Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

16
By Meg Frechette Cartoon Wars: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the to Social Constructs of the Enemy Enemy

description

Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy. By Meg Frechette. introduction. “Good Guy” v. “Bad Guy” How is this idea constructed? The power of propaganda during war. Constructed enemy versus Reality. research question. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

Page 1: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

By Meg Frechette

Cartoon Wars:Cartoon Wars:An Application of Hall’s Theory to An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the EnemySocial Constructs of the Enemy

Page 2: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

introductionintroduction“Good Guy” v. “Bad

Guy”How is this idea

constructed?

The power of propaganda during war.

Constructed enemy versus Reality

Page 3: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

research questionresearch question

How do does the United States construct their

enemy in political cartoons during times of war and

what are the implications of this construct?

Page 4: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

literature review: literature review: warswars

WWI (1914-1918)U.S, France, U.K, Russia, Italy.

versusGermany, Austia-Hungry, Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria

WWII (1939-1945)U.S, British Empire, U.S.S.R, (China)

versusGermany, Japan, Italy

Vietnam (1959-1975)U.S., Republic of Vietnam (S. Vietnam)

versusDemocratic Republic of Vietnam (N. Vietnam)

Iraq (2003-Present)U.S., Multi-National Force, UN Assistance Mission, NATO Training Mission, Iraq (post-

Saddam Hussein), Turkeyversus

Iraq (under Saddam Hussein), al-Qaeda in Iraq, Islamis Army of Iraq, Baath Party Loyalists, Insurgent Groups

Page 5: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

literature review:literature review:cartoonscartoons

Harry Katz(2004)

William Hogarth – 1700s

Benjamin Franklin

“Join or Die” (1757)

Great Depression

Current Day Cartoonists

Page 6: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

literature reviewliterature review::propaganda and the enemypropaganda and the enemy

Sam Keen (1986)

Propaganda meant to Paralyze Thought

Cultural Differences

Reality of Enemy

Page 7: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

theory:theory:

Stuart Hall (1996)

How Nation constructs identityNarrative of the nationOrigins, continuity, tradition, and timelessnessInvention of traditionFoundational mythPure, original people, or ‘folk’

Shaped by those in power

Page 8: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

methodology:methodology:

Historical Content AnalysisGathered From Online Search

“Vietnam political cartoons” or “WWI editorial cartoons”

Cartoons Collected: Iraq – 119Vietnam – 54WWII – 48WWI – 19

Coding SheetStrengths and Weaknesses

Page 9: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

findings:findings:

Weapons Present

ToneMocked or Feared

Humanized v. Dehumanized

Group v. Individual

Page 10: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

discussion:discussion:weapons and toneweapons and tone

War Total Cartoons Weapons Tone

WWI 19 (19/240=7.9%) 14(14/19=73.7%)

F: 11(11/19=57.9%)

M: 8(8/19=42.1%)

WWII 48(48/240=20.0%) 20(20/48=41.7%)

F: 38(38/48=79.2%)

M: 10(10/48=20.8%)

Vietnam 54(54/240=22.5%) 23(23/54=42.6%)

F: 17(17/54=31.5%)

M: 35(35/54=64.8%)

R: 2(2/54=3.7%)

Iraq 119(119/240=49.6%)

39(39/119=30.3%)

F: 22(22/119=18.5%)

M: 95(95/119=79.8%)

R: 2(2/119= 1.7%)

Total 240 (100.0%) 96(96/240=40.0%)

F: 88(88/240=36.7%)

M: 148(148/240=61.7%)

R: 4(4/240=1.6%)

Page 11: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

discussion:discussion:humanized v. dehumanizedhumanized v. dehumanized

War Humanized Dehumanized

WWI 1(1/19=5.3%) 18(18/19=94.7%)

WWII 25(25/48=52.1%)

23(23/48=47.9%)

Vietnam

12(12/54=22.2%)

42(42/54=77.8%)

Iraq 87(87/119=73.1%)

32(32/119=26.9%)

Total 125(125/240=52.1%)

115(115/240=47.9%)

Page 12: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

discussion:discussion:dehumanizeddehumanizedWar Animal Monster Evil Stereotyp

eOther

WWI 1(1/18=5.6%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 11(11/18=61.1%)

6(6/18=33.3%)

WWII 6(6/23=26.1%)

2(2/23=8.6%) 3(3/23=13.3%)

7(7/23=30.4%)

5(5/23=21.6%)

Vietnam

4(4/42=9.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 36(36/42=85.7%)

2(2/42=4.8%)

Iraq 1(1/32=3.1%) 3(3/32=9.4%) 6(6/32=18.7%)

21(21/32=65.7%)

1(1/32=3.1%)

Total 12(12/115=10.4%)

5(5/115=4.3%)

9(9/115=7.8%)

75(75/115=65.3%)

14(14/115=12.2%)

Page 13: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

discussion:discussion:group v. individualgroup v. individual

War Group Individual Other

WWI 8(8/19=42.1%)

11(11/19=57.9%)

0(0/19=0%)

WWII 21(21/48=43.6%)

24(24/48=50.0%)

3(3/48=6.4%)

Vietnam 13(13/54=24.1%)

39(39/54=72.2%)

2(2/54=3.7%)

Iraq 21(21/119=17.6%)

94(94/119=79.0%)

4(4/119=3.4%)

Total 63(63/240=26.3%)

168(168/240=70.0%)

9(9/240=3.7%)V

.

Page 14: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

conclusion and conclusion and further researchfurther researchEnemy is merely construct to create unity

“Them” v. “Us”

Need to reinforce cultural awareness

Page 15: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

Questions?

Page 16: Cartoon Wars: An Application of Hall’s Theory to Social Constructs of the Enemy

discussion:discussion:humanizedhumanized

War Humanized Named Features

WWI 1(1/19=5.3%) 0(0/1=0%) 1(1/1=100.0%)

WWII 25(25/48=52.1%)

24(24/25=96.0%)

1(1/25=4.0%)

Vietnam

12(12/54=22.2%)

11(11/12=91.7%)

1(1/12=8.3%)

Iraq 87(87/119=73.1%)

76(76/87=87.4%)

11(11/87=12.6%)

Total 125(100%) 111(111/125=88.8%)

14(14/125=11.2%)