COP2 Proposal

Context of Practice: Evaluation

End of module Evaluation 

Generally speaking, I found COP to be beneficial to me in a learning environment, the module hasn’t improved my actual animation practice but it has informed me contextually about the practice and how influential it can be and the impact it can make on society. Sometimes I need reminding that by choosing animation, I am not sacrificing my other interests in current affairs and culture; so I found COP to be a refreshing introduction of academia into the syllabus. I did not find the lectures to personally benefit my practice but it was enjoyable to discuss topics which I may have already formed an opinion or understanding on, and getting a new insight into it. I particularly enjoyed the lecture on Consumerism, but that may be the inner cynic in me.

I really enjoyed the essay writing, it was a well needed break from the need to constantly circulate creative ideas and to stretch the academic part of my brain after so long. My quote led me to a topic I really appreciated delving into. Essentially I was discussing whether the history we know is real, or whether it is just a series of accepted judgements by a group of individuals. This was probably one of the vaguest quotes that I could’ve chosen from but it sparked an interest in propaganda and stereotypes that I find very interesting. I actually relished in the research for the first triangulation essay. It was fascinating to educate myself on a topic that was so different to all the previous modules; I learnt more about history that was unbeknown to me before and came to understand techniques that are employed by authorities to advertise their views in times of war. I had a brief knowledge that Marvel and Disney were involved in war editions, but I did not know the extent to their employment by military services until researching for this essay. It’s good to be reminded that you can use a platform such as animation for fun, trivial projects, as well as those that could possibly impact the path of history and society.

The animation analysis essay was also enjoyable, I think it’s important to sometimes take a step back and analyse pieces of work in order to inform my own practice, in terms of how tone, colour, character and sound can all interact to create a really powerful piece. This followed on in my sketchbook where I found more examples of political animations. I really enjoyed learning more about these and would love to make an animation of my own on a topic surrounding socio-political themes. The sketchbook was a laborious effort and there were definite ebbs and flows in the enjoyment of filling the seventy pages. It was interesting to see the visuals laid out in relation to the subject matter of my essay but I did not find it very productive in regards to the module. Although, it was a very fulfilling feeling when I’d got it all done. Saying this, I am quite pleased with the outcome of my storyboard, which is the topic of my final essay. I think it ties in with all the themes that I had previously discussed in essays and it is a direct product of my sketchbook. It is also not a style that I usually lean to so it was nice to get out of my comfort zone from the other modules. 

Essay Three: Reflective Practice

A reflection on previous Practice and Research into the validity of the History we know and the concept of Propaganda

To rationalise prior discussions, it is reasonable conjecture to say that we as a people will never know the full truth of our history. It may be formed from a foundation of truths, but these can be sourced by misinformed individuals in a kind of global game of Chinese whispers. Relaying of events may not be maliciously twisted but even with a plethora of knowledge a historian, for example, must choose which ‘facts’ they deem to be important. On the other hand, a select group of powerful individuals may be able to intentionally manipulate the truth by controlling the safety and funding of an (media) outlet, in order to gain control by means of propaganda to promote their point of view.

