to sell and opinions they wanted to shape went about their mission. In America, some would say in the world, there is no greater producer of media than Hollywood. New York places a strong second, but their speciality since the early days of the industry has been television. In a way, film and television – despite their more transitory nature than something like great works of architecture – have become our modern cultural monuments of choice.
Animation is the nexus of graphic arts and film and it has been used for propaganda both here and abroad. A fair warning, these cartoons feature racist and/or dehumanizing characterizations about whatever “Other” they are trying to portray as the enemy. Although animation is not strictly for children, it holds a strong attraction for them, and these examples can be considered exemplary of one of the lowest tactics of propaganda – that which is aimed at children – and reflecting a maxim in propaganda that it is best to “catch them young”.
Bugs Bunny in Nip the Nips:
Daffy Duck in Daffy the Commando:
A Russian example with subtitles – The Millionaire:
A Nazi war propaganda cartoon aimed at the French to convince them that the Allies were attacking them as well:
In cinema, it is no different. The history of film used officially as propaganda traces its roots to World War II. Before the war, Germany was a hub of European cinema. Exploiting this asset, the Nazis had the Ministry of Propaganda under the leadership of Joseph Goebbels driving the production of antisemitic films like “Jud Süß“, “Die Rothschilds” and “Der ewige Jude“. In addition, the Third Reich was heavily involved in the production of the more nationalistic fare of films like Leni Riefenstahl‘s documentaries. Of her two most famous works, one is considered the most famous propaganda film in history. “Triumph des Willens” or “Triumph of the Will” is about Hitler and the rise of the Nazi Party to power. Her second most famous works are the pair of films known collectively as “Olympia” (“Olympia 1. Teil — Fest der Völker ” (Festival of Nations) and “Olympia 2. Teil — Fest der Schönheit” (Festival of Beauty)) that chronicle the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. The Nazi co-opting of the German film industry had the not so surprising effect of driving out some of their top talent who fled to Hollywood, such as actress Hedy Lamarr (who also aided the Allied war effort in her role as an inventor – a very interesting and insanely beautiful woman) and directors such as Fritz Lang and Otto Preminger.
In the United States during World War II, we had the Office of Wartime Information (OWI). Despite the fact that the overall net effect of propaganda of World War I was negative with many Americans feeling the propaganda from the previous war was not only misinformation, but possibly human rights violations, the Roosevelt administration went forward with a full media blitz from posters to radio to cinema. Some of the films were pure propaganda such as the series of films produced by Frank Capra at the behest of General George C. Marshall. Called “Why We Fight”, the series consisted of seven films made from 1942 to 1945: “Prelude to War” (1942), “The Nazis Strike” (1943), “Divide and Conquer” (1943), “The Battle of Britain” (1943), “The Battle of Russia” (1943), “The Battle of China” (1944), and “War Comes to America” (1945). They made no pretence to be anything other than what they were – propaganda.
Other films, however, worked in to the efforts of the OWI and were more commercial in nature. Did you know that “Casablanca” was propaganda? The hero of the film, Rick Blaine, is a man with an anti-fascist past who despite his personal misgivings and personal motivations to the contrary works to help his former lover and her freedom fighter husband escape the claws of the Nazis. The message is distinctly anti-Nazi and anti-fascism. That the film is art is practically without question as when you mention the very term “classic cinema” it is practically synonymous with “Casablanca”. Other films of the period were similarly slanted in their messages and some, like he 1942 film “Mrs. Miniver” (which told the story of an English housewife during the Battle of Britain and urged the support for the war effort) were even rushed into release at Presidential request. “The Purple Heart” (1944) dramatized Japanese atrocities and the heroics of American flyers. “Hitler’s Children” (1943) told the story of an American girl declared German by the Nazi government and her trials and tribulations with the Hitler Youth. “Dive Bomber” (1941) tells the heroic story of a military surgeon working with a Navy flying ace to develop pressure suits to keep pilots from blacking out in steep dives. These are but a few of many such examples of commercial films made with directed political messages. Even after World War II, the Hollywood/Washington propaganda nexus is alive and well.
