MANDERSON

I was really engaged in reading the story of "Boss" Tweed and his publicized response to the political cartoons that were being drawn of him. Tweed fostered some pretty controversial commentary regarding Nast's cartoons. Not only had Tweed demanded the halt of his inky ridicule, he reportedly stated "I don't care so much what the papers say about me. My constituents don't know how to read, but they can't help seeing them damned pictures!". In this case we find that propaganda graphics had fostered some secondary social unrest in eventually informing Tweed's constituents of his manipulation and disrespect to their intelligence.

Never had I fully realized just how far governing bodies had pursued the prosecution those who had designed a strong, educating message. From Philipon being forced to appear in court for his depiction of the "pear-headed king" and Stalin's action of outlawing abstract art in benefit of socialist realism, it becomes true that visually driven propaganda will always be under consideration in politics. It's no wonder that carefully edited film reels and photographs became primary modes of controlled thought distribution once they became technically developed. I love how the author concludes the role of the modern advertising poster in WWII and how it "became the main vehicle for sustaining one of the most devastating wars in history".

I think Quince made a great comparison in drawing a parallel to our recent presidential campaign. Such an overabundance of polished promotional material and "trustworthy" typography left me staggered; the dramatic campaign treatment played an undoubtable role in the poll results.