Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    using cartoons to spread seditious truth - case study 'Nuclear demolition'

    According to Yaakov Kirschen, cartoonists are able to insert ideas into your head using cartoons, and a "unifying force for mass movements quests for power".

    http://www.yale.edu/yiisa/yaakovkirs...paper12110.pdf

    These guys were ditched by Yale for basically parasitically feeding of Yale's good name and churning out Israeli propaganda. If you read that particular paper it's filled with so many idiotic comments and contradictions. Despite that, I think there is at least some truth for cartoons being an effective way to spread seditious ideas.

    The 911 nuclear demolition theory is the case study I'd like to investigate. I know what you are thinking, we've already a thread on 911 already. This thread isn't about whether this 911 conspiracy theory is correct, just what is the most effective way to use cartoons to spread it.

    The theory has many components, you can read the book here: https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:911...d_Truth_v2.pdf . The main one is that 3 nuclear weapons were detonated 75 or so metres below the basement of the three buildings which fell that day.

    There are a number of secondary components, such as this being organized by Mossad, and missiles being used.

    Attached is my first attempt. It shows Bush riding a granite missile which will hit the tower. It's a throwback to 'Dr. Strangelove'.

    I think this cartoon fails at delivering the nuclear demolition message. But it's my first attempt. I'm having trouble boiling down such a complicated theory into a simple and funny cartoon. Please post ideas for cartoons that would depict nuclear demolition more effectively (and funnier)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,883
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,153 Times in 1,066 Posts
    The cartoon fails, period. The idea you're trying to convey is fucking stupid. The "hurrr durrrr Dubya is a cowboy" shtick has been used by every able bodied liberal with a pen and a keyboard. There's some nice anti-Israel sentiments thrown in. To top it all off you make a pop-culture reference to a movie that I'm not entirely sure you've seen. And like all good 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're trivializing the death of 3000 of your fellow man so you can stand on a soapbox made of salt.

    And only people with weak minds would allow something like this to be planted in their mind.
    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."

  4. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to s.ketch For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Washington (state), USA
    Posts
    459
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 143 Times in 127 Posts
    psyopjunkie:

    wow, I can tell from this clever and totally original cartoon that you fully understand the complexities and misinterpretations of 911 conspiracy theories as well as those of Israelie politics and the Israelie/Arab conflict. Please, make more cartoons to impart your wisdom on us, since we all live in the land of rock people, where the weekend-political-warrior and freshman-liberal-groupie is king!

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Saramel For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts

  8. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Thanks for the feedback. Even if the cartoon makes you angry, that's still good feedback. I'll try my best to improve.

    Could you be more constructive though. For example, "what works about Arab cartoons are ... which is missing in your piece".

    I did want to add that Simpsons made jokes about abu ghraib, George bush made jokes about no WMD in iraq, so there seems to be alot of trivializing of death and suffering going around. You're definately welcome to keep discussing this issue though in this thread. How do holocaust denial cartoons get around this problem of angering readers, for example? Maybe I should reread Yaakov Kirschen's piece for tips.

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    560
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 91 Times in 48 Posts
    I don't think this type of political cartoon is capable of implanting ideas of any sort. Planting an idea takes more than a single frame. I can see maybe something like an animated show planting ideas. You would be surprised how many people form opinions based on Family Guy or South Park. Even then, it isn't really planting an idea so much as having an "effective" way to push a message.

    As far as the two cartoons you posted here, I don't find them effective, funny or even sensical. I'm not really sure what the point of the second one is at all. I see the missiles, but why is the statue of liberty like that? I'm not much of a cartoonist, so I'm not even sure how these can be improved.

    Honestly, it seems like you are just trying to be deliberately offensive for no real reason. If you actually want help you should start a sketchbook here.
    Remember, just because you have their attention doesn't mean you have their respect-Dale Gribble (from King of the Hill)
    Old Sketchbook 1
    Old Sketchbook 2
    Newest sketchbook

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,023
    Thanks
    2,164
    Thanked 3,346 Times in 1,120 Posts
    ... nukes? That's a new one.

