In the book 'War Posters - Weapons of Mass Communication' the author discusses the relationship between the government and communications industries during the Second World War and how this varied in different countries. The writer appears to be asking what the differences in styles and messages are between the propaganda in several countries. Propaganda examples from Germany, USSR, Britain and America are discussed in reference to style and also how the key values of each country are visually represented and how they differ from each other.
How propaganda was created and the values it was intended to portray to the given nation are discussed in detail. The author explains how Nazi propaganda was 'openly associated with communism' it was distributed by one political party, repressing negatives of war and portraying an 'illusion of coherent reality'. It is important to note that these communist values greatly influenced the style of the propaganda displayed at the time, calculated in its messages, 'ideological' ideas and repetitive use of the swastika symbols to assert control. Advertising space was controlled in Germany and was even more manipulated in Soviet Russia, media was censored and very controlled and the author again shows how this affected the propaganda visuals.
The main point of view that the author appears to be trying to put across is how acutely different these countries propaganda could be. This is asserted when he goes on to discuss British propaganda - he suggests that the graphic design industry in Britain was part of the war effort and was there to assist , it had a much more independent voice whilst still maintaining a desire for unity. The author highlights that messages of promise and benefits were portrayed, posters were intended to "inform and instruct" people on how to behave and carry on with everyday life, encouraged but not forced, hugely different from the authoritative demands of propaganda from countries like Nazi Germany. The author supports his ideas by also suggesting although it seemed a more free type of propaganda from USSR and Germany some people may not have found it completely effective by including quotes from secondary sources such as "posters today are not pictures to sell pills, but to save civilisation and however clever, are a waste of paper unless they kill Germans" a quote from J.B Guild from and advertising company at the time, showing that some people perhaps felt the propaganda should have been more war focussed in terms of fighting and achieving.
The author also discusses American propaganda and explains also how different it was, american imagery was very patriotic, they used a realistic style, depicting photographic images of war, even if they showed defeat, it was honest and truthful. The author also again backs this up with an argument showing that although this seems like a positive way of creating propaganda, it is important to note that advertising was still a business and was still a means of 'mass communication and persuasion' just in a very different form from such propaganda like the Nazi posters.
Although the author uses many references to examples of posters and the odd quote from people to back up his statements, implications may lie in taking on board his line of reasoning as there are not many opinions on the actual propaganda from people that were surrounded by it at the time and although containing many interesting facts it seems more like a 'looking back' view of it.
Monday, 29 November 2010
Assignment 4 - Analysing a Journal
The first text I chose to look into was a journal titled "The war has turned our lives upside down" : The Merit of Commercial Advertising in Documenting the Cultural History of the British Home Front in the Second World War. The journal is focused around the idea that the striking, memorable war poster we know and associate with the second world war were not in fact the best graphic representation of life at that time. The author questions whether this recognisable and nostalgic government propaganda that is so much associated with the war time were a true visual representation of how British people acted and felt at this time and alternatively shows how commercial advertising was perhaps more relevant.
The author discusses how government propaganda was not representational of real life on the home front but rather a reflection of an almost theatrical and unfamiliar image that the people of Britain could not relate to. The author explains that commercial advertising was much more effective as it related to the people with familiar ideas and concepts that helped people adapt to the war rather than be overwhelmed by it.
Several examples of commercial advertisements are given by the author from the time that related well to the lives of people in Britain. It is reiterated throughout the article that the ads which related to everyday experiences and how to balance these with working during these hard times were most effective. An example that helped me to understand the authors point of view was the advert about " Mrs Peek's Puddings" which was promoting easy to make food - very appealing as woman had to balance working( to contribute to the war effort) as well as being a housewife, this supported the reality of people having to adapt their normal lives to the situation of war time life rather than being soupy controlled by it, people still had to get by on a day to day basis.
The views of the author are backed up by occasionally referring to secondary sources, one of which gives insight from Philip Stobo, a man who worked in advertising during the war and was part of many successful campaigns at the time. He explains that in advertising, we should look at "real living people" a point stressed by the author throughout the article about connecting and relating to your target market. It is helpful that the author makes references and includes opinions from other relevant people about the topic as it helps to back up his ideas and consolidate them.
