Writing Journal
Writing Journal Images in Crisis
Writing Journal #1, Sep. 7th. Iconic Photography.
An icon is a person or thing that symbolizes an idea or an era of significance. The right time and place, the composition, how the photo is presented to the masses, and how it is perceived by the masses are all factors in the making of an “iconic photograph.”
This image, taken in the mid-1870s, became iconic through its summation of the juvenile American spirit for westward expansion. It represents the social turbulence during this period; the push of expansion against the pull of Indigenous communities and the blatant attack on these communities.
In this photo, though there is no Indigenous person in sight, their image is still depicted negatively. The symbol of the bison, a sacred and spiritual animal in Native American culture, is reduced to a symbol of prey. In turn, the image of Indigenous Americans is reduced to something disposable. Natives hunted bison as their main resource for clothing, food, fuel, and still consider them an important symbol of their history. While American expansionists hunted them for sport, more bluntly as an exertion of power, to near extinction.
There are obvious elements of power and pride in the photograph. The tall pile of skulls symbolizes domination. It takes up most of the frame, providing a shock factor that nails home the idea of excessive cruelty. The graphic subject sets a gruesome tone, also adding to the shock factor. The pile overrides the other elements of the photograph the same way American expansionists seem to override the bison and, in turn, Indigenous Americans.
The prideful stances of the hunters exude hubris, which leaves a bad taste in the mouth mingled with the graphic elements of the photo. Though pride and power are common themes in iconic American photography, combined with the blatant disrespect for Indigenous culture, the symbols turn sour. This photo characterizes the young American spirit as greedy and self-interested.
Westward expansion, usually painted as a prosperous period of American growth, is tainted by this image. Although we have known for a long time the crimes committed against Indigenous Americans, iconic photos like these help centralize the information and de-memorialize the events. A large element of this photo’s iconic status can be attributed to its eye-opening nature.
Writing Journal #2, Sept. 14. Cult of Personality.
A cult of personality is often created by political leaders and public figures as a common form of propaganda. This tactic taps into the ethos of one’s character by highlighting their charisma, wisdom, and overall superhuman faultlessness. We look for personality cults surrounding politicians and celebrities in their advertisements, endorsements, political campaigns, and mostly any media they/their representatives produce.
John F. Kennedy, for example, has attained a cult of personality, especially through his legacy, in the eyes of the American people. When discussing propaganda, we often think of evil men scheming behind closed doors. But there is propaganda surrounding almost every public figure. We remember JFK in a relatively good light because of the propaganda surrounding his image, and his cult of personality.
One factor JFK’s cult leans heavily on is his family-man values. He symbolizes an ultra-classic American ideal of the nuclear family that appeals to a wide set of Americans whether it’s subconscious or not. There are heaps of photography depicting JFK as the perfect husband, father, and family man. Even if this may not have been true, the imagery has been ingrained in American minds and added to his repertoire of superhuman perfectness.
This black-and-white photo, for example, paints Kennedy as a good-hearted patriarch. He is strong, front and center compositionally, yet not overbearingly strong. He is surrounded by who we can assume, by the matching outfits, are his loved ones. The white outfits alone represent the important American ideal of purity. The balance in color, between the grey suits and white outfits, symbolizes unity. Familial unity given the context. The culmination of these elements is humanizing for Kennedy, and adds to his image of good character. Images like this, depicting him in this light, are purposeful and not rare. 
JFK’s unfortunate assassination interestingly played a large role in building his cult of personality. His premature death sealed his good character in time eternally because he was already so highly regarded in the eyes of many Americans. On top of his image of charisma and family-man appeals, he was now also a victim. His death garnered sympathy for him and his family and propelled his image into ethereal status. The masses could not point out any flaws of a wrongfully killed man, they could only mourn and recall his good-natured spirit.
This image of Kennedy’s funeral characterizes him as a widely loved and honorable man. The tightly packed crowd suggests he had many supporters and loved ones. The imagery of the American flag, which alone carries symbols of pride, over his casket reveals that he was an honorable man deserving of national praise. The composition of Kennedy’s casket, hitting a line of thirds, centralizes him as a subject of our utmost attention and care. The emotions in the faces of the crowd cast a heartbreaking and stoic mood over the image. From this photograph, we can gather John F. Kennedy was an honorable man deserving of widespread American respect.
Combined with the praise he received while alive, JFK’s image after death cements him in an untouchable status of good- heartedness. It’s been proven. Despite his scandals being uncovered long after his death, his cult of personality lifts him to a pedestal of irrevocable goodness. We picture him still as a charismatic and respectable man of American history because of the way he was depicted in media.