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,272 Times in 887 Posts
    Hey, anybody know where I could buy some "warhammer gold?"

  12. #9
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,177
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 2,362 Times in 1,214 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by psyopjunkie View Post
    According to Yaakov Kirschen, cartoonists are able to insert ideas into your head using cartoons, and a "unifying force for mass movements quests for power".
    Please. All you have to do is read one Chick Tract to know this theory's full of crap. Editorial cartoons are merely preaching to the choir, which is why they work so poorly on the Net. Nobody is going to keep coming back to a page full of things they think are dumb, unless they're entertaining and dumb.
    *** Sketchbook * Landscapes * Portfolio * Store***

    "There are two kinds of students: the self-taught and the hopeless."
    - Dr. Piotr Rudnicki

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vineris For This Useful Post:


  14. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,830
    Thanks
    1,110
    Thanked 1,312 Times in 544 Posts
    Sorry man, your cartoon is a swing and a miss.


    You're also doing these cartoons for the sake of doing them with no forethought nor even a decently considered opinion on the topic, and that has fuck-all depth to it.


    Wait until something pops up that really gives you a strong reaction then maybe try again. Maybe.

  15. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    737
    Thanks
    477
    Thanked 497 Times in 270 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by vineris View Post
    Please. All you have to do is read one Chick Tract to know this theory's full of crap. Editorial cartoons are merely preaching to the choir, which is why they work so poorly on the Net. Nobody is going to keep coming back to a page full of things they think are dumb, unless they're entertaining and dumb.
    Hahaha...Chick tract..haven't heard about those in a while. That being said, editorial cartoons are great for representing an idea across culture, educational, and language barriers in a single image.

    It's a way to speak out, and that's important. Even if we disagree, it not our place to silence someone.

  16. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Not so secret lab
    Posts
    402
    Thanks
    148
    Thanked 182 Times in 129 Posts
    Actually I think there is some truth to the idea that political cartoons can change opinions and plant ideas in people's heads. Assuming the audience is receptive to the idea and that there is some truth or plausibility to it of course. We see it in newspaper cartoons all the time, but not so much about convincing people to completely change their ideas, just giving them a way to interpret news events.

    I admire good political cartoonists, it is a real conceptual and artistic skillset.

  17. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggum View Post
    I don't think this type of political cartoon is capable of implanting ideas of any sort. Planting an idea takes more than a single frame. I can see maybe something like an animated show planting ideas. You would be surprised how many people form opinions based on Family Guy or South Park. Even then, it isn't really planting an idea so much as having an "effective" way to push a message.

    As far as the two cartoons you posted here, I don't find them effective, funny or even sensical. I'm not really sure what the point of the second one is at all. I see the missiles, but why is the statue of liberty like that? I'm not much of a cartoonist, so I'm not even sure how these can be improved.

    Honestly, it seems like you are just trying to be deliberately offensive for no real reason. If you actually want help you should start a sketchbook here.
    I assumed others would be interested in drawing cartoons promoting this theory (and better at it). I'll give a week or so and if it's just me, you're right I'll ask it to be locked.

    I do agree about your skepticism of the power of cartoons to implant messages (the author watched too much star wars I think!). But it would be better to try drawing cartoons for a controversial idea which is not being taken up and try to get it popular. Then you would know it worked!

    Even though you aren't much of a cartoonist, your feedback is helpful. The second cartoon is supposed to show the missiles are fast, and something impossible happened that day.

    edit:

    You might need to know some info about dustified matter to make sense of the second cartoon:

    The state of being “dustified” in this particular case is in fact a kind of very interesting state of
    any material. Except only after an underground nuclear explosion, it can not be found anywhere else in
    the nature. It looks like this: while remaining seemingly “solid” the so “dustified” rock (or whatever other
    material) will be immediately reduced to microscopic dust under slightest mechanical pressure. You can
    even crush this kind of material to fine dust by simply pressing it with your bare hands for example – it is
    that fragile. It could be probably compared with an extra dry (means deprived of any oil) halva or with a
    snowball made from snow which was not sticky. Such a “dustified”, yet looking like still “solid” matter will
    be the only filling of the “crushed zone”.