I found it important that the author showed why government propaganda was not truly representational at the time by explaining that although visually striking the posters were generally over the top and enthusiastic, they tried to make war look appealing but it wasn't - people were depressed by the thought of war and needed advise on how to deal with it - especially in correspondence to daily life. It was also interesting to note that although commercial advertising dealt with 'the uncomfortable truths' it was effective because it was real-life and reassuring for people to know that everyone was in the same boat.
Although I do agree that government propaganda was not the the best documentation for representing the people of this era, I feel that the author could have looked into why the government used these glamourised visuals more. Although the author picks up on the fact that the propaganda 'became mythologized as a way to cope with the harsh realities of being at war' he doesn't look into maybe why they had to remain positive - could it have been because they didn't want to seem weak in the eyes of the enemy? If we take the authors line of reasoning on board, it undermines the exciting, nostalgic and memorable graphic design that we currently associate so strongly with that era. The author touched on it slightly but I feel should taken on board that these were adverts still trying to sell products, using psychology to encourage empathy in people which would cause their products to be remembered.
The overall main points that were expressed in this paper were that although government propaganda from the war time is visually exciting and well known, it is not the necessarily the best visual source we can use to learn about the time period. We can learn from commercial advertising what everyday life was like in the war and if we were to rely on government propaganda alone we would not get an accurate account of how people felt and acted, which was so important to the history of this crucial time.
The author discusses how government propaganda was not representational of real life on the home front but rather a reflection of an almost theatrical and unfamiliar image that the people of Britain could not relate to. The author explains that commercial advertising was much more effective as it related to the people with familiar ideas and concepts that helped people adapt to the war rather than be overwhelmed by it.
Several examples of commercial advertisements are given by the author from the time that related well to the lives of people in Britain. It is reiterated throughout the article that the ads which related to everyday experiences and how to balance these with working during these hard times were most effective. An example that helped me to understand the authors point of view was the advert about " Mrs Peek's Puddings" which was promoting easy to make food - very appealing as woman had to balance working( to contribute to the war effort) as well as being a housewife, this supported the reality of people having to adapt their normal lives to the situation of war time life rather than being soupy controlled by it, people still had to get by on a day to day basis.
The views of the author are backed up by occasionally referring to secondary sources, one of which gives insight from Philip Stobo, a man who worked in advertising during the war and was part of many successful campaigns at the time. He explains that in advertising, we should look at "real living people" a point stressed by the author throughout the article about connecting and relating to your target market. It is helpful that the author makes references and includes opinions from other relevant people about the topic as it helps to back up his ideas and consolidate them.
I found it important that the author showed why government propaganda was not truly representational at the time by explaining that although visually striking the posters were generally over the top and enthusiastic, they tried to make war look appealing but it wasn't - people were depressed by the thought of war and needed advise on how to deal with it - especially in correspondence to daily life. It was also interesting to note that although commercial advertising dealt with 'the uncomfortable truths' it was effective because it was real-life and reassuring for people to know that everyone was in the same boat.
Although I do agree that government propaganda was not the the best documentation for representing the people of this era, I feel that the author could have looked into why the government used these glamourised visuals more. Although the author picks up on the fact that the propaganda 'became mythologized as a way to cope with the harsh realities of being at war' he doesn't look into maybe why they had to remain positive - could it have been because they didn't want to seem weak in the eyes of the enemy? If we take the authors line of reasoning on board, it undermines the exciting, nostalgic and memorable graphic design that we currently associate so strongly with that era. The author touched on it slightly but I feel should taken on board that these were adverts still trying to sell products, using psychology to encourage empathy in people which would cause their products to be remembered.
The overall main points that were expressed in this paper were that although government propaganda from the war time is visually exciting and well known, it is not the necessarily the best visual source we can use to learn about the time period. We can learn from commercial advertising what everyday life was like in the war and if we were to rely on government propaganda alone we would not get an accurate account of how people felt and acted, which was so important to the history of this crucial time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
