1
Sport-WarCartoonArt
RobertE.RinehartandJ.Caudwell.
Abstract
Inthispaper,weexploretheextenttowhichpoliticalcartoonsandcomicstrips
(asmediatedpublicandpoliticalvisualart,theninthart(cf.,Groensteen,
2007[1999]))subvert/confirminstitutionalvaluesofso-calledWestern
democraciesduringtimesofwar.Ourconcern—associologistsofsport—iswith
thewaysdominantsportingsensibilitiesare(re)presentedincartoonart,and
howsportitselfisconflatedwithpatrioticideologiesofwarasavehiclefor
propaganda.Inparticular,weinterrogatehowcompetitive-sportingidealsare
alignedwithwarandconflict,andmobilisedbycartoonsduringperiodsof
Western-assertedconflict.Weareintriguedbyhowsomecartoonillustrations
havethevisualpowertomisplace,simplify,andessentialise—viasporting
analogy—theintenseandcomplexemotionssurroundingwar.Ouraimisto
examinehowthevisualwithinpopularcultureisusedtodis-connectanddisengageapublicwiththerealitiesofwarandhumanconflict.
Sport-WarCartoonArt
Introduction:Sport/WarPreserves
Theconnectionbetweenpopularculturalrepresentationsandpersonal
andsocietalissueshasarichtradition:suchwrittentextsportrayingnarrative
(cf.,Denzin,2008;Richardson,2013),narrativeaboutart(cf.,Denzin,2011),and
poetics(cf.,Faulkner,2009;Pelias,2011)havediscussedbothspecificissues
andidentities,andthewaystheserepresentationshavedisseminated
"information,""knowledges,"and"understandings"differentially.Butvisual
methodology,asHarper(2005)remindsus,isbothrepresentativeand
constitutiveofculturalformations:thus,theuseofthevisualforculturalstudies
hasbeenintendedprimarily‘toadvancetheoriesoftheself,society,existence
itself,and/orsymbolism’(p.748)whilealso,insomeform,utilizinginductive
visualrepresentations‘tostudyspecificquestionsandissuesinsociology,
anthropology,communications,andthelike’(p.748).Apperceptionthroughthe
visualsense(s)hasbecomeahegemonicconceit,atleastsincethemiddleages
(cf.,Howes,2005).
Themediumofcreatedartwork,morespecificallypoliticalandcomicstrip
cartooning,utilisesthevisualandthewrittensimultaneously:
Whatdefinesnarrativeinacomicstripisthatpictureandtext
worktogethertotellonestory.Oncewefocusonthenatureof
comicsasnarrative,wewillceasetobetemptedtothinkthattheir
unityisanylessnaturalthanthatofpaintingsornovels.(Carrier,
2000:74)
Thoughtherearesignificantdifferencesbetweenthepoliticalcartoonand
cartoonstrips,weconflatethesetwoformsofcreativeartsasobjectsofstudy
basedonthethemesofsportandwar.Theworldofcomicsexistsforitsown
2
sake,anditisproperlystudiedregardingthe‘realmsofthesemanticandthe
aesthetic’(Groenstein,2007[1999]:2).Comics,bytheirownlogics,contain
suchsystemsthatmayinformsocietalviewsofwarandconflict.
Inthispaper,wediscussperceptionsofandattitudestowardwar,nationstatehostileactions,andconflictwithincartoonartthatislinkedtosport
and/orsportingpractices.Thereisapaucityofpoliticalcartoonsfocusing
specificallyonsportandwar(forreasonselucidatedlater)—notcartoonson
war,orcartoonsonsport:cartoonsonwarseenthroughasportlens.
Weutilisedaconveniencesample—basedonEnglish-languagecomics,
withlogicsthatamajorityofEnglish-speakingaudienceswouldunderstand,and
withthestipulationsthattheyincludebothsport-andwar-orterror-or
conflict-relatedcontent.Thislatterstipulationsharplycutdownonpossibilities,
andtheideaofa"convenience"sampleisonlyrealisticinthat,whilewe
exhaustivelyscouredtheInternetforsearcheswiththeseterms,wecannotbe
certainthatwehaveexhaustedthepossibilities.
Thepoliticalcartoonswediscusseitheradvanceordecryaggression,
assertiveness,andoverthostilitybetweenindividualsand/ornation-states.
Thatistosay,thecartoonistmakesastatementaboutwarand/orhostile
actionsusingsportmetaphorsin"his"art.1
Theissueofthesport-warpoliticalandcomicstripsandanypublic
supportorrejectionofwarorwar-likeactionsismuchmorecomplexand
nuancedthansimplybeingcorrelationalorcausal.Thepurposeofthis
examinationisnottodrawcausallinesbetweencomplexsocietalfactors.
Instead,itistodelineatemediatedsport-warcartoonartasapopularculture
formationthatreflectsattitudinalarcsofpublicresponsetothenormalizationof
3
warandconflict,andtounpacksomeofthewaysthatcartoonistsalignthe
writtenwiththepowerfulvisualmetaphor.Themediatedimagebecomes
powerfulasatropewhenitisexposedtomassified,popularculture.
Welookatcartoonarttobetterunderstandcurrent(western)societal
attitudestowardwarandconflict.Weutilizeacasestudyapproach(cf.Becker,
2014),withpoliticalcartoons—drawn"cartoons,"fromtheInternet,andcomic
stripsmorebroadly—providingmostofourexemplars.Aswell,weare
engagingwiththepremisethatpoliticisedcartoonshavethepotentialto
provideasimple,conciseandeffectiveuseofsportasavisualmetaphorforwar.
Thesecartoonseffectivelycompetefornoticeinaworldrifewithwarand
terrorismimagery(e.g.,Lamb&Long,2014).
Theunexaminedpoweroftheexactly-resonantvisual/verbalcartoon
movesmassesinwaysthatcognitivelogicsoftencannot(cf.,Harvey,1996;
Lamb,2007).Weexaminetheco-existenceofcartoonartusingsportinsupport
orrejectionofnation-states'actionstowardsothernationstatesorgroups,be
theytolerantorbelligerent,interventionistor"nation-building,"defensiveor
offensive.Wearguethatvisualculturemaybeconstitutiveoflargercultural,
mediated,andpoliticalformations(e.g.,acceptance,tolerance,orrejectionof
war,bellicoseactions,andconflictsituations).Theparametersofacceptanceof
and/orresonancewithasinglecartoonbyapublicgivesus,byinference,an
indicationofwhattoleranceagivensocietymayholdforsuchconstructsas
bullying,violence,terror,conflict,andwar.
Throughsatire,thepoliticalcartoonistismeanttocounterthedominant,
toshakeupcomfortableworldviews(Lamb,2007).Yettheworkingsof
hegemonicpowercananddomanagetoevaderealchange–andpraxis:
4
...thesubalternfunctionsofsocialhegemonyandpolitical
government[include]...the"spontaneous"consentgivenbythegreat
massesofthepopulationtothegeneraldirectionimposedonsocial
lifebythedominantfundamentalgroup;thisconsentis"historically"
causedbytheprestige(andconsequentconfidence)whichthe
dominantgroupenjoysbecauseofitspositionandfunctioninthe
worldofproduction.(Gramsci,1989:12)
Assuch,thepoliticalcartoonistsimplyworkswithinasystemwhere,byonly
slightlydisrupting(dominant)sensibilities,thecartoonultimatelyservesto
reinforcethepowerofthedominant,tomomentarilysatisfyobjectionssothat
easingbackintothe“normal”feelscomfortable.
Thecartooningwefocusoninthisarticleisgroundedinthetwin
preservesofwarandsport,andinnegotiatingthedynamicalrelationships
betweentheaudienceresponsesofstatusquoorofprogressivesocialjustice
movements.
Logicsofsport-warcartoonart
Ouranalysisisframedbyutilizingthetheoreticalunderpinningsof
AntonioGramsci(1989[1971]),RaymondWilliams(1974;1977),and,toa
lesserdegree,PierreBourdieu(1986).GramscidrivesaMarxistdiscussionof
whatLaclauandMouffe(1985)seeasanessentialiststancetowardstructures.
Conversely,asMarxistthoughtisbroughtforward,throughGramsci,Williams
andBourdieu,theinterplayofculture(somewhatopposedto'theeconomic
sphere'(Laclau&Mouffe,1985:85)),agents,andstructurecreatesanewspace
fortheconceptofsubject-basedhegemony.Thus,LaclauandMouffe(1985),
interpretingGramsci—andothers—arguefora‘subject[position,which]is
penetratedbythesameambiguous,incompleteandpolysemicalcharacterwhich
overdeterminationassignstoeverydiscursiveidentity’(p.121).Simplyput,
5
then,readersofcartoonsmayassume—withinandbetweensubjectpositions—
fluid(or"ambiguous")positionalitiesandstandpoints.EvenWilliams(1974)
arguesforaninterplaybetween‘technologicaldeterminism...[and]
symptomatictechnology’(p.13),resultinginanactivesubjectpositionwith
‘intention’(p.14).Inourview,theinterplaybetweenculturalknowledge,
capital,literacies,competenceandconsumptionofcartoonsismostdecidedly
notdeterministic,essentialist,orfunctionalist—weremainaspirationalthat
comicscanhavesomeimpactupontheirreaders.Assuch,examiningcartoons—
politicalandstrip—providesvisualmaterialoftheeveryday,popularist
representationsofwarandconflict,whicharehistoricallyandculturally
contingent.
