A Final Entry on Visual Rhetoric

The thing I have enjoyed most about this blog is the opportunity it has given me to analyze images from a variety of genres. Not only did that requirement make this blog a lot more fun and interesting to write, but it also helped me stretch my analytical muscles and take a second look at some images I would not have normally looked at again. Also, since starting this blog, I feel much more aware of the images around me and the arguments they make. I have to admit, it is hard to look at an image anywhere now and not start to mentally deconstruct its visual argument.

American soldiers finish preparing the coffins of their fallen comrades ("Soldiers").

For this final entry, I chose the image of the star-spangled military coffins we looked at in class, because I feel it encapsulates much of what was talked about. At first glance, the photo seems like nothing more than a beautiful, but tragic, candid photo snapped by a journalist. As you begin to examine it, however, it becomes clear that this is not just a great photograph, but also a piece of visual rhetoric. Whatever you believe its argument to be (perhaps that soldiers are just consumable goods pushed down a conveyor belt like any other product or that all soldiers are ultimately there to serve their country regardless of sex, race, sexuality, etc.), when viewed as a piece of visual rhetoric, this photograph becomes a richly layered text and its photographer becomes the constructor of a visual argument. 

"Soldier." Photograph. Anthony David. "Our Deepest Explosions, and
              Theodore Parker." Soul Seeds. Web. 5 Dec. 2010.

Resistance Propaganda and the IRA

When I stumbled upon the Irish Republican Army propaganda poster seen below, it immediately caught my attention. While the poster’s design is nothing elaborate, its bright red background, sans-serif text, and striking image are bold in their simplicity. Published in the 1980s, this poster uses all of the aforementioned qualities, along with the content of the text, to assert that violence and sacrifice are necessary components of resistance. This is especially relevant considering the IRA’s history of extremist and violent resistance tactics.

(Republican Movement)

First, the placement and prominence of the figure holding the gun and the word “resistance” is significant because it suggests a strong connection between the two ideas they represent, violence and resistance. Particularly, the placement of the word “resistance” parallel to the gun barrel creates a visual flow in the poster, connoting that the two ideas are concurrent. Also, the figure with the gun and the word “resistance” are easily the most attention-grabbing components of the poster. Their large size and design simplicity draw the eye directly to the two images, once again visually creating an association between the ideas they represent.

            Keeping with the figure with the gun, the fact that the figure is faceless is significant because it allows the audience to place himself or herself as the rebel. This facelessness creates a relationship with the poster’s audience by allowing anyone to see his or herself as the figure holding the gun. This relationship and facelessness also thrust a sense of obligation on the poster’s audience: armed resistance is not only a task of a select few rebels, but it is the task of every Irish citizen.

            Also, the reference to Bobby Sands is an important persuasive element because of his significant credibility in 1980s Ireland. As a prominent figure of the Irish resistance against the British, Bobby Sands led a prison hunger strike that ultimately cost him his life. He is a figure of sacrifice and a figure of death, as his birth and death dates emphasize. His inclusion in the poster also sets a standard for what kind of resistance and sacrifice are expected. In effect, the poster uses Sands reputation, as well as the previously discussed elements, to assert that Irish freedom is worth fighting and dying for.

Republican Movement. Resistance. 1980s. 22 November 2010.

<http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/images/posters/ira/>.

His Ego is Bigger than Jesus

("good god")

Liam Gallagher’s ego has always astounded me. While I will admit to being a fan of Oasis, half the time I wonder how he is able to stand up straight with a head so colossally bloated. The photo to the left, depicting the aforementioned rock star in a Christ-like pose, not only perpetuates this public persona of exaggerated self-opinion, but also emphasizes his connection to one of the most significant and influential musicians in history, John Lennon. Liam Gallagher connecting himself to Christ and John Lennon is important because it both contributes to his self-aggrandized image and it positions him and Oasis as the second coming of The Beatles.

To anyone who even remotely paid attention to Oasis during their sixteen-year career, it is no secret they thought themselves as the saviors of British rock’n’roll, The Beatles of a new generation. The photo of Liam contributes to this self-proclaimed image in two ways. First, Liam is specifically styled to look like John Lennon. His mop-top hair and round sunglasses, while not exactly the same, are unmistakably similar to John Lennon’s iconic, 1960s look, and will draw an instant parallel for anyone familiar with John Lennon’s image. Second, the religious allegory (the Christ-like pose, the heavenly rays of light radiating from his head like a halo, and the crucifix around his neck) can be seen as a metaphor for the relationship between Lennon and Gallagher. If Lennon is the father, the one who helped start the British rock’n’roll invasion of the 1960s, the God figure, then Gallagher is the son, the one who helped resurrect British rock’n’roll during the 1990s, the Jesus figure.