    Video showing steel cables turned to dust:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtElk4aHBWM
    Last edited by psyopjunkie; September 14th, 2011 at 10:11 AM.

  18. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    I'm posting this here because last time I tried posting it in the main 911 thread, it got a message saying a moderator had to approve it, and 24 hours later that still hasn't happened. I tried posting again in the main thread and got the same message. Don't know if its an error with the forum or my proxy but I'd rather it was posted here than not at all.

    Excellent post Jetpack42. I think there are only two types of people, those who care about the truth, and those who care about whatever ideas are convenient for them and their friends at a particular point in time. I thought this thread was dominated by the latter, so there was little point in posting, but having read your post I think I'll try again!

    I'll address just one argument against missiles. They say that because there are so many people in New York, there must have been planes. Let's break this argument down:

    1. there are many witnesses
    2. there is a media that is willing to report any witness statement
    3. so media presentation reflects views of witnesses
    4. there are no reports of missiles, so there were no missiles

    Well surely 2 seems a little dubious given the invasion of Iraq. Former weapons inspectors who believed Iraq did not possess WMDs were put on air by the BBC at 3AM, for example. Given no WMDs were found, it became clear to all that the media fell into the latter category of people. While they promise us that their "Embedding" was just a one off, why believe them?

    Let us look at the witness reports as presented on websites and see what is not reported by the mainstream media:

    Then out of nowhere came this noise. This loud, high-pitched roar that
    seemed to come from all over, but from nowhere in particular. AND THE SECOND
    TOWER JUST EXPLODED. It became amazingly obvious to anyone there that what
    we all had hoped was a terrible accident was actually an overt act of
    hostility. I DIDN'T SEE THE PLANE HIT,ALTHOUGH I WAS LOOKING AT THE TOWER AT
    THE TIME.


    http://www.911closeup.com/nico/witne...adictions.html

    So you have witnesses who didn't see what hit the building at all.

    Let us look at some objective video footage of a missile hitting the pentagon:

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08...ntagon-leaked/

    And consider also the following 'witness', harley shirt guy http://www.deviantart.com/users/outg...is-harley.html . If the analysis is correct, here you have a planted witness, possibly filmed in a studio with his image altered to hide his identity, saying planes hit the building.

    If planes hit the building, why would they need obvious plants like this?

    Finally aluminium wings of planes can't punch through the walls of the building:

    It shall be also noted that armor-piercing shells fired
    against tanks or other armored items, travel to their targets with a speed at least trice as much as a speed
    of sound – because even though they are made of Wolfram, this fact alone is not enough to achieve
    steel-piercing capability – some very high speed is the second required factor. Speed of a typical armorpiercing
    shell fired from anti-tank cannon is actually over triple sound-speed – it is at least 1000 meters
    per second, and normally even faster than this, while a maximum cruise speed of whatever passenger
    Boeing is subsonic – less than 250 m/sec in the best case. It is good to look at these columns again. And
    imagine that their thick double walls are comparable with some armor used to make tanks. To penetrate
    such a column alone would be a challenge for an armor-piercing shell fired from a long-barreled anti-tank
    cannon at point-blank range. In fact, this concept of “double-walls” is applicable only to the case of an
    armor-piercing shell because it faces a task of penetrating only two walls perpendicular to its way.
    However, an aluminum plane faces a bigger task – it addition to the two walls perpendicular to its way, it
    has to cut two more walls – that are parallel to its way, because each of such tubes has actually 4 walls,
    not just two. And these two parallel to its way columns would evidently have much greater “thickness”…
    Now, I guess, it would be a little bit easier to contemplate over those alleged armor-piercing capabilities of
    the aluminum “Boeings 767” – after comparing such with an artillery armor-piercing shell. Why the “9/11
    Commission” or those “engineers” from the above mentioned NIST, who managed even to count the
    exact number of the “severed” steel columns, did not want then to try to make some penetrating
    experiment with some written-off passenger “Boeing 767” and with several of those columns? That kind of
    experiment would be a really good thing to prove to the doubtful guys that it were really the “terrorist
    planes” that did demolish the World Trade Center… This particular realization led many people to a belief
    that since aluminum kind of planes apparently could not be involved in such a feat, and then only the
    “digital” kind of planes could really break through those dense double-walled steel perimeters of the now
    defunct Twin Towers…


