The perfect Democratic Convention cartoon (+ 9 other political cartoons)
I love cartoons, especially political cartoons – and I think the Brits are still the world’s number one when it comes to making them.
What makes the political cartoon such a perfect medium is that it can deliver quite complex stories and ideas within one frame.
Take the one that opened this column, about the Democratic convention. You could easily write three or four full editorial articles, or blog posts or traditional columns about that one cartoon. More to the point though, it’s the cartoon that distills its loud and clear (and very funny) message from a wealth of other sources – and I would say it does it better than most journalists and commentators will ever do.
What helps the cartoonist, of course, is that he or she is not limited to the rules and mores of strict journalism. There is, for instance, no way in Hell you could deliver the following message within the confines of a, let’s say, Washington Post editorial, or London Times obituary - but a cartoonist will be happy enough to present his or her case in the following manner:
It’s not just the stories that take up most of the daily newspapers that are translated into cartoons. Sometimes, a cartoon can present you with the abstract kind of story that philosophers and moralists turn into lengthy (and mostly dusty) tombs.
Again, you would have to write a lot of columns in order to translate the following cartoon into prose:
There’s that old saying about the pen being mightier than the sword. Those translators and publishers of Rushdie’s Satanic Verses who were killed by Islamist imbeciles might not quite agree with that sentiment but it’s certainly true that words are often seen as very potent weapons in any ideological war.
No wonder that cartoons, which can be worth a thousand editorials, are often the cause for such disapproval and, these days, also the cause of global unrest and rioting.
So, the following cartoon won’t be the last one to deal with both Islam and the overreaction and hypocrisy of a rather large number of its more demented followers but it will do for this column:
Cartoons love to deal with global issues, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that there are quite a few of them that deal with global warming. Most of these cartoons don’t really work, since the whole subject matter inspires too much dogmatic belief on both sides of the argument.
The biggest risk that any political cartoonist runs is to turn into a humourless zealot and this infliction has made for many a leaden text balloon. So, there are definitely a large number of decidedly unfunny global warming cartoons.
I love the following one, though, since it’s nicely irreverent on all kinds of levels:
As I said before, cartoons can be incredibly good at telling very complex stories about all kinds of political issues. The following cartoon is a perfect example of this. It deals, on an intelligent and human level, with the despair of Lebanon – and also shows us the larger and quite sinister ramifications.
It is obviously not laugh-out-loud funny but then it wasn’t intended to be. Some of the best cartoons often are not funny in that way. What they give us comes closest to what is sometimes described as ‘Merlin’s laughter.’
The famed magician, supposedly, once laughed out loud when he saw a beggar, sitting next to a rubbish heap. Merlin laughed because he was the only one who knew that below the rubbish a priceless piece of jewelry was hidden.
There can be a lot of Merlin’s laughter in cartoons, like this lebanon cartoon shows:
I love the next one. You need to know a bit about modern political history to appreciate it but if you know the background story (I think) this one is priceless – but I’m sure you remember how Bush looked deep in Putin’s eyes and immediately knew he could trust the soul that lived inside the leader (and how McCain joked that when he looked in Putin’s eyes all he saw were the lettters K,G & B.)
This one is about that story – but I like to think it’s also about the vanity of many of humanity’s, mostly short-lived fancies and wishful thinking. To my mind the cartoon also says a lot about the kind of hubris that gives us book titles like ‘The end of history’ – but, much more to the point, it’s also a very funny cartoon:
More of Merlin’s laughter in this following cartoon. Again, it only needs this one picture to tell us a Hell of a lot about the sad, and bloody, and quite probably doomed story of Zimbabwe, its psychopathic leader and its despicable South-African neighbour Mbeki.
It’s decidedly as unfunny as a cartoon can get – but it is also very good:
I saw the following cartoon on a Dutch site, surprisingly enough. I think all of our political cartoonists are inferior to (most of) their American counterparts – and the Americans can’t really come close to their British colleagues. So, I was rather surprised to see the following cartoon.
It’s not the most original one about China, Tibet and the Olympic games but it’s still quite good, so I’ll include it here. The title of the cartoon reads ‘The Olympic spirit’ and the text balloon shows Baron de Coubertin’s, ‘Partaking is more important than winning:’
I suppose you can’t do a piece about (contemporary) political cartoons and not do something about the Iraq war.
So, here’s an old one, from January 30 2003, when, in theory, history as we know it now was not yet written. In reality, it most probably already was – but that’s not something that would surprise your average cartoonist, or those of us who’ve been following the news and reading the cartoons for quite a bit longer than Bush and his poodle tried to fit the world to their idea of that famous new world order.
Anyway, here’s the tenth and final cartoon of this column. Hope you enjoyed them:
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe today to get free updates by email or RSS.
August 27th, 2008 at 01:29
I too love political cartoons–these are good–unfortunately the top one is wrong(the advice) He needs the Clintons–especially Hillary and her voters…otherwise I am afraid McCain is good to go–her followers are not flocking behind obama as he had hoped.
Perhaps after her speech tonight at the Dem. convention but who knows…
August 27th, 2008 at 01:54
Hi A., thanks fot the comment.
