Reading WW2 Propaganda Posters: Silence
December 17, 2009
So, I seem to have pissed off some militant WW2 buff-wads (like Fred) with my queries in the post below. Let’s see if I can piss off some more of them!
This next set of American WW2 proraganda posters focuses on SILENCE as patriotic, which I think is veeeeery interesting!
I’m interested here in how quiet conformity is always preferred during wartime. Let me first assure you that I get the literal message of these posters that civilians and soldiers should not publicize strategic military information, and this message is even more clearly outlined in this historical document. It makes sense because there were and still are consequences to information-sharing. That’s why it’s a crime. That’s why there are spies. That’s why there are entire information-gathering organizations on all sides of every war.
But I’m not interested in the literal message, eh hem, Fred. I’m interested in how it is still seen as patriotic to not question, not dissent. I’m concerned about this trend even and especially when it comes from the left. However, not all lefties are staying quiet about what is now the Obama Administration’s war in Afghanistan. Here’s a great article that questions the “justice” of said war. Writing about the war in Afghanistan, the author states, “the use of arms already has produced evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated, and will almost certainly continue to do so.” I agree.
I’m also interested in looking at history and thinking critically about history in an attempt to not repeat mistakes. So, here’s my question: how does the message of historical wartime propaganda urging civilians and soldiers alike to “be quiet” or “not dissent” still resonate today?
Still curious,
Spring
December 17, 2009 at 11:22 am
You should read Elizabeth Bishop’s poem “Roosters” (you can just google it). Part of the meaning behind it is the context of WWII that she was dealing with at the time, and how everyone was expected to not just be quiet but stick to their assigned roles.
But on the subject of keeping quiet during wartime, the most interesting thing to me is that this wouldn’t happen in very small societies (like, hunter-gatherer or that kind of thing) because it wouldn’t HAVE to; people would probably just band together anyway. In other words, I think it’s a product of a large society, larger than our social circles. There are a lot of things that can be traced to the same thing but punishing dissent during wartime and even the extreme of fascism/jingoism can be traced to that. It’s like when someone points out something bad about your family and everyone in the family binds together because of it; if one person doesn’t – if one person says, “actually, that’s true” – even if it is true, you feel more betrayed by the dissenter than by the person who said it in the first place.
December 17, 2009 at 3:57 pm
“One of the great American tragedies is to have participated in a just war.” –Kurt Vonnegut
December 17, 2009 at 4:40 pm
oh, miz h…that’s why i love the bookish types.
December 17, 2009 at 5:31 pm
These posters are fascinating! I think the yellow ribbon car stickers with the “Support the Troops” message on them are a way of silencing dissent today. Hell, there are tons of ways dissent has been squelched.
Yet . . . I can’t help but really believe that history will always side with the war dissenters. It seems to me that many writers are archiving a history of American dissent, and bringing back the Vietnam chant “Dissent is American.”
December 17, 2009 at 6:38 pm
I love WWII propaganda art (both ally and axis). And Russian Cold War propaganda too–now there’s some cool stuff.
Anyway, here’s a classic WWII “silence” propaganda poster that everyone loves:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2025/2146147009_6145c336ba.jpg
December 17, 2009 at 7:06 pm
daniel- yes! and how about this one: http://byteboy.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/wwii_vd-poster.jpg
stay tuned for next week’s discussion about images of women in ww2 propaganda!
December 18, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
Do you know or care that you’re ENTIRELY misreading these posters? These posters are specifically meant to discourage anyone (military or civilian) from disclosing information that could help the enemy.
For example, sailors on leave were explicitly prohibited from telling people on shore leave which ship they were from during WW2.
These posters are certainly open to interpretation, but the INTENT behind these posters is incredibly clear, it’s not a mystery. The posters weren’t created to stifle dissent. That’s an entirely invalid interpretation.
BTW, I’m not a “buff-wad” or a militant anything. I’ve never served in the armed forces, nor do I ever plan to. Don’t own a gun.