            Considering Liam is directly aligning himself with both Jesus and one of the most talented and respected musicians of the 20^th Century, there is no mistaking the ego needed to even consider posing for this photograph. His brazenness smacks the audience in the face, but that is what it is supposed to do. There is nothing subtle about ego and the heavy-handedness of the allegory in this photograph makes sure no one is in question of who is, as Gallagher himself would phrase it, “the dog’s bollocks.”

good god. n.d. Oasis Fanatic. oasisfanatic.com. Web.

<http://www.oasisfanatic.com/gallery/oasis/picture/0/1699.html>

Glee, Rocky Horror, and Sexuality

Fox recently aired an episode of the television show Glee dedicated to covering famous musical numbers from the cult classic The Rocky Horror Picture Show. While I will admit my bias is with Rocky Horror (what other film lets you throw toast at people?), the Glee episode bothered me for more reasons than simple indignant fan snobbery. I was bothered by the changes they made to the representations of gender and sexuality, specifically during the “Sweet Transvestite” number.

The “Sweet Transvestite” number was problematic for me because, by changing Dr. Frank-N-Furter’s character from a homosexual, transvestite male to a straight, non-cross dressing female, Glee makes Frank-N-Furter and the musical number a part of the dominant, heteronormative culture the original Rocky Horror sought to subvert. In essence, Glee robs the number of all its cultural power.

Particularly, Glee’s heterosexual, female Frank-N-Furter significantly lessens the powerful and exaggerated contrast between Frank-N-Furter and the comically clean-cut Brad and Janet. In the original, Brad and Janet are an almost perfect representation of a supposedly ideal couple (young, heterosexual, white, and abstinent until marriage), but when Frank-N-Furter steps out of the elevator, the melodramatically fainting Janet and stammering Brad appear just as absurd as the overly made up man in the sequined teddy. In effect, this contrast presents Brad and Janet’s extreme heterosexuality as equally over-the-top as Frank-N-Furter’s transvestite homosexuality. Since the Glee “Sweet Transvestite” has nothing more than a straight, non-transvestite female dressed in a sexy outfit, the contrast that puts Brad and Janet’s exaggerated heterosexuality into sharp relief is completely lost.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Dir. Jim Sharman. Perf. Tim Curry,
           Susan Sarandon, and Barry Bostwick. Twentieth Century Fox, 1975.
           Film.

“The Rocky Horror Glee Show.” Glee. Dir. Adam Shankman. Perf. Lea
           Michele, Cory Monteith, Amber Riley, and Chris Colfer. Twentieth
           Century Fox, 2010. Television.

Pundits and Cannibals

(Tomorrow)

When I first stumbled upon the comic “If Jeffrey Dahmer had been a Right Wing Pundit,” I laughed and then immediately felt uncomfortable for laughing. Comparing a person or group of people to someone who has committed violent atrocities is always questionable, but I believe the sheer absurdity of this comparison, a serial killer and cannibal with right wing pundits, is what makes this 2005 comic from the series This Modern World an effective criticism of both right wing pundits and the apathetic news media that sensationalize them. Specifically, the reactions to Dahmer’s outrageous claims of cannibalizing liberals and the comic’s allusions to specific right wing pundits are what make the comic both compelling and darkly humourous.


The comic purposely exaggerates the political and news media climate with an extreme figure, Jeffrey Dahmer, to argue that the political and media climate allow pundits to get away with saying whatever they like without being critically challenged. Even when Dahmer’s assertion that liberals should be cannibalized is challenged in panel four, Dahmer responds, “Of course you don’t [agree with cannibalizing liberals], Alan—you’re a liberal!” This response parodies and draws emphasis to the stereotypical attitude of partisan politics that has come to dominate many news media programs and, because it uses murder and cannibalism as its subject matter, points out how insane a dangerous this attitude is.