Inthenextsectionsofthispaper,weexaminetheartsandcraftsof
cartooning,lookathistoricalexemplarsofcartoonsthatcontainametaphorical
linkagebetweensportandwar,andthenhoneinonsomesport-warthemed
cartoonsduringtheso-called"WaronTerror."
Wefirstgroundtheworkinadiscussionofpoliticalcartoonsandtheiruse
inmediatedpopularcultureasaformofthevisualthatmightreflectandonly
slightlychallengesocietaltrendsandattitudes.Inthissection,weoperationalize
suchtermsas"comicstrips"and"politicalcartoons."Wealsoforegroundour
argumentswithinsomeofthescholarlyliteratureaboutcartoonsandtheir
machinations,andliteratureabouttheso-called"softstruggles"thatpopular
culturemayelicit,produce,andmakevisibleforitsaudiences.Itisimportantto
rememberthat,astherearerelativelyfewexamplesofsport-warthemed
politicalcartoons,weexpandourdiscussiontoexemplarsfromcomicstrips.As
6
such,thispaperreflectsapreliminarydiscussionoftheconflationofsportand
warthemeswithincartoonart.
Second,weoffersomeexemplarsofhistoricalcartoonsthatreflect,
reinforce,orpushpublicattitudestowardswarorbellicosestates.These
exemplarsprovidecontextualcomparisonstothecontemporarypolitical
cartoonsweinvestigateinthefinalsection.Aretheresubstantivedifferences
betweenhowthepublicviewedwar(andsport)inthe19thCentury,for
example,andhowa21stCenturyglobalpublicviewswar(andsport)?Aswell,
aretherealsosubstantivedifferencesbetweentheculturalcapitalsof
contemporaryaudiences(cf.,Bourdieu,1986)?
Third,welookatpoliticalcartoonswithinthepastfifteenyearsof"A
[global]WaronTerror."Thesecartoonsexemplify(mostly)English-speaking,
westernnations'takesonthe"new"natureofconflict(e.g.,thatconflictbetween
organizationsandnation-states,ortheproclaimed"waron[abstractions]"),and
ouroriginalpoolofpossiblecartoonsdrewfromtheUnitedStates,theUnited
Kingdom,Australia,andNewZealand.
Weconcludebyspeculatingontheexpansionandeclecticsofwhatmight
bestrictlytermed"war"cartoonstoalookat"terrorism,""conflict,"andthe
rhetoricsofperpetualwar.Wereiteratethatthispaperismeanttospark
furtherresearchintopopularculturalformsofvisualresearchwithinmedia,
peace,andwarstudies.Photography,videography,andmultimediaapproaches
(cf.,Pink,2007)arecertainlydominantformsofhowcontemporarysociety
"sees"itsvisual,butthereremainresidualforms,suchasnewsprint,where
readersengagevisuallyandemotionallyinarangeofways.Allofthesepopular
7
culturalformationscaninfluencecitizens'attitudestoward—andacceptance
of—thenormalisationofwar.
Drawingtheframe(s)
Theintent,techniques,presentation,andreceptionofcomicstripsand
politicalcartoonsvary.However,wepositthattheircreationandreceptionmay
overlapintermsofwhenandhowthey"discuss"warandsport(cf.,Harvey,
1996).Withthatsaid,thecomicstriprequiresslightlydifferenttextual
receptiontechniquesthanthepoliticalcartoon.Comicstripsareaseriesof
panels(alsoknownas"cels"orframes)juxtaposedsequentially,usuallyrelying
ontemporalmovement.Thislinearitygenerallydemandsasequentialreading,
andmuchoftheinformationneededforliteracyandunderstandingisprovided
withinthestripitself(cf.,Carrier,2000).
Incontrast,thepoliticalcartoonistypicallyonelargerframethatusually
requiresgreaterknowledgeoutsideoftheworldofthecartoonitself.This
knowledgeandculturalcapitalmaybeofcurrentevents,bothsomberand
humorous;itmaybeofsocietalrelationships,orintricate,historically-laden
positioningswithinalargerculture:theknowledgemaybetacitorexplicit.The
knowledgerequiredmayalsoinclude,inthecaseofsport-warmetaphors,
knowledgeofbothsportcodesandbellicoseeventsthroughouttheworld.
Politicalcartoonsusuallyappearonornearaneditorial/opinionsectionofthe
paper,whichaddstotheirpotentialembeddedgravitas.Politicalcartoons,by
theirnature,canbeveryfragile:outoftheirowncontext,theymayappear
offensive,wrong-headed,orsimplypassé.Thereaderofapoliticalcartoon,to
8
moredeeplyunderstandit,mustbesufficientlyversedinthelogicsoftheworld
outside(cf.,Bostdorff,1987).
Audiencesofcartoonswithapoliticalsensibilitygenerallyconsumeboth
politicalandstripcartoons(ElRefaie,2009).Theirreception,engagementwith,
andsubsequentsupportofeitherstripsorpoliticalcartoonsisintegratedintoa
complexsystemofvisualrepresentationandconsumptionthatcangobeyond
the"realities"oftheworldandsuggestotherpossibilities.Readershavetohave
bothvisualandwrittenliteracy—formsofculturalcapital—forbothtypesof
cartoons,buttheyrequiremoreculturalliteracyforpoliticalcartoonsthanfor
comicstrips(Carrier,2000;Eisner,2005[1985]).
Generally,scholarlyworkabouthowcartoons"work"resolvesinto
discussionsoftherelationshipsbetweenthesignsandsymbolsinherentinthe
semioticsofcomics.Thereisscholarlyworkcontextualizingcomicstripswhose
"language,"inthesenseofa"text,"hasbeenconveyed,accordingtoEisner,in‘a
seriesofrepetitiveimagesandrecognizablesymbols’(2005[1985]:8).There
hasbeenalongerpatternofscholarlyworklookingatthepoliticalcartoon,
whose‘overtlypoliticalpurpose[is]achievedprimarilythroughsatireandirony’
(Todd,2012:37),in,generally,asingle"panel."2
However,attheaudiencelevel,borrowingfromLorenz(1995),Hallettand
Hallettstatethat‘a(political)cartoonhastheabilitytoinfluenceareaderas
wellasreflectsomeinternalpartofthereader’(2012:60).Insuchaway,
qualitativeresearchershavefoundpoliticalcartoonstouncover‘shared
ideologiesandcultureofaparticularreadership’(ibid.).Asvehiclesofsubtle
coercion,cartoonsmayreflectand[re]produceattitudes,opinions,orworldview
aboutatopic,suchaswar.
9
Theprocessofconsumingapoliticalcartoonissubtle.Marín-Arrese
(2008)discussessalience,incongruity,andresolutionoftheincongruityin
politicalcartoons.Essentially,thereaderofacartoon,whoisconfrontedwith
seemingly-incompatiblemetaphoricalobjects,registersthemostsalient
relationshipbetweentheobjects.However,thatisfrustratedbythe
incongruenceoftheinitialreading,andasecondary—oralternative—reading
emerges,whichishumorous,ironic,orsomehowpedagogical.3
Withinthisresolution-of-dissonanceframe,ofcourse,manyintertextual
aspectsaboundinorderforareaderofthepoliticalcartoontounderstandany
ironies.Forexample,s/hetypicallymustbequiteculturallyliterate.Note,as
oneobviouscounter-example,YonatanFrimer'smazecartoon(see:Yonatan
Frimer,“TheAfghanistanHandoff”http://fineartamerica.com/featured/theafghanistan-handoff-by-yonatan-frimer-yonatan-frimer.html).Thisworkuses
imagesofAmericanfootball,thelingeringUS-leadincursionintoAfghanistan,
andthe"facts"ofGeneralPetreus'givingupcommandofalliedforcestoGeneral
McChrystalasbasicassumedknowledgesinthereader.
