I am pleased to share with you the Preface of my recent book on Strategic Communication and Deformative Transparency. Persuasion in Politics, Propaganda and Public Health:
This is a photograph (Figure a) of Cyril Winter, an Ottawa-based anti-
abortion activist. I took this photo on September 8, 2017. He was in front of
the Canadian Tribute to Human Rights monument, during one of his usual
one-man protests.
This photo summarizes the aim and scope of this book. The bottom panel’s image of body parts—of foetuses or babies, depending where you position yourself in the debate—is a clear display of grotesque transpar- ency. Its intent is stated in its text: “No censorship”. Its crudeness does not leave any room for euphemisms. Mr. Winter is not talking about “repro- ductive rights”, “medical procedures”, “the right to choose”, “interrupted pregnancy”, or even “pro-life”. He wants to shock the public by disclosing the concrete “truth”, or at least his truth.
At the heart of his message is an aesthetics of horror. It seems, how- ever, that the image of small, dismembered bodies was not enough for Mr. Winter. To emphasize this disclosure of a crude reality, he also added the baby doll hanging from his neck. This is a sign of over-production of meaning, where the grotesque and the kitschy tend to overlap. It also reveals an economy of the affects, done through the saturation of emotions based on the premise that overcoming “cognitive indifference” requires an aesthetic reflexivity, or an alternative path to “knowing” about an issue.
The photo also speaks to the tension between strategy and tactics. Mr. Winter was present at the monument as an individual without any insti- tutional affiliation. His means appeared to be quite limited, with no major strategic relevance. As with many cases in today’s digital sphere, however, he was introducing the transparently grotesque in the public space to disrupt and eventually call attention to it. His rationale was not that different from the old prescriptions of propaganda, though he was also facing a highly overcrowded and fragmented communication ecosystem, as illustrated by passers-by at the monument who were plugged into their mobile devices.
By putting on this display, Mr. Winter visually desecrated the sacred in order to defend what he thought is the “supreme good”: human life. We can assume he considered this a legitimate means to achieve his goal (that is, to end or limit abortion). Some may agree with him; others may find these images repulsive or an unethical manipulation of emotions. The majority of passers-by that day near the human rights monument were indifferent to Mr. Winter’s images and speech. The question remains: how far can some- one go to achieve their goals? What are the limits of the visible? This book is an attempt to answer these questions by looking into both the visible and invisible aspects of the strategy of the transparently grotesque.
This photo summarizes the aim and scope of this book. The bottom panel’s image of body parts—of foetuses or babies, depending where you position yourself in the debate—is a clear display of grotesque transpar- ency. Its intent is stated in its text: “No censorship”. Its crudeness does not leave any room for euphemisms. Mr. Winter is not talking about “repro- ductive rights”, “medical procedures”, “the right to choose”, “interrupted pregnancy”, or even “pro-life”. He wants to shock the public by disclosing the concrete “truth”, or at least his truth.
At the heart of his message is an aesthetics of horror. It seems, how- ever, that the image of small, dismembered bodies was not enough for Mr. Winter. To emphasize this disclosure of a crude reality, he also added the baby doll hanging from his neck. This is a sign of over-production of meaning, where the grotesque and the kitschy tend to overlap. It also reveals an economy of the affects, done through the saturation of emotions based on the premise that overcoming “cognitive indifference” requires an aesthetic reflexivity, or an alternative path to “knowing” about an issue.
The photo also speaks to the tension between strategy and tactics. Mr. Winter was present at the monument as an individual without any insti- tutional affiliation. His means appeared to be quite limited, with no major strategic relevance. As with many cases in today’s digital sphere, however, he was introducing the transparently grotesque in the public space to disrupt and eventually call attention to it. His rationale was not that different from the old prescriptions of propaganda, though he was also facing a highly overcrowded and fragmented communication ecosystem, as illustrated by passers-by at the monument who were plugged into their mobile devices.
By putting on this display, Mr. Winter visually desecrated the sacred in order to defend what he thought is the “supreme good”: human life. We can assume he considered this a legitimate means to achieve his goal (that is, to end or limit abortion). Some may agree with him; others may find these images repulsive or an unethical manipulation of emotions. The majority of passers-by that day near the human rights monument were indifferent to Mr. Winter’s images and speech. The question remains: how far can some- one go to achieve their goals? What are the limits of the visible? This book is an attempt to answer these questions by looking into both the visible and invisible aspects of the strategy of the transparently grotesque.
You can read a preview of the book by clicking here
