Museum propaganda paper

Museum propaganda paper

Introduction.

Propaganda, in my view, is the deliberate spreading of information and ideas to help a movement, institution, or nation. According to the Oxford Dictionary, propaganda area ideas or statements that may be false or exaggerated and that are used to gain support for a political leader, party, etc. Propaganda is a form of persuasive communication. The word propaganda, like most other terms, has its origin in Latin. The term propaganda means “to spread or to grow.” Therefore, the success of propaganda depends on how fast it reaches the target audience. The phrase propaganda in its current form was used by the Catholic church appearing in “Congregation de propaganda fide.” The mission was instituted by Pope Gregory XV, who introduced it in 1621-23. The term propaganda during this period was used to represent the propagation of a particular spiritual or religious doctrine.

With the success of the religious doctrines passed through the mission, the political players saw an opportunity or a tool to use to help them get more power. The total usurping of the world from the religious realms to the political ones happened around the First World War. The word propaganda seized defining religious doctrines but political. Politicians and systems of governance applied the same basic principled used in religious propaganda to help them get to power and retain the same control. Politicians were able to circumvent people’s reasoning and rational choice and creating a cult-like following for themselves.

A good example of propaganda in politics was the United States president Wilson’s excuse to enter into the First World War. American society is known to be a democratic country where the people have their input on matters governance. As such, a leader, including the president, cannot drag the country to war without the support of the people. With this in mind, President Wilson needed people’s help. Therefore, the president utilized propaganda as a tool to get into the war. He introduced pro-war literature into the education system. He crafted his propaganda campaign to ensure compliance, adherence, and a new sense of enthusiasm toward democracy and liberalism. He ensured the people were tunnel-vision and thereby getting the support to join the war.

President Wilson is an example of a leader who has used propaganda to spread their ideology. However, he was not the first leader to do so. Although the other leaders never used the term propaganda, they still implemented the same principles. This paper is going to discuss two sets of propaganda, the old propaganda and the new propaganda. The paper will compare Royal Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal, Assyrian (875-860 BC) carving, and the Peasant art war cycle paintings by Kathe Kollwitz.

In the Royal Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal, the carvings value the prowess and courage of the king when it comes to the hunting of lions. The carvings emphasize the quality of leadership and determination in the image. The images are being used to convey the magnitude of power and dominion that the king has over the people and even the beasts who are terrorizing the people. The carvings glorify war and praise courage. They aggrandize the person leading the charge against the animals and, in this case, Ashurbanipal. In essence, the propaganda message here is successful for it ensures the Assyrian people circle Ashurbanipal and support him in his endeavors as the king.

Unlike the Royal Lion Hunt of Ashurbanipal, Kathe Kollwitz bastardizes war and anything related to war. Kollwitz uses a series of etchings to deliver her message. She highlights the effects of war and the pain and suffering that people endure during and after the war. She emphasizes on body language and the vulnerability and the inevitable death of human beings. In her etchings, Kollwitz is successful in delivering her message of the effects and dangers of war. She emotionalizes her art and targets even people who are not on the war fronts.

A visit to the Getty Museum was eye-opening. From visiting the art, I was able to relate to Kollwitz through her art. Her depiction of people during suffering and pain was too real for me to ignore. The ploughmen and woman painting was by far the most touching painting that I experienced in the museum. The art showed the effects of war and how men are on the losing end, where most of them end up dead or impaired for the rest of their lives. However, this impairment does not affect men only for it affects the women in their lives. The women have to pick up roles and responsibilities that were meant for men. They also have to watch as the condition of their men who return from war worse, and they can do nothing about their pain and suffering.

I was also intrigued by the raped painting. The image was vivid with proper representation of flowers and with a presence of symmetry in it. The depiction was that of a woman lying in the field with her dress cut on the upper part of her body. I am also impressed by Kollwitz’s creativity, and respect for human decency in that she was able to portray the evil meted on the woman but also maintained her dignity. She was able to hide the woman’s face and even her nudity. It is impressive of her considering the barbaric coverage that victims of rape are currently getting. Their images are plastered all over social media without caring for their privacy.

In ancient Assyria, the region was prone to attacks by lions. The lions attack shepherds, killing them and their livestock. The Royal Lion Hunt carvings are a depiction of the king hunting and killing the lions that were invading and killing people and their livestock. The carvings are meant to increase the level of confidence in the king by the people. The art represents the king as a more than a human being creature who was anointed by the gods, the god Ashur and the goddess Ishtar, to lead his people. The carvings also show the power that the gods have handed to the king that he can even kill beasts of the wild that have been destroying the livelihood of the people of Assyria.

However, this was not the case for Ashurbanipal. Ashurbanipal was a coward who never led his people even in wars against fellow human beings. Unlike his predecessors, Ashurbanipal stayed indoors and left his soldiers and generals to go to war without him. He also lacked the courage to go out and hunt the lions himself. The pieces of art, which the Royal Lion Hunt belongs to, were stage-managed. The king never participated in the hunt himself, but the carvings portray him with a bow and arrow on a chariot after making a kill.

The curving aggrandized the king. It made him look powerful and invincible. The fact that he ensured the people were safe and free from lion attacks increased his grip on power. His horse riding on lions that he had slain meant that nothing could be an obstacle to him. It was equating him to an immortal, a person that people and his subjects should respect and fear in equal measure. The curving also supported his claim that he was a person chosen by the gods. The curving meant that the gods’ powers were manifesting in him, and people should not fight or question him. This piece of art was successful, for it ensured the king was not challenged or overthrown hence maintaining his grip on power and his authority over the people.

Conclusion.

In a nutshell, art, like literature, is a powerful tool of communication. Its captivity to the eye and the brain’s ability to retain it makes it the best way of communicating. We can see from the two scenarios illustrate show that art is a powerful tool for spreading propaganda. Its interpretation may differ from person to person, but the message persists. Art will connect with the people in a manner that words would seem offensive. Propaganda treads on the grey area where we cannot easily differentiate facts from illusion or lies. Art becomes the best form of propaganda where the message is embedded in the image, but the interpretation is left to the masses.