Essay: Dissertation for Year 3 Art & Media Practice

Explain how Photomontage has been applied as a visual language, as well as a technique throughout its history. How has it evolved to meet

technological changes? Discuss whether the technique remains to be an effective voice of social commentary?

Michael CoxBA (hons) Illustration

Department of Art and Media Practice

Date: 25.1.2008.

1

Contents page

Chapter 1 Devising a world view: PhotomontagePioneering the future

Russian Constructivist photomontage 5-16Examining Schawinsky’s Year XXI of Fascist Era & Citroën’s Metropolis 16-17

Chapter 2 The Art of Protest

Dada photomontage 21-24Looking at the work of Goya & Picasso’sGuernica 24-26The political photomontage: John Heartfield 26-35Contrasting and comparing Heartfield’s workWith Richard Hamilton’s 36-37Martha Rosler: Bringing the War Home 38-39

Chapter 3 A Force Still Today?

Peter Kennard: the anti- war posters of… 40-43Illustrator Olivier Kugler 43-45Looking at contemporary editorialPhotomontage 45-58

2

Introduction

My intention is this dissertation is to explore the historical foundations of

political photomontage, find out why and how it began and where it is going now. I shall begin by exploring the development of the technique by its early pioneers of the avant garde.

I shall also look in more depth and the so called ‘power’ of the photograph,

investigating and looking for reasons why photomontage practitioners, of

both past and present are so intrigued as to incorporate the medium into their

work.

3

Chapter 1 Devising a World View: Photomontage pioneering the future

The process of photomontage as a technique of cutting & pasting photographic imagery

has been around since the “second half of the 19th century.”1 It was only after WW1 that

its potential was seized upon by the pioneers of Russian Constructivism, these being

Alexander Rodchenko, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy and El Lissitzky. The Constructivists

wished to dispel the uniqueness of a work of art (since this had too much in common with

bourgeoisie society of old) in favour of mechanical production, which could further their

ideological intentions of spreading the unifying message of Communism.2

According to author Victor Margolin,

“…the Soviet Union had no strong tradition of

design for commerce and industry that could compare with Western Europe, thus

the production artists of the avant-garde were forging a new profession as well as a

new visual language.”3

The Stalinist regime like that of Nazi Germany during the 1930’s, sought the use of

propaganda on both a national and international scale, the aim of which was emphatically

espouse the militaristic strength, unity, self sufficiency and technological advancement of

the Soviet state. Through mass industrialisation, Soviet Russia was able to put the

ideology of the social collective into action. Stalin was quoted as saying in 1929:

1 Douglas Kahn, John Heartfield Art and Mass Media, Tanam Press, New York 1985, p106. Here D. Kahn states that although the Berlin Dadaists George Grosz, John Heartfield, Hannah Höch and Raoul Hausmann all concurred that it ( photomontage) was invented in 1916, this was only true in terms of its use by avant-garde movements, since he cites 19th century examples of photographers O.G. Rejlander and Henry Peach Robinson as being amongst the first to practice the technique.2 See Richard Hollis Graphic Design A Concise History, Thames & Hudson world of art, 2001 p46-473 Victor Margolin, The Struggle For Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 University of Chicago Press 1997 p170

4

“We are advancing full steam ahead along the path of industrialism to socialism,

leaving behind the age- long “Russian Backwardness.”4

The regime pushed its propaganda message across through ‘Socialist Realist’ poster

designs and ever more increasingly through the circulation of magazine publications.

In Chapter 5 of The Struggle For Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy 1917-

1946, Margolin explains that both Lissitzky and Rodchenko undertook a considerable

number of commissions after Stalin was installed to power. One such commission was

for the propaganda magazine USSR na stroike (USSR in Construction). Margolin states

that “[its] principle mission was to promote a favourable image of the Soviet Union

abroad.”5 Later in this chapter, he describes USSR in Construction (which was printed in

German, English, French, Russian and later Spanish) as being a pictorial magazine which

emphasised not only the magnitude of huge industrial projects such as the White Sea

Canal and the Moscow Metro, but which also included the “collectivisation” of

agriculture, issues on raw materials and themes of family life:

“…gradually USSR in Construction evolved a style of visual rhetoric that shared

the characteristics of Social Realism as introduced by Zhdanov, Gorky and others at

the ALL-UNION Congress of Soviet Writers in 1934.”6

The Russian Constructivists set out to devise a visual form of propaganda, which could

be readily digested by a nation in which says author Dawn Ades, “[the] population was

neither fully literate nor united by a single language.”7 Their task as artists was a

mammoth one, for they were in the words of Victor Margolin, “building a new society”, a

utopian society; through their photomontage works the Constructivists were acting as

visionaries, this art form essentially fulfilling a social duty (as they opposed to an

aesthetic one) as a continuation of the revolutionary struggle.8

4 Joseph Stalin, cited in Donald Treadgold, Twentieth Century Russia 6th edition ed. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1987), 2455 Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 University of Chicago Press 1997, p166 28-296 Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 p1697 Dawn Ades, Photomontage revised & enlarged edition Thames & Hudson 1986 p638 SeeVictor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 p3

5

An example of such photomontage work is Lissitzky’s front cover for issue 10 (fig 1) of

USSR in Construction in 1932, a somewhat glamorous & idealized celebration of the

completion of the Dnieper dam and hydroelectric station.