Your “analysis” is in Emily Latella territory. If you see a spike in your traffic, it’s because my friends and I are laughing at your complete (and apparently willful) ignorance of facts that are available to schoolchildren.
Next week: “Is Rosie the Riveter really a dyke archetype intended to promote lesbianism during a time when women were forced to take on ‘men’s jobs’ during WW2?”
If anyone here wants to read facts about WW2 propaganda, as opposed to masturbatory nonsense, here’s a good start:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_propaganda_during_World_War_II
December 18, 2009 at 7:01 pm
“These posters are certainly open to interpretation, but the INTENT behind these posters is incredibly clear, it’s not a mystery. The posters weren’t created to stifle dissent. That’s an entirely invalid interpretation.”
this is where we differ, fred. as rhetoric and composition teachers, spring and i (along with most of our other readers) believe that it is important to read into these posters’ cultural significance, beyond whatever their creators’ purported their intention to be. this is not “masturbatory nonsense” as you so rudely put it. it is the study of rhetoric, argumentation, history, culture, and art.
December 18, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Apparently, Fred (and his friends) need to learn how to read: But I’m not interested in the literal message, eh hem, Fred. I’m interested in how it is still seen as patriotic to not question, not dissent.
December 18, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Where in these posters does it suggest that it’s “patriotic to not question, not dissent?”
Nowhere.
If you bothered to Google “world war 2 propaganda posters,” you’d find many images that depict the Axis as being very anti-freedom (religion, expression, etc.) Freedom from fear and freedom of expression were enshrined in American propaganda.
“Careless talk” does not equal dissent in the context of WW2 posters – it refers explicitly to discussing those issues that would be of interest to “enemies,” both foreign and domestic.
The sad cocker spaniel, Navy scarf and Gold Star would have told contemporary readers of the poster that the dog’s master died because someone leaked classified information. If you want to illustrate a point about dissent during wartime, you are using the wrong images.
The Allies’ propaganda highlighted the differences between their side and the Axis by presenting them as the literal defilers of Western culture:
http://www.guidespot.com/guides/world_war_ii_posters
I know you’re trying to draw some equation between WW2 and our current wars using these posters, but you cannot. Your efforts to do so make you look, well, solipsistic.
December 18, 2009 at 3:58 pm
thank you for the wikipedia and general google links, fred. we have already viewed them and are very familiar with WWII history. our problem is that you are not reading the original entry by spring thoroughly enough. please go back and re-read, follow her links, and realize how, in your critiques of her entries, you are saying things that she is (and we regular readers are) already aware of. you say, “freedom from fear and freedom of expression were enshrined in american propaganda,” but were they? when someone tells you to shut your trap in the name of freedom of expression, do you do so without question?
spring chose to work with the loose lips and cocker spaniel posters because they do not include messages of the preciousness of freedom of expression. perhaps you do not agree with her choices, but maybe you can think again about why she might have chosen them to start this part of the conversation.
December 18, 2009 at 3:35 pm
fred, you are wasting our time and are obviously a troll. fly away, troll!
December 18, 2009 at 3:48 pm
If you don’t like it, then skip past my name if my words are so offensive. I’ll cop to trolling, but I’ve addressed (and thoroughly debunked) the premise of these blog posts.
I’ll continue to do so as long as comments are open. It’s fun watching you fail to respond to any of the points I’ve made and instead rely on zingers like “militant buff-wads.”
December 18, 2009 at 4:14 pm
“you say, ‘freedom from fear and freedom of expression were enshrined in american propaganda,’ but were they?”
Yes, child, they were. Here are just two examples:
http://www.thewisdomjournal.com/Blog/wp-includes/images/fourfreedoms.jpg
http://poster-posters.com/world-war-ii/propaganda/thisenemy.html
“American” traits of outspokenness, rebelliousness and mistrust of authority are also enshrined in many of wartime films. Every studio film made during this period featured characters who embodied some or all of these traits.