Thoughtheimageandthelinguisticsmayprovidearelativelypowerful
initial,affectiveimpact,uponcloserexamination,themetaphoricalrelation
betweenits"factual"componentsbreaksdown.The"facts,"asportrayedbythe
artist,donotproceedlogically,atleasttoaUSA-football-literateaudience:when
McChristalwasdismissedbyPresidentObama,Petraeusreplacedhim.Petreus
tookovercommandfromMcChristal,nottheotherwayaround.Coincidentwith
thischronology,thereader(andapparently,artist)alsoneedstounderstanda
basic"fact"aboutAmericanfootball:the"football"—Afghanistan—being
10
handedoffintendstoimplyasharedteameffort,asenseofmalecamaraderie,
andalossofPetraeus'power(whichmakesthecartoontemporallyillogical).4
Theinitialeffectsofcartoonsareoftenmostlytransitory,emotional,and
affective,andmanyconsumersofthemdonotdeeplyanalysetheirlogics.One
pointthatcanbetakenfromFrimer'smisrepresentedsport-warcartoon,
however,maybethatunderstandingandcontextcanmatter.Inorderfora
politicalcartoontobecognitivelyeffective(asthemetaphorworksorfails,asit
resonateswiththethoughtfulreader),theartistandthereaderhavetoshare
commonunderstandingsofsocietaltrends,attitudes,andcontext.Inthecaseof
Frimer's,knowledgeabouthowAmericanfootball"works,"themetaphorfor
transferenceofpowersimplydoesnotalignwithknowledgeaboutcurrent
eventsinAfghanistan.ItistruethatPetraeuswasnowthe"quarterback,"the
"fieldgeneral,"the"oneincharge."ButbyhandingoffthefootballtoMcChristal,
Petraeus—illogically—hasgivenuphisownagency.Wecanseehowthe
delicatemetaphorical"fit"breaksdownifoneoftheelementsisnotanexactfit,
oriftheaudiencedoesnotunderstandthecontext.
WearguethatFrimer'smainpurposewasnottodepictanaccurate
renderingofAmericanfootball,oreventhesuccessionofgeneralsbytheUnited
StatesinAfghanistan.Weproposethattheartist'sprimaryintentionwasto
supportthewareffortbyusingasport-as-patriotism-conflatedmetaphor,which
advancedarhetoricofsport(beinganuncontested"good"thing)supportingthe
warinAfghanistan.Theconflationofsportwithwar(orwithpatriotism,or
nationalism)isaratheroldtrope,oftenusedbypoliticianstogarnersupport
fromfence-sittersduringelectioncycles(cf.,thepreviously-mentionedBIRG).
Thiscartoonworksinmuchthesamewayaspoliticalleaders,who
11
‘assume...thatiftheysupportthethingsthatpeoplevalueandenjoy,theycan
increasetheirlegitimacy...’(Coakley,Hallinen,&McDonald,2011,p.424).Itis
abandwagonsport-warcartoon.
Torecap,politicalcartoonsandcomicstripsprobablysharemore
similaritiesthandifferences.Theseincludearichvisualimaginative
engagementwithreaders,andrequirementsforaculturally"literate"
readershipandvaryingdegreesofculturalcompetence.Thereareobvious
generaldifferences,aswell.Amongthesearetheperceivedsalienceofpolitical
cartoonstoeverydaylife;theperceivedgravitas—andaccompanyingreflexive
nature—ofpoliticalversuscomicstrips;andtherelativeephemeralityofcomic
strips.
However,inregardtoculturalcapital,threepointsneedtobereinforced.
One,understandingsandexperientialresonancesofreadersmaydissipateover
time.Thatistosay,thedetailsandnuancesofbitingsatiremaybeloston
contemporaryreaders.Two,geographicaldifferencesmaymitigatecultural
capitalofreaders.Three,evenwithinaso-calledhomogeneousculture,capital
mayvaryquitewidely.Levelsofeducation,knowledgeofcurrentaffairsor
popularculture,tribalaffiliations,gender,age—alloftheso-calledsocioeconomicvariantsmayinfluencehowaspecificcomicisread.
Historicalexemplars
Theimportanceofculturalliteracywithinpoliticalcartoonscanbe
illustratedbylookingathistoricalexamples.Wearenotexaminingthe
historicalproductionofcartoons;rather,weseethesepopularculturalartifacts
(politicalcartoons)aswaysofmeasuringhowpublicsmayhaveviewedwar
12
historically.Forexample,do21stCenturypolitical/editorialcartoonsoffera
qualitativelydifferentsetofconstraintsandfreedomstoviewing,audiencing,
andconsumingcartoonsthaninthepast?Mightthey,forexample,have
devolvedsothatpolitical/editorialcartoonistshavebecometargetsfor
totalitarianexpressionsofgovernments,where‘intimidationandclosingof
newspapersfarandwide’servestodampenlivelyandopendiscussion,sothat
contemporarycartoonists‘foundthemselvesintheirweakeststate...sincethe
latenineteenthcentury’(Lamb&Long,2014:95)?
Sincemostpoliticalcartoonsengagewithsomesortoflifeevent—anevent,
orseriesofevents,ofwhichthereaderisexpectedtobeknowledgeable—when
onelooksathistoricalexampleswithoutthehistorical,culturalknowledgeofthe
events,thesatirical,metaphorical,andironicaspectsmayoftenbelost.
Decontextualised,theseeventslosetheirimmediacy.This"orderoftranslation"
existsmoreatthesemioticlevelthanthelinguisticlevel:theintertextualityof
textandimageinmanyofthesepoliticalcartoonsisdependentupon‘asemiotic
system,makinguseof...fertilizedentitiesofmeaningandpointsof
reference...’(Tzankova&Schiphorst,2012:119).Wehaveinferredthata
temporalelementexistsaswell—politicalcartoonsoftendonottranslatewell
overtime.
Inafascinatingstudyofsixtyyearsof18th-19thCenturypoliticalcartoons
fromtheUnitedStates,Cohen(2012)spendstwoparagraphscontextualizing
andexplainingDavidClaypooleJohnston'scartoon"AFootRace"circa1824
(see:https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/04/10/books/review/10Ellis/10El
lis-master675.jpg)Thecartoon,initstime,wasabitingstatementaboutthe
crowdingoffourcandidatesintothePresidentialelections.Inthecontextofits
13
owntime,thiscartoonrequirednodiscussion:infact,todiscusswhyitworked
wouldhaveundercutitseffectiveness.Johnstondrewitintermsofafootrace
betweenthecandidates:themetaphorofasportingcontestengagedthe
"commonman."(Footraceswerepopularphysicalfeatsatthetimeandawayto
winmoney).Thetemporaldistancefrom1824topresentdaydullstheabilityof
readerstoapprehendwhatisgoingonvisually:wedonotevenknowsomeof
thecaricaturedpoliticians!Thusisituptoahistoriantofleshoutthemeaning
ofwhatwas,atthetime,asnappyvisual.Allthe‘dialogueballoons’(Buhle,
2005:24),mostlyofthebettors'comments,makethisaverybusycartoon.The
pointisthatevenwiththe"busy"verbalaids,thedecontextualizedsatiricaland
ironicelementsarebasicallylost.
Therearesignificantworldevents,suchastheUSinvolvementinVietnam,
thatarerelativelyfreshinpeople'smemories,andyeteventhenuancedwitof
specificcartoonsfromtheVietnamerahasdulled.Wecanlookatexemplarsof
thepoliticalcartoonsofthe1960-70sintermsoftheirhybridizedtakesonsport
andwar.Forexample,politicalcartoonistKarlHubenthaldepictedtheUnited
Statesasagiganticbaseballpitcher("USPower"see:
http://www.bobstaake.com/karl/images/cartoon_guerilla.gif)effectively
stifledbytheNorthVietnamese–whoaredepictedasthecatcher("Guerrilla
tactics").Titlinghiscartoon“Reducedstrikezone,”heappearstoexpress
frustrationattheunevennessofthe"game"beingplayedbybothteams.Butthe
meaningisambiguous,muchliketheVietnamintervention.A1960sknowledgeable"reader"ofthiscartoonwouldhavetoknowaboutAmerican
baseball—includingthechargesofunethicaltacticsbyreducingthestrike
14
zone—andabouttheNorthVietnameseuseofguerrillatacticstoattemptto
eventheplayingfield—whichmany21stCenturyreadersmaynotknow.5
Asecondexample,begunduringtheVietnamConflict,GarryTrudeau's
Doonesburystripseries,anamalgamofthepolitical/editorialcartoonandthe
comicstrip,[re]producedthenationalemerginghorrorattheendlessnihilismof
theVietnamwar.Italsoreflectedagrowingbellicose,xenophobic,and,
ironically,tiredUnitedStatesculture.B.D,oneofthemaincharacters,‘...has
beenacollegefootballstar,Vietnamsoldier,third-stringproquarterback,
highway-patrolofficer,GulfWarreservist,footballcoach,andlastly,reactivated
reservistforthewarinIraq’(Lule,2007:77).
