The Rhetoric of Political Cartoons
From RhetorClick
Let us begin this examination of the rhetoric of political cartoons with a brief history of their application and use in America. The first political cartoon in America is almost unanimously considered to be that created by Benjamin Franklin, calling his fellow citizens of the colonies to "Join, or Die." The cartoon depicts a snake, severed into eight pieces, each piece with the name of a colony. Beneath the snake is the phrase "Join, or Die." The rhetoric here is clear, that should the colonies remain separate, then they should fail in their cause, which, at the time, was to defend the colonies against the French and their Amerindian allies. Becoming popular in the mid 19th century, political cartoons have played an important role in social satire, rising in production and prestige, especially during the 20th century. Today, as in the past several decades, political cartoons have been used both to attack political leaders and to promote them, as well as to address the controversial issues of the day.
The Rhetoric of political cartoons is, as could be expected, a primarily visual rhetoric. One major element of this visual rhetoric is caricature, a style of portrayal in which the artist strives to make the subject of the drawing both recognizable and distorted in a way that fits the artist's motives, usually either to ridicule or to empower, although to ridicule is the more common of the endeavors. Political cartoons rely heavily on humor, looking to the pathos to shift the view of the audience in a direction the artist desires. Logos and ethos are seldom if ever the chief means of persuasion utilized by political cartoons. That is another thing; political cartoons almost always seek to persuade. In that sense, though they are often presented alongside objective journalism, political cartoons are a highly subjective form of rhetoric, almost exclusively picking a side on an issue or about the subject they depict. Political cartoons seem to run the gauntlet between the theories of Lloyd F. Bitzer and Richard E. Vatz, proving in many cases to be a clear cut reaction to a political exigence, while at other times appearing to themselves define the porthole through which an audience views and defines a political atmosphere.
The medium through which political cartoons and their rhetoric have been delivered has thus far been predominantly a printed medium. However, during the past decade, the digital revolution and the rise of the Internet as a source for news media has brought about a rapid decline in the production and distribution of printed newspapers. Numerous political cartoonists have found themselves jobless, as the remaining newspapers find themselves in a less competitive market which makes the inclusion of socially striking images far less necessary. However, the political cartoon remains a beloved and entertaining medium through which social satire is delivered, and as such is finding new avenues for production. Several political cartoonists have, through the past decade, begun to use animation as a means to modernize the political cartoon and make it relevant to an audience that is becoming ever more reliant on digital media. Considering this transformation, we may see the rhetoric of political cartoons expanding beyond visual rhetoric, to become a multimodal form of communication that utilizes both image and the oral/written word to convey the social satires of the future.
Further reading-
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/an-animated-discussion-about-political-cartoons/