Sources: https://prezi.com/sfapeglhedty/cult-of-personality-john-f-kennedy/
Writing Journal #3, Sept. 21. Propaganda
This propaganda poster was created by Gordon Odell, during World War II (1940-41), to promote war bond sales. It taps into American family values and emotions to propel American patriotism and demonize the Axis powers. The symbolism, the text, the color; all these elements appeal to pathos, drawing on America’s fear and pride as a means to sell bonds.
The main subject of the poster, the woman and the child, symbolize ideas of purity and the American nuclear family. They’re a visually pristine and good looking family, wearing light colors and fluffy fabrics that inherently emit a sense of innocence. They’re meant to represent an American woman and child, those who have been left at home while the war wages. Odell is painting this temporarily unguarded American family as an innocent victim to the Axis powers, who are menacingly reaching out to get them. He calls on fear in this poster to move his audience to his “call to action” – buying war bonds.
American women and children, being the subject, also happen to be the target audience. They’re meant to see themselves in this illustrated family and fear they too could end up in the clutches of the Axis powers. Luckily the poster provides an immediate solution: buying the new victory bonds!
The text in this poster directly calls its audience to action. “Keep these hands off” serves not only as a warning but somehow as an empowering statement. It implies that average Americans have the power to “keep these hands off”. It’s also a plea. It’s calling on its listeners. The words could have been, “We need to keep these hands off” but they aren’t. They’re speaking directly to their audience. Not only do they have the power, but they have a moral and National responsibility to protect their fellow Americans from Germany and Japan.
The way Germany and Japan are represented in the poster is also quite purposeful. Firstly, they’re represented as just hands. This adds an element of dehumanization. The way they’re illustrated in contrast to the woman and the child is monstrous. The woman and the child being so realistic grounds the viewers in reality which highlights the otherworldly, demonic aspects of the hands. They’re drawn with an inhuman and menacing hue in contrast to the healthy, rosy skin of the Americans. The way they’re grabbing at the Americans is frightening and seen as greedy. They’re trying to take over the frame that this family exists in. This purposeful illustration is again tapping into the fear of the audience.
The culmination of these elements drag a sense of nationalism and fear out of the poster’s American audience, a common tactic in propaganda.
Writing Journal #4, Sept. 28. The Pentagon Calls the Shots
To what extent does Hollywood shape (and sometimes distort) our understanding of history?
One film that addresses how Hollywood shapes and sometimes distorts our understanding of history is “Saving Private Ryan” directed by Steven Spielberg in 1998. The film serves as a powerful example of how Hollywood can shape our understanding of war through its visceral depiction of war. It opens with a documentary-like sequence of the D-Day invasion which has been praised for its realism.
The scene blatantly presents the chaos, violence, and filth of the battle. The brutality of the scene challenges romanticized ideas of war, giving the movie a sense of credibility. Assuming this piece of media isn’t afraid to expose the dirty realities of war, the audience is more likely to trust the movie’s depiction of it. Thus, building the movie’s ethos.
In addition to gaining the trust of the audience, “Saving Private Ryan” simplifies the context of war so that the audience can apply the movie’s ideals of heroism to the general American military. The central plot of rescuing a single soldier, Private Ryan, while engaging, can obscure the broader context of the war. This is purposeful. This zoom-in on individual heroism can promote a narrative that prioritizes personal valiance over the political and moral factors that led to the conflict.
Once a film decontextualizes the aspects of war and puts on its armor of ethos, it can begin to present the positive or patriotic ideals of the American military. These include, camaraderie, sacrifice, honor, and the list goes on.
In “Saving Private Ryan”, the relationships between the soldiers are central to the plot. They demonstrate the bonds that are built by mutually faced adversity. The aspects of brotherhood are truly inspiring and moving for the audience. Ideals of sacrifice and honor also serve as a narrative tool. The film portrays the soldiers as willing to lay down their lives for their country and brothers, contributing to this romanticized idea of the American military. This is where the movie taps into the viewer’s pathos, and where Hollywood subconsciously twists our perception of historical events. It’s easy to gain a viewer’s trust through film. The appeals to ethos and pathos are subconscious and obscured through the aspect of entertainment.
“Saving Private Ryan” illustrates how Hollywood can twist our understanding of history by highlighting certain romanticized themes, such as heroism and camaraderie and distorting the broader context of war.