Within my storyboard I am exploring how the common person may be able to regain their freedom of thought and I reflect upon how propaganda interacts with society and how it may define the history we make. I present how there may be ‘positive’ propaganda to oppose the ‘negative’, but of course my portrayal will be laced with historical bias. In Frame 1 I insinuate that there is a fascist group of powers (the ‘negative’ propaganda) whom are creating their means of propaganda, and deciding which series of accepted judgements that they want to project to the world, using a play on the phrase ‘weapons of mass destruction’ it implies that their deceptions are potentially damaging . To oppose this group I use visuals to represent the Allies who are fighting to dismantle the power the fascists had. I play on the concept of covert propaganda which is when “people are not aware that someone is trying to influence them, and do not feel they are being pushed in a certain direction” (Carr, 2008, p.15). The image in Frame 2 reinforces this idea whereby a pot of pills are being handed over, it is “sugar coating bitter pills, of making people accept policies they would not accept spontaneously” (Ellul, 1968, p.21). The idea is that propaganda is so easily consumed because often people would rather absorb already formed opinions than open their minds, gather their own knowledge and decide their own views. Often the most common technique “is to connect the idea or object you are propagandizing with some attitude, symbol, or emotion [...] that appeal to broad, general attitudes or sentiments ”(Cantril, 1938) so the natural ‘fight or flight’ instinct within humans leads them to choose the option that will benefit them best economically and socio-politically. Also people are often manipulated by propaganda through persistent fear tactics, leaving them to feel somewhat paralysed, adhering to the views of the propagandist until an equal power may begin to oppose this. Frame 3 is aimed to show the control that is inherent to mass propaganda, the figure is connected to the bitter sweet pills (the view or opinion that they are supposed to believe) by a pipe through their head- a symbol of how propaganda can be used to mould and change how a person may see and think about the world. Similarly, the figure’s limbs are held by string, making it a defenceless puppet for the fascist powers to dictate. It was important to show that this manipulation does not just change a way of thinking because it inevitably influences the actions that a person then makes- whether this is a political vote or a possibly problematic protest for these chosen opinions. Essentially propaganda plants a seed of thought, and if given the wrong influence, it could bloom into a powerfully destructive and toxic way of life and thinking.

Showing how the Allies may oppose the fascist propaganda, I illustrated how they may employ an influential and recognized company such as Disney or Marvel comics to help publicize their ‘positive’ propaganda (assuming it is positive because it is attempting to oppose the tyrannical rule of the fascist group). Art has been used throughout history as a way to retaliate against rival politics in times of war. As Saunders says, the CIA “used American modern art - including the works of such artists as Jackson Pollock, Robert Motherwell, Willem de Kooning and Mark Rothko - as a weapon in the Cold War”(1995). Likewise, the loveable cartoon characters we see on our screens and in our comic books were used as weapons of war. I show the process of them being created in Frame 4, as well as insinuating that the intention behind them was funding from the military. As we know, the US Army helped keep the Disney studio alive with their war funds. I decided to approach the proposed storyboard in a collaged style because whilst I was working through my visual research in my sketchbook I found myself magnetised to the visuals created by a combination of raw war footage and cartoon war propaganda. I think it is indicative of how the Allie’s propaganda relied on making light of situations, sometimes approaching the subject with humour in order to resonate with a wider audience. This can be compared to Disney’s ‘Der Fuehrer’s Face’ which uses multiple swastika motifs and creates a caricature of life under the Nazi regime with comedy, rather than graphic imagery which may make the public turn off their screens, therefore meaning their moral message is not received.

Finally Frame 5 and 6 are intended to show how these cartoons were meant to be breaking the illusions of the fascists, dismantling the influence of the propaganda and reducing the effectiveness of their way of thinking. They are literally breaking through their strongholds in an attempt to give people a cross road, a chance to choose their own beliefs and embrace the idea that Knowledge is Power. I am not showing these cartoons to break down the laboratory where the fascist propaganda comes from because it doesn’t have that physical strength, but I am portraying that a real gift is to stop believing these manipulations and to rationalise your own thoughts. With this, an increased number of empowered people can help to take apart their authority. Essentially propaganda is immaterial; it is a collection of thoughts and opinions which have no power if people have no faith in it.

Visual Research : Storyboard

Studio Brief 2: Visual Investigation

The storyboard below is what developed from the images in my concertina sketchbook, it is a combination of my own drawings and photos that I have sourced. I chose this collage style to show how drawings or cartoons (relating to Disney and Marvel in war propaganda) can interact with real life. I have explained the premise and concept behind my storyboard in my final essay in great detail. But essentially this sequence of images is showing how the common people can regain their personal strength and get out of the grip hold from Government propaganda. It begins showing that a group of authority people will gather to form a series of accepted judgements that they will then relay to the people as propaganda to change their way of thinking. This is portrayed by the puppet figure whose body and mind are now under control. The opposing propaganda is then shown to give the person an opportunity to rationalise their own views as Superman breaks through the piping and gives them freedom of thought again, without that toxic manipulation of propaganda.