Occasionally,Trudeau'ssocialcommentarypushededitorstoeither"edit"
itoutofthepaperaltogether(thatis,banit:cf.,Trudeau,2007,p.91;Lamb,
2004)ortoresignittotheeditorialpage,markingit,insubstance,asa"strip
political"cartoon.ThefactthatDoonesburyisacomicstripmeansthat
...recurringcharacters,whomanaudienceisfamiliarwith,providea
muchdifferentopportunitytocommentonthewaranditseffectthan
single-paneleditorialcartoons.(Mello,2007:79)
Fromthe1970s,Doonesburyhasbeenacartoon"comic-strip"whosesocial
commentarywasmanifest.Itscreator'sinterpretationoftheVietnam,firstIraq,
andsecondIraqwarsbecamearunningsocialcommentaryintheUnitedStates
regardingUSinvolvementinincreasingly-frequent,ifnothighlyviolent,
bellicoseactionssuchasLebanon,Grenada,andPanamaduringtheReagan-era
1980s(cf.,Zinn,2005).
Newton(2007)suggeststhatTrudeauusesthefour-panelcomicstripin
suchawayastotella‘long-formstorywiththeshort-formpunchofacomic
strip’(p.83):
15
Thegraceofminimalvisualdetailandcarefullychosenwordsinvitesa
fusionofheartandmind,asynthesisofsimultaneousrecognition,
enlightenment,andempathy,ofaffirmedtruth,adeeprecognitionof
knowingbeyondlogicalargument,facts,orstatistics.(p.84)
Indeed,Doonesburyasawholeworkedtoovertlypoliticizethecomicstripform,
creatinganideologicalnewincongruitythatdirectlychallengedthedominant
pro-warrhetorics(cf.,Holsti,2011;Barker&Sabin,2012).
ThoughB.D.'s"footballmetaphors"andanalogiesrunthroughoutthe
lengthoftheDoonesburyseries,wehavechosenbutoneexemplarofthisform
(see:http://wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/Vietimages/Cartoons/cartoons.htm).In
thiscomic-strip,runon9December1970,Trudeauexploitsthevarying
rhetoricsoftheVietnaminvolvement:theso-called"dominoeffect,"where,
withoutintervention,Communismwouldtopplecountryaftercountryin
SoutheastAsia,the"totalvictory"referredtoisareferencetoNixon's
"OperationTotalVictory"whichsenttroopsintoCambodia.Thelayersof
meaning,subtlyreferencingalackoffullcommitmenttothewareffortby
celebratingafamiliarsportmetaphor"youneedelevenmenonthefield,"would
laterbeechoedinmanypro-warhawks,bothintheadministrationandinthe
public,sayingthatthemilitaryhadbeenhampered.Ironically,Trudeau'sown
ironyhadmorphedintopro-warrationale.
ItisinterestingtonotethatTrudeauhimselfhasdifferentiatedbetween
hisownpoliticalstanceandhisrecognitionoftheindividualswhoenactwar.
HisviewshavebeensummarizedbyNewton(2007:84):‘Cartoons...abstract
andrepresentapersonalwarwithinandapublicwaroftherealversusthe
political.’ThisechoofC.WrightMills'senseofthepersonalandthepolitical(cf.,
1959)isimbeddedinTrudeau'sownstatementthat‘...longtimereadersofthe
16
stripknowthatwhileI...bitterlyopposedtheVietnamWar,thestriphasnever
beenparticularlyantimilitary’(2007:87).Inotherwords,hesupportedthose
individualscaughtupinthegovernment'spolicies(privatewoes,publicissues),
whichhedecried.
Thesefewselecthistoricalexamplesdemonstratehowtimelyand
temporally-sensitivepoliticalcartoonsmaybe.Thatis,theyaredependent
uponnotonlyknowledgeofthesituationbutalsoonadeeper,experientiallybasedunderstandingofthesituation(which,unfortunately,canneverbeexactly
duplicatedbyhistorians,artists,novelists,orpoliticians).Theimmediacyofthe
cartoonreflectsuniqueexperience—a"youhadtobethere"sense.
TheWar(s)onTerror:2001-'Endless'
WhentheWorldTradeCenterTwinTowersinNewYorkCitywere
levelledinSeptember2001(cf.,Baudrillard,2002;Denzin,2002;Giroux,2002;
Richardson,2002),thisactofaggressionprovidedanopportunityforthenPresidentGeorgeW.Bushtodeclare,ratherdisingenuously,a"waronterror."6
Infact,thissingleeventmobilizedwesternindignationandanger—often
misguidedandmisdirected—sometimesevenagainstfellowvictimsofthe
violence(cf.,Bratich,2002;Kellner,2002a).Thevisual"facts"ofthedestruction
ofthetowers,thecountlessdeaths,andthevisiblerighteousindignationof
citizens,however,playedrepeatedlyonAmerican,British,andotherEnglishspeakingnewsmedia.Theeventproducedarhetoricthatseesawedbetween
'confused,angry,depressed,fullofgrief,notknowinghowtoact'kindsof
responses(Denzin,2002:5)andcallsforactionandretribution.
17
Ofcourse,thedisproportionatemediaresponse—includingthetypical
cartoonistresponsesofthiseventbeingan"untouchable"resultinginpre-verbal,
hushedresponses—workedasareinforcertotheimpressionthattheviolence
itselfwasmoreterriblethanviolenceinanyoneofanumberofplacesacrossthe
globe,beforeorsince.ThemacromessagefromwesternmediawasthatNorth
AmericanssufferedmorethananyothergroupofpeopleduetotheSeptember
11tragedy.TheOp-Edsectionsofnationalandlocalnewspapersdrew
responses,andthevisualsforthoseopinionsandeditorialsoftenplayedoutin
politicalcartoons.But,inkeepingwiththeuntouchabilityfactor,therewereno
sport-warcartoons.
Theeventof9-11wasnotcauseforageneralpoliticalcartoonwithits
accompanyingsensesofsatire,irony,orhumor:thiseventbecamea"taboo"
topic,notexploitedforhumourorirony—orbysportmetaphors,whichtend
towardthelightorthecomfortablydistant.7Thenatureoftheperceivedsocial
insultseemstohaveprovided,atleastforatimeinthemainstreampress,a
stronggatekeepingfunction(cf.,Lamb,2007).
Infact,Lamb(2004)discussesthisveryphenomenon,relatedtothe
September11TwinTowers'destruction:
SocialpolicypunditStephenHess...saidthattheSeptember11
tragedyleftAmericans,includingeditorialcartoonists,shaken,
andhedescribedthecartoonsintheweeksfollowingtheattacks
as"verydull."...[Cartoonist]MikeLuckovichagreed."After
September11,youjustcouldn'tusehumor,"Luckovichsaid."The
tragedywassoenormous,youcouldn'tbefunny...."(p.5)
Linkingtogetherlightertopics(suchassport)withthe9-11eventwaseven
moreunthinkable.
18
Therhetoricsurrounding9-11becameitsownspaceforcartoonsof
hushedregard,cartoonsthatreinforcedbringingpeopletogether,orthat
solemnlyreverencedtheheroesofthehorrificday.Luckovich'scartoon,"We've
reachedthetop,"(MikeLuckovich,AtlantaJournal-Constitution,13September
2001)8depictedsixuniformedfirstresponders,haloesaboveeachhead,atthe
gatesofheaven.AsRees(2005)pointsout,politicalcartoonists‘...couldn’t
seemtomakejokesaboutthatparticularelementoftheWaronTerrorism’(p.
32).
Thus,intheyearssincetheTwinTowers'destruction,popularculture
references—likemetaphoricalreferencestosport—simplywerenotusedby
politicalcartoonistsfortheircartoonsregarding"9-11".Linkingsportandthe
horrific,unimaginablenatureoftheWorldTradeCentertowers'collapsewas,
itself,unimaginable.Thecartoons,whentheywereused,wereatdifferenttimes
dense,serious,nostalgic,patriotic,nationalistic,angry,andreverential;butmost
"cartoons"werebasedinsaferealitiesorpathos.Thus,mostcartoonistsmade
noindividualstatement:theyworkedtoreinforcethestatusquo,collective
safety,andaparadoxicalnational"hush"—anon-critical"comingtogether"—
abouttheactualeventsof9-11.
Cartoonists—and,interestingly,comedians—regarded9-11asofflimits,
and,toalargeextent,stilldo.9Theincessantvisualrepetitionof,forexample,
theWorldTradeCentertowersbeingimpactedbyairplanes,isakintoavisual
"shouting"thatamplifiesthe(perceived)horrorandsacrednatureofthesubject
tothosedirectlyaffected(cf.,Baudrillard,2002).Thevideo-ificationofevents
likethisleadstoadisproportionatesenseoffear,vulnerability,andangst—
19
cartoonsbecameavehicleforpeopletobegintotrytoaffectivelydealwithwhat
hadhappened.
Theuseofnostalgia,reverie,orthereligiousorspiritual,forcartoonsis
reservedforthesublime,theindescribable,theineffable.Clearly,mostpolitical
cartoonistswerestaggeredbythedestructionof9-11.Responsesrangedfrom
sublimehorrorthatanygroupcouldhateNorthAmericanstotheshocking
realisationthatothers(e.g,theplanehijackerswhodrovetheplanesintothe
buildings)mightdisagreewiththeirmoralworldview,fromtheprivileged
suddenunderstandingthatallhumanbeingsarevulnerableintheworldtothe
knowledgethattheirgovernments'actionscouldresultincounter-actionsby
others.