    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/File:911...d_Truth_v2.pdf

  19. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,177
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 2,362 Times in 1,214 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rabbit run View Post
    It's a way to speak out, and that's important. Even if we disagree, it not our place to silence someone.
    That is very true. I just don't think that it's more of an effective way of planting an idea or changing someone's mind than any other. But I think everyone should be equally free to speak.
    *** Sketchbook * Landscapes * Portfolio * Store***

    "There are two kinds of students: the self-taught and the hopeless."
    - Dr. Piotr Rudnicki

  20. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,883
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,153 Times in 1,066 Posts
    Drawing is a language. Cartoons are a dialect. You don't know enough of the language yet. It's like trying to write an editorial in English, when you don't know English. Plus there's a cultural aspect. Certain symbols, ideas, memes, and perspectives that you don't have yet. It's not something that you're going to grasp by throwing up a bunch of cartoons in The Lounge. You need to go back to the drawing board and work on your language. Study your context (politics, history, economics, other cartoons) on the side. Then you may be properly equipped to tackle the task of creating a funny and clever cartoon. Or you still might fall flat because some political cartoons are still stupid regardless of any experience the author has.
    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."

  21. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    58
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
    All of your cartoons suggest conspiracy theories that most of the members here don't really relate to. If a cartoon is showing some important man as a pig or something, next time I'll see him I might think, "hey, he really does remind me of a pig, it's kinda funny". But this example is far from trying to convince someone the world will end by 2012 or aliens are controlling humanity. Get real for a second, there are hundreds of UFO videos on youtube yet we all know they are fake, why would someone change his mind after seeing a simple line drawing?

  22. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    A summary so far.

    *****

    doubt as effectiveness of cartoons -

    wiggum - needs more than one frame
    vineris - editorial cartoons can only preach to choir

    endorse effectiveness of cartoons -

    Atreides - must be truth or plausibility to idea though

    *****

    Discussion has found some important requirements for a successful cartoon

    1. Draftmanship
    2. Depth - the quality of the idea (thx bloghtedart) - for example avoiding cliche (such as George bush as cowboy - thx sketch and saramel)
    3. Symbols - its a language??? (thx sketch)
    4. Humour -
    5. Comprehendible - thx Wiggum

    But unfortunately the consensus is all the above cartoons are failures! That's okay, but we cannot discuss the effectiveness of cartoons with failures! However, I have found a way to work around the problem. It is a trick used by academics. You know twin studies? We will use twin cartoons. Then the question becomes which is the least failure, and the cause is obvious.

    ******

    First up, are symbols important? I doubt this. But let's see arguments for symbols being important:

    1. the audience must decode the message
    2. the symbols help the audience relate it to other cartoons which share the same symbols
    3. SUBLIMINAL MESSAGES because perhaps we only have mental defenses for verbal messages, and not symbolic messages

    But in my opinion, symbols are just a means to depict abstract concepts without using words, and of themselves do not make the meme spread more effective. But let's see. Here is twin cartoon, meant to be read independently. Look at it first then read on.

    Both have the same level of draftmanship, same 'depth' because it is the same idea, and only differ in that the second one uses symbols instead of humour.
    Now consider: if you were an Arab editor which cartoon (top or bottom) would you run (you must pick the better one - doesn't matter if you hate both) to spead the meme "israel stabbed america in the back"???