Margolin states that using the combination of the retouched night photograph of the

dam’s opening ceremony with searchlight beams “airbrushed in”, “Lissitzky managed to

create a visual flow for the issue that reinforced his early interest in film as a narrative

medium for the modern world.”9

The cover with its contrast between the night background & apparent flood-lit letters,

does indeed exhibit a certain cinematic quality; there is a somewhat Film Noir style to the

design also. This style continues on towards the end of the same issue of The USSR in

Construction, with a double page spread (fig 2) titled “The Current is Switched On.”

It consists of the cover image juxtaposed with a photographic portrait of Stalin as

foreground on the far right and an anonymous hand pulling a lever on the left of the

composition. Lissitzky has created a visual balance in terms of light & dark, with the

searchlight beaming between Stalin and the gripped fist to cast shadows against them; a

heightened sense of reality thus prevails in this dynamic composition, the purpose of

which “was to credit Stalin with realizing Lenin’s vision of electrification in the Soviet

Union” according to Victor Margolin.10

The reputation of Lissitzky as a designer was heightened further, when in 1928 he was

commissioned in collaboration with fellow Constructivists Sergei Senkin and Gustav

Klutsis, to design the Soviet Pavilion at the International Press Exhibition in Cologne.

Together, they produced an enormous and spectacular panoramic photo-frieze, (fig 3) at

3.8 metres high and 23.5 metres long.11

Figure 1 (left)Lissitzy –USSR in Construction, issue 10,Cover page, 1932

Here I paraphrase Margolin’s explanation of the objectives as well as the deeper meanings behind Constructivist art.9 Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 University of Chicago Press 1997 p172-17310 Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 University of Chicago Press 1997 p18011 See Brandon Taylor, Collage, The Making Of Modern Art, Thames & Hudson, paperback edition 2006 p89 for reference

6

Figure 2 (below)Lissitzky –‘The Current is switched on’USSR in Construction issue 101932

As in his previous work, Lissitzky incorporates a cinematic quality in this large

photomontage collaboration, which is essentially an advertisement of “the achievements

of the Soviet state, as well as its advancements in press methods” in the opinion of author

Brandon Taylor.12 (Brandon Taylor, Collage-The Making of Modern Art Thames &

Hudson 2001 p86).

12 Taylor explains that the photofrieze “seen by more than five million people” is homage not only to the heroic figure of Lenin, but also to the workers as it “showed collective activities in agriculture, the workplace and the worker’s club…” see p89

7

This astonishing exhibit was another opportunity for the Communist USSR, not only to

compete with the entries of the predominantly commerce driven nations, (the

bourgeoisie) but also to further spread its own ideological message. The main strengths of

the photofrieze lye in its composition; the directions of the heads emanating away from

the centre point adds much to its panoramic style. Also, the photographic images

juxtaposed together look somewhat like separate movie stills which, when put together

form a very strong narrative sequence, again demonstrating the effect of cinema upon

Lissitzky. Most importantly however, are the themes & subjects represented by each

photographic image, the Social Realist values and successes of the Republic; there is a

clear reference to Soviet technological advancement to the far right, with a man looking

through a box camera to the fervent interest of his peers. The placement of Lenin’s proud

portrait to the immediate left (also gazing in the same direction) roughly surrounded by ¾

images of workers & peasantry, suggests that such technological success is as result of

the ‘collective’s’ effort under its leader’s guidance; this documentary style of

photomontage is much in keeping the with the mental framework of Constructivism, this

being that “ Constructivists saw in its reality-effect an ideological tool far more powerful

than easel painting” says B. Taylor.13 In ‘sharing’ the reality of its every day people along

side its achievements & ambitions, the photofrieze serves to show the rest of the world

that the USSR exists as a democratic, orderly, harmonious and highly co-operative

society when this was anything but the case. Furthermore, there is an image just left of

centre of a captain at the wheel of his ship, which hints at voyage and exploration beyond

frontiers. Soviet sporting prowess is also allured to (left of Lenin) in the form of a well

built female athlete.

