Despite the perception in some quarters that cartoons constitute an important medium for framing social issues, they are often dismissed on the grounds of political absurdity and ideological insignificance. Cartoons are seen as offering just “passing chuckles” rather than any “deep reflection” on social issues. The perception may be related to the cartoon's discursive spatial limitation and its very nature as a visual mode of communication. Visual modes of communication are deemed deficient in performing analytical communication. By grounding cartoons within a theory of visual semiotics and visual persuasion, this paper attempts to address some of the concerns raised about the effectiveness of editorial cartoons. It attempts to find out how cartoons, as uniquely visual forms of communication, signify their meanings and manage to offer “deep reflection,” rather than just simple “passing chuckle” on social issues.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamLinus (Unpublished). Effectiveness of cartoons as a uniquely visual medium for orienting social issues.
2.
BarnardM. (1998). Art, design and visual culture. New York: St. Martin's Press.
3.
BarryAnn M. S. (1997). Visual Intelligence: Perception, Image, and Manipulation in Visual Communication. New York: State University of New York Press.
4.
BarthesR. (1964/1977). The Rhetoric of the Image: Image, Music, Text (trans. HeathS., 1977). London: Fontana.
5.
BestJ. (1995). Images of Issues: Typifying Contemporary Social Problems. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
6.
BlockHerbert (1974). Herblock Special Report. New York: Norton.
7.
BurgoonJ. K. (1985). The relationship of verbal and nonverbal codes. In DervinBrendaVoightMelvin J. (Eds.), Progress in Communication Sciences, Vol. VI. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
8.
BurgoonJ. K.BullerD. B.WoodallW. G. (1996). Nonverbal Communication: The Unspoken Dialogue. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
9.
LeRoyM. Carl (1970). Political Cartoons: ‘Ink Blots’ of the Editorial Page. Journalism Quarterly45: 533–535.
10.
LeRoyM. Carl (1968). Editorial Cartoons Fail To Teach Readers. Journal of Popular Culture.
11.
CaswellLucy Shelton (2004) Drawing swords: War in American Editorial CartoonsAmerican Journalism21(2), 13–45.
12.
CoupeW. A. (1969) Observations on a theory of political caricatureComparative Studies in Society and History11, 79–95.
13.
ConnersJoan L. (1995). Representations of Saddam Hussein as the enemy: Political cartoons during the Persian Gulf crisis. Mass Communication Division, AEJMC, Washington, D.C.
14.
DeSousaM. A.MedhurstM.J. (1981) The editorial cartoon as visual rhetoric: Rethinking Boss TweedJournal of Visual Verbal Language2, 52–61.
15.
DeSousaM. A. (1984). Symbolic action and pretended insight: The Ayatollah Khomeini in U.S. editorial cartoons. In MedhurstMartin J.BensonThomas W. (Eds.), Rhetorical Dimensions in Media: A Critical Casebook, (pp.204–230).
16.
DeSousaM. A.MedhurstM.J. (1982) Political cartoons and American culture: Significant symbols of campaign 1980Studies in Visual Communication8, 84–97.
17.
EntmanR. M. (1993). Framing: Toward a clarification of a fractured paradigm, Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.
18.
EveretteDennis E. (1974). The regeneration of political cartooning. Journalism Quarterly, 51:664–69.
19.
FischerR.A. (1996). Them damned pictures: Explorations in American political cartoon art. North Haven, Conn.: Archon.
20.
FiskeJohn (1990). Introduction to communication studies. Routledge: London & New York.
21.
FiskeJ. (1996). Media Matters: Race and gender in US politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
22.
FolgerJ. P.WoodallW. G. (1982). Nonverbal cues as linguistic context: An information-processing view. Communication Yearbook6, 63–91.
23.
FreedbergD. (1989). The power of images: studies in the history and theory of Response. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
GardnerHoward (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, HarperCollins Publishers.
25.
GardnerH. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Basic Books, A member of the Perseus Books Group.
26.
GoldbergV. (1991). The power of photography: How photographs changed our lives. New York: Abbeville Press.
27.
GombrichE.H. (1985). The Caroonist's Armory. The Image and the eye: Further studies in the psychology of pictorial representation. Limited 4th ed.Singapore: Phaidon Press Limited, pp. 127–142.
28.
