Aestheticization as propaganda - Revision history

wikademia>Dr. Fresh at 11:30, 18 November 2010

2010-11-18T11:30:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:30, 18 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{Article issues\|POV =June 2009\|refimprove =February 2009\|essay-like =December 2007}}~~
	{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}
	~~<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.~~

	~~{{Semiotics}}~~
	[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.{{Fact\|date=June 2009}}		[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.{{Fact\|date=June 2009}}

wikademia>Wikademia: 46 revisions

2009-06-14T20:58:41Z

46 revisions

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:58, 14 June 2009
(No difference)

wikademia>SmackBot: Date maintenance tags and general fixes

2009-06-13T21:33:26Z

Date maintenance tags and general fixes

Show changes

wikademia>Bigdaddy1981: npov tag

2009-06-13T03:48:22Z

npov tag

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:48, 13 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}		{{POV}}{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}
	<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.		<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.
	{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}		{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}

wikademia>Bigdaddy1981: adding fact tags

2009-06-13T03:34:19Z

adding fact tags

wikademia>Bigdaddy1981: prod tag

2009-06-13T03:27:55Z

prod tag

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:27, 13 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}
			<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.
	{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}		{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}

wikademia>Robofish: Added {{refimprove}} tag to article. using Friendly

2009-02-28T04:36:59Z

Added {{refimprove}} tag to article. using Friendly

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:36, 28 February 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}
	{{Semiotics}}		{{Semiotics}}

wikademia>Nauticashades: Reverted edits by 98.223.133.81 to last version by SmackBot

2008-06-05T22:24:29Z

Reverted edits by 98.223.133.81 to last version by SmackBot

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:24, 5 June 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}
	{{Semiotics}}		{{Semiotics}}
	[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''~~adfadfdtheticization~~ as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.		[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.

	==Overview==		==Overview==

98.223.133.81 at 22:06, 5 June 2008

2008-06-05T22:06:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:06, 5 June 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}
	{{Semiotics}}		{{Semiotics}}
	[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''~~aestheticization~~ as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.		[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''adfadfdtheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.

	==Overview==		==Overview==

wikademia>SmackBot: Date/fix the maintenance tags or gen fixes using AWB

2007-12-14T08:59:36Z

Date/fix the maintenance tags or gen fixes using AWB

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:59, 14 December 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~essay~~-~~entry~~}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}
	{{Semiotics}}		{{Semiotics}}
	[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.		[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:48, 13 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}		{{POV}}{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}
	<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.		<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.
	{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}		{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:27, 13 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{dated prod\|concern = That this page has survived for 4 years appalls me. This reads exactly as though the creator is passing an undergraduate essay -- totally unsourced -- and pushing the most outrageously blatant bias possible off as an encyclopedia entry. \|month = June\|day = 13\|year = 2009\|time = 03:27\|timestamp = 20090613032754}}
			<!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod\|reason" -->.
	{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}		{{refimprove\|date=February 2009}}
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:34, 13 June 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:
	{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}		{{Essay-like\|date=December 2007}}
	{{Semiotics}}		{{Semiotics}}
	[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.		[[Aesthetics]] is the branch of [[philosophy]] that studies the nature of [[beauty]] and the [[moral]] [[Value (ethics)\|value]] of [[art]], so '''aestheticization as [[propaganda]]''' is the process of presenting any form of behaviour considered dangerous or threatening as an acceptable means of promoting a political aim, for example violence that may involve injury or death.{{fact}}

	==Overview==		==Overview==
	Each culture formulates mechanisms for considering the acceptability of behaviour and its outcomes. For example, [[utilitarianism]] may take the [[ontological]] view that the greatest good will be achieved for the largest number of people if violence is used in particular situations, i.e. morality as utility is expressed in the form of a [[cost-benefit analysis]].		Each culture formulates mechanisms for considering the acceptability of behaviour and its outcomes.{{fact}} For example, [[utilitarianism]] may take the [[ontological]] view that the greatest good will be achieved for the largest number of people if violence is used in particular situations, i.e. morality as utility is expressed in the form of a [[cost-benefit analysis]].