December 18, 2009 at 6:49 pm
please to not refer to me as “child.” thank you.
i have seen those two posters you linked to. yes, they do promote the american value of freedom of expression. however, if you “read between the lines,” you will notice what “freedom” is supposed to mean: norman rockwell images of white middle or working class people, christianity, the nuclear family, etc.
so, we have the freedom from want and fear and the freedom to express ourselves publicly and to express our religion by practicing it.
in what ways do these posters suggest that christianity is the norm or that white working class america is the normal lifestyle? a nazi stabbing the bible suggests that our enemies detest religion, freedom of religion, etc. four images of rockwell america show that we are fighting wwii to preserve rockwell’s and the poster maker’s notion of the american way.
the american way.
if there is an american way, then that “way” is where we can locate conformity or pressure to conform. that american way is american nationalism; it implies something to conform to or to dissent against.
this brings us around to spring’s point. silence and consent are linked; keeping mum might keep us safe, but it also might be a measure of control denying us freedom of expression or of religion.
December 18, 2009 at 3:41 pm
check this out, spring: http://www.army.com/news/item/528
“This isn’t censorship,” Pate said about the OPSEC plan he had a key role in devising. “It’s about striking a balance between freedom of expression and protecting sensitive military information.”
In World War II and Korea, it took a long time for information to move from the battlefield to the public, Schoomaker says at the beginning of his video. Today with the Worldwide Web, it’s immediate with the push of a button.
December 19, 2009 at 8:21 am
Wow, you kids are teachers? I find that sad and mildly amusing at the same time. Sad, because you don’t seem capable of critical thought, and amusing because your solipsism makes you think that you’re looking deeply into the issues at hand.
In fact, your rejection of the *stated intent* behind the creation of these images in an effort to open them up to your specific interpretation could be considered the very definition of solipsism. You gamely, but lamely attempt to transform fact into theory.
I don’t need to read between the lines of Rockwell’s Four Freedoms because I can look at Rockwell’s words, journals, recordings and other material that probes the symbols in his work. Your incredibly superficial observation that his models are largely white and Christian is accurate, but it also exposes your willful ignorance. Much of Rockwell’s work was published in the Saturday Evening Post, the whitest and most mainstream of publications.
Rockwell’s paintings were inspired by a speech FDR gave on 1/6/41 called “The Four Freedoms.” The fact that you don’t know that makes me feel sorry for you, since you’re determined to rewrite their intent.
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/ralph/workbook/ralprs36b.htm
As even kids know, media reflects society. 1940s America had a racist, sexist culture that did not celebrate its diversity — why would you expect to see different ethnicities/genders featured in “Four Freedoms?” You may as well ask the other black theatergoers how they felt when Lincoln was assassinated. Oh, wait a minute! It was the 1860s, so black people didn’t go to the theater with presidents.
And to this point:
“if there is an american way, then that “way” is where we can locate conformity or pressure to conform. that american way is american nationalism; it implies something to conform to or to dissent against.”
No, this is wrong, child. The American Way in the 1940s was an antidote to the Axis’ fascism. See the text of FDR’s speech; don’t just take my word for it. In the context of these posters, the US defines and celebrates its freedoms to encourage citizens to believe that they’re facing an existential threat (the Axis).
“this brings us around to spring’s point. silence and consent are linked; keeping mum might keep us safe, but it also might be a measure of control denying us freedom of expression or of religion.”
Again, this is incorrect. The posters that promoted “silence” explicitly refer to Intelligence, not Dissent. You can continue to suggest otherwise, but it’s intellectually dishonest and self-gratifying (hence the use of the word “masturbatory”).
Using your logic, I could say that “Titanic” was really about the struggle between economic classes, discrimination against immigrants and the lax regulation of ocean liners.