Writing Journal #5 Oct. 12, 2024. Conspiracy Theories
A conspiracy theory is “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators,” according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. They work to turn the masses against certain organizations, groups of people, or individuals, typically by turning them into scapegoats. The success of certain mainstream conspiracies is interesting because they are widely labeled as such, theories. They often use blatant propaganda tactics like direct finger-pointing and name-calling, so it’s interesting to see how conspiracies gain such large followings despite this. 
For example, one conspiracy theorist with a particularly large following, Marjorie Taylor-Greene, has somehow managed to create a name and a following for herself through her outlandish theories. It’s not shocking – in a digital age when most people rely on social media as their primary news outlets- that she uses X as her main outlet for spreading information. You don’t need education or research skills to scroll or post on social media, so authority and influence often falls into dangerous hands. Like in the case of Marjorie Taylor-Greene.
Here is a recap of her most recent theory:
She suggested that the U.S. government has the power to control the weather, using high-frequency technology, and has induced Hurricane Helene in the South to sway the results of the 2024 presidential election in the Democrats’ favor.
She’s known to spread misinformation like this. And although the theory has been widely denounced by many politicians and experts, it doesn’t make it any less dangerous. Marjorie Taylor-Greene is backed by a wide audience of supporters who wholeheartedly believe her.
One of the reasons Marjorie Taylor-Greene’s theories are widely accepted is because of her ethos. She has a cult of personality. You can scroll through her social media and see that she represents the idealized American Republican woman. She stands for her country. She stands for “integrity” (her definition of it). She’s blonde. She’s healthy. She’s Georgian. She’s cemented her credibility in her audiences eyes, and now has the wiggle room to spread her unbacked theories and still be supported.
Once outlandish ideas like hers fall into the masses as factual certainty, it’s not just ridiculous – it’s scary. If we accept ideas like this as the truth, what else will be accepted? These beliefs can seriously affect the outcome of presidential elections, inter-political party tension, and mass prejudices. Her recent theories have been part of a wider effort to re-elect Donald Trump, including the Hurricane Helene theory, but she will continue to theorize until well after the election backed by her far-right fans.
Sources: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspiracy%20theory
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/07/marjorie-taylor-greene-hurricane-helene
Writing Journal #6 Oct. 26th, 2024. Dangerous Advertising
Advertisements have always held a subconscious power over their audiences. They are designed to tell us what to desire, what to crave, and what to think, all to sell a product. Often advertisements reflect specific cultural attitudes, or what a culture generally fancies. Or they can project cultural attitudes onto an audience, in an attempt to stir a general hunger for their product. The power of an advertisement is underestimated and, like other popular media, they have the potential to plant roots of harmful narratives in a culture’s mind.
The 1965 Chanel No. 5 advertisement, “The Spell Of Chanel” employs lavish imagery and an alluring narrative to evoke an idealized version of femininity. The ad suggests a woman’s value is linked only to her desirability. Chanel No. 5 is presented as the key to unlocking a woman’s full potential, which reinforces a problematic cultural attitude that equates femininity with physical beauty and the need for male validation. The ad ultimately pushes unrealistic societal standards that undermine women’s self-worth and identity.
The advertisement opens with a dreamy image of a lovely couple, obviously madly in love, accompanied by the narrator saying, “This is the spell of Chanel.” Essentially he’s saying, “This is what can be achieved through buying our product.” This language exposes a general assumption that the prospect of being desired is prioritized by all women. Immediately after, a montage of a beautiful woman gracefully fades across the screen, backed by whimsical music, as an extension of “the spell of Chanel,” or “what can be achieved if you buy this product.” Again, the choices of the producers suggest an assumption that all women prioritize physical beauty and that women will want to buy their product if beauty is guaranteed.
Adding another layer, the advertisement is directed towards men. It leaves its audience with this last line, “Tempt her with Chanel, and let yourself be caught by the spell.” Here’s the general message to men: buying this perfume for their partners will enhance their relationship, make their women happy through pampering their physical images.The perfume inspires romance, as reflected in the picture-esque, charming imagery. All of these elements suggest that men are the beholders and the proprietors of femininity, and that a woman’s value is determined if she is adorned with that femininity. 
This is problematic because femininity being equated with the attention of a man completely undermines women and writes them off as shallow, only intrigued with pleasing men. The ad completely diminishes the value of complexities and character in women. When popular media pushes this narrative year after year, general misconceptions take root and become widespread beliefs.