1

2

3

4

5

6

Essay Two: Animation Analysis

An analysis of Disney’s ‘Der Fuehrer’s Face’ and its use as propaganda in World War II

Previously I’ve written that history is built on a foundation of truths, but details can be influenced by successful propaganda through forms of media. This is often controlled by physical organizations who seek to spread their views, consequently leading to more propaganda which contends with their message. Throughout history it’s been shown that it’s more tasteful to satire a person of authority if it’s through art, rather than publically slandering them with words.

Disney’s Der Fuehrer’s Face is an example of political animation, whereby methods are used “by a government, a party, an administration, a pressure group with a view to changing the behaviour of the public” (Ellul, 1968). Wartime lifted animation to a higher regard to its audience than prior to the war, when it was deemed as a childish form of entertainment. The light hearted nature of this genre meant the government could convey their views in an entertaining way. Its witty rhetoric, rather than graphic wartime imagery meant that people wouldn’t switch off their screens to the messages being put across. This short film (1943) “is a caricature of life under Nazism, though based on actual conditions” during World War II, but maintains balance as “even American nationalism is gently mocked when Donald’s bedroom is shown to be a virtual shrine to democracy” (Baxter 2016). Baxter says their shorts and features “were intended to help the war effort, whether by encouraging thrift and sacrifice, demoralizing the enemy or [...] promoting a strategy for military success.” (2016).

Throughout this short, familiar propaganda techniques are used to conjure the atmosphere of totalitarian Nazi Germany. The director Jack Grinney must connote imagery of Nazi ruler ship with oppression and disgust. He focuses on demoralizing Hitler rather than the inclusive Nazi groups because it’s easier to concentrate on one target, as Lasswell says, it’s “important to single out a handful of enemy leaders and load them down with the whole Decalogue of sins” (1938). It educates about Nazism to build up a negative image in the hope of dismantling the power of Nazi regimes. It’s awash with signs to illustrate the converse opinions of the fascists. The music accompaniment, the hit song Der Fuehrer’s Face strengthens the mocking tone as each “Heil” is followed by a scornful raspberry sound, resulting in a ridiculing phrase "Heil, (raspberry), Heil (raspberry), right in Der Fuehrer's face!”.

Immediately the character design serves to undermine the lyrics “master race” as the soldiers [Fig.1] march gracelessly with disproportionately shaped bodies. Donald the Duck is shown to be an overworked slave to the Fuehrer; with expectations to work at impossible speeds on an artillery conveyer belt, whilst at bayonet point, saluting Hitler. The increased pace of the animation signifies his building stress, which eventually leads to a mental breakdown where he hallucinates to envisage a different paradigm where he is living under Nazi dictatorship. Relief of this torture is shown when he wakes up free from his uniform and in patriotic pyjamas; unsubtly exclaiming to Lady Liberty “Am I glad to be a citizen of the United States of America!” The backgrounds are overwhelmed with the swastika motif- found in clouds, trees, a windmill and fence; maintaining the threatening tone of being under Hitler’s tyranny. Kinney successfully mocks a man of great superiority, but one must ask why we laugh when there’s great malice and seriousness to the subject. It could be suggested that art is taken lightly because hyperbole of characters and expressions are inherent to the genre. A possibly offensive representation can then be reduced to it “being animation” rather than blaming the politics. Similarly, the mocking of an authority figure is shown in Shepard Fairey’s piece ‘Hope’ in 2008 [Fig.2] where in 2011 [Fig. 3] he altered the design to have a Guy Fawke’s mask and read "Mister President, we HOPE you're on our side”. Both examples disregard the idea that art can’t be placed on an intelligent level, and that it can evoke academic, political thoughts. Der Fuehrer’s Face, like many political animations, aims to ‘positively’ influence the public for the good of the people. Many propagandists worked hard to extinguish Nazi Propaganda because Goebbels theorized that “every bit of propaganda had to implement policy”; unfortunately in promoting liberality and freedom America, “as the defender of true democracy, it is also employing a system of false representation” seen in the exaggeration of characters and reality of this animation (Doob, 1950). Although it intends to rationalise its views with honesty, there’s a “veil drawn deliberately over a reality one wishes not to see” (Ellul 1968), so it could be thought that outcomes of both sides are no better than the other. Opinions may be in good faith but because they are just that, rationalised by a group of bias people, it can in turn lead to representing a lie.