December 19, 2009 at 10:04 am
Hi Fred,
Pardon my boldness, but I think you are stuck in the trap of black and white thinking. It’s a hard concept to grasp, but I truly believe it’s worth the time and patience to see the complexity and multiplicity surrounding each and every piece of art and literature. That’s what we think, and that’s kinda what we do for a living. And we actually enjoy thinking and talking about these things. And we do it without resorting to paternalistic belittlements. Yay us!
As I said before, I am not interested in the explicit INTENT of WW2 propaganda. I know what that was. It was to further a winning war strategy. However, I am interested in the (possibly) unintended effect on the American culture after these posters no longer served their intended purpose but were still around and still very meaningful and even beloved to many, many Americans. I am interested and curious about how these posters were part of a MUCH larger culture of quiet conformity that continued into the 1950s and beyond.
I’m sure you’ve read Allen Ginsberg’s incredible poem HOWL. He first performed it in 1955 at Six Gallery in San Francisco. One of his peers who attended that evening was Michael McClure, who said of the event: “Ginsberg read on to the end of the poem, which left us standing in wonder, or cheering and wondering, but knowing at the deepest level that a barrier had been broken, that a human voice and body had been hurled against the harsh wall of America…”
That harsh wall of America has been felt by many people. If you have never felt it, then you are privileged and lucky. I envy people like you sometimes. But chances are that you HAVE felt that harsh wall. What is this metaphorical harsh wall you ask? Well, it’s complicated, and it’s probably slightly different to every single person who has recognized it. I can’t speak for Ginsberg, but I know that when he read HOWL with it’s defense of “insane” people and its criticism of mainstream America, he spoke for many people, and his poem still resonates. However, he got a lot of shit for it. Especially from official government organizations. In fact, because he discussed homosexuality in particular, he was subjected to a highly publicized obscenity trial. But he kept talking and questioning and writing and performing anyway. He became the subject of a big FBI dossier. But he kept talking and questioning and writing and performing anyway.
Why? Because he could. Because we are humans with amazing abilities. Because we have been gifted with language and tongues. That’s why we talk and ask questions and write and think. Because we can! And, thankfully, we are in positions to teach others that they CAN say anything they want. But they SHOULD think about the consequences. We value free speech. And just speaking for myself, I value free speech above almost all other freedoms. Not to say that the other freedoms don’t have lots of value. They most certainly do! But, I have to say that I’m thankful to all the people who put in time and energy to make Free Speech the FIRST Amendment. I think it should be first.
And on this little bitty, unadvertised, not-for-profit, community blog in the middle of the country, we are (humbly) anything BUT masturbatory. But, please don’t misinterpret me: I’m not saying that you’re “wrong,” I’m just saying that we are not “wrong”.
Forever curious,
Spring
December 19, 2009 at 10:21 am
Here’s how this goes:
Historians: interested in the original intent of a piece of text/art and the world events that created it.
Linguists: interested in the WORD CHOICE of a piece of text/art and what it tells one about the culture of the time and out general relationship with language.
Rhetoricians: interested in the way arguments are presented and how they could be misconstrued by the hearer.
Fred = historian. POP writers/many readers = linguists and rhetoricians. It’s like a biologist telling a physicist “You idiot, that rabbit isn’t made of atoms, it’s made of cells!”
December 19, 2009 at 10:23 am
“Using your logic, I could say that “Titanic” was really about the struggle between economic classes, discrimination against immigrants and the lax regulation of ocean liners.”
Well, yeah, to linguists, sociologists, and rhetoricians, that about sums it up. *But not to historians!* See, different views, both right. Go read the story about the blind men and the elephant.
December 19, 2009 at 6:12 pm
thanks for enunciating that so well, miz H!
December 20, 2009 at 3:13 pm
and spring, you are a beautiful communicator. thank you also.
December 21, 2009 at 11:45 am
Spring = Beautiful and eloquent.
Miz H = Used to asshats.
December 22, 2009 at 9:21 am
thanks all around!
November 27, 2010 at 10:35 pm
another ww2 poster encouraging conformity, in my opinion:
http://ww2poster.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/keep-calm-and-carry-on.jpg