GreenbergJ. (2000). Opinion discourse and Canadian newspapers: The case of the Chinese 'boat people.”Canadian Journal of Communication, 25 (4), 517–38.
29.
GreenbergJ. (2002) Framing and temporality in political cartoons: A critical analysis of visual news discourseThe Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology39 (2), 181–198.
30.
GunterB. (1987). Poor reception: Misunderstanding and forgetting broadcast news. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31.
HarrisonR. P. (1981). The cartoon: Communication to the quick. Beverly Hills, CA Press.
32.
KemnitzT.M. (1973 Summer). The cartoon as historical resource. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 4 (1), 81.
33.
KershawI. (1987). The ‘Hitler myth’: Image and reality in the Third Reich. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
34.
LambC. (2004). Drawn to extremes: The use and abuse of editorial cartoons. New York: Columbia University Press.
35.
LangeveldW. (1981) Political cartoons as a medium of political communicationInternational Journal of Political Education4, 343–371.
36.
LesterP. (1995). Visual communication: Images with messages. New York: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
37.
LongS. (1962 November), “The Political Cartoon—Journalism's Strongest Weapon,”The Quill, 50, 56.
38.
MedhurstM. J.DeSousaM. A. (1981) Political cartoons as rhetorical form: A taxanomy of graphic discourseCommunication Monographs48, September.
MessarisP. (1997). Visual persuasion: The role of images in advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
41.
MessarisP.AbrahamL. (2001). The role of images in framing news stories. In ReeseS.D.GandyO. H.GrantA.E. (eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
MillerG. (1990) The place of language in a scientific psychologyPsychological Science1, 7–14.
43.
MitchelW. J. T. (1994). Picture theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
MoraritySandra E. (2005). Visual Semiotics Theory. In SmithK.MoriarityS.BarbatsisG.KenneyE. (eds.), Handbook of visual communication. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, New Jersey & London, pp. 227–255.
45.
MorarityS. E. (1994) Visual Communication as a Primary SystemJournal of Visual Literacy14 (2).
46.
MorrisonM. C. (1969 Winter). The role of the political cartoonist in image making. Central States Speech Journal, 253.
47.
OllerJ. W.Jr.GiardettiJ. R. (1999). Images that work: creating successful messages in marketing and high stakes communication. Quorum Books: Westport, CT & London.
48.
NelkinD. (1987). Selling Science. New York: W. Freeman.
49.
NickersonR. S. (1965) Short-term memory for complex meaningful visual configurations: A demonstration of capacityCanadian Journal of Psychology19, 155–160.
50.
PerkinsD. (1975) A definition of caricature and recognitionStudies in the Anthropology of Visual Communication2 (1): 1–23.
51.
PerlmutterD. (1998). Photojournalism and foreign policy: Icons of outrage in international crisis. Praeger Publishers: Westport, CT.
52.
PiperG. W.ClearM. (1995). Imagery of conflict in MacNelly's editorial cartoons and the comic strip shoe. Presented to the Comic Art Section, Popular Culture Association: Philadelphia, PA.
ShepardR. N. (1967) Recognition memory for words, sentences and picturesJournal of Verbal Learning and Behavior6, 156–163.
55.
SontagS. (1977). On photography. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.
56.
SpectorM.KitsuseJ. I. (1977). Constructing social problems. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.
57.
StreicherL. (1967) On a theory of political caricatureComparative Studies in Society and History9, 427–445.
58.
The Clinton Scandal cartoons discussed in the paper were collected from a website created by syndicated editorial cartoonist, Daryl Cagle (http://www.cagle.com/scandal/).
UrsittiJ.NordinK. D. (1995). Lampooning the President: Bill Clinton's image in American political cartoons. Presented to the Comic Art Section, Popular Culture Association: Philadephia, PA.
61.
Van LeeuwenTheo (2001). Semiotics and Iconography. In van LeeuwenT.JewittC. (eds.), Handbook of visual analysis. London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage, Chapter 5.
62.
VinsonJ. C. (1967). Thomas Nast: Political cartoonist. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.
63.
WilliamsJ. W. (1997). Moles and clowns: how editorial cartoons portrayed Aldrich Ames, Harold Nicholson and the CIA. Presented to the Visual Communication Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
64.
WinchSamuel P. (1999). Cuddly bear and vicious ape: Soviets and Germans in editorial cartoons, 1933–1946. Presented to the Visual Communication Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