The tail-end of Red Scare of the McCarthy era and the burgeoning Cold War brought us the rather unusual movie “Zots!” (1962). “Zots!” tells the story of a language professor who comes into possession of an ancient magic coin that gives him the power to inflict pain, slow down time or kill. In no time at all, Communist spies are out to get him and steal the coin for their own nefarious purposes. Directed by scholck-meister William Castle – best known for his cheesy horror films, “Zotz!” most certainly is a film, but it is so bad I don’t think anyone would mistake it for art. But anti-Communist propaganda? Without a doubt. The 1960’s and early 1970’s brought the United States the very unpopular Viet Nam War. It also brought us films like the highly unrealistic and jingoistic John Wayne fare, “The Green Berets” (1968). Today we are again involved in an unpopular war and again we have pro-war propaganda from Hollywood in the form of 2112’s “Act of Valor” where an elite team of Navy SEALs embark on a covert mission to recover a kidnapped CIA agent. Have you seen a commercial for this film? They are very proud of the fact that it stars not actors, but active duty Navy SEALs. Propaganda at its finest (?).
Television is no better. Much of what passes for entertainment is either direct propaganda or has propagandistic elements. Consider “Dragnet” – possibly the original pro-police propaganda program. A more modern example? Consider the show “NCIS” and its spin-off “NCIS: Los Angeles”, all of the programming on the Military History channel, and the consequential commercial advertising that supports most networks persuading you to buy things you may or most likely do not need. On most networks you are guaranteed at least twenty minutes out of every hour being devoted to persuade your or change your mind based on the interests of those who may or may not have your best interests at heart. I would say that as Americans you are awash in a sea of never ending propaganda, but the reality of the matter is that mass media has become a practically unavoidable global phenomena. Where mass media goes, propaganda surely follows. It is up to you to think for yourself and not succumb to the subliminal and overt efforts of others to think for you. That doesn’t mean you have to live in a cave. That means you have to consider what you see dispassionately even if it is something you enjoy or that entertains you in some way.
Can propaganda be considered art? I think that some of it most certainly can be, but that it is part and parcel of the idea of persuasion to make the idea being presented attractive. It is not art though merely because it is pretty. Something about it must transcend both the intentional message and the method of presentation to reach something universally human to truly be art. The perfect example of this is “Casablanca”. Enjoy it. I know I certainly do. However, I also keep in the back of my mind that it is a form of propaganda. Being aware of and asking the right questions about propaganda is the first step in protecting yourself from its undue influence.
Can propaganda be considered art?
Does intent of the speaker color the artistic merit of the piece?
Does remoteness in time affect the relationship of message to artistic merit?
What do you think?
As a reminder: when carrying on the fight to make sure you understand when propaganda is being used to manipulate you, be vigilant, thoughtful and emotionally detached when considering whether something is or isn’t propaganda. And above all . . .
__________________________
Disclaimer: All images used are either public domain or copyright of their respective copyright holder, used without permission and used for not-for-profit educational/illustrative purposes.
~submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
The Propaganda Series;
Propaganda 105: How to Spot a Liar
Propaganda 104 Supplemental: The Streisand Effect and the Political Question
Propaganda 104 Supplemental: The Sound of Silence
Propaganda 104: Magica Verba Est Scientia Et Ars Es
Propaganda 103: The Word Changes, The Word Remains The Same
Propaganda 102 Supplemental: Holly Would “Zero Dark Thirty”
Propaganda 101 Supplemental: Child’s Play
Propaganda 101 Supplemental: Build It And They Will Come (Around)
Propaganda 101: What You Need to Know and Why or . . .
Related articles of interest;
Mythology and the New Feudalism by Mike Spindell
How about Some Government Propaganda for the People Paid for by the People Being Propagandized? by Elaine Magliaro
Dredd 1, June 19, 2012 at 2:04 pm
Tony C. 1, June 19, 2012 at 11:19 am
…
@Dredd: … It also isn’t “microbial” in any useful sense.
============================================
Again, since the propaganda against my linking to my research may have influenced you and others not to read certain texts, i.e., my texts, here is another quote and link for your benefit:
(Human Microbiame Project). We know far more about Mars than we do our own
bodieshuman ecosystem.Other papers point out how microbes shape our brains, especially in the area of the limbic system, the greater amygdala.
Some of the propaganda activities of microbes could have some impact on our tendency to use propaganda.
Tony C. 1, June 19, 2012 at 11:19 am
…
@Dredd: … It also isn’t “microbial” in any useful sense.