Similarly, this is an example of propaganda which portrays a message that may not be true to the opinion of the creator, so what is the authenticity of this animation? It’s noteworthy that Disney was not a master with money, often exceeding budgets by as much as four times the amount. By 1940, the downfall of Fantasia in the box office meant that Disney studios were near bankruptcy and less than half the animators remained on the payroll. Working for the US Military would give the Studio a chance to stay afloat with government set rates for American nationalistic propaganda. This means that Disney’s output media was motivated by funding rather than the intended message and that “If it wasn’t for the US Military, The Walt Disney Company may not exist today” (Raiti 2007). Disney’s extensive help with the war effort did not fail to boost morale and gather citizen involvement. In fact the “The Treasury Department estimates that 60 million Americans saw The New Spirit, yielding 37% increase in submission to the income tax” (Pottash 2008).

Der Fuehrer’s Face was therefore very influential propaganda during World War II in an attempt to promote liberality and aid with the war effort, however with this good intention lies contention over whether its aims can be seen as pure due to the exaggeration of facts and scenes relating to life under Nazism; as well as it relying on funding from the US Government. Since the time of this animation, socio-political priorities have changed in such a way that “politically incendiary topics must be hidden from the mainstream. National responsibilities become ancillary to capitalistic market forces” (Raiti 2007), meaning big animation companies such as Disney now steer away from patriotic content in order to please the masses.

Fig1

Essay One: Triangulation and Referencing

A critical discussion on propaganda and the extent at which it can shape our history

It’s been said by Carr (2008) that “The history we read [...] though based on facts, is, strictly speaking, not factual at all, but a series of accepted judgements”. It rejects the assumption that historians have an accumulation of knowledge which remains objective to their interpretation. It can be postulated that with expansive knowledge, one must decide which facts to make use of; that it’s possible we hear the side of the ‘winners’ and improved media meant history could be manipulated with ease.

Churchill once said that ‘History is written by the victors’ meaning we could be receiving falsified events in order to embellish a victory or create fear to maintain authority, as “structural factors are those such as ownership and control” (Herman and Chomsky 2010, p.11), meaning reports may’ve been overseen by authorities whom controlled the writer’s job security and personal safety. This could’ve possibly changed the path of history, with physical organizations enforcing their mantra through propaganda which is used for “sugar coating bitter pills, of making people accept policies they would not accept spontaneously” (Ellul, 1968, p.21).  A technique used by the Nazis was to create a victim for the German people to focus sole blame for their own faults. By infiltrating their ideas, one has civilians defining history as it’s laid out by propagandists. This is referred to as black/ covert propaganda, whereby “The people are not aware that someone is trying to influence them, and do not feel they are being pushed in a certain direction” (Carr, 2008, p.15).

