Oldal 226 [226]
224
Liisi Laineste, Margus Laane
event, Hitler’s speeches were often quoted in a positive and favourable context by
the Russian press until 1940 (Ibid.: 390). Even the word Fascism was replaced with
more neutral “Hitlerism” in Soviet newspaper articles from that short period.
In a similar vein, Stalin famously described artists as “engineers of the human
soul” and considered political posters a significant force in agitation work (Aulich
& Sylvestrova 1999). Visual propaganda was valued highly because of the high level
of illiteracy. On the whole, both oppositions believed in the power of propaganda
and practiced it actively in order to create an imaginary world subordinated to their
often contradictory (although sometimes surprisingly similar) ideological claims.
‘The routine and repetitive elements in this propaganda reveal the its performative
ambitions, as effectively described by Kamila Baraniecka-Olszewska (this volume).
Studies on the history of film propaganda have shown that the audiovisual
medium was considered the most influential weapon in propaganda war. Political
messages were hidden in fiction movies and—a more obvious choice—in the com¬
pulsory newsreels before movies in cinemas. Historical drama was considered the
most influential genre in changing and constructing public opinion. At the same
time, film did not reach more remote places but remained primarily an urban phe¬
nomenon. The rural environment—but not only that—is where posters, placards
and wall newspapers were used to spread the message, often doing so in a humor¬
ous way. It is thus fairly natural that caricatures and comics were recognised as
powerful propaganda tools (see Merziger 2012; also Aulich & Sylvestrova 1999 on
poster art under the Soviet Union).
Humour as Propaganda
‘The proponents of propaganda appreciated the role of humour as a facilitator for
successfully delivering the message to the audience. Talking mainly about visual
propaganda, it goes without saying that much of it (apart from heroic posters to
encourage the soldiers in their own army) was targeted against the enemy, belit¬
tling and mocking them. The enemy was depicted in a ridiculous way, as if looked
upon from the superior position of ‘us. WWI had already taken advantage of the
media, and this trend definitely grew during WWII. Verbal and visual denigration
of the enemy was part of warfare, and caricatures functioned as a means “to whip
up emotions at home, offer visions about continuing social order, and denigrate the
opponents” (Kessel 201 2a: 5).
Humour can be used in propaganda for many reasons. First of all, it is capable
of reaching a wide audience, as people (especially in a long-lasting stressful situation
like a war) seek out humour to alleviate the seriousness of their daily lives. As many
previous studies on war humour (as well as political humour) have shown, people
use this humour to cope in stressful situations (for an overview, see Martin 2007:
303-305). In a similar vein, it is an effective commentary on everyday events, as
shown in a number of studies on disaster/topical humour (Davies 1999; Kuipers
2005; Laineste 2003). Humour has the capacity to entertain and educate at the