I agree with that - and I don’t understand that nobody told Obama that it was a bad idea not even to vet Hillary. I don’t like the sense of entitlement her most enthusiastic (and sometimes rabid) admirers have but I think it was bad tactics to be seen or perceived as snubbing her.
On the other hand, if he would have vetted her and then not chosen her, some of her followers would have claimed that would be even more disrespectful. I think he will have to accept that what I call the lunatic fringe is lost for good.
Still, most of those Hillary voters (I trust) will remember that they are also Democrats. This nonsense (about voting for McCain because Obama didn’t show enough respect to an opponent who didn’t show much respect herself during that first campaign) needs to stop. That is, if you really believe in the things the Democratic party stands for.
I don’t mean this as a blanket advise to the American voter but for Democrats - and especially for female voters who were inspired by Hillary Clinton, it would almost be an obsecenity to vote for some old (same old) Republican male, who is pro life and who, in the next four years, could fill the Supreme Court with even more pro life judges.
I would not like to be in those women’s shoes when they have to explain to their daughters how their grudge vote was responsible for taking away the choice of millions of American women - and that could easily happen: for it will be another tight race, I feel.
Anyway, it’s still some time till polling day. I predict that Hillary will give a very good speech (I’ve given up all hope for Bill Clinton; he’s really gone weird and bitter and too full of himself and his legacy.) I think Obama will do just enough to ensure that most of the Hillary voters will feel they can vote for him in November.
Back to that cartoon though. The cartoon was not about that part of the business - but it was a perfect tableau vivant: it showed the perceived sense of entitlement of the Clintons, the perceived disdain of the older Kennedy for what HE saw as the young upstart Bill Clinton and the all too real insecurity and irritation on the face of Obama, who must feel that he will be damned if he does or if he does not give the Clintons what some think is their due.
All of that in one snapshot cartoon ain’t bad,
J.
August 31st, 2008 at 06:56
agreed on all points–The cartoon had all elements of what was transpiring—which was great–
Bill Clinton did come thru–in his way-
I am not an embittered Clinton supporter -just a wary Obama supporter–
anything that appears too good to be true –usually is.
If people see him as the second coming of MLK(and they do) they should know for fact that MLK had to be paid to accept his role as a leader of the bus strikes (after Rosa Park’s famous sit-down) and marches that led to “the I had a Dream,” He declined the task until offered money so it didn’t appeared to be his “calling.”
If I am wrong, blame it on historians, please.–lol
August 31st, 2008 at 20:31
Hi,
I didn’t mean to suggest you were one of that lot, of course - and I fully share your reservations about Obama.
One of the strangest differences between the US and ‘old’ Europe is the way our respective people look at politicians (and elections.) Over here, most of us are mostly cynical about (or at best weary of) the political classes. We don’t trust them; neither on a personal, nor a professional level.
Americans also tend to be cynical about their politicians while the latter are in office but something strange happens in the US during the presidential election: then all past experiences seem to be forgotten and millions are buying into the messages of one ‘Saviour’ or the other. To put it crudely, election time is wet dream heaven for every snake oil merchant in the business.
Look at a Romney, for Christ’s sake. Yes, he lost but that he even came as close to winning as he did is a testimony to the kind of seasonal folly Americans are prone to in an election year.
So, if I were an American I would vote for Obama in November (as I would have voted for Hillary if that coin had landed on the other side.) Not because I have huge expectations from him - I mean: he IS a politician and that’s not exactly a selling point to me - but because I know enough about McCain and the Republicans to never vote for the latter.
I don’t know enough about the background of King - but most of the time people don’t rise to a public eminence by being nice. Not that that matters per se, if what they do when they reach the top is worthwhile, but a useful ending does not necessarily mean a virtuous beginning.
Still, he was shot dead and history loves its martyrs. Again, I don’t know enough to say much about the King ’story’ but, in general, I would always advise people te be cautious about the ones they annoint. Being a victim doesn’t make you virtuous or saintly. What you did during your forming & productive years before you were shot, burnt or crucified matters; not the manner of your passing.
End of sermon,
J.
September 6th, 2008 at 05:46
Americans also tend to be cynical about their politicians while the latter are in office but something strange happens in the US during the presidential election: then all past experiences seem to be forgotten and millions are buying into the messages of one ‘Saviour’ or the other. To put it crudely, election time is wet dream heaven for every snake oil merchant in the business.
You made the case too well–Americans tend to buy into the pipe dream–but who is the true “saviour?” and which will turn out the snake oil salesman?
Can I have a -non of the above box to check?
Another thought-if all this money they raise during their campaigns to be elected were put to good use–the trickle down effect might work and change might not be necessary–Why can’t a good man( or woman) spent 1000.00 and be just as electable? I personally don’t want to hear that someone raised 12-25 million in this month or that–FOR WHAT
September 6th, 2008 at 07:26
Thanks again for the thoughts. Me, I’m definitely one of the ‘none of the above boxes’ type of guys - or, when I feel grumpy and Shakespearean enough, that becomes more of a, “A plague on both your houses.”
And yes, wouldn’t it be nice if all of those millions would have gone to the nation’s much-beleaguered libraries…?
J.