The Problem of 'Mere Propaganda' (original) (raw)
Related papers
Art as a Means of Propaganda: Accounting for a Hierarchical Set
Scopus, ISSN 1988-0847, 2009
Art which is the description of the relation between the subject and object from an aesthetical point of view is used to create a classified society and then to protect the life principles of the dominant group-bourgeoisie-and to create symbolic set between the dominant class and other classes. Although this symbolic classification structure was harmed in the postmodern era, this determination is still valid. Besides it is used as means for propaganda, it also carries on its function of creating a set for classification. With the composing of popular culture and reproduction of artistic indicators, and with the loss of uniqueness, the use of artistic activities as a meta caused the deconstruction of its function as a set for classification. The astounding development of the propaganda means in the modern times led to the popularization of the art and in this process of popularization the nature of art also changed. Within this context and within the scope of this study, propaganda will be defined and the classification relations of art will be handled before this set causing nature of propaganda is studied.
This study provides an overview of the relationship between art and politics. After having defined both art and politics, in the sense in which they are used in this study, this paper examines what makes them overlap and interact.
Propaganda, Aesthetics & Contemporary Art: Languages and Rehearsals of Power
Piet Zwart Institute, 2019
In every society power must be visible to be meaningful. But, like the shifting political actors that exercise it, the representation of power is not fixed and is constantly redefined through the symbolic. If art allows for transformative experiences, can it transform, or redefine, the meaning of power for its audiences? What would it mean to construct a visual language that permits the exploration of empowerment? What visual codes or idioms might it be possible to draw on? Power of course must be understood in relational terms, and so any visual language or aesthetic must tap into a shared vocabulary already present in society for the sake of its legibility. In other words, the artist must take into consideration those existing sociopolitical relationships as well as existing languages of power as the artist’s clay to be molded. Perhaps an aesthetic can be constructed that takes up established languages of power for artistic ends. When power is applied to art, our thoughts quickly arrive at propaganda art. When we think of 20th century propaganda, we know of its incredible power in affecting transformative change through aesthetic persuasion. For artists to take it up as part of an ‘autonomous’ practice is no small thing. Can such a pre-existing language, charged with its own historical connotations, be used to different ends without reducing artwork to the service of narrow political goals? Artists must maintain a practice that is not subservient or instrumentalized to political ends. Were the latter not the case, the artists risks converting their work into a tool, or a means to an end rather than a work to be understood on its own terms. Nevertheless, the possibility of using an aesthetic of power may allow for the artist to open up a space for exploration, a space for rehearsal of power, through the language of propaganda. In what follows, I look at artistic practices that apply the language of propaganda in order to think through these questions. This adoption of aesthetics must be understood in its historical relation to propaganda art, as well as the ontological evolution of the image itself.
Understanding Propaganda: The Epistemic Merit Model and Its Application to Art
Journal of Aesthetic Education, 2002
Liberty Leading the People, George Orwell's Road to Wigan Pier, Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will, and D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation, are all examples of expressly political art. Historically some art has been not only an object of aesthetic appreciation, but has also embodied and imparted a political message. Understanding the way art can be used to further political aims is an important part of art education. I contend that it is as important to investigate the political and cultural uses of art as it is to engage in the more traditional inquiries of form and style. To further this end, I propose a new model of propaganda that can better accommodate the phenomenon of art propaganda. "Propaganda," in current usage, has a pejorative sense; however, at one time "propaganda" was understood to mean mere persuasion. My aim in this essay is to rehabilitate propaganda as a term of analysis while accounting for the pejorative sense propaganda has come to have. First, I provide a conceptual analysis of propaganda. In doing so, I develop a new model of propagandathe epistemic merit model. I argue that this model will enable us to identify and assess propaganda in general. Second, I show that my definition is especially well-suited to cases where the propaganda in question is also a work of art, since art, from posters and pamphlets to films and novels, has been a particularly prevalent means for the dissemination of propaganda. Analyzing Propaganda: Some Previous Definitions The term "propaganda" was originally associated with propagating or spreading the Christian faith. The word was coined by Pope Gregory XV in 1622 to refer to the congregio de propaganda which was an organization of the Roman curia that had jurisdiction over missionary territories. "The congregation's mission...was to reconquer by spiritual arms, by prayers and good Sheryl Tuttle Ross teaches at Edgewood College in Madison, WI. She is currently preparing a paper for the Pacific APA.
Art is Inherently Propagandistic
When we think about the term propaganda, when we use the term propaganda, we habitually associate it with evil political aims. Perhaps this is born out of our learned desire to not be influenced. This brief essay explores how logically one my conclude all art as a form of propaganda and the neutral role propaganda plays in society, breaking down the negative façade society built for the term.
e-flux journal, #52, 2014
The disappearance of the notion of propaganda is the result of a delicate ideological operation meant to obscure the fact that modern propaganda was developed by capitalist-democratic countries, rather than by so-called totalitarian ones. Our unwillingness to speak of art as propaganda proves the success of this operation. The Venice Biennale and its relation to the phenomenon of the world fair is a case study that could help us both understand the inherent propagandistic role of art in capitalist democracy, and reactivate our political relation to the practice of art in the realm of global politics.
Art Propaganda: The Many Lives of Picasso's Guernica
Guernica is almost universally recognized as anti-war propaganda, and its existence challenges long-standing views that art, properly speaking cannot be propaganda. The anti-art propaganda claim admits of varying degrees from its strongest articulation by Clive Bell who maintains that art and politics are mutually exclusive to Monroe Beardsley and R. W. Collingwood who maintain that propaganda is at best amusement art or that in so far as art is propaganda it gets in the way of its aesthetic value. This paper will argue that not only is Guernica a paradigm case of art propaganda, but that the epistemic merit model of propaganda can best account for the variety of propagandistic uses of this painting from its inception extending to modern day, in the contexts of the Spanish Civil War, the Vietnam War, Spain’s transition to democracy, and most recently in the buildup to the Iraq War.