Pop Culture Protest and the Presidential Myth Library: LIF-POP Keywords: CULTURE POLITICS WAR IRAQ PROTEST INTERNET BUSH AR Description: Myriad spoofs, parodies and cartoons criticizing Bush have proliferated over the Internet, but Arkansas researchers say this form of pop culture protest is no match for the administration's own use of myth in its rhetoric. (Meeting: Southern States Communication Association)
FOR RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 2003
CONTACT: Janice Rushing, professor of communication, Fulbright College (479)575-5960, rushing at uark.edu
Tom Frentz, professor of communication, Fulbright College (479)575-5953, tfrentz at uark.edu
Allison Hogge, science and research communications officer (479)575-5555, alhogge at uark.edu
UA RESEARCHERS EXAMINE MYTHS AND MEDIA IN POLITICAL DISSENT
FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. -- President Bush strides across the green backdrop of the White House lawn, a stack of documents tucked under his arm. The foremost, in a familiar yellow and black jacket, reads: "Presidency for Dummies." Scroll down: the President strikes a James Bond pose, flanked by the First Lady and Condoleezza Rice in alluring attire. A montage of battle and "bad guy" photos lays splayed beneath an emblazoned title: "The World has had Enough."
These are just two examples of the myriad spoofs, parodies and political cartoons that have proliferated over the Internet since President Bush's election, say University of Arkansas researchers Janice Rushing and Tom Frentz. The professors of communication have been examining anti-war and anti-Bush propaganda that blends popular culture with politics. Though amusing, they say, these forms of dissent fail to undermine the administration's own powerful rhetoric, which relies, not only on entertainment references, but on deeply ingrained American myth.
"It obviously takes a lot of thought to draw these associations between politics and popular culture and then to create these images. But the sophistication doesn't translate into effectiveness," Rushing said. "The effect is more cathartic than motivational."
Frentz and Rushing analyzed these forms of political protest and presented their findings during a panel discussion at the Southern States Communication Association meeting in Birmingham, earlier this month. Titled "The Rhetoric of War," the panel included Michael Leff and Thomas Goodnight of Northwestern University and Kurt Ritter of Texas A&M.
Since one of their earliest articles, comparing the Carter v. Ford election to the Rocky v. Apollo Creed fight, Rushing and Frentz have asserted that politics and popular culture are deeply intertwined. Part of that connection comes from the media they share. From newspapers to radio to television, the vehicles that carry our entertainment programming also deliver our political information.
So it's no surprise to see the two blended together on our newest medium, the Internet, where images like those described above are widely and rapidly distributed. What concerns Rushing and Frentz is the possibility that these snide, savvy commentaries may serve as a placebo for effective protest -- replacing meaningful dialogue and dissent with a cheap laugh and a chance to feel superior.
"The underlying message behind most of these political/popular culture collages is that our president is an idiot. We may get a laugh out of that, but rhetorically it's rather impotent," Frentz said. "The truth is, Bush's rhetoric is really effective. His policies are overriding all forms of resistance. He's got approval ratings higher than 70 percent. And he's just waged a war that most of the world refused to support. If we really want to challenge the administration, we need to stop sn-wording about its stupidity and start analyzing what it's doing right."
In making a case for war in Iraq, one of the things the Bush administration did right was to tap into a deeply ingrained American myth. According to Rushing and Frentz, the President and his advisors employed rhetoric that invoked the myth of the frontier -- extending it beyond the American west to represent a different distant and dangerous land.
"There's a long history of extending this myth even after the actual American frontier is closed," Rushing said. "To do that, you tap into the idea of manifest destiny -- that it is our god-given right to move into new land, to spread our own way of life, in Bush's words 'to create a space where democracy can work.' In addition, you have to have a population seen as inferior to ours but also mysterious and exotic."
Frentz adds that the "frontier" always represents land that is economically advantageous to control. With Iraq's petroleum resources, the country seems to fit well within the mythic structure, he said. And Bush's "dead or alive" policy toward Saddam Hussein only reinforces the parallel.
Though popular culture is widely embraced by Americans, its evocative power is negligible unless it is steeped in American mythology -- particularly a myth so critical to the formation and identity of our nation, the researchers say. As a result, the administration's use of the frontier myth overpowers any protest grounded in pop culture that doesn't reference this myth or another equally powerful one. Further, because America is so steeped in the frontier myth, any attempt to oppose or contradict that myth comes off looking un-American.
"The opposition won't make any impact with a piecemeal campaign of popular culture commentary. It won't even help to expose the mythic narrative behind Bush's actions," Frentz said. "The only effective strategy is to invoke a powerful, alternative myth." # # # --- Sent from UnionMail Service [http://mail.union.org.za]