=======================================
In case you are averse to reading my blog, here is a quote from Chemical & Engineering News, which I quote from in my blog:
(Our Microbial Selves, emphasis added). Like I say, just about every day some new blast of research shines through the fog of the past.
Apes can quote philosophy, Otto. They just don’t understand it.
Tony C. 1, June 19, 2012 at 11:19 am
@Blouise: Sorry….
@Dredd: It isn’t junk, we have known for many years it isn’t junk. It also isn’t “microbial” in any useful sense.
================================
Science is becoming more and more politicized and opinionated it would seem:
(Wikipedia, Junk DNA). Would you prefer the description “dark matter?”
Recent declarations of microbiologists do not appear to be in agreement with you:
(The Tiniest Scientists …). I try to quote recent papers because this explosive area of microbiology is moving fast.
I see the orchestra is in full assembly, ok guys, don’t make this sound like the organ grinder from the circus. We have enough monkeys for you to do your bidding, get going.
Gene H.- I was inspired to do some digging in my memorabilia box. I have some interesting leaflets that we dropped. I’m working on translating them now, and I’ll post pictures of them and the translations somewhere, then link them. Blatant use of propaganda, but in some cases, I agree with their usage. A lot of what we dropped by air were leaflets that said, basically, we’re about to bomb this area, suggest leaving. Others were surrender instructions, which have saved lives. I don’t agree with going in in the first place, but if we do, I’m glad at least some use of propaganda was beneficial.
@Blouise: Sorry….
@Dredd: It isn’t junk, we have known for many years it isn’t junk. It also isn’t “microbial” in any useful sense.
I am formally trained in both genetics and bioinformatics even though it is not my primary field; I have a statistical interest in the topic and I am interested in the nanoscale mechanics where biology becomes somewhat deterministic chemistry.
The non-coding DNA is highly conserved both across species and within humans. This is a technical term meaning it seems to be protected from the normal rate of mutation, and that happens when mutation is harmful and reduces survivability. Thus, the conserved stretches of non-coding DNA must convey information critical to day-to-day survival, and the question becomes, “what is it?”
We already have some answers; we have found non-coding regions that are called “promoter regions” that can cause (or prevent) genes to be expressed more strongly or less strongly; with “strong” meaning producing multiple copies. For example the promoter region in one person may cause a gene for a protein to produce three copies instead of one, thus tripling the concentration of that protein in the person, which can cause major changes in physiology (like darker skin, thicker hair, bigger bones, etc). In fact, the main visual differences in people, how they look, all seem to be a result of differences in their promoter regions. The proteins that make a face are not varying, it is the recipe of proteins during development, the relative quantities of protein, that make a face unique. (That and methylation; an epigenetic (non-DNA) means of suppressing the production of proteins).
The coding DNA, the proteins, are like various building materials, but they do not assemble themselves; the non-coding DNA is orchestrating that somehow. Promoter regions are a very tiny part of that orchestration, but perhaps an example of how the whole thing works.
We don’t know how, exactly. However, life is clearly structural in nature; both DNA and proteins fold and twist into odd shapes, depending upon chemical and electrical attractions / repulsions, that seem deterministic but are difficult to predict correctly in simulations. But those shapes can act as mating sites (like a lock and key), or bring together different pieces of the genome that react, or pinch off into loops that float away, or whatever. That is how the proteins themselves work, they are three dimensional shapes that connect at sites, change shape when touched by another to open a pore, release a fragment, separate, reconnect, etc.
The fact that there are microbial correlations is both obvious and irrelevant, it means nothing. By evolutionary theory, we of course expect these systems to have first evolved in microbes near the beginning of the chain of life; heck we’d expect them to begin in the RNA world before microbes, in the earliest replicators. What is being conserved in non-coding DNA (in my opinion) is the same thing being preserved in proteins: shapes that work.
I think that in the non-coding DNA it is the three dimensional shape of the DNA fragments themselves that gets something done, while other DNA fragments are designed for ribosomal translation into amino acids that crumple up into a protein, where again it is the three dimensional shape that matters.
Humans share something like 75% of their DNA with carrots, but we are not made of carrots. We both conserved DNA that either directly or indirectly (through proteins) produced shapes that worked in orchestrating the construction of a living thing, and work in building proteins that do work in the living thing. By analogy, whether I am building a garden shed or a palace, the idea of doors, with hinges, knobs, and locks, is a good thing to use. So is the idea of working from a blueprint, or cross bracing for support, or windows that somehow open and close.