	Propaganda is a method used to influence the [[discourse]] by offering alternative constructions of the [[paradigm]]s of social acceptability, no matter whether the tests are described as moral, ethical, pragmatic or otherwise. Anything that is said or shown through the mass media can be true or false, sincere or dishonest, but propaganda is distinguishable from conventional types of political or religious communication.		Propaganda is a method used to influence the [[discourse]] by offering alternative constructions of the [[paradigm]]s of social acceptability, no matter whether the tests are described as moral, ethical, pragmatic or otherwise.{{or}} Anything that is said or shown through the mass media can be true or false, sincere or dishonest, but propaganda is distinguishable from conventional types of political or religious communication.{{who}}

	In [[communication theory]] it is described as [[framing (social sciences)\|framing]] in that the words or images selected are packaged to sell an interpretation of events to a specific audience. If the framing is successful, the paradigms will expand to admit the proposed or actual violence into the class of events considered acceptable (or, in some cases, desirable).		In [[communication theory]] it is described as [[framing (social sciences)\|framing]]{{fact}} in that the words or images selected are packaged to sell an interpretation of events to a specific audience. If the framing is successful, the paradigms will expand to admit the proposed or actual violence into the class of events considered acceptable (or, in some cases, desirable).

	==The aestheticization of violence for political purposes==		==The aestheticization of violence for political purposes==
	Though many tools are available for political purposes, the threat or use of violence attracts those of a more proactive disposition as the simplest way to resolve any conflict or achieve any ends, because its strategies are well-known and weapons easily obtained. When asked to identify alternative nonviolent techniques, people find it difficult to visualise effective methods; moreover, sceptics can quickly raise moral and practical dilemmas to complicate any set of choices until violence appears the easiest option.		Though many tools are available for political purposes, the threat or use of violence attracts those of a more proactive disposition{{fact}} as the simplest way to resolve any conflict or achieve any ends, because its strategies are well-known and weapons easily obtained.{{fact}} When asked to identify alternative nonviolent techniques, people{{who}} find it difficult to visualise effective methods;{{fact}} moreover, sceptics can quickly raise moral and practical dilemmas to complicate any set of choices until violence appears the easiest option.

	Thus, this topic is relevant across a spectrum of causes from those who disagree about social or commercial practices within their local community, to those unhappy with the political regime in their own country, to those who believe that another country is a threat.		Thus, this topic is relevant across a spectrum of causes from those who disagree about social or commercial practices within their local community, to those unhappy with the political regime in their own country, to those who believe that another country is a threat.{{or}}

	Nevertheless, a person or group wishing to use violence as a strategy must overcome objections from both prospective supporters and the other interested parties. No cause will prosper until the majority agrees with the justifications offered for the decision to use force, because all who adopt aggressive strategies require emotional and logistical support from the local community for success.		Nevertheless, a person or group wishing to use violence as a strategy must overcome objections from both prospective supporters and the other interested parties. No cause will prosper until the majority agrees with the justifications offered for the decision to use force,{{fact}} because all who adopt aggressive strategies require emotional and logistical support from the local community for success.{{fact}}

	Hence, the aestheticization process is used to direct the audience's interpretation of events by shifting the [[value (Semiotics)\|values]] of the [[lexical (Semiotics)\|lexical]] words used to minimise consideration of the moral, ethical or other costs. In ''[[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]'', [[George Orwell]] proposed that the means to achieve complete control of people's minds or their ability to think rationally about the issues at stake is to invent a new language, more primitive and less articulate than current "oldspeak". That is the intention of aestheticization. It seeks to subvert the rationality of the current paradigms through ''doublespeak'' and ''goodthink'', and to persuade the majority that the use of violence in the particular context is not merely necessary or expedient, but just and glorious in the prosecution of higher ideals.		Hence, the aestheticization process is used to direct the audience's interpretation of events by shifting the [[value (Semiotics)\|values]] of the [[lexical (Semiotics)\|lexical]] words{{fact}} used to minimise consideration of the moral, ethical or other costs. In ''[[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]'', [[George Orwell]] proposed that the means to achieve complete control of people's minds or their ability to think rationally about the issues at stake is to invent a new language, more primitive and less articulate than current "oldspeak". That is the intention of aestheticization.{{fact}} It seeks to subvert the rationality of the current paradigms through ''doublespeak'' and ''goodthink'', and to persuade the majority that the use of violence in the particular context is not merely necessary or expedient, but just and glorious in the prosecution of higher ideals.{{fact}}