13 Brandon Taylor, Collage the Making of Modern Art, Thames & Hudson paperback edition 2006 p89

8

Figure 3 (above)El Lissitzky, Sergei Senkin &Gustav Klutsis‘The Task of the Press is Education of the Masses ‘Photofrieze for the International Press Exhibition, Cologne 19283.8 × 23.5 metres

9

Figure 4 Gustav Klutsis

Millions of Workers Take Part in Socialist Competition 1927-28

Lissitzky’s fellow Constructivist colleague Gustav Klutsis was a resounding master of the

photomontage technique. The designer, who made the public statement that

‘Photomontage [was] a new kind of art agitation’ in Moscow 1938,14considered the

technique to be inseparable from ‘revolutionary politics’ as well as industrial &

technological progress according to author Dawn Ades.15

In his poster titled Millions of Workers Take Part in Social Competition, (fig4) we see the

forthright image of Stalin saluting the masses who Klutsis as B.Taylor explains, “forges

these elements into a severe geometry of diagonals, the colour red and the dominating

‘double’ of Lenin…”16

Lenin’s enlarged ‘double’ body outline raises his cult of personality to a level of almost

divine providence; the photographs of the masses contained with their narrowing as well

as expanding geometric containments, are akin to newspaper reels on production

conveyor belts; Klutsis also includes drawn imagery of factories which follow down with

the ‘movement’ of the workers. Here, the message is straightforward: continual industrial

progress is being made by the efforts of the collective, in accordance with Lenin’s grand

vision. To the bottom left of Lenin is the Photographic image the head of a worker,

juxtaposed at a right angle to the other workers; he could be addressing the viewer, since

he looks towards the audience; he possibly even signifies the viewer, captivated by what

his leader has to say.

As far as Klutsis was concerned, art, economy and culture were inextricably linked:

“Photomontage, as the newest method of plastic art, is closely linked to the

development of industrial culture and of forms of mass cultural media….There

arises a need for an art whose force would be a technique armed with apparatus and

14 Dawn Ades, Photomontage Revised & Enlarged edition Thames & Hudson 1986 p63 15 Here I paraphrase author Dawn Ades, Photomontage Revised & Enlarged edition Thames & Hudson 1986 p.63 L22-2616 Brandon Taylor, Collage: The Making of Modern Art, Thames & Hudson 2006 p89

10

chemistry MEETING THE STANDARDS OF SOCIALIST INDUSTRY.

Photomontage has turned out to be such an art.”17

Klutsis also claimed to be the first to make ‘militant’, ‘political’ photomontages, which

he says were “created on the soil of the Soviet Union.”18 The first work of this kind to

appear in the USSR was Dynamic City (fig 5) in about 1919 -20.19 It was as in much of

Klutsis’ work, based on the avant garde Suprematist movement; Suprematism was an

offshoot of Futurism (which had evolved from Cubism) and was rooted in architectural

design, focusing upon perspectives and tones of abstract geometric forms.20

Its originator Kazimir Malevich argued in his essay ‘From Cubism and Futurism to

Suprematism’, that such geometric design should be based:

“not on the interrelation of form and colour, and not on the aesthetic basis of beauty in

composition, but on the basis of weight, speed and the direction of movement.”21

The author Dawn Ades states in Photomontage, that the composition allures to a

“Communist world of the future under construction, a new world is being built.”22

Furthermore, she explains:

“The introduction of photographs transforms what was in

Suprematist terms a symbolic message couched in comparatively abstruse ‘non-

objective’ terms, into a relatively accessible image.” 23

This is what makes Klutsis’ photomontage style stand apart from that of fellow

Constructivists Lissitzky & Rodchenko; he prefers to express his utopian ideals through a

combination of photographic image juxtaposed upon formulaic abstract designs, this

17 Quoted by Bojko Szymon, New Graphic Design in Revolutionary Russia (London, 1972) p. 2118 Quoted by Raoul Hausmann, Courier Dada. op. cit. p.49, author’s translationParis, 195819 See Dawn Ades, Photomontage, Revised & Enlarged edition, (Thames & Hudson 1986) p.6720 SeeVictor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 p.3221 Kazmir Malevich, “From Cubism to Futurism to Suprematism,” in K.S. Malevich, Essays on Art 1915-1928, vol.1, ed. Troels Anderson (Copenhagen: Borgen, 1971), p.2422 Dawn Ades, Photomontage, Revised & Enlarged edition, (Thames & Hudson 1986) p.67 L24-523 Dawn Ades, Photomontage, Revised & Enlarged edition, (Thames & Hudson 1986) p.67 L25-8

11

interaction between the two creating an extra dimension of reality as you can see in The

Electrification of the Entire Country (fig 6). Lissitzky on the other hand, strives for a

more ‘ground level’ approach in showing Russian construction. His montage for the 10th

edition of USSR in Construction (fig 7) which was published in 1932, continues with the

12

Figure 5 Gustav Klutsis Dynamic City 1919-20

Figure 6 (left) Gustav Klutsis The Electrification of the Entire Country 1920

Figure 7 El Lissitzky, montage from USSR in Construction, no.10, 1932

13

Figure 8 Gustav Klutsis, Figure 9 Alexander RodchenkoPhotomontage for a special edition of The Crisis 1923Molodaya gwardya 1924

14

same cinematic style as in seen in his photofrieze for the International Press Exhibition in

Cologne in 1928; in his double page spread, (fig 7) Lissitzky paints an intimate, even

heroic portrait of the workers who face this Herculean task of constructing the new

Russia; the sheer magnitude of this is etched clearly upon both their faces, as they gaze in

apparent astonishment at the ever increasing scale of industrialisation in their horizon.

