Semiology and Propaganda

I chose to write about this image for two reasons:  (1) I hate to be manipulated so I like to analyze advertisements and commercials; and (2) I'm fascinated by my response to this poster versus the expected and probable response from its intended audience (which I assume to be Chinese people, particularly Chinese youth).  This analysis will be brief and very incomplete.  (See previous post for an interesting reaction to something else in Visual Methodologies.)

Following are a few signs, along with what they seem to signify "in themselves," how they relate to other signs "in themselves," their connections to wider systems of meaning (from codes to ideologies), and what they say about ideology and mythology (98).  I will address both what they represent to me and might represent to their intended audience.

(I have to admit that I cheated a little bit.  I noticed the title of the image file, so I searched Lei Feng and found a Wikipedia entry with the exact same image and a translation of the Chinese characters as, "Follow the examples of Comrade Lei-Feng" or "Learn from Comrade Lei Feng.")

 

Doves (?) and Gun - These seem to me to be in stark contrast with one another.  In my cultural understanding, doves (if that is what they are) symbolize peace and even carry a religious connotation (the Holy Spirit descending like a dove at Jesus' baptism).  Therefore, it is anachronous in my Western discourse to see doves and a machine gun (which I equate with violence and ugly death) pictured together.  But in China's militaristic, nationalistic, socialistic culture, it may not be unusual to equate the two.  Guns in China may signify peace, pride, and duty to one's country (a devotee of Chairman Mao, Lei Feng joined the Communist youth corps and later the People's Liberation Army, before his death at age 22).  Or, perhaps this is precisely what this propaganda poster is attempting to do: "transfer" the viewer's association of peace from the dove to the gun, and from the gun to the military, the government, and even Mao himself.  As Rose writes, "[I]n that process of making meaning, the viewer is also made in specific, ideological ways" (99).

National Emblem and red color - This one's pretty obvious.  No subtlety here.  This signifier doesn't give us the kind of interpretive "creative freedom" (99) that some of the others do, but rather seems to be an appellation (100), a "hey - I'm talkin' to you!"  And that "you" is definitely not me.

Great Wall - This seems to be a good example of Barthes's notion of mythology.  The first level of the sign is meaning at the denotive level: " 'In meaning...the meaning is already complete, it postulates a kind of knowledge, a past, a memory, a comparative order of facts, ideas, decisions' " (97).  For someone living in China, an image of the Great Wall would certainly come with all of the above.  But I imagine that it has also become something more, something bigger than the accumulation of history, facts, etc.  " 'When it becomes form, the meaning leaves contingency behind; it empties itself, it becomes impoverished, history evaporates'....  The meaning is put at a distance, and what fills the gap is signification." (97).  The Great Wall is, therefore, a sign of Chinese superiority, national pride, and security (even though most tactics of modern warfare wouldn't be daunted in the slightest by a big wall).

Face - Obviously, this is a young, healthy, attractive (?) male, a symbol of the virility, strength, and future of the empire (even though he's dead).  His facial expression might be perceived by a Chinese person as determined, resolved, thoughtful, and - back to the doves/gun discussion - peaceful.  That isn't necessarily my reaction, but again, that's my culture/discourse coming through.  And to be perfectly honest, I'm predisposed against interpreting his expression in a positive light by the insignia, the gun, and the assumption that this is "communist propaganda."

Then again, are advertisements really anything other than propaganda?