	Whether the use of violence is or is not justifiable is irrelevant for these purposes. The sole interest lies in the mechanism for the transfer of the particular use from the paradigm of unacceptable into the paradigm of acceptable. In contemporary terms, this brings [[semiotics]] into a position of prominence both to set the frame and to deconstruct it.		Whether the use of violence is or is not justifiable is irrelevant for these purposes.{{fact}} The sole interest lies in the mechanism for the transfer of the particular use from the paradigm of unacceptable into the paradigm of acceptable. In contemporary terms, this brings [[semiotics]] into a position of prominence both to set the frame and to deconstruct it.{{?}}

	==An example of semiotic analysis==		==An example of semiotic analysis==
	In January, 2003, the U.S. implemented a battle plan based on a concept developed at the National Defense University. Called "[[Shock and Awe]]" (see [[Americanism (semiotics)\|Americanism]]), its stated purpose was the psychological destruction of the enemy's will to fight rather than the physical destruction of his military forces. The choice of name is revealing, even at a [[denotation (Semiotics)\|denotative]] level.		In January, 2003, the U.S. implemented a battle plan based on a concept developed at the National Defense University.{{fact}} Called "[[Shock and Awe]]" (see [[Americanism (semiotics)\|Americanism]]), its stated purpose{{fact}} was the psychological destruction of the enemy's will to fight rather than the physical destruction of his military forces. The choice of name is revealing,{{or}} even at a [[denotation (Semiotics)\|denotative]] level.

	''Shock'' refers to the surprise and distress caused by events and, when associated with battles, means the violent interaction of individuals or groups as they join in combat. Meanwhile, ''awe'' is an overwhelming sense of wonder or admiration that may, to a greater or lesser extent, be associated with fear. But, at a [[connotation (Semiotics)\|connotative]] level, the use of the words is intended to fulfil several distinct aims:		''Shock'' refers to the surprise and distress caused by events{{fact}} and, when associated with battles, means the violent interaction of individuals or groups as they join in combat.{{or}} Meanwhile, ''awe'' is an overwhelming sense of wonder or admiration that may, to a greater or lesser extent, be associated with fear. But, at a [[connotation (Semiotics)\|connotative]] level, the use of the words is intended to fulfil several distinct aims{{fact}} :

	In reality, the army may be going to kill large numbers of people, both combatant and non-combatant. These words are not the [[action (philosophy)\|action]]s but they represent them at a [[symbolic]] level. Analysis shows that the words fall within the [[paradigm]] of [[lexical (Semiotics)\|lexical]] words signifying the [[emotion]]al responses to external stimuli: responses that can only be experienced by those who are alive. The intended [[implication (pragmatics)\|implication]] is that enemy soldiers and civilians will be so disoriented by the display of power that they will simply surrender rather than face the threatened injury or death. Hence, the enemy casualty count will be low and the immediate gains will significantly outweigh the moral, ethical or other costs of the enterprise.		In reality, the army may be going to kill large numbers of people, both combatant and non-combatant. These words are not the [[action (philosophy)\|action]]s but they represent them at a [[symbolic]] level. Analysis shows{{fact}} that the words fall within the [[paradigm]] of [[lexical (Semiotics)\|lexical]] words signifying the [[emotion]]al responses to external stimuli{{fact}} : responses that can only be experienced by those who are alive. The intended [[implication (pragmatics)\|implication]] is that enemy soldiers and civilians will be so disoriented by the display of power that they will simply surrender rather than face the threatened injury or death. Hence, the enemy casualty count will be low{{fact}} and the immediate gains will significantly outweigh the moral, ethical or other costs of the enterprise.{{fact}}

	All warfare involves death and destruction on a scale that may be shocking to the sensibilities of the ordinary person, so what is the [[value (Semiotics)\|value]] of these words? Applying the [[commutation test (Semiotics)\|commutation test]], substitutes for "shock" might be: excitement, impact, and surprise, as opposed to: scare, trauma, and upset.		All warfare involves death and destruction on a scale that may be shocking to the sensibilities of the ordinary person,{{or}} so what is the [[value (Semiotics)\|value]] of these words? Applying the [[commutation test (Semiotics)\|commutation test]], substitutes for "shock" might be: excitement, impact, and surprise, as opposed to: scare, trauma, and upset.{{or}}

	The substitutes for "awe" might be: admiration, reverence and wonder, as opposed to fear, horror, and terror. Both words are capable of signifying less appealing qualities but, by setting them in a conjoined relationship, the expectation is that they will both be given the same value. The ''sui generis'' rule applies so that second and subsequent words in a conjoined sequence define the class. Evaluating the substitutes for "shock", the degree of match as [[synonym]]s seems reasonably adjacent and the balance of connotation can be considered balanced.		The substitutes for "awe" might be: admiration, reverence and wonder, as opposed to fear, horror, and terror.{{or}} Both words are capable of signifying less appealing qualities but, by setting them in a conjoined relationship, the expectation is that they will both be given the same value.{{fact}} The ''sui generis'' rule applies{{fact}} so that second and subsequent words in a conjoined sequence define the class. Evaluating the substitutes for "shock", the degree of match as [[synonym]]s seems reasonably{{or}} adjacent and the balance of connotation can be considered balanced.