The labour itself, is not shown in any way which could be construed as ‘idealized’ or

glamorous, as a workhorse can be seen descending a steep hill of rubble in the

foreground. This suggests that these are perhaps not the easiest of terrains to navigate

heavy loads across & fairly dangerous one would imagine. Overall, the montage exhorts

the spirit of the Soviet workforce in their building of ‘utopia’ from the bottom upwards.

Klutsis prefers to show Russian construction in a more simplified, symbolised manner.

He delivers his message in more deliberate and I must say, dispassionate fashion; in both

The Electrification of the Entire Country (fig 6) and his photomontage for the special

edition of Molodaya gwardya, (fig 8) Lenin is the focal point: it is he who is really the

‘grand constructor’ of the new nation, and so it is he who takes full acclaim therefore.

Furthermore, he (Klutsis) makes the efforts of the workers appear minimal in

comparison, for in Electrification of the Entire Country the miniscule & anonymous

worker (and why it is only a single worker is not clear) is completely dwarfed by the

colossal figure of Lenin, who is carrying a large building construction; the visual

language is important in this composition as is it also in Dynamic City, since:

“…the Communist world of the future is under construction, a new world is being built

(the circle = the globe)” according to Dawn Ades.24

Likewise, in his montage for the special edition of Molodaya gwardya (fig 8) Klutsis

shape edits photographs of the masses into restricted triangular forms, the diagonal

composition culminating in Lenin taking centre prominence upon his podium.

Alexander Rodchenko’s photomontage differs also, in that he incorporates a slap-stick

humour into such work as The Crisis, (fig 9) which on the other hand causes it to lack

authoritativeness present in both Lissitzky and Klutisis’ socio- political photomontages;

this fits less well into the Constructivist mindset of forging a utopian reality through

visual means, in comparison with the other two artists.

24 Dawn Ades, Photomontage, Revised & Enlarged edition, (Thames & Hudson 1986) p.67

15

The realization of photomontage as a medium for visual propaganda was not just the

preserve of Communist Russia, for many of Europe’s fascist nations also followed suit.

The prominent themes within the Constructivist photomontage posters were centred on

the ‘cult’ of the personalities of Stalin and Lenin, under which is the unwavering

solidarity of the loyal masses; these are the same themes which are incorporated into

graphic designer Alexander Schawinsky’s Year XII of Fascist Era (fig 10), with

Mussolini shown to be the ‘embodiment’ of a the nation, with the superimposing of a

photograph of the masses upon his body. The ink dot pattern of Mussolini’s photograph

suggests that Schawinsky relied upon mass produced source material; the implication is

that in attempting to avoid the election poster being labelled as ‘aesthetic’, Schawinsky is

effectively making the statement that the work is anti-bourgeoisie, thus more readily

accessible to average people on a grander scale. In referring to mass production, he is

also highlighting the technology of mass production and economic potential.

The inclusion of the large typography, an affirmative ‘SI’, implies that it is morally

imperative to vote Fascist; juxtaposition of photographs (in the body of the type) of

marching bands offset against ancient architecture, is suggestive of the movement’s

rather romanticised view of Italy’s ancient legacy and its desire to restore this militaristic

pomp & ceremony once again.

In much the same way that the Constructivists encapsulated an ideological zeal for future

industrial expansion, Paul Citroën’s Metropolis photomontage series is also highly

visionary. Citroën had been a student of Weimar Bauhaus and had been in contact with

Berlin Dada, states author Dawn Ades.25 She further claims that his Metropolis montage

(fig 11) may have been the inspiration for Fritz Lang’s film by the same name in 1926.

In this montage, minute figures of people are almost lost in the vastness of this urban

jungle; buildings and structures overlap incessantly and chaotically in angled proportions.

Ades describes there being a “dizzying space” in Citroën’s Metropolis montages and

certainly, one does feel as if they are peering into an inhospitable labyrinth; the artist in

crafting this ‘dystopian’ world, affirms his own standpoint that this future is anything but

an ideal one.