  23. #19
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    356
    Thanks
    184
    Thanked 249 Times in 125 Posts
    I don't think an editorial cartoon necessarily needs to be funny. Politics and conspiracies can be amusing (or at least satirised amusingly) but 9/11 and nuclear explosives aren't exactly known for their lulz-factors. A dark or surreal image would be more appropriate. Or less inappropriate.

    Here's an example of what I mean by 'dark', something by Martin Rowson. He tends to capture the grimness of whatever is in the news well; sometimes it's funny, sometimes it isn't.

    using cartoons to spread seditious truth - case study 'Nuclear demolition'

    Depicting a conspiracy theory in a similar way would be incredibly difficult, because it's complex and you're probably forced to resort to tired stereotypes and obvious caricatures or references (the Star of David is one I'd retire along with Cowboy Bush, personally). It's simpler when the cartoon refers to an event/person/situation that the public are already familiar with. I'm not sure how informative a cartoon can be without becoming too... busy.

  24. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Noo Yawk
    Posts
    2,175
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 776 Times in 461 Posts
    @psyopjunkie: What are you working with? Just asking because your lines are getting rather uneven.

    That being said, why is it so trendy to insult the establishment?
    Amateur Artist. Professional Asshole.

    Lookit the Pretty!

    Rule #1 of depicting soldiers: KEEP THE DAMN FINGER OFF THE DAMN TRIGGER.

  25. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Gavage - fantastic post! I understand your point and think it's a fantastic twin cartoon to try out - comedy versus tragedy.

    But I want to give the discussion of symbols some more time. So I'll respond more fully later. Thankyou though, especially the picture which is inspirational.

    Falchion - I use pencil, I recently varied the line weight deliberately but I guess unsuccessfully.

  26. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    58
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
    I think most successful political cartoons are cleverly targeting issues which the majority of the public already agrees on. I can't recall any cartoon that managed to change one's political views. They can only enhance them. It's exactly the same as propaganda in my opinion.
    Now, because your specific cartoons are targeting conspiracy theories and not that popular ideas, I can hardly see you getting much positive reviews (that are not pure technical) on this forum. Try posting on some anti-Israel forums and see what types of comments you get there...

    Technically speaking about the last 2 cartoons, the second one seem like pure gore and the first is just straight to the point with only a little bit of cleverness.

    I can't quiet understand what are you investigating, if you want to post a bunch of conspiracy cartoons and see if they penetrate our subconscious go ahead but it won't get ya popular or anything...

  27. #23
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14,051
    Thanks
    4,223
    Thanked 6,727 Times in 4,633 Posts
    I love political cartoons. It has to be contemporary and, no, you don't have to agree with the sentiments, but it does have to show what the general population is sort of thinking and where they're coming from.

    I like both of the below. The first I agree with, the second amuses me as it's parody. Both are valid.

    Attachment 1323350

    Attachment 1323351

    Giving them what you think they will think is amusing never works. Speak it as you see, and find your voice. Other people may agree or disagree, but it has to be with you, not platitudes.

Similar Threads

  1. Art: Sketchup Case Study: Massive Black
    By Parka81 in forum SKETCHUP™
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 27th, 2011, 03:00 PM
  2. IDW #71: Demolition Derby Car - Voting
    By yoitisi in forum Industrial Design of the Week
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2008, 06:13 PM
  3. IDW #71: Demolition Derby Car
    By yoitisi in forum Industrial Design of the Week
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: July 19th, 2008, 03:10 PM
  4. Demolition
    By dleewa01 in forum Art Critique Center
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: June 21st, 2007, 06:46 PM
  5. Art: Demolition Derby and Halloween Love!
    By WithTeeth in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 18th, 2005, 01:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Designed by The Coldest Water, we build the coldest best water bottles, ice packs and best pillows.