	This would give the word "shock" a relatively neutral value. Since the preponderance of connotation to "awe" is positive (the negative substitutes are less directly synonymous), the relationship in the phrase is intended to invoke values suggesting a certain degree of magnificence in the technology and the manner of its delivery. Not only those on the receiving end are expected to experience awe: all external observers may be impressed by this display of power, and, perhaps, feel not a little afraid — a useful general propaganda gain.		This would give the word "shock" a relatively neutral value.{{fact}} Since the preponderance of connotation to "awe" is positive (the negative substitutes are less directly synonymous), the relationship in the phrase is intended{{fact}} to invoke values suggesting a certain degree of magnificence in the technology and the manner of its delivery. Not only those on the receiving end are expected to experience awe: all external observers may be impressed by this display of power, and, perhaps, feel not a little afraid — a useful general propaganda gain.{{fact}}

	The connotation of the word ''awe'' tends to refer to unequal power relationships, e.g. a beginner may be in awe of the skills of a professional, an ordinary mortal is in awe of a deity, etc. The implication is that this war is such an asymmetrical contest that the ''enemy'' might just as well give up before the battle is joined with such an overwhelmingly superior force.		The connotation of the word ''awe'' tends to refer to unequal power relationships{{fact}} , e.g. a beginner may be in awe of the skills of a professional, an ordinary mortal is in awe of a deity, etc. The implication is that this war is such an asymmetrical contest that the ''enemy'' might just as well give up before the battle is joined with such an overwhelmingly superior force.

	Figurative usages provide what the semiotician [[Roland Barthes]] called a "pleasure of the text" (1970), i.e. the pleasurable reaction produced by a clever arrangement of [[sign (semiotics)\|signs]]. So [[literal and figurative language\|figurative]] words are more memorable than literal words, particularly when used in unexpected contexts. Using this phrase in the otherwise literal context of declaring the opening of violent hostilities is incongruous and that contextualisation has made the phrase memorable, effectively displacing all the imagery of imminent death and destruction that might otherwise have dominated.		Figurative usages provide what the semiotician [[Roland Barthes]] called a "pleasure of the text" (1970),{{fact}} i.e. the pleasurable reaction produced by a clever arrangement of [[sign (semiotics)\|signs]].{{fact}} So [[literal and figurative language\|figurative]] words are more memorable than literal words{{fact}} , particularly when used in unexpected contexts.{{fact}} Using this phrase in the otherwise literal context of declaring the opening of violent hostilities is incongruous and that contextualisation has made the phrase memorable, effectively displacing all the imagery of imminent death and destruction that might otherwise have dominated.

	Monosyllabic words wield considerable [[rhetoric]]al might: they are short, punchy, and memorable. Through the careful mixing of short and long words, the impact provided by the short words stands out against the rhythmic flow provided by long words. Rhetorical theory maintains that any proposition can be expressed in a variety of ways.		Monosyllabic words wield considerable [[rhetoric]]al might{{fact}} : they are short, punchy, and memorable. Through the careful mixing of short and long words, the impact provided by the short words stands out against the rhythmic flow provided by long words. Rhetorical theory maintains that any proposition can be expressed in a variety of ways. {{fact}}

	Hence, when persuasion is the overriding goal, the rhetorical perspective suggests that the manner in which a statement is expressed may be more important than its propositional content. In this instance, the repetition of two sounds, a binary pair of semi-[[onomatopoeic]] words, produces [[hyperbole]]. Whether written or spoken with an appropriate intonation and body language, the phrase is memorable and serves its aestheticization function.		Hence, when persuasion is the overriding goal, the rhetorical perspective suggests that the manner in which a statement is expressed may be more important than its propositional content.{{fact}} In this instance, the repetition of two sounds, a binary pair of semi-[[onomatopoeic]] words, produces [[hyperbole]]. Whether written or spoken with an appropriate intonation and body language, the phrase is memorable and serves its aestheticization function.

	==See also==		==See also==