We are not microbes. Microbes were the result of the evolution of shapes that worked in the self-assembly of a self-replicator, and we are still using some of those shapes, and some of our own. There is nothing mystical about genetic inheritance.
E. Nowak 1, June 18, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Art is in the eye of the beholder. What’s art to an artist isn’t the same as what my great-aunt Agnes thought was art (which was Norman Rockwell).
On a side-note. Another form of propaganda you could include are novelties and knickknacks. For example, such as racist Mammie cookie jars, boot-jacks that show an African-American woman with legs spread, or the plethora of knickknacks that portray African-Americans as apes and other racist stereotypes that were wildly sold during the antebellum and Jim Crow eras. Also, the numerous sexist knickknacks that are still manufactured that portray women in an objective way. The most recent appalling example I saw was a Hillary Clinton nut-cracker. I actually received a catalog in the mail during the 2008 election season that had this as their cover item. Talk about powerful imagery.
===========================================
Yes, powerful imagery propagating a message.
As I pointed out above by quoting “Cell – Host & Microbe“, microbes have practiced propaganda for a long time.
And our culture has had a propaganda “war on microbes” for a long time too, as you can read in the rants in comments contra known microbial abilities.
Let me translate the article quoted up thread:
That means these phytopathogens send false messages to plants so that those plants will “lower the drawbridge”, i.e., open their stomata so that those propagandist phytopathogens can enter the plants under false pretenses.
This may be the oldest and most primitive form of propaganda messaging.
Since our genes are 98% microbial, we may have been influenced by them at some point, in terms of the origin of propaganda.
This form of false messaging is taught as art in the most unexpected place: The U.S. War College.
We should stop the war against microbes, as urged by yet another scientist, because 9 out of 10 of our cells are microbes:
(NY Times). Not a bad idea to get with the science of today and learn the billions of years old saga of the microbes.
They are dynamic survivors, even engaging in a little spin or propaganda now and then.
Tony C. 1, June 19, 2012 at 8:23 am
@Diogenes: An interesting point there, the Harry and Louise ads. I wonder if they were considered a success or not?
I am really sick of the “kitchen table” construct in political ads the last few cycles, as in “What are families around the kitchen table talking about / dealing with / struggling with?”
I know everybody gets it, and in a way that is what bothered me about it, it took on faddish proportions. Which brings me to the Hawkeye Pierce line from MASH. The setup: “Hawkeye, what she wants from you is sincerity.” Hawkeye, enlightened: “Ohhh… I can fake that.”
So why the faddish proportions? Why did kitchen tables sprout in speeches, debates, ads and sound bites everywhere? Because it was all fake sincerity, false identification with “common” voters. It is as if the boardrooms full of millionaires have no clue how to reach voters, then one of them stumbles upon the “kitchen table” set, and they all seize upon it: “Ohhh, so that’s where the muggles talk their serious stuff. Scrap that seventh green shoot boys, and find me a kitchen table set!”
=============================================
“Would you like to have a beer with the candidate.”
Of course in polite company the word “spin” is used in place of “propaganda”, but it is just another move to make propaganda palatable.
Words are changed faster by spin-propaganda than by the normal everyday discourse of people.
Take “junk gene” which was used for years to describe 98% of human genes:
(One Man’s Junk …). What will they do now that we find out that this 98% of the human genome is microbial?
How did the microbes change our genetic makeup so completely?
Do we change the dictionary or deny the reality?
Indigo Jones 1, June 18, 2012 at 6:19 pm
This is important, but don’t forget the private sector equivalent: PR.
The PR field was largely invented by Edward Bernays, who helped overthrow the government of Guatemala and made smoking attractive to women, among other accomplishments.
Few people know the name of Edward Bernays, but everybody is familiar with his work.
========================================
Very true.
He is also known as “The Father of Spin”.
He worked for the federal government before WW I to get the public to change their minds about it. He changed the public’s mind to favor the war.
I have a link to a free download of his book “Propaganda”, the purpose of which is:
(A Closer Look …). He was the nephew of Sigmund Freud so he had insights into the workings of the subconscious mind.
@Diogenes: An interesting point there, the Harry and Louise ads. I wonder if they were considered a success or not?