IntheUnitedStates,therewasavirtualshut-downofallrangesof
discourse,evencartoonedvisualdiscourse,inthemainstreammedia,regarding
theantecedents,meaningsandresultanteffectsof9-11.Thisresponsewas
framedasthenationcomingtogetherinitsgrief.Complexthinking,
considerationoftheothers'pointofview,empathicefforts:allseemto
disappearinfavorofsimplistic,binaryandbifurcatedthinking.'You'reeither
withusoragainstusinthefightagainstterror',intonedPresidentBush('Bush
says',2001;'You'reeitherwith',2001).Indeed,manyreferencessincehave
pointedtothisunifiednationalresponsetothe9-11attacks(cf.,Denzin,2002;
Giroux,2002;Clough,2002;Rocha,2004;Conley,2010).Counter-hegemonic
voiceswereeffectivelysilenced—andnowheremoreprominentlythaninthe
mainstreampress.
Morerecently,however,theabstraction“WaronTerror",asithas
continuedtobenamedforyears,hasbecomerelativelyfairgameforpolitical
20
cartoonists,andsoweseemoresport-relatedcartoonartintheironicand
satiricaldisplaysofpoliticalcartoons.Examplesofthesemorecommonplaceor
staunchrenderingsofpoliticalcartoonsincludediscoursessurroundingthe
London2012OlympicsandtheBostonMarathonbombingin2013.Thesemay
playonsolidifiedculturalstereotypesandreflectthecartoonist'sownpolitical
positionings,ortheymaydemonstrateageneralennuiabouttheendlessnessof
continualandnormalizedconflict.
Itisimportanttorememberthatcartoonsrarelyconfrontthedominant;if
theyreflectanon-dominantstance,theyusuallydoitglancingly,byplantinga
seedofdoubtinthereader.Theireffectsarealsotheirprocess:theyaremeant
toentertainwhilepiquing.Thecourageoftheindividualcartoonist—andthe
waytheyconfront"commonsense"stereotypes—ofteniswhatisreflectedin
theirrenderings.Buttheirstealthisamodusoperandi:theyneedtosomehow
hookthereaderfirst,oftenwiththereader'sownassumptionsandvalues.For
example,inthecartoon"LondonOlympicbowling"byTerryWise10the
stereotypically-Semiticcharacter—perhapsconflatedwithanimaginedimageof
amemberofanAlQaedaterroristcell—isshownreleasing/bowlingacrude
bomb/bowlingball.Thiscartoonpromotesandreinforcesxenophobiaand
racisminthewayitcaricaturestheethnicityofthe"terrorist"—hisbeard,
sandals,thestereotypicalshapeofhisnose.AswithHubenthal’sbaseball
cartoonreferencing"Guerrillatactics,"the"other"of"LondonOlympicbowling"
isillustratedvia—literally—under-handedandatypicaltacticsofwarfare.
Furtherridiculeof"theenemy,"andthethreatof"terrorism"atLondon
2012,isachievedinaformofemasculation.IntheUK,bowlingisnot
consideredamainstreamcompetitivesport.Instead,bowlingisanactivity
21
associatedwitholdermembersofcommunities,peoplewhoaretypicallyviewed
asnon-athletic,weak,withdiminishingpotency.Again,thisplaysintoa
simplisticgenderbinarythatequatesvirilitywithaggressiveaction,and
weaknesswith'notplayingfair'.
AftertheBostonMarathonbombingin2013,cartoonistJohnColedepicted
atrim"UncleSam"11figure—itselfacartoon-basediconrepresentativeof
dominantUnitedStatesideologies—runningonahamsterwheelof“Terrorism,”
whosetreadsendlesslyrepeatedtheword"Threat"("Theterrormarathon,"
JohnCole,22April2013,http://billingsgazette.com/april-cartoonterrorism/image_62c4dcf1-4184-51e9-866c-e9e2b1fb86a7.html).Asa
commentaryontheendlessnessofBush’sdeclared"waronterror,"anda
recognitionofanyrealthreatsofterror,itsolidifiesapointofgrowingconcern
intheUnitedStatesandtherestoftheworld:whilecontinualwaris
unsustainable,vigilanceiscontinual.
Contextualizingthemotifofrunningandtheendlessnessofthistypeof
waristhefactoftheBostonMarathonbombing,whichtookplaceonlyaweek
before.Twelveyearsafter9-11,theshockofthisattackwasmitigatedbyitnot
beingthefirstattackonNorthAmericansoilinrecentmemory.Coleseemingly
hasnoanswers,but,in2013,chosetoengagereadersinathoughtful
questioningofwesterngeo-politicaltactics,and,possibly,someofthe
consequencesofthosetactics.
Likemanypoliticalcartoons,theimageandwordsposequestionstotheir
audienceandaskforreaderengagement.AscartoonistPeterKuperwrites,‘...I
haveconcludedthebestwaytogetpeople’sattentiononlifeanddeathissuesis
tousehumor’(2005:28)."Cartoons"are,defacto—becauseofthecaricatured
22
natureofthem—seenashumorous,despitetheiroften-sombresubjectmatter.
Theintegrationofirony,satire,andcurrenteventscanprovidehumorousand
thoughtfulwaysforreaderstoengagewith,confront,oppose,orsupportthe
abstractionsand,perhaps,particulars,ofwar.
Expandingtheframe
ClearlythereexistsavarietyofwaysthatcartoonsinprintorInternet
mediahave"worked"visually,toreflect,shape,ordiscussanation-state's
policiesregardingwar.Inthispaper,wehavediscussedtheuseofasport-war
metaphor,findingthathistorically,therelationshipofwartosportinpolitical
cartoonsespecially,hasactedasamitigatingforcetotheharshrealitiesofactual
war.Insomecases,thecartoonhasbeencreatedtohumorously—or"softly"—
enervatereaders'imaginationsaboutthepossibleoutcomesofviolentconflict;
inothercases,politicalcartoonshaveironicallytakenastanceeitherforor
againstaproposedwar;somecartoonshavesimplybeendrawnnostalgically
andpoignantlytotakeorreflectanation'spulse.12Mostofthecartoonswehave
discussedaremeanttoelicitemotionsandclarifyvalues.Theemotionselicited
mightinclude,forexample,humour,outrage,pathos,patriotism,ordistress.
Valuesclarificationsmaymeanthatreaderscomeawayfromthemediated
consumptionofacartoonreinforced,confused,orconflictedabouttheir
previously-heldbeliefsaboutwar,oracertainwar.
Whethercartoonists,ascitizenswithintheirowncountries,respondto
perceived‘nationalcrises’withsardonicwit,bitingsatire,oras‘government
propagandists’(Lamb,2004:102)largelydependsuponthecontext.However,
afteraperceivedcrisis,cartooniststypicallyreturntowhattheydobest:Joel
23
Pett(Lexington(KY)Herald-Leadercartoonist),inresponsetoGeorgeW.Bush's
admonitionto‘goabouttheirlivesasusual’said:‘Hewantedustoreturnto
whatwedo...andwhatIdoisattackBush’(citedinLamb,2004:5).
WefoundGarryTrudeau'sDoonesburystripparticularlyenlighteningin
ourdiscussionofsport-warmetaphors:whenaudiences"gettoknow,"for
example,B.D.inDoonesbury,theyempathizewithhim.Heishumanised.
InDoonesbury,B.D.loseshislegin2004Iraq.13Thisresultedingreat
dismayandangstfromtheDoonesburyreadership.Thecomicisimmediateand
visceral:B.D.ishelmeted(ashealwayswas),proneinamedi-vachelicopter,
withmedicsworkingonhim.Hisbloodpressureis90/60;hehassweat
tricklingoffhisface;"letmedomyjob,man,"oneofthemedicsshouts.Inthe
finalpanel,oneofthemedicssays"Notyourtime,bro."Finally,B.D.,forthe
veryfirsttimewithoutahelmet(Vietnam,football,Iraq),isshownwithhisleft
legamputatedabovetheknee,clearlyinshock.Trudeauisaskingreaderstofeel
conflicted,andtoseethehumanbeingwithinthepro-warrhetoric.
SincereadersofDoonesburymostlyderivefromtheUnitedStatesof
America,theirattitudestowardwarandconflictarguablymayaffecttheir
governments'policy.Unfortunately,itseems,cartoonsandsportalikeareoften
dismissedaspopularculture,asunimportantinmotivatingpeople'svalues.
Thisparadox—thatthesubjectmatterisbitingsocialcommentaryatthesame
timethatitisephemeralandeasily-dismissed—canundercuttheimpacts
cartoonsmayhaveonpolicymakers.Theirlogicsarenotoftentakenseriously,
butwithDoonesbury,malereaders(particularlyUSAveterans)couldidentify
withmanyofthedailydissonancesthatthecharactersexperienced.