Writing Journal #7 Resistance and Political Activism
On the streets of Les Bosquets, Montfermeil’s “ghetto”, JR’s “Portrait of a Generation” unexpectedly confronts its viewers. JR’s wide-lens, up-close, photographs capture young men from Les Bosquets making “scary faces.” 
Rather than simply viewing art at a museum, JR’s audience encounters it in everyday places: at a cafe, on the side of a garbage truck, or the side of a building. His art demands attention in big bold lettering, like a news headline. JR’s project was directly meant for the civilians of Montfermeil, who understand the context in which these photographs live. In 2005 Montfermeil was the site of a series of riots sparked by the death of two teenage boys hiding from the police. Through the media’s lens, these rioters were dangerous scumbags. JR offers a different side of them through his silly yet provocative photographs. They’re just boys, pushed by structural inequalities, into playing scary men. JR’s caricatures of the Montfermeil youth challenge their viewers to look inward – at their preconceived judgments and aim to reveal the true character of these teenage boys.
JR knew some of these young men, most of whom didn’t partake in the riots. Rather, they were simply trying to get by under harmful stereotypes. His project attempts to satirize and demystify the daunting image of these men.
JR’s photographs in “Portrait of a Generation”, throw the viewer’s preconceived notions in their faces, partly, because of the bluntness of their scale. But also, the placement in Montfermeil’s everyday streets unapologetically takes back the boy’s identities. The confidence of JR’s subjects is conveyed through the personal angles of the photographs. JR’s approach to photography cuts its audience in a more striking way than a book, magazine, or newspaper. It urges civilians to consider its message. They cannot deny such bold art.
This photograph (on the left) in particular is the peak of JR’s purpose. It flips the public’s image of these boys on its head. At first glance, the audience might think the main subject is holding a gun. Maybe because the photograph pictures young black men in the “ghetto”, especially at the time when this demographic was depicted as recklessly violent through the news. Instead, upon closer inspection, the audience can see the man is holding a camera, a symbol of wide stream media. The way he holds the camera reveals the power in the content we consume. He is physically taking back his identity, which the media has tried to reshape. By dismantling the stereotype of black men, JR challenges the audience to consider their prejudices. Why did they assume he was a violent man? Should we believe everything the media pushes our way?
Writing Journal #8 Dorsky Art Museum Field Trip
I have always been drawn to the natural imagery of trees, particularly the comforting symbolism of human connectivity through nature. I find it fascinating that we’re linked not only by a canopy of branches above our heads, but also by a system of roots below our feet. This painting, I feel, captures that feeling of connectivity on all sides — above and below, past and future. It immediately reminded me of The Overstory by Richard Powers, a novel that chronicles a massive story of the interconnectedness between all living beings, including trees. It brings trees to life in a way that completely changed the way I empathize with the natural world.
This was the very first painting I spotted upon walking into The Dorsky Museum. I was drawn to it immediately because of its association with this natural symbolism in my mind. The painting was accompanied by this curatorial statement:
After reading the curatorial statement, I gained a better sense of the artist’s vision and was able to weave it with my own interpretation of the piece. To me, this painting embodies the deep flow of inspiration between humans – not in the formal sense of student and teacher – but in the continuous taking and giving of ideas across history. The imagery of roots and branches as a means of transferring ideas, much like sap and nutrients, is particularly alluring to me.
The painting displays a whisper of impressionistic technique, with its details becoming more obscured the closer you get — yet from afar it transforms into a cohesive, realistic piece. The significance of this lies it’s similarity to human experience. Up close, we’re overwhelmed by the confusion and disorder of the human experience, but from a distance our experiences fit into the larger narrative of humanity. I find comfort and awe in remembering my experiences are not unique – they have been lived before, across centuries.
During my trip to The Dorsky Art Museum I gained an understanding for the professionalism of the exhibits and the importance of a strong curatorial statement. What stood out to me as a common thread throughout the art was simply the beauty between pieces. I found drawing the viewer in with aesthetic appeal and visual ease is key in creating my own Dorsky exhibit.
My overall visit to the museum was quite calming and enjoyable. The soft lighting and quiet atmosphere set a relaxing mood. Ashlyn and I went together — it was lovely to have a buddy with me to discuss the art. I thoroughly enjoyed my experience and I’m glad I got a chance to visit.
Writing Journal #9 Image Manipulation:
The U.S. presidential situation room may be one of the most consequential place a political figure could be during a national crisis. Its inhabitants must exude, power, intelligence and authority. Any problem-solving attribute we associate with the President’s cabinet. Even in our modern era, does society still struggle letting women own these qualities?
