Art in Propaganda?

The seventeenth century marked an important shift in history. Settlers from England had reached Plymouth Rock, and were beginning to colonize what would one day become the superpower of a global economy. The East India Trading Company had just put footholds in distant lands, and access to foreign cultures and goods was increasing dramatically. Protestantism was growing rapidly in European countries and spreading across borders. The increasing numbers of this branch of Christianity, combined with the heightened contact with the rest of the world, pushed the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Catholic Church to combine and form a specialty school in 1622. The "College of the Propaganda" was formed to train missionaries to spread Catholic doctrine and increase attendance to the the church. This is where the term "propaganda" was officially coined.

The College of the Propaganda most likely believed they had righteous intentions, but in today's society the term propaganda has negative connotations. This word usually brings to mind images of brain-washing, deceit, and suppression. More relevantly to this blog, propaganda often brings to mind "poster art" like Rosie the Riveter:

Artist J. Howard Miller was commissioned to create this poster in 1942
by the Westinghouse Company's War Production Coordinating Committee.

What is the relationship between artists and politics in relation to propaganda? Is there an inherent difference between an artist who creates landscape paintings and one that creates posters like Rosie the Riveter?

The definition of propaganda varies from one source to the next, but most agree that it is "... a form of communication that attempts to influence the behavior of people by affecting their perceptions, attitudes and opinions" (http://www.answers.com/topic/propaganda-uses-and-psychology). One could argue that both paintings and propaganda posters attempt to convey a message to a perceived audience by "affecting their perceptions, attitudes and opinions." The artist who creates a still-life painting employs the same elements of art that a 1950s Soviet poster artist does: line, color, texture, form, space, value, and shape. So, where do we draw the line between art used as "brainwashing" and a "pure expression" of art?

It seems the main difference comes in the "attempts to influence the behavior of people," or the use of power and control, that propaganda pieces employ. A propaganda poster is trying to incite a particular action or belief in all members of the public, while art is an attempt on the part of the artist to convey their own beliefs or views. In simple black-and-white terms, propaganda's aim is control and suppression while art's aim is enlightenment and self-expression.

The line separating the two is more easily recognized when a piece is commissioned by a second party. Artists who are hired by another individual or company are being used as tools to promote a certain image for the second party. However, even this isn't a perfect definition. Consider commissioned portraits; could these be considered propaganda? Though the artist will want to portray the individual they are painting in a flattering light in order to receive payment, the artist will try to do this while keeping the features of the subject as realistic as possible. Is this more truth or more lie?

The example of the portrait artist falls in a grey area. However, there are clearer examples of propaganda, and they are often linked to political agendas.

Soviet propaganda poster by unknown artist.
Translation: "The People and Army are One!"

Political parties have used art as a tool for propaganda for centuries. This was a particularly effective tool where country's population was illiterate or only semi-literate. The power of pictures was recognized and taken advantage of, particularly during wartime, to increase patriotism and compliance to the state. Images, however, are rarely the only device used by visual propaganda. Poster art generally uses a combination of key trigger words, images, and associations to create the most effective campaign. The Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA), established in 1936, sites seven standard propaganda techniques:

• Bandwagon: pretty self-explanatory; this technique promotes the importance or veracity of a concept by making the audience believe the majority is acting or thinking in a certain way.
• Card-stacking: the selective omission of certain information.
• Glittering Generalities: the use of vague concepts that are generally seen as "good" and applying them to them to the cause at hand; examples include "democracy," "patriotism," "brotherhood," and "freedom."
• Name-calling: essentially the opposite of glittering generalities, this technique overrides a person's rational thought by employing negative emotional trigger words, such as "terrorist."
• Plain Folks: the attempt to make an individual or group seem like one of the majority, or as promoting the needs of a certain group.
• Testimonial: citing the support of a well-known and respected individual.
• Transfer: taking the the reputation of one concept, group, or person and applying it to another. William Jennings Bryan did this in 1896 when he compared Jesus to labor unions: "You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold!"

Other techniques that have been suggested as propaganda techniques over the years also include: inducing fear, asserting an opinion as truth, presenting the desired action as the lesser of two evils, pinpointing one specific person or group as "the enemy," and oversimplifying a situation (often through the use of stereotypes.) Many of these techniques employ the written word, but others can be applied through the use of images and symbols alone or in conjunction with words. Consider a poster created to promote Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign:

A poster from Obama's 2008 election campaign
employs the use of glittering generalities

The stylized picture shows Obama gazing above the viewer and uses the three colors of the American flag: red, white, and blue. This would likely cause the viewer to associate this image with patriotism and foresight: good qualities in a leader. This, combined with the single word "hope" at the bottom of the poster, causes the audience to associate Obama with loyalty to America, planning, and a better future, even though poster reveals nothing about the man's actual policies or personality.

What is interesting about the Obama poster shown above is that it was not originally commissioned by a second party. The artist, Frank Sheppard Fairy, created the image of his own volition, and was only later endorsed by the official Obama presidential campaign.

While there is a difference between art and propaganda, the examples of the portrait artist and of the  poster above shows that it's important to remember that visual propaganda employ artists. The distinction between an artist's work that is meant to make people think and an artist's work that is meant to make people think in a certain way is often not black-and-white. Truth is subjective, and artists can be swayed by opposing opinions.