24
Thoughweexaminegenderissuesmorespecificallyinwar-sportcartoons
inasubsequentpaper,itisnoteworthythatbothsportandwararehighly
masculinizedinstitutions—andthatcartooningisanalmost-exclusively-male
endeavour.Thelinkagesbetweenthesethreeinstitutionsareclearlyinfluenced
bygender,stereotypicalgenderperformances,and—particularlyinthecaseof
war—itstragicconsequences,whichoftenimpactdisproportionatelyonnoncombatants(cf.,Ormhaug,Meier,&Hernes,2009;Roy,1997;2004).
Finally:Eclecticlogics
Politicalcartoonsareusuallyintendedtomakeapoint,notsimplyto
amuse;theyarehistoricallycontextualized:thatis,visualandlanguage/image
andwordsworktogethertoinfluencethereader.Politicalcartoonsalsouse
satireandironyasdevices.Thisincreasestheirdependenceuponthecultural
competenceoftheirreaders.Notably,GarryTrudeauinDoonesburyusesmany
ofthesamedevicesandvaluesofpoliticalcartoons.Doonesbury,throughthe
years,hasbecomehistoricallycontextualized,inrealtime:readersfromthe
1960swouldhaveunderstoodthenuancesofthecharacters'involvement
duringtheVietnamWar.However,thecomicstripisnotintendedtobe
timeless;Doonesburyworksinthepresenttime,muchlikepoliticalcartoons.
Thoughthelinesareoftenquitesubtle,Doonesburyworked/worksthroughits
relianceonsatireandironytoengageandresonatewithreaderswellbeyond
theirconsumptionofthestrip.
Forapoliticalcartoon,thesharedculturalcapitalofreadersandartistmay
createaninteractiveeffect,throughthevisual,betweencartoonistandaudience.
Savvyreaderswillknowcontextsandnuancesthatthecartoonistdependsupon
25
tomaketheworktimelyandhard-hitting.But,concomitantly,bothvisualand
writtenmeaningscanbecomedistortedandwashedoutovertime.AsGarry
Trudeaumakesthepoint,‘comicswereonceanenormouslyinfluentialpartof
theculturalconversation,butnowit’sstreamingvideothat’saleadingedge....
thefieldobviouslyisn’tasrobustasitwaswhenIwasstartingout'(inKahn,
2014:¶2).
Inusingacomicstripforminpresenttime,Trudeauhasco-optedsomeof
thehard-hittingvaluesofpoliticalcartoonswhilealsogaininganempathetic,
engagedaudiencethatfollowshisstripasifitsrecurringcharacters(e.g.,B.D.,
MikeDoonesbury,Boopsie,ZonkerHarris,MarkSlackmeyer)areseeminglyreal
people.Clearlythiscontinualengagementwiththecomicstripprovidesavery
differentmotifforconveyingcurrenteventstoreaders,anditisaneffectivetool
forsharinglivedexperiences,attitudes,andvaluesaboutnations'involvement
inconflictsandwars.Arguably,Trudeau'sVietnamWar—accompaniedbythe
anti-wareffortandotherubiquitouspopularculture,likeHeller'sCatch22
(publishedin1961)—nudgedanti-warsentimenttowardsacriticalmass.
Wealsofoundthatthesport-warmetaphorhasbeenusedbypolitical
cartooniststopokefunatindividualswho"donotmeasureup,"reinforcinga
stereotypicalmachoviewofsportingculturethatcomingleswithasimilar
attitudewithinarmedforces,conflict,andwar.Aswell,sometopicscanbecome
temporally'taboo'inthemainstream.Forinstance,9/11eventsremainobjects
ofreverenceintheUSA,andarenoteasytargetsofmainstreamcartoonists.As
the'WaronTerror'hasbecomenormalisedwithinUKandUSAsocieties,gentle
reproofsandslightdigsarethemoretypical(seeKnight,“TVCarnage,”
http://media.cagle.com/218/2013/04/16/130381_125.gif)
26
TheKnight(16April,2013)cartoon,bymakingthestatement:'FACT:
NETWORK&CABLETVHAVESHOWNMORECARNAGEFROMTWOSPORTING
EVENTSOVERTHEPASTCOUPLEOFWEEKSTHANFROMOVERADECADEOF
WARCOVERAGEINTHEMID-EAST',criticizestelevisualreportage,including
thevisualizationofviolence,reflexivelyturningbackonmassmediaand
popularcultureitself.
Paradoxically,theveryephemeralityofpoliticalcartoons(withveryfew
exceptions,wheretheirimagesmayhaveentered,asiconicstructures,intothe
largermassifiedpopularculture)assignsthemtoastatuswheretheproblem
feelsassuaged.Byreading—andnoting—thedeftpoliticalcartoon,somehow
thereaderis"letoffthehook"(Johnson,2005).
Sowhichisit?Arepoliticalcartoonists(andtheirmediaoutlets)agents
for(gradual)change,orhavetheybecomeapartofasmoothlyfunctioning
system,actingaspressurerelievers,ascatharticdevicesofafunctionalsystem?
Theanswerisnotasclearasthequestionmayimply:itdependsonone's
epistemologicalstandpoint.Viewedonacase-by-casebasis,cartoonists'work
mayenlightenandshapereaders.Seenthroughafunctionalisttheoreticallens
thatattemptstoidentifydeterminant,causalrelationshipswithinlarger
structuresofsociety,cartoonsmayservetoperpetuateandreinforcethestatus
quo.Viewedthroughamorecriticallens,cartoonsmaybecomeavehiclefor
change,forindividualorgroupinsights,andforidentificationofsocialproblems,
includingwarandconflict.
Inthisway,somecartoonistscarryonatraditionofanti-hegemonic
writing.Theymayresistthedominant,usingsatireandhumourtomaketheir
pointsaswehaveshowninsomeofourexamples.But,theyoftentravelalonely
27
road—supportedbyeditorsinanincreasingly-homogeneousfield,andtheir
positionalitymaybethoughtfullycomparedwiththatofthemorally-conflicted
'embeddedjournalist'inwarzones(cf.,Pfau,etal.,2004;Inghilleri,2010).They
liveinatleasttwoworlds:therealityofcorporate,neoliberal-driven,for-profit
newsandtheworldoftheirownconsciences.Itisthisomnipresentpolitical
contextwhichmakescomplexthecriticalanalysisofsport-warcartoonart.In
thispaper,wehaveillustratedparticularculturalintricaciesandformations
throughafocusonthesport-warmetaphor.
References
Agamben,Giorgio.(1993)Thecomingcommunity.Minneapolis:Universityof
MinnesotaPress.
Anderson,Benedict.(1983)ImaginedCommunities.London:Verso.
Barker,Martin,andSabin,Roger.‘DoonesburydoesIraq’:GarryTrudeauand
thepoliticsofananti-warstrip.JournalofGraphicNovelsandComics3(2),
127-142.
Baudrillard,Jean.(2002)ThespiritofterrorismandRequiemforthetwin
towers(trans.ChrisTurner).London:Verso.
Becker,HowardS.(2014)WhataboutMozart?Whataboutmurder?:Reasoning
fromcases.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Bernheim,Laura.(2008)Tokenbroadtokeyplayer:Womensportswriters
begintoleveltheplayingfield.UnpublishedHonorsThesis,Ohio
University.
28
Bostdorff,DeniseM.(1987)MakinglightofJamesWatt:ABurkeanapproachto
theformandattitudeofpoliticalcartoons.TheQuarterlyJournalofSpeech
73(1),43
Bourdieu,Pierre.(1986)Theformsofcapital.InJohnRichardson(Ed.),
HandbookofTheoryandResearchfortheSociologyofEducation(pp.241258).NewYork:Greenwood.
Bratich,JackZ.(2002)Culturalstudies,immanentwar,everydaylife.Cultural
StudiesóCriticalMethodologies2(1),20-23.
Buhle,Paul.(2005)Learningfromthepoliticalcartoon.InMichaelDooleyand
StevenHeller(Eds.),TheEducationofacomicsartist:Visualnarrativesin
cartoons,graphicnovels,andbeyond(pp.24-27).NewYork:Allworth
Press.
'Bushsaysitistimeforaction'.(2001)http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06
/ret.bush.coalition/index.htmlRetrieved12October2015.
Carrier,David.(2000)Theaestheticsofcomics.UniversityPark,PA:The
PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.
Clough,PatriciaTicineto.(2002)PostspostSeptember11.CulturalStudies↔
CriticalMethodologies2(1),15-17.
Coakley,Jay,Hallinan,Chris,&McDonald,Brent.(2011)Sportsinsociety:
Sociologicalissuesandcontroversies.Sydney:TheMcGraw-HillCompanies.