25 Dawn Ades, Photomontage, Revised and Enlarged Edition, (Thames & Hudson 1986) p99

16

Figure 10 Alexander (Xanti) Schawinsky Year XII of Fascist Era 1934 96.5 × 66.5 cm

17

Figure 11 Paul Citroën, Metropolis 1923

18

19

Chapter 2The Art of Protest

At the concluding of the First World War, avant garde movements all across main land

central Europe responded to what they perceived to be the injustices of the conflict, none

more so than the Berlin Dadaists. They adopted photomontage as a ‘key medium’ states

author M.W. Marien, and although it remains unclear who decided this & why, “…it

seems that Hannah Höch and (Raoul) Hausmann were two of the earliest Dadaists to

make such images.”26

It members, who also included Max Ernst, George Grosz and John Heartfield, were

embittered intellectuals looking for a means to channel their angst towards: the corrupted

politics of the Weimar government; their disgust with the immorality and unnecessary

bloodshed of the First World War; the bourgeois art scene and its lust for aestheticism.27

As Dietmar Elger puts it:

“Dada was not exclusively an artistic, literary, musical,

political or philosophical movement…it was all of these and at the same time the

opposite: anti-artistic, provocatively literary, playfully musical, radically political

but anti-parliamentary.”28

The tone which the Berlin Dadaists employed in their photomontages was one of satire.

This is unequivocally evident in Hausmann’s The Art Critic, (fig 12) where the head of

the subject (a bourgeois art critic) is deliberately distorted, with the features of the eyes &

mouth both replaced with humorous collaged drawings; Hausmann is mocking the art

critic, the oversized head, sagging eyes, rasping mouth, along with the over-sized

drawing pen, (which he is holding) all combining to shatter any notions of social

respectability; this is further brought into question with what looks very much like a

banknote sticking out from the back of his collar, “a bribe perhaps” says Elger.29

26 Mary Warner Marien, Photography a Cultural History, (Laurence King Publishing 2002) 24727 Dietmar Elger, Dadaism (TASCHEN, 2006) p.1828 Dietmar Elger, Dadaism (TASCHEN, 2006) p.6, lines 10-1329 Dietmar Elger, Dadaism (TASCHEN, 2006) p.36

20

Figure 12 Raoul Hausmann, The Art Critic 1919/20 Collage, 31.4 × 25.1 cm

21

Fig 13 Hannah Höch, Incision with the Dada Kitchen Knife through Germany’s Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch 1920 Collage 114 × 90 cm

22

Hannah Höch’s collage titled, Incision with the Dada Kitchen Knife through Germany’s

Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch, (fig 13) made in 1920 for the first International

Dada fair, was intended to be a ‘snap-shot of the year’ in the view of Dietmar Elger.30

The exhibit he goes on to explain, “depicts a situation of upheaval, chaos and

contradiction.” Compositionally, it is elaborately laden with bizarre mal-formed figures,

mechanical objects (representing the inner working of the state), along with recognisable

figure heads of state (Weimar politicians and Kaiser Wilhelm II for example), which all

makes for a highly anarchic view of Weimar Germany; what we are looking at is a

society falling apart on itself, a society that has lost its cultural sanity.

In both of these Dadaist works, the acquisition of photographs from mass produced

source material, best allows the practitioner to stamp their own beliefs & values upon

reality itself; they are able to surgically redefine what is real within a recontextualised

and paradoxical framework. On the subject of reality and the photographic image, the

photographer Susan Sontag had this to say:

“Photography does not simply reproduce the real, it recycles it-a key procedure of a

modern society. In the form of photographic images, things and events are put to

new uses, assigned new meanings, which go beyond the distinctions between the

beautiful and the ugly, the true and the false, the useful and the useless, good taste

and bad.”31

At this point I think it important, in light of this discussion on the ‘special’ relationship

between photographic imagery and reality, to also mention the raw and potent work of

artists who have not made use of photomontage technique. Is Pablo Picasso’s painting

Guernica, (fig 14) which echoes the carnage and horror of the German aerial bombing of

the Spanish town of Guernica in 1937, in anyway less emotive for its lack of

photographic reference to the atrocity? I ask also the same question of Goya’s Disasters

of War illustrations (fig 15 & 16), which all too graphically document and capture the

brutality of the forces of French ‘puppet king’ Joseph Bonaparte, in dealing with the

30 Dietmar Elger, Dadaism (TASCHEN, 2006) p. 4431 Jessica Evans & Stuart Hall, Visual Culture (SAGE Publications 1999) See Susan Sontag’s chapter titled The Image World, p.91

23

Figure 14 Pablo Picasso, Guernica 1937

Figure 15 Francisco GoyaWhat more can one do? 1863Etching from ‘The Disasters of War’ series

Figure 16 Francisco GoyaNothing. We shall see 1863Etching from ‘The Disasters of War’ series

24

Spanish nationalist insurrection.32 The series consisting of a set of 83 plates, account of

the horrors which Goya himself had borne witness to; there are vivid recreations of

scenes of execution, torture, mutilation, the disposing of corpses, amidst unrelenting

human suffering.