How revolutionary it would be, to have a woman photographed in the Situation Room for the first time, and let it serve as a symbol of not only female independence but female power. Instead, this revolutionary moment was dragged down by the familiar waves of misogyny embedded in culture. The monumental moment of a woman photographed in this specific position of power was overshadowed by the controversy surrounding it.
From 2009 to 2013, Hillary Clinton oversaw Obama’s Department of Foreign Policy. Subsequently, In 2011, throughout the national operation to kill Osama Bin Laden, Hillary Clinton was heavily involved in this operation.
Although she was far from the first woman in a presidential cabinet, Hillary Clinton’s political involvement was a tough pill for many Americans to swallow. Clinton’s involvement in the Bin Laden operation became controversial when a photograph was published featuring her and the rest of Obama’s cabinet deep into their work. Some argued that her shocked expression proved her misplacement as a women handling the horrors of war. Deeper controversy struck when the photo was later published by a newspaper called Der Tzitung with Clinton digitally removed from the photograph. The photograph featured another young woman, Audrey Tomason, who was also removed.
Although the general Western consensus supported Clinton’s position in the Situation Room, this defense itself drew away from the weight of the moment. The moment became a conversation of mygosginany rather than an appreciation of a woman’s accomplishments.
Der Tzitung is a Brooklyn-based, ultra-orthodox Jewish newspaper published in Yiddish. It appeals to extremely traditional religious gender ideals. When they faced backlash from the American public and The White House itself, who forbade changes to the photo, they used religious ideals to justify in their removal of Clinton. They claimed they had a “long standing editorial policy” of not publishing women, that it contradicted their religious beliefs. The American consensus was that the paper’s discomfort publishing a woman in a position of power was from a place of sexism along with religion and many Americans were offended. Der Tzitung had to issue their regrets and apologies to The White House. This instance of image manipulation led to a stir of controversy, pulling away from the real story. Der Tzitung faced extreme backlash and Clinton herself received backlash for her involvement in the Situation Room. It was an instance of misogyny manifesting in manipulation in journalism, which American currently has more laws on due to the controversy it often stirs up.
Writing Journal #10: Thanksgiving Stories
This photograph of Ellen Baize and her sister celebrating Thanksgiving at their grandmother’s house embodies the values of a traditional American Thanksgiving, with its emphasis on the plentiful feast, prayer, and quality time with family. This depiction of Thanksgiving, the one we’re familiar with, overlooks Indigenous heritage and the violent history of colonization.
The photograph is part of a larger collection of American Thanksgiving photos throughout the decades that displays American values of quality family time, plentiful feasts, consumerism, religion, and the ideal nuclear family. This familiar version of Thanksgiving is a contemporary extension of The Pilgrim Thanksgiving narrative. It directly ignores the truth of colonization and Indigenous suffering.
The photograph of Ellen Baize and her sister reflects how we often ignorantly celebrate Thanksgiving, without acknowledging its history. The photo below, however, offers a counter-narrative.
In this photograph, two Indigenous Mexicans pray to the Mixe god Kioga “in gratitude for a good harvest”. It features a different perspective of Thanksgiving prayer, contrasting two cultural expressions of the same holiday. While the first photo reflects American Christian values, the second highlights a distant culture. The colors alone in each photograph speak to the cultural feelings towards Thanksgiving. The first photograph, bountiful in color, symbolizes consumption, wealth, and joy, while the second photograph in its stripped hues of black and white exposes a mournful perspective of the ignorant holiday. The colors don’t need to speak alone though, the symbols of each photo do some talking as well. The plentiful feast filling up the frame in the first photograph directly contrasts the foggy, hollow, landscape of the second photograph, which is symbolic of a loss of land and culture. This second photo offers an alternative narrative to the pilgrim Thanksgiving. It holds a deeper cultural connection to the land and harvest and is symbolic of Indigenous loss and mourning.
These two photographs offer a striking contrast of how Thanksgiving is understood and celebrated across cultures. We often sweep Indigenous loss under the rug on Thanksgiving because tradition is stronger than guilt. It’s convenient to forget Indigenous suffering because Americans have built an entirely new culture of family and consumption right on top of the Indigenous one. For me and my family, the first photo is more reminiscent of our perspective of Thanksgiving. We see it as a family and feast driven holiday, as most Americans do. We’re often ignorant of the Indigenous experience, despite our common understanding of the painful history of Thanksgiving.