There’re many counterparts to the opinion that victors write history: one being the telling of the Eastern front in World War II because “scholarship adopted the tone set by the losing German generals and veterans [...] summaries tended to echo the wartime propaganda of Goebbels and led to distortions in the literature.” (Clarke, 2013) Likewise, the recount of the Vietnamese War was dominated by American historians; and the Peloponnesian War told by the losing Athenians. It’s disputed that history is simply written by the people who can be bothered, and that facts may not be maliciously misrepresented but a settlement between two variables. ‘Facts of the past’ are deemed unimportant and ‘historical facts’ are deemed important. An example being that Carr claims millions had crossed the Rubicon but only Julius Caesar’s crossing in 49BC was marked as significant. This suggests we should question how historians record information in regards to their own bias and to “study the historian before you begin to study the facts” (Carr, 2008).

Many techniques have been employed in the past to strengthen ‘white’ propaganda, which is when the aims and intentions are known. The first “is to connect the idea or object you are propagandizing with some attitude, symbol, or emotion [...] that appeal to broad, general attitudes or sentiments which are so vague that people may be for or against them emotionally and yet not know precisely what such symbols mean”(Cantril, 1938). Symbols such as: justice, beauty, liberty, economy and patriotism. In 2016 we were bombarded with the phrase “Make America Great Again”, a campaign promising justice against minorities who were to be blamed for the downfalls of America, to be free of the ‘oppression’ of progression and political correctness and repeated words like ‘wall’, ‘Muslim’, ‘They’. According to Cantril the “vague words are so intrinsic to the propaganda that the layman is aware of the manipulation so the second principle is employed” (1938). He claims the aim is “to build up a new attitude around your product or idea by using subtle, concealed suggestion.” The propagandist advances their idea via popular media “to occupy every moment of the individual’s life” (Ellul, 1968); or disguise it as explanation so that “the educators will teach, without knowing it, the things that would preserve the interests of those who now control utilities” (Cantril, 1938).

Propaganda readily penetrates our mind, for reasons which we should understand; the first being that we contextualise words that are lined with emotion, i.e. ‘Muslim’ (unfairly) creates tension around Americans or bigots.  Secondly, people are inherently lazy and fear the unknown, so will gladly have views analysed and rationalised for them by an authority to not seem ignorant. Lastly, people won’t actively claim to be more superior to others but will accept it from someone else (with race and social hierarchy). It allows one to feel void of guilt when reaping the benefits of their privilege.

Propaganda’s continued to flourish and “one of the chief reasons for this tremendous barrage is the last development [...] in the mediums of communication” (Cantril, 1938). The benefits of having less outlets in the early 19th century is that the propagandist could be more specific about who they reach without interference of other platforms. For instance Saunders says the CIA “used American modern art - including the works of such artists as Jackson Pollock, Robert Motherwell [...] as a weapon in the Cold War” in attempt to encourage expressionism (1995). It’s hard to avoid current affairs with a plethora of knowledge at our fingertips due to internet and social media, yet it’s argued that “these technologies of memory also act as filters or editors. They help us remember much by discarding even more” (Vaidhyanathan, 2011) because material can be edited and kept away from us as easily as it’s presented. One can avoid being influenced by propaganda media because we’ve the ability to research and gather our own knowledge. Social movements can use media to craft their aims and reach millions; the extensive streaming of ‘Black Lives Matter’ events unfolding in America made it possible to see social injustice that’s often not shown, because people are uncomfortable by the magnitude of their own privilege. However the internet can give people a skewed impression of current events; Twitter showed Brexit leaning to Stay because of its use by Millennials and an overwhelming 75% of 18-24 year olds remained, but the platform was not representative of older voters.

It can be assumed that history is built on a foundation of truths, which have been shaped by historians or authorities with a bias relaying of events. Similarly, pieces of the puzzle may’ve been accidentally or purposefully missed out. We continue to make the same mistakes in not owning our ‘history’ by accepting the information we are fed through propaganda without actively deciding our own opinions. One could say that the history we’re currently making will be recorded more truthfully because a multitude of agreeable accounts and footage cannot lie, but every individual will relay a bias message in regards to the context of the situation.