I am really sick of the “kitchen table” construct in political ads the last few cycles, as in “What are families around the kitchen table talking about / dealing with / struggling with?”
I know everybody gets it, and in a way that is what bothered me about it, it took on faddish proportions. Which brings me to the Hawkeye Pierce line from MASH. The setup: “Hawkeye, what she wants from you is sincerity.” Hawkeye, enlightened: “Ohhh… I can fake that.”
So why the faddish proportions? Why did kitchen tables sprout in speeches, debates, ads and sound bites everywhere? Because it was all fake sincerity, false identification with “common” voters. It is as if the boardrooms full of millionaires have no clue how to reach voters, then one of them stumbles upon the “kitchen table” set, and they all seize upon it: “Ohhh, so that’s where the muggles talk their serious stuff. Scrap that seventh green shoot boys, and find me a kitchen table set!”
Bravo! this work is of excellent Curator’s quality!
Pity that today’s standard, yes, even Propaganda’s standards, are demonstrated by Harry and Louise ads for the masses.
Apropos of the topic: propaganda as art, I just ran across Nuke ’Em: Why negative advertisements are powerful, essential, and sometimes (see “Daisy”) even artistic. One of the most effective propaganda pieces ever employed to assure the election of a “peace” President who then escalated an unnecessary “little” war into a national disaster.
And a man can dream, can’t he?
Blouise,
Interesting idea in re Elizabeth. I was also thinking about using religion and government in conflict as an angle, perhaps using the oppression of Christianity in the Tokugawa Shogunate after the Shimabara Rebellion or the purges of Mao’s Cultural Revolution or the invasion of Tibet. The nexus of religion and propaganda is simply so multi-faceted that the choices for taking a pro/anti stance and building the argument from there is really an embarrassment of riches. The English efforts to promote the Anglican Church though are an excellent example though. I’d kind of like to avoid the Inquisition as an anti- example simply because that is such well worn ground and always attracts the lunatic fringe. I may just jump right in to the modern era though and use historical revisionist fundamentalists like David Barton in some way.
As far as basic approach for the article goes, this remains the biggest challenge of all the potential topics.
missing – absent … no need for both … I’ll blame Dredd … again
Gene,
One other thing:
“or I get crushed by a falling starlet” … in your dreams
Jesus H Christ … what happened to this thread?! Dredd, I blame you for purposely antagonizing Tony C and Tony C, stop taking the bait. Oh hell, you two aren’t going to listen to me … moving on:
Gene,
I have a suggestion that might help you find a focus for the religious art thing … try looking at the way Elizabeth I used the “Virgin Queen” propaganda imagery to fulfill the missing Mary, Mother of God figure absent from the newly formed protestant Church of England complete with halo type hair-dos and one mask that all portrait painters, sculptors etc. had to use so that her image remained constant. It solidified her reign and her Church.
This is important, but don’t forget the private sector equivalent: PR.
The PR field was largely invented by Edward Bernays, who helped overthrow the government of Guatemala and made smoking attractive to women, among other accomplishments.
Few people know the name of Edward Bernays, but everybody is familiar with his work.
The reach of the industry can be studied effectively by examining the corporate profile of Burson Marstellar:
— “Cleaned up” the image of Exxon after the Valdez oil spill
— Put a friendly face on the Argentinian death squads
— Represented Union Carbide after the Bhopal chemical spill in India
— Worked for the engineering company responsible for the Three Mile Island disaster
Twisting the truth in pursuit of dollars. These are massive, coordinated propaganda campaigns.
More self-serving blather and no kind of cogent rebuttal to any of the arguments here about propaganda.
How utterly predictable.
Do you think educating people to the nature of propaganda is propaganda? That is by definition anti-propaganda as it gives people the tools necessary to recognize and combat propaganda being used against their best interests.
So far your rebuttal has consisted of (in summary) “Uh uh!”, “You’re a Social Darwinist!”, “You’re delusional!”, “Tony C is a warmonger!”, “I understand science better than you do but I just can’t prove it!”, “You’re trying to censor me!”, “My stuff is the best, your’s is junk!”, “Grandpa’s Dictionary!” – None of which constitutes an evidentiary or logically based rebuttal of the criticism that Orwell’s religion comparison is incomplete in the discussion of propaganda.
Tony got you right. You are little better than an attention seeking child.
Run along, little boy.
This is an adult conversation about propaganda.