In his 'Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship', J.M. Coetzee discusses inter alia the phenomena of giving and taking offense (Coetzee 1996). Elaborating on this during the course about censorship and social transformation at Leiden University, we came across the following question:
Which of these photographs would be more offensive towards the Russian president?
Obviously, the first image is much more expressive and the message that it triest to convey is more likely to be clear from the first moment than it is the case for the second image. However, the first image conveys the message of boycotting the Sochi Olympic Games, which was more or less a protest by people who knew better; a boycot of the Olympic Games would be very unlikely. Although the second image is not particularly expressive, it is much more challenging and offensive towards Putin's authority than the first image, because it is not edited or exaggerated by opposition, it is a real, original image.
Despite the clear validity of this distinction, I am not completely happy with it. I think that there is a third type of image, which was mentioned in the course lecture as well; namely the ridiculing image. It combines both of the above mentioned cases: it is a demonstrative, exaggerated image by opposers of the authorities, but it originates from a phenomenon that was created by the authorities themselves. To stick with Russia, let me show some examples:
Vladimir Putin is often presented as a strong leader, all the stops are pulled out for this. Simple images like the one above are meant to strengthen his authority and leadership. The point here is, that these real and original images coming from the authorities themselves, provoke even more parodies on the authority, as can be seen below:
So, what actually happens, is that the attempts to enhance and strengthen authority by those in power, offer free play for the opposition to exercise resistance by parodic imitations and ridiculing.
Works cited
Coetzee, J. M. Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1996. Print.
Images derived from https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=610&q=putin+parody&oq=putin+parody&gs_l=img.3...2808.4180.0.4373.12.4.0.8.8.0.59.230.4.4.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.62.img..6.6.232.lmQXVO1V6A4 (The images used are just a small selection, the internet is full of Putin parodies).
Undoubtedly the Russian Federation is an example immediately associated with censorship. “Parody on authority” – as you wrote – has been influencing the performance of Russia globally, especially since Putin came to power after Yeltsin’s governance and the presidential elections in 2012. You are right that ridiculing Vladimir Putin as a means of “giving offence” is a very significant way to shape the image of the Russian president nowadays. We are living in times when we could not imagine our lives without Internet anymore; we can see thousands of memes and pictures ridiculing Putin, but one can barely compare them with those stultifying – for instance – Polish politicians, which are very popular on Polish websites too. However, the main difference between the Polish and Russian ones is that Polish governance’s reputation worsens whereas pictures of Putin still present him as a powerful and influential person internationally as well as domestically.
ReplyDeleteInteresting blog as you highlight how parody is used to ridicule censored pictures of an authoritarian leader. Note that in Africa the acceptance or even use of parody is used by a lot of dictators to give their unsatisfied people freedom of expression. This mights give the citizens a feeling of 'power' over the dictator, therefore preventing them to revolt. A known example is Ugandan dictator Yoweri Museveni, already in power for more than 20 years. He has access to a strong and reactive army, police force and secret intelligence causing enough fear for Ugandan citizens to openly talk about revolution or resistance. But in the newspapers, on TV and especially on the Internet is ridiculed to even more extent than Putin. So it might even be that the by opposition exercised resistance by parodic imitations and the ridiculing itself reinforces the status quo of the one in power, instead of challenging it.
ReplyDelete