Certainly from the Dadaist perspective and Marxist perspective, Picasso’s Guernica is

just the kind of gallery based, aesthetic bourgeois high art for which they were so

vehemently against. This tension between painters and photomontage artists/ designers

existed in Soviet Russia, where it was eventually decided that painting or ‘pure art’

“could go no further as a revolutionary practice” according to Victor Margolin. The

scientific approach was instead favoured, incorporating the technology of photography

into Social Realist ‘production art’.33

Arguably, it can be said that actually, both Goya’s Disasters of War and Picasso’s

Guernica are ‘accessible’ to a mainstream audience, because of the historically

monumental events they chose to represent; their artistic responses to these despicable

atrocities are surely no less valid than that of a vocalised opinion?

I now turn attention to the political photomontages of John Heartfield, himself a brief

member of Berlin Dada and a man who bravely attacked the barbarity of Nazi Germany

in his scathing work. He had become a member of the German Communist Party in 1919,

“Year One of Dada” commented Raoul Hausmann.34 Once Berlin Dada had finally

been extinguished, “Hausmann effectively quit making photomontages, Höch being the

only one besides Heartfield to continue” explains author Douglas Kahn; he continues on

to say that “montage became intertwined with documentary and reportage” within left

modernism, of which Heartfield was part.”35

32 Philip Hofer, The Disasters of War By Francisco Goya (Dover Publications 1967) p.133 Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 (University of Chicago Press 1997) p.81-83 34 Hausmann is quoted by author Douglas Kahn, John Heartfield Art & Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.3035 Douglas Kahn John Heartfield Art & Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.108

25

It was his photomontages for the Communist magazine the Workers Illustrated Paper,

AIZ in short, for which he became synonymous. It’s readership in 1929 was broken down

into 42% skilled workers, 33% unskilled, 10% clerks, 5% youth, 3.5% housewives, 3%

professionals, 2% self-employed, 1% civil servants, and although distribution outside of

Germany was in German speaking regions, it did also reach out to Vancouver,

Montevideo, Sydney and Tokyo according to Kahn.36

The task of AIZ was straightforward: provide the masses with Socialist truth, a truth so

suppressed by the ruling powers of the state. Illustrated magazines of the state were

frowned upon by Bertolt Brecht, who in 1931 said:

“…photography in the hands of the bourgeoisie, has become a terrible weapon

against the truth. The vast amount of pictured material that is being disgorged daily

by the press and that that seems to have the character of truth serves in reality only

to obscure the facts…The task of A-I-Z, which is to restore the truth…”37

An example of one Heartfield’s AIZ covers, published in September 1933 and just short

of one full year of Hitler’s coming to power, (see fig 17) features the blood spattered

figure of Herman Goering holding an axe; to his left the text reads: “Goering, The

Executioner of the Third Reich.” The theme of violence and savage brutality of National

Socialism is brought to the fore, as it in a November issue from 1933 (fig 18) with the

juxtaposition of Julius Streicher, editor of racist anti-Semitic magazine Der Stürmer, next

to a savagely murdered corpse; Heartfield effectively portrays Hitler’s henchmen as

psychopathic gangsters with an obsession for killing. The juxtaposing of the axe with

Goering and likewise, the scene of a brutal murder with Streicher, powerfully displays

the potency of recontextualization using photographic images.

An important factor, key to Heartfield’s gaining of public awareness was that he was

prepared to use photographs from the ‘accepted’ mainstream illustrated magazines. By

doing do so, “photographs appearing in their (magazines of the state) pages could be

entertained as being the future or past object of Heartfield’s anonymous machinations,”

36 Douglas Kahn John Heartfield Art & Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.6537 Quoted in Douglas Kahn John Heartfield Art & Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.64

26

Fig 18 John Heartfield “A pan-Germanist” AIZ, November 1933

Fig 17 John Heartfield Goering: “The Third Reich’s Executioner” AIZ, September 1933

27

says Kahn.38 This was in the Dadaist tradition of consuming, then ‘regurgitating’ images

from mass produced sources back upon the state & society, in a counter attacking

fashion.

In using photographic reference from National Socialist approved publications, Heartfield

was able to ‘surgically’ alter them, thus rendering them ‘socially unacceptable’ in his

photomontages.

Heartfield could be incredibly varied in how made his visual commentaries concerning

the totalitarian Nazi state. For example, there is the apocalyptic Death sowing his seeds:

(fig 19) “Everywhere in the country where Death passes, he harvests hunger, war and

fire.” in 1937. At other times he is employing Dada style satirical humour in mocking

Hitler, in montages such as “A tool in the hand of God? A toy in the hand of Thyssen!”

