Attacks on the cartoonist’s strategic manoeuvring An argumentative analysis of criticism on political cartoons

Authors
Publication date 2017
Host editors
  • C. Ilie
  • G. Garzone
Book title Argumentation across Communities of Practice
Book subtitle Multi-disciplinary perspectives
ISBN
  • 9789027211279
ISBN (electronic)
  • 9789027265173
Series Argumentation in Context
Pages (from-to) 317-337
Publisher Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Organisations
  • Faculty of Humanities (FGw) - Amsterdam Institute for Humanities Research (AIHR) - Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication (ACLC)
Abstract
Political cartoons may be understood as instances of visual or multimodal argumentative discourse. When a political cartoon is a subject of controversy, the criticism of the cartoon may therefore be aimed at the argumentation. For the purpose of a systematic analysis of visual and multimodal argumentation that gives rise to controversy, I make use of insights of the extended pragma-dialectical argumentation theory by van Eemeren (2010). The analysis provides a starting point to determine what aspect of strategic manoeuvring is criticised and to specify the derailment of strategic manoeuvring the cartoonist is accused of. Accordingly, the analysis facilitates a refined evaluation of the accusation in which general soundness conditions are amended or supplemented by relevant institutional conditions. In this study I will concentrate on controversies on political cartoons that make use of visual metaphors to scrutinize politicians’ behaviour or actions.
Document type Chapter
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.10.14plu
Permalink to this page
Back