CANADIAN SOCIAL STUDIES - VOLUME 38 NUMBER 2 - Winter 2004 - On Political Cartoons and Social Studies Textbooks

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by SANS

Political cartoons generate meaning through visual analogies that connect the event depicted to the issue the cartoonist comments on, yet comprehension becomes difficult when analogies rely on contemporary or historical events, literary allusions, or cultural knowledge unavailable to all viewers. This intertextuality rests on an ideal viewer and a restricted cultural memory, shaping who is included in and excluded from public editorial conversation. The discussion applies these ideas to social studies textbooks used in British Columbia.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages11

Reading Time28 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Visual Analogies

Ideal viewer, cultural memory, and editorial inclusion

Visual language of signs, conventions, and rhetoric

Analogy sources: mundane life, popular culture, historical texts

Reading difficulty across knowledge gaps

CANADIAN SOCIAL STUDIES VOLUME 38 NUMBER 2, WINTER 2004 [www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css](www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css) On Political Cartoons and Social Studies Textbooks: Visual Analogies, Intertextuality, and Cultural Memory Walt Werner University of British Columbia Return to Articles Abstract Political cartoons are animated through visual analogies that imply a likeness between the event portrayed in the image and the issue on which the cartoonist is making comment. Although many kinds of analogies can be used, meanings arise as the viewer is able to recognize and interpret them. This becomes difficult, though, when a cartoon's analogy is drawn from contemporary or historical events, plays on literary allusions, or uses past cultural knowledge not readily available to a viewer. The resultant intertextuality assumes an ideal viewer and a narrow cultural memory that have consequences for who is included in, and excluded from, the ongoing editorial conversation. Issues flowing from this assumed memory are discussed in relation to social studies textbooks used in British Columbia. My first stop with the morning paper is the political cartoon. I expect to be surprised and delighted, and on a good day, to be provoked or even jolted. On some mornings, though, I puzzle over a cartoon that doesn't make much sense. This experience causes reflection on the viewer text relationships taken for granted by newspaper readers, editors, and cartoonists. Cartoons "work" as long as these deeply taken for granteds are not countered or questioned. My purpose is to focus on assumptions embedded within cartoons themselves rather than what is assumed by viewers1 and editors.2 Every cartoon assumes an ideal viewer who has the relevant cultural memory. This assumption underlies the analogies used to activate meaning, and has consequences for who is included in, and excluded from, the ongoing editorial conversation. When analogies are drawn from historical events, literary allusions, or past cultural knowledge, and are also Eurocentric, the resultant intertextuality appeals to a narrow cultural memory that positions most viewers as outsiders. Let me explain. Visual Analogies Cartoons are meaningful to those who understand something about the larger discourse within which they are constructed and read. Since the mid eighteenth century when cartoons began to be used in North American newspapers, this discourse included, among other things, assumptions about ideal viewers, ethical standards, criteria for excellence, and competitive publishing practices that define what counts as a cartoon, and that regulate the work of cartoonists in particular time periods (Hess and Kaplan 1968, Hall 1997, 6, 44, Werner 2003) . This discourse also includes a visual language of signs, conventions and rhetorical devices used to convey and interpret meanings. Most rhetorical devices can be grouped under the broad categories of caricature and visual analogy (Hou and Hou 1998) . Visual analogies are the heart of cartoons and what animates thought and emotion (Burack 1994, 19) . They consist of simplified situations, characters or objects designed to stand for more complex issues. Rather than making a literal statement about an issue, the artist likens it to something else, and through this comparison invites interpretation. The point of an analogy is not just to present an opinion, but also to stimulate interest and thinking. Meanings arise as each viewer sees a comparison between the portrayed scene and the larger issue. By bringing two things together and implying a likeness between them, though, a metaphor is essentially ambiguous because it both highlights and hides meanings, and allows for multiple entailments and implications. When constructing analogies, cartoonists use three sources. They can draw from (1) mundane situations and everyday objects that most newspaper readers have experienced,(2) contemporary popular culture – such as curre

FAQs

How do political cartoons create meaning according to the text?

They use visual analogies that imply a likeness between the event shown and the issue being commented on. Meaning arises when viewers recognize and interpret the implied comparison.

Why can some political cartoons be hard to understand?

Understanding can fail when the analogy depends on contemporary or historical events, literary allusions, or past cultural knowledge not readily available to the viewer.

What consequences does the “ideal viewer” assumption have?

It assumes a narrow cultural memory, which affects who is included in and excluded from the ongoing editorial conversation. When analogies are also Eurocentric, most viewers may be positioned as outsiders.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by SANS