Uncle Sam Photos

So. In response to Jeremy's most latest request for a blog, I've pulled up a few photos upon which I wrote my most recent paper, entitled The Many Faces of Uncle Sam. I found it was really interesting to see how the original poster has been manipulated throughout the past century to express different political rhetoric and also to notice how it was the artist went about achieving that effect. Consider some of the photos below for yourself.... -Scarlett

Favorite Political Pictures

Ben Cardin gets passionate.


I think this picture got my mother to vote for him.


I love this. Martin O'Malley shows off his abilities with kids. If that didn't get parents to vote for him, I don't know what did.

Master’s Choice selectors know of no better blog

The power of Ethos and Pathos defies logic (literally). It works, and that's why it’s used everywhere.

In this picture we see a bag of generic frozen corn from the supermarket SuperFresh. You may notice the subtext on the package. It reads:

"Master’s Choice selectors know of no other sweeter or more tender corn."

Really?

Master’s Choice has Ethos?

The name that SuperFresh has given to a line of generic products has the credibility to speak about the quality of corn?

By definition this is the same exact corn sold in 50 different supermarkets across the country. Surely it’s excellent corn, but are we so taken with Master’s Choice ability to pick cheap food that we can invent an Ethos for them?

The answer is yes. Not because Master’s Choice has Ethos, but because Ethos has Ethos and people aren’t interested in the truth. It doesn’t matter who says it’s good, just that somebody says it’s good. Even if that somebody is a fictional company created to give generic packaging a little more pizzazz.

Logic doesn't stand a chance.

Rockwell Meets Scandal

This image is a priceless parody. A Rockwell-esque style (think traditional American Values, Campbell's Soup and Mom's Apple Pie) poster with an innocent enough scene.... except when you realize it is Mark Foley!! For all the conservative right wing neocons who believe that the Republican Party really stands for everything good, wholesome, and the good ole American way, where are they when their scandals hit the news? They are the first ones to jump in front of a camera when there is even a hint of impropriety on the part of a Dem. Meanwhile (admitting that I am a Democrat), I didn't see any Democrats screaming into a camera about the Republican party as a whole when the Foley scandal hit. What does that tell you about the direction of the two parties?

The Thrilla in Owings Milla

The incumbent appears on edge from the beginning--his posture almost prehistoric; his hands constantly moving from praying to waving frantically; he’s unsure as to whether he should speak to the camera (and therefore the people) or the moderator; his suit rolls up tight on his shoulders pulling the sleeves to his elbows and exposing multiple 'charity bracelets'; and finally he gestures with an open hand toward his challenger; who deftly looks offstage as though there’s something there that requires his attention--like an Ali rope-a-dope he moves away from the image-based rhetorical challenge of his opponent...

AND so goes the first 20 seconds of Maryland’s “not so live” 2006gubernatorial debate.

After watching, recording and reviewing the debate several times, I drew the simple conclusion that these were two different characters—or at the very least, two different characters for the moment. Ehrlich admitted he did not prepare and brought the unscripted swagger and off-the-cuff demeanor that carried him throughout his term. While this was a demeanor that may have played well on his home ‘turf’, it probably failed with the objective viewer who was looking for forensics or facts---versus Aristotle's Epideictic or Ceremonial rhetoric. Instead of laying out the plan for the next term of his Administration, Ehrlich jeered, veered and cheered the viewers into sticking with him. He was and is very good at this role and depending on your expectations, he was at his best.

Conversely, O’Malley was well-scripted, fully-prepared and frighteningly ‘wired’ at times. It was as though someone wound him up and sat him in the chair; then hit the on-switch. However, in the end, and when he moved himself to the position of informed-aggressor, O’Malley would have realized great gains in the hearts and minds of the objective voter---had the events received extensive TV coverage. He was clearly the better-prepared of the two candidates; and his command of the data, facts and issues (forensics) o overcame the pathos-style of Ehrlich.

In the end, no one could have missed the sharp contrast between the two participants and while it wasn't the “Thrill in Manila” it was truly worthwhile if only for the purpose of gleaning data on the finer points of rhetorical image and word analysis.

A Rhetorical Stank

Here is an image of President Bush that's been attached to a popsicle stick and stuck into a pile of dog shit near the sidewalk in Baltimore, MD. The artist is anonymous and their intentions vague, but surely we can glean some information about the text with a good rhetorical analysis.

Obvously, this is a case of the medium affecting the message. It must be one of the few, if not the first, rhetorical texts to use un-scooped dog poop as a medium. Un-scooped dog poop is the bane of urban dweller. It’s a filthy, smelly mess that gets stepped in and tracked into the house; it’s the product of rude, inconsiderate lawbreakers with no regard for their fellow humans; and it’s just another someone else’s mess that we’re going to have to clean up.

Now what could this have to do with George W. Bush? Is there some sort of association the artist would like us to make? Apparently so.

It’s easy to imagine the artist as a member of the urban liberal elite; well-educated, wealthy, and with a little bit of time on his hands. Perhaps they’re a responsible dog owner fed up with the irresponsibility of other dog owners and they’re using these flags as a call to arms for citizens to stand up and pay attention to the lawbreakers. Perhaps they want us to do something about the travesties and injustice being perpetrated against people all over the world … ‘er in Hampden.

It’s also apparent (through analysis) that the intended audience is the artist’s liberal contemporaries and the rhetorical appeal is Ethos. The audience’s opinion of the credibility and character of George W. Bush is such that his portrait makes for the perfect marker to bring attention to the un-scooped dog poop problem in this city. His Ethos will certainly have a powerful persuasive influence on this audience.

Look at this face (the one on the right):