Cohen,Kenneth.(2012).'Sportforgrownchildren':Americanpolitical
cartoons,1790-1850.InMikeHuggins&MikeO'Mahony(Eds.),Thevisual
insport(pp.215-232).London:Routledge.
Conley,DonovanS.(2010)ThejoysofvictimageinGeorgeW.Bush'sWarof
Totality.CulturalStudiesóCriticalMethodologies10(4),347-357.
29
Constanzo,M.(2002)"Onecan'tshakeoffthewomen":Imagesofsportand
genderinPunch,1901-10.TheInternationalJournaloftheHistoryofSport
19(1),31-56.
Denzin,NormanK.(1989)Interpretiveinteractionism.NewburyPark,CA:Sage
Publications.
Denzin,NormanK.(2002)CulturalstudiesinAmericaafterSeptember11,
2001.CulturalStudiesóCriticalMethodologies2(1),5-8.
Denzin,NormanK.(2008)SearchingforYellowstone:Race,gender,family,and
memoryinthepostmodernWest.WalnutCreek,CA:LeftCoastPress.
Denzin,NormanK.(2011)Custeroncanvas:RepresentingIndians,memory,and
violenceinthenewwest.WalnutCreek,CA:LeftCoastPress.
Durkheim,Emile.(1976[1915])Theelementaryformsofthereligiouslife
(JosephWardSwain,trans.).London:GeorgeAllen&UnwinLtd.
Edwards,JanisL.(2007)Drawingpoliticsinpinkandblue.PS:PoliticalScience
andPolitics40(2),249-253.
Eisner,Will.(2005[1985])Comicsandsequentialart:Principlesandpracticeof
theworld'smostpopularartform.Tamarac,FL:PoorhousePress.
ElRefaie,Elisabeth.(2009)Multiliteracies:Howreadersinterpretpolitical
cartoons.VisualCommunication8(2),181-205.
Faulkner,SandraL.(2009)Poetryasmethod:Reportingresearchthrough
verse.WalnutCreek,CA:LeftCoastPress.
Festinger,Leon.(1985[1957])Atheoryofcognitivedissonance.Stanford,CA:
StanfordUniversityPress.
30
Frimer,Yonatan.(2010)MazecartoonoftheAfghanistanhandoffbetween
PetraeusandMcCrystal.http://www.teamofmonkeys.com/press/pressrelease11.html
Giroux,HenryA.(2002)TerrorismandthefateofdemocracyafterSeptember
11.CulturalStudiesóCriticalMethodologies2(1),9-14.
Gramsci,Antonio.(1989[1971])SelectionsfromthePrisonNotebooksofAntonio
Gramsci(ed.&trans.,QuintinHoare&GeoffreyNowellSmith).NewYork:
InternationalPublishers.
Groensteen,Thierry.(2007[1999]).Thesystemofcomics(trans.,BartBeaty&
NickNguyen).Jackson,MS:UniversityPressofMississippi.ProQuest
ebrary.Web.1March2016.
Harvey,RobertC.(1996)Theartofthecomicbook:Anaesthetichistory.
Jackson,MS:UniversityPressofMississippi.
Howes,David.2005.Introduction:Empiresofthesenses.InDavidHowes(Ed.),
EmpireoftheSenses:TheSensualCultureReader(pp.1-17).Oxford:Berg.
Hallett,Jill,&Hallett,RichardW.(2012)MetaphorsandtopoiofH1N1(Swine
Flu)politicalcartoons:Across-culturalanalysis.InFrankBramlett(Ed.),
Linguisticsandthestudyofcomics(pp.59-91).NewYork:Palgrave
Macmillan.
Harper,Douglas.(2005)What'snewvisually?InNormanK.Denzin&YvonnaS.
Lincoln(Eds.),TheSagehandbookofqualitativeresearch(3rdEd.)(pp.747762).ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,Inc.
Holsti,OleR.(2011)AmericanpublicopinionontheIraqWar.AnnArbor,MI:
UniversityofMichiganPress.
31
Inghilleri,Moira.(2010)"Youdon'tmakewarwithoutknowingwhy":The
decisiontointerpretinIraq.TheTranslator16(2),175-196.
Jansen,S.C.,&Sabo,Donald.(1994)Thesport/warmetaphor:hegemonic
masculinity,thePersianGulfWar,andthenewworldorder.Sociologyof
SportJournal11(1),1-17.
Johnson,AlanG.(2006)Privilege,power,anddifference(2ndEd.).Boston:
McGraw-Hill.
Kahn,JosephP.(2014)GarryTrudeauplanshiatusfromdaily‘Doonesbury’.
TheBostonGlobe(12February).https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/
2014/02/12/garry-trudeau-will-suspend-daily-doonesbury-strip-focusshow/v0896Nrni2MgL8EHQRNwkM/story.htmlRetrieved4March2016.
Kellner,Douglas.(2002a)September11,terrorism,andblowback.Cultural
StudiesóCriticalMethodologies2(1),27-39.
Kellner,Douglas.(2002b)September11,socialtheoryanddemocraticpolitics.
Theory,Culture&Society19(4),147-159.
Kian,Edward(Ted)M.,Fink,JanetS.,&Hardin,Marie.(2011)Examiningthe
impactofjournalists'genderinonlineandnewspapertennisarticles.
WomeninSport&PhysicalActivityJournal,20(2),3-21.
King,Samantha.(2008)Offensivelines:Sport-statesynergyinaneraof
perpetualwar.CulturalStudies<=>CriticalMethodologies8(4),527-539.
Kuper,Peter.(2005).LaunchingWorldWar3.InMichaelDooleyandSteven
Heller(Eds.),TheEducationofacomicsartist:Visualnarrativesincartoons,
graphicnovels,andbeyond(pp.28-31).NewYork:AllworthPress.
Laclau,Ernesto,&Mouffe,Chantal.(1985).Hegemonyandsocialiststrategy:
Towardsaradicaldemocraticpolitics.London:Verso.
32
Lamb,Chris.(2004)Drawntoextremes:Theuseandabuseofeditorialcartoons.
NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
Lamb,Chris.(2007)Drawingpower.JournalismStudies8(5):715-729.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616700701504666 Retrieved 15 February
2016.
Lamb, Chris, & Long, Mark. (2014) Drawing fire: Editorial cartoons in the
War on Terror. Journalism History 40(20: 85-97.
Lent,JohnA.(2010)Theglobalcartooninglabourforce:Itsproblemsand
copingmechanisms.WorkOrganisation,LabourandGlobalisation4(2),
160-172.
Leonard,David.(2009[2006]).Anuntappedfield:Exploringtheworldofvirtual
sportsgaming.InArthurA.RaneyandBryantJennings(Eds.),Handbookof
sportsmedia(pp.426-441).Taylor&Francise-Library.
Lule,Jack.(2007)OnDoonesbury.CriticalStudiesinMediaCommunication
24(1),77.
Maguire,Joseph,Poulton,Emma,&Possamai,Catherine.(1999a)WeltkriegIII:
MediacoverageofEnglandversusGermaninEuro96.JournalofSport&
SocialIssues23(4),439-454.
Maguire,Joseph,Poulton,Emma,&Possamai,Catherine.(1999b)Thewarof
thewords?:IdentitypoliticsinAnglo-GermanpresscoverageofEuro96.
EuropeanJournalofCommunication14(1),61-89.
Marín-Arrese,JuanaI.(2008)Cognitionandcultureinpoliticalcartoons.
InterculturalPragmatics5-1,1–18.
33
Mello,W.Bradford.(2007)Politicalcartooninginthe21stcentury:Achanging
anddynamicfuture.CriticalStudiesinMediaCommunication24(1),78-80.
Mills,C.Wright.(1959)Thesociologicalimagination.Oxford:Oxford
UniversityPress.
Morgan,Winifred.(1988)AnAmericanIcon:BrotherJonathanandAmerican
Identity.Newark,DE:UniversityofDelawarePress.
Newton,JulianneH.(2007)Trudeaudrawstruth.CriticalStudiesinMedia
Communication24(1),81-85.
Ormhaug,Christin,withMeier,Patrick,&Hernes,Helga.(2009)Armedconflict
deathsdisaggregatedbygender.PRIOPaper.Oslo:InternationalPeace
ResearchInstitute.
Pelias,RonaldJ.(2011)Leaning:apoeticsofpersonalrelations.WalnutCreek,
CA:LeftCoastPress.
Pfau,Michael,Haigh,Michel,Gettle,Mitchell,Donnelly,Michael,Scott,Gregory,
Warr,Dana,&Wittenberg,Elaine.(2004)Embeddingjournalistsin
militarycombatunits:Impactonnewspaperstoryframesandtone.
Journalism&MassCommunicationQuarterly81(1),74-88.
Pink,Sarah.(2007)Doingvisualethnography(2ndEd.).London:Sage
Publications.
Richardson,Laurel.(2002)Smallworld.CulturalStudiesóCritical
Methodologies2(1),24-26.