(Platon)

Also, “If Jeffrey Dahmer had been a Right Wing Pundit” is an effective criticism because it makes allusions to specific pundits and news media. For instance, the fifth panel references the now defunct Fox News pundit program “Hannity and Colmes,” as indicated by the Fox News logo and caricature of liberal pundit Alan Colmes, and parallels Dahmer with the show’s conservative voice, Sean Hannity. Similarly, the next panel is a direct spoof of Ann Coulter’s 2005 Time magazine cover, right down to the caption “is he kidding… or just hungry?” which mirrors the original, “Is she serious or just having fun?” The directness of these references is effective because they give the comic a focused target for its criticism, making its satire all the sharper, and give it specific historical and social context.


Tomorrow, Tom. “If Jeffrey Dahmer had been a Right Wing Pundit.”            Cartoon. www.thismodernworld.com. 31 May 2005. Web.
Platon. “Ann Coulter: Ms. Right.” Photo. Time. 25 April 2005. Cover.

Exploring Goya's Saturn

(Goya)

Francisco de Goya’s Saturn Devouring his Son subverts the traditional conventions of Classical mythological imagery to reflect the barbarism hidden beneath humanity’s thin veneer of civility. This critique of humanity is important to examine because it does not simply derive from an academic notion of civilization and its faults; it derives from Goya’s personal experiences with war, cruelty, and intolerance. During his time, Goya witnessed two of the most brutal events in Spanish history: the Inquisition and the Peninsular War. While the influence of these two events is seen more literally in Goya’s The Disasters of War prints, Saturn Devouring his Son provides and excellent metaphorical glimpse into Goya’s experiences.

As the beginnings of Western philosophy and the inspiration for the Renaissance, Classical culture is almost always used to connote high civilization and is represented in art as such. Muscular gods, beautiful goddesses, and noble heroes are often posed dramatically and with an air of sophistication. Goya’s Saturn defies all of these ideas. Naked and wide-eyed, Saturn (or Cronus) is depicted as little more than a murderous madman so megalomaniacal and paranoid he is willing to brutally cannibalize his own offspring to protect himself. While the painting is visual disturbing, the beauty of Goya’s painting is its unforgiving frankness. At the heart of the original myth is a crazed madman who eats his children; there is no veneer of Renaissance sophistication, a veneer that two centuries earlier smoothed over many of the violent and atrocious realities of Classical culture, in this painting. Goya digs beneath the surface of a culture held up as a model of high civilization and exposes the viciousness beneath. In doing so, Goya makes his strongest point: if the culture looked to as epitome of civilization is barbarous and violent, then the true and brutal nature of all culture is simply masked by a thin veneer of civility.

Goya, Francisco. Saturn Devouring his Son. 1819. Museo del Prado, Madrid.

Protecting Domesticity

(Fallout Shelter Handbook Cover)

My recent interest in the Cold War and the culture it created compelled me to take a closer look at this cover for a 1962 guide to building and living in a fallout shelter. At the centre of the cover is an image of a white, middle class, suburban mother, father, and child—the ideal nuclear family. This image is particularly powerful because it suggests that even after a full-scale nuclear attack, the American, capitalist way of life will still prevail. Considering the Cold War was a clash of economic ideologies and of ways of living more so than it was a clash of literal military force, suggesting the post-nuclear attack survival of the American way of life is extremely important to the rhetoric of this piece. In essence, not only will this guide save your family’s life, it will save their comfortable, domestic way of life.

            Also, the image and the preview of contents text at the bottom of the page suggest that the Cold War itself is something that can be tackled domestically with the consumer goods that help drive the American capitalist way of life. In the image, this family is not just surviving, but they are surviving comfortably with all the goods they possessed above ground. Looking at the family, the mother looks at ease with her presumably well-stocked pantry of supplies, the father lounges peacefully in his stylish and new looking chair while smoking a pipe and listening to a record, and the child sets the table with clean dishes on neat, white placemats. This family, and other middle-class families just like them, can buy their safety and comfort.

            The text at the bottom of the page reinforces the message of the image by providing a shopping list of sorts. Each point on the cover either tells a family what they will need to buy in order to survive a nuclear attack, or tells them that somewhere else in the book will tell them what they will need.

           

Fallout Shelter Handbook Cover. 1962. Fallout Shelter Handbook. By Chuck West. New York: Fawcett Publications. Cover. Print.