Talk:World War II political cartoons

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 June 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

Political cartoon versus propaganda cartoon

Is a propaganda cartoon (or for that matter a public information cartoon) legitimately a "political cartoon"? The latter appears to be used synonymously with (and redirects to) editorial cartoon. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to rename it WWII editorial cartoons? I think editorial cartoons would be in newspapers, and would include things other than political things(not just politics they make fun of), while some political cartoons such as on posters wouldn't be called editorial cartoons for any reasons. Dream Focus 00:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that we've got no basis for claiming that propaganda cartoon and public information cartoon are a subset of political cartoon, and so the inclusion of them here is currently WP:OR. This fundamental issue should have been addressed at the AfD (which is why I get really hot under the collar about take-it-to-article-talk demands like this one), instead of a we-have-sources-so-lets-sweep-all-other-problems-under-the-carpet stampede, like we had. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 07:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Different situation here. Everyone understands what this one is, so what to call it isn't really relevant. It is clearly a real thing. Would you prefer it called Cartoons used in WW2 for political reasons? Instead of cartoon we could argue about using the word "illustrations" or "comics". Editorial cartoon says "An editorial cartoon, also known as a political cartoon, is an illustration or comic strip containing a propaganda message, that usually relates to current events or personalities." MSNBC calls them political cartoons. http://www.cagle.com/politicalcartoons/ Google news archive search for that term shows 9,130 results. [1] Dream Focus 12:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very similar situation. What I personally would call it is a "mismatched 'dog's breakfast'". It is clearly several, poorly connected, real things. I would prefer you cease and desist 'throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks' -- Editorial cartoons are not "Cartoons used ... for political reasons" -- they are very frequently (as is the case of the David Low cartoon in the article) commentary on the abuse of the political process. I would also note that the "propaganda" claim in editorial cartoon does not appear to be in any way cited (and is a stretch for an art form that is more closely associated with Political commentary than naked propaganda). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 13:07, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And after being tagged as unsourced, the claim was rather quickly removed. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 14:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Seuss

Googling for "Dr. Seuss" AND "political cartoons" gives 182 results. [2] There is quite a lot about his work out there. Working on article now. This is how he started his career. Googling for "political cartoons during world War II" shows some results in Google news [3] and Google books [4], many of which include Dr. Seuss. Dream Focus 08:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

The issue raised was not notability, but rather relevance -- and the fact that you have provided no verifiable substantiation that propaganda or public information cartoons are properly a subset of political cartoons. I am not familiar with Dr. Seuss's early work, so will simply accept the conclusion of the sources that they are political cartoons. Where no such verifiable confirmation that examples are related to this topic, it does not seem good practice to include them. Nor does excessive see-alsoing of propaganda-related topics seem appropriate, for the same reason. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of the most famous writers in history did political cartoons during World War 2 while working for the US army's animation department. That is certainly relevant to this topic. I also added in information about Arthur Szyk whose political cartoons were so powerful, the first lady called him a "one man army" and Hitler put a bounty on his head. This demonstrates how important some political cartoonists were. Dream Focus 09:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What part of "I am not familiar with Dr. Seuss's early work, so will simply accept the conclusion of the sources that they are political cartoons" did you fail to comprehend? Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Seuss & anti-Japanese racism

A host of sources establish the relevance and prominence of the anti-Japanese racism of Dr Seuss's wartime cartoons. E.g.: [5][6], and especially this summary of Minear, Richard (1999). Dr. Seuss Goes to War. New York: New Press. ISBN 156584565X. (I don't have access to the book itself). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 10:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And what does that have to do this article? Shouldn't that be in the Dr. Seuss article? And the major comic book companies portrayed the Japanese as subhuman during that time period, as did everyone else. The Japanese did the same with Americans, showing them as ignorant monkeys and whatnot. Dream Focus 10:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is clearly an important aspect of both Dr Seuss's wartime cartoons and American wartime thinking (as prominently reflected in these, and most probably many other, cartoons). We even have a prominent historian, who has written a book specifically on Dr Seuss's wartime career, stating this. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 11:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In fact your premise works against your conclusion. (i) Dr Seuss's comics are being cited as an example of WWII political comics. (ii) WWII political comics were frequently racist. (iii) Therefore pointing out that this example is racist illustrates a general point (which is what examples are supposed to do). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 11:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]