Richardson,Laurel.(2013)Afterafall:Asociomedicalsojourn.WalnutCreek,
CA:LeftCoastPress.
34
Rocha,MarioAlberto.(2004)UndoingtheblindfoldofOldGlory:Observations
on9/11andtheWaronTerrorismfromLockdownUSA.CulturalStudies
óCriticalMethodologies4(2),143-151.
Roy,Arundhati.(1997)TheGodofsmallthings.NewYork:HarperPerennial.
Roy,Arundhati.(2004)Anordinaryperson'sguidetoempire.Cambridge,MA:
SouthEndPress.
Rudd,PhilipW.(2004)Weaponsofmassdestruction:Theunsharedreferents
ofBush'srhetoric.Pragmatics14(4),499-525.
Scodari,Christine.(1993)OperationDesertStormas“Wargames”:Sport,war,
andmediaintertextuality.TheJournalofAmericanCulture16(1),1-5.
Sneed,Tierney.(2013)(11September).After9/11,HowWeLearnedtoLaugh
Again:Thosedeclaringtheendofironywerequicklyprovedwrong.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/11/after-911-how-welearned-to-laugh-againAccessed23/09/14
Staake,Bob.(2013).KarlHubenthal.http://www.bobstaake.com/karl
/hubenthal_importance.htmlAccessed24/08/13
Sullivan,John.(1983)TaxingtheMedhurst/DeSousataxonomy:Anotherlook
atpoliticalcartoons.Paperdeliveredatthe69thAnnualMeetingofthe
SpeechCommunicationAssociation(Washington,D.C.),citedinBostdorff,
1987.
Todd,RichardWatson.(2012).CreatinghumorinGaryLarson'sFarSide
cartoonsusinginterpersonalandtextualmetafunctions.InFrankBramlett
(Ed.),Linguisticsandthestudyofcomics(pp.37-58).NewYork:Palgrave
Macmillan.
35
Trudeau,Garry.(2007)Deathandpoliticsonthefunnypages:GarryTrudeau
addressesAmericannewspapereditors.CriticalStudiesinMedia
Communication24(1),86-92.
Tzankova,Veronika,andSchiphorst,Thecla.(2012).Constructingmeaning:
VerbalizingtheunspeakableinTurkishpoliticalcartoons.InFrank
Bramlett(Ed.),Linguisticsandthestudyofcomics(pp.119-141).New
York:PalgraveMacmillan.
Ulmer,Gregory.(1989)Teletheory:Grammologyintheageofvideo.NewYork:
Routledge.
Williams,Raymond.(1974).Television:Technologyandculturalform.London:
Fontana/Collins.
Williams,Raymond.(1977)Marxismandliterature,Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press.
'You'reeitherwithusoragainstus'.(2001)CNN.com
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.attack.on.terror/Retrieved9
March2016.
Zinn,Howard.(2005)Apeople'shistoryoftheUnitedStates:1492-present.New
York:HarperPerennial.
36
1MalesdominateinbothproducingandconsumingpoliticalcartoonartinbothEnglishandnon-
English-speakingcultures(seeBernheim,2008;Lent,2010;Kian,Fink,&Hardin,2011).
2Inourdiscussionofcontemporarycartoons,wespeculatethatthelackofexemplarsmay
reflectahorror,exacerbatedbya"shouting"ofthevisual,thatissimplytoosensitivetojoke
about.Sometimes,however,thepoliticalcartoonismeanttosignifya“collectiveeffervescence”
(cf.,Durkheim,1976[1915])—ofhorror,sorrow,angst,orotherdominantcollectively-perceived
feelingsorattitudes.Examplesmightincludecartoonsthatcelebratetheendingofadrawn-out
war,thatsimplystate"RIP"toabelovedfigure'spassing,orthatservetoeffectivelybring
imaginedcommunities(e.g.,Agamben,1993;Anderson,1983)togetheroverasignificantevent
like9-11,theUK7/7Londonbombings,ortheBostonMarathonbombing.Thoughthesetypes
ofcartoonsre-instantiatetheideologythatmembersofanationorcollectiveareall,in
fundamentalways,alike,theyalsoacttoreinforcethesacrednatureandtaboospacethattheir
topicsmaysignify.Theyactasreinforcersofthetaboo,and,inthesecollectivecases,rarely
advanceunderstandingorany‘perspectivebyincongruity’(Bostdorff,1987:45).Theirpurpose
ismoresublime:to"express"theinexpressible.
3Insomeways,thisreadingisnotunlikeFestinger's(1985[1957])conceptof
"cognitivedissonance,"wherebyinitialdifferenceisresolvedbytheagent.
4Agenerousalternate"reading"ofthiscartoonmightseethehandoffasthebeginningofa
fumble,alossofpossessionbytheoffensiveteam.
5Thisso-called“unethical”tacticisironic,especiallytoNorthAmericanswhorememberthatthe
AmericanRevolutionwasinlargepartwonbytheuseofguerrillatactics.WhileBritish
Redcoatsstoodinformation,theAmericaninsurgentshidbehindtrees,bushesandrocks,taking
shotswhenevertheycould.
6Wesay"disingenuously"because,asmanycriticshavepointedout,thedeclarationofwar
againstanabstraction—inthiscase,"terror"—isillogicalintheway"war"hadbeenconceived
priortothismoment.Thedeclaration,however,workedtonaturalisenationalism,patriotism,
andcreatedalogicsofitsownthatallowedforcounter-measuresagainstanypeoplethatits
instigatorsmightwanttoname.Thus,basedonthislogic,Bushenteredintoamilitaryaction
withinIraq—andagainstSaddamHusseinparticularly—withathinly-veiledexcuseofseeking
WeaponsofMassDestruction.Thisclaimitselfwasalsodisingenuous,ashasbeen
demonstratedelsewhere(e.g.,Kellner,2002b;Rudd,2004).
7Thoughtherehavebeenafewnewspapercontentanalysesofsport-relatedeventsorpeople
(e.g.,the1996Eurofootballchampionships(MaguirePoulton,&Possomai,1999a,1999b),the
paucityofspecificallysport-warcartoons,toourknowledge,hasresultedinnocontentanalyses
thusfar.
8See:https://www.google.co.uk/search?sa=G&hl=enGB&q=9+11+political+cartoons&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSlwEJZhBm2Bj6EHAaiwELEKjU2AQa
BAgDCAoMCxCwjKcIGmIKYAgDEiitCIwDQn6Aa4IlgP4CZIElAyTA8orhjjiOcU2zz28Oc0ruD3jOcwrGjCiDhgn065x1_1mnUDAFJw8NMxceUiCQNOPHANhydMbyUm6_1Y8ygLMTtfm1x6zNuUgAwwLEI6u_1ggaCgoICAESBIyaq_1MM&ved=0a
hUKEwjN4MP83pbOAhUsDcAKHQlMBREQwg4IGygA&biw=1366&bih=635
9Thereareafewexceptions,atleastincomedy.AccordingtoSneed(2013):"Notevery9/11themedjokelandedhowever.GilbertGottfriedbombedwithhis,givenataroastafewweeks
after.'IhaveaflighttoCalifornia,'itwent.'Ican'tgetadirectflight—theysaidtheyhavetostop
attheEmpireStateBuildingfirst.'Itwasmetwithcricketsanda'toosoon.'"Thus,Gottfried
demonstratesthatsomesubjectareas—actualdeathsofpeoplewevalorize—are"taboo."They
areonlytaboo,however,tothedominantoraffectedgroup—nottothosesubordinategroup
memberswhodieatthehandsofthedominant.
10Duringthetimetakentowritethispaperthe“LondonOlympicBowling”cartoonhas
disappearedfromtheInternet.Wedonotknowwhythisisthecase,butweareawareofthe
conditionsthatnowfacecartoonistsposttheCharlieHebdoattack.
11"UncleSam"asaniconthat"alwaysreferredprimarilytothegovernmentoftheUnitedStates
ratherthanthenationasawhole"(Morgan,1988,p.33)has,inturns,reflectedtotheworlda
benevolent,welcomingspirit;amalignedcollective,attackedbyforcesofevil(e.g.,PearlHarbor,
9-11);and,morerecently,aninvasive,corrosive,hegemonic,imperialistsuperpower.Apossible
37
reasonforthismorphingofsuchaniconmaybetheovertandexplicitmergingofcorporateand
governmentalinterestsintherecenthistoryoftheUnitedStates.
12Warcartoonswithoutsportthemes,likethoseofHansvonStengelandKarl
FrederickWidemanninWorldWarIandBillMauldininWorldWarII(cf.,Lamb,
2007,pp.723-724),reflectthistrend.
13See:
https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2010/10/25/bdlosesleg_custom.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=13081518
4&h=316&w=1000&tbnid=QJio5THTu5FjPM&tbnh=126&tbnw=400&usg=__Tx_Jmk5Dm35674p
t-earj-IJWhk=&hl=en-GB&docid=TviCYYx6U8wSLM