(fig 20), which refers in ironic twist to industrialist Fritz Thyssen (pictured) financially

backing Hitler’s rise to power.39 Hitler is shown to be the puppet or ‘plaything’ of the

bourgeoisie elite, to Heartfield’s disgust. Furthermore, Hitler, Goering & Goebbels are

portrayed as incompetent, circus-act like buffoons walking a tightrope, in “The Wise

Kings (fig 21) in a Troubled Land.” (1935) Again, Heartfield recycles existing Nazi

propaganda photographs, subverting them in this montage format, so that the mythology

or ‘cult’ of the Fuhrer is practically torn apart before the viewer’s eyes.

Heartfield decides also in many of his political photomontages, to take quotes or even

sayings from the speeches of the regimes’ most prominent figures and convert them into

literal imagery. The quotes are ‘recycled’ as it were, but visualised, which conveys the

vile absurdity of the Nazi mindset. The October 1935 cover edition of AIZ (fig 22) is a

fine example of this. The caption, a quote by Josef Goebbels, offers a ludicrous solution

to the ending of food shortages in the country: “What? No butter or lard? Well then, eat

your Jews!” The image Heartfield constructs hereof, acts as an ironic punch line, but

Goebbels himself is the joke, buttressing a view that he and his fellow Nazi espousers

should not be taken seriously by the public. What is quite clear is that the human figure is

posed; Heartfield did like to have his own photographs produced, and in many cases

would have friends volunteer having their pictures taken in certain postures. This is cited

38 Douglas Kahn John Heartfield Art & Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.6839 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler ( Hazan Edition, Paris 1997) p.129

28

Figure 19 John Heartfield Figure 20 John Heartfield (above)Death sowing his seeds: “A tool in the hand of God? A toy in “Everywhere in the country where hand of Thyssen!” September 1933Death passes, he harvests hunger, war and fire.” April 1937

Figure 21 John Heartfield (right)“The Wise Kings in a Troubled Land”January 1935

29

Fig 22 John Heartfield “What? No butter or lard? Well then, eat your Jews!” October 1935

30

Figure 23 John HeartfieldFigures posing in originalphotograph.

Figure 24 John Heartfield, Book cover for Macht Man Dollars by Upton Sinclair 1931

by Richard Hollis in Graphic Design-A Concise History, who provides a photographic

example (fig 23) of his friends posing on scaffolding for what later became a book cover,

31

titled So Macht man Dollars, (fig 24) in which they are ‘transformed’ into capitalists

climbing a dollar sign.40

Being a member of the Soviet Writers, it was difficult for Heartfield since montage was a

part of left modernism (which represented literature & theatre according to D. Kahn) and

the anti-modernist left held more sway. Fortunately for Heartfield, George Lukacs the

“theoretical adjudicator of communist anti-modernism” explains Kahn, showed leniency

towards photomontage as a documentary practice.41

In fact, Lukacs recognised the true strengths of the medium:

“In montage’s original form as photomontage, it is capable of striking effects and

on occasion it can even become a powerful political weapon. Such effects arise

from its technique of juxtaposing hetero-geneous, unrelated pieces of reality torn

from their context. A good photomontage has the same effect as a good joke.”42

The Nationalist Socialist regime sought to ‘root out’ Communist and Socialist opposition

publications through its Reich Press Chamber, one of Seven Chambers of the larger

Reich Chamber of Culture, which was set up in law in September 22nd 1933.43 This

however did not prevent Heartfield from continuing to produce his political

photomontages for AIZ when in exile in Prague; he was also highly indebted to the loyal

members of the KPD (German Communist Party) who acted as an effective support

network. Heartfield called them “Brave underground fighters from the Reich [who]

took copies over the border and so, the montages were even distributed in the big cities of

the Fascist barbarians…”44

On the subject of freedom of expression in art, I believe that the critical thoughts of

cultural theorist Herbert Marcuse tie in with the scenario of that faced by John Heartfield.

40 See Richard Hollis, Graphic Design –A Concise History (Thames & Hudson World of Art, London 2001) p. 6141 Douglas Kahn, John Heartfield Art And Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.10842 George Lukacs, “Realism in the Balance,” in Ernst Bloch , et al., Aesthetics and Politics. London, 197743 Oron J. Hale, THE Captive Press In the Third Reich, (Princeton University Press 1973) p. 9044 Heartfield quoted in Siepmann, ibid, also Douglas Kahn John Heartfield Art And Mass Media (TANAM PRESS, New York 1985) p.91

32

Marcuse an advocate of aestheticism in the study of society, comments in his book The

Aesthetic Dimension:

“The autonomy of art reflects the unfreedom of individuals in the unfree society. If

people were free, then art would be the form and expression of their freedom. Art

remains marked by unfreedom: in contradicting it, art achieves its autonomy.”45

The final Photomontage creation of Heartfield I would like to discuss is ‘Hurray the

Butter is all gone!’ (fig 25) from 1935. The title caption according to authors and

historians John Hite & Chris Hinton, was from a speech by Herman Goering, who said of

the regime’s sole economic gearing for war: “would you rather have butter or guns? Shall

we bring in lard or iron ore? I tell you, guns make us powerful. Butter only makes us

fat.”46 Heartfield supplies a heavy irony to this montage, an intentional over-exaggeration

of an ideologically fervent Nazi household; the wallpaper is patterned with emblems of

the Swastika, with a proud portrait of the Fuhrer hanging from its wall as a centre piece;

the family are dressed in a way which is telling of their lower working class status, and a

cushion cover can be seen with an embroidery of Hindenburg, illustrating their serf-like

respect for the establishment. ‘Hurray, the Butter is all gone!’ works on numerous levels:

firstly, in this literal visualization of a working class family consuming weaponry &

armaments, Heartfield makes Goering’s speech appear crass in the most extreme way

possible, through recontextualization; weapons and food are ‘merged’ into one to create a

hybrid meaning. Secondly, the family demonstrate their blind obedience to Hitler’s Nazi

Party in carrying out the action of the recontextualization; the ridiculousness of what

they’re doing is a clever platform for Heartfield to engage with the German audience

directly, warning of the ‘Nazification’ of every aspect of their lives and of the subservient

role they are expected to follow under this regime. It is a disquieting message

45 Herbert Marcuse, The Aesthetic Dimension (THE MACMILLAN PRESS LTD, London 1979) p.72-7346 Quoted in John Hite & Chris Hinton, Weimar & Nazi Germany, (Murray 2000) p. 221

33

Figure 25 John Heartfield ‘Hurray, the Butter is all gone!’ 1935 Photomontage 38.7 × 27.3 cm

in this context, ‘Hurray, the Butter is all gone!’ passing a damning judgement upon a

government that had little, if any respect for its people’s welfare.

34

If we move forward by twenty two years, we can see these same style and visual

approach being employed by the artist Richard Hamilton, with his 1957 collage titled

‘Just What is it That Makes today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing?’ (fig 26). Just as

the subject in ‘Hurray, the Butter is all gone!’, was about how people were being duped

into living their lives according to a false ideology, Hamilton’s work also follows that

very same premise; in the case of ‘Just What is it That Makes today’s Homes So

Different, So Appealing?’, American consumerist living, is to Hamilton, what

Nazification of everyday life was to Heartfield. It is also set in a home, an American

home of the 50’s adorned with paraphernalia and modern appliances of the period.

Similarly with Heartfield’s photomontage, Hamilton’s interior communicates this

consumer culture: upon the wall there lies an historical photograph of either a President

or politician, representing American nationalism; next to that is a large framed magazine

cover titled Young Romance, a comic book style illustration of an apparently older man

comforting a younger woman. This exudes a patronising patriarchal attitude, particularly

as in the caption the man expresses to her unashamedly, “we’ve got to keep our love a

secret Marge…I’d lose my job if the boss found out about us! After all, I’m engaged to

his daughter! That’s why I have to sneak away to see you!” This ethos of female

subordination continues in the form of the two unclothed figures in pose; a man with the

physique of a body builder stands proudly (asserting his male dominance) whilst the

woman (presumably his wife) seated further out of picture, appears to fit in as one of the

objects surrounding her; she is wearing a hat, although it looks much like a lampshade,

and she further objectifies herself as a mere object of male desire by caressing her breast.

The general picture space is akin to a television commercial of how American homes

should look; a woman is seen hoovering a set of stairs, as an arrow points with the

message ‘ordinary cleaners reach only this far’.

The worlds of reality and popular mass culture are blurred, making it difficult to ascertain

whether the two nude figures are really in ‘their’ home; a woman seen on television using

a telephone gazes almost knowingly at the male figure.

35

Figure 26 Richard Hamilton ‘Just What is it That Makes Today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing?’ 1957 Collage, 26×25cm

The American left wing activist and artist Martha Rosler also used photomontage as an

emotive tool, to open the American public’s eyes to horrors of the war in Vietnam during

36

the 1960’s. The series of works of which all came under the title ‘Bringing the War

Home’: House Beautiful: Vietnam’ (fig’s 27, 28 & 29) literally did that, they brought the

suffering of Vietnamese people into comfortable, spacious and leisurely American

homes. The juxtaposition of these figures upon such contrasting backgrounds makes the

statement that these worlds are not separate as we may so believe.

In a conversation with Benjamin Buchloh, Rosler explained that she was a part of the

‘New Left’, e.g. student activism: “I was, indeed. It was really the Vietnam War that

pushed me decisively to the left, but in my mid-teens I was already involved with civil

rights and antinuclear protests.”47

Just how effective are images such as these in affecting people’s opinions? The writer

Marshall McLuhan said this of the Vietnam War in the Montreal Gazette, May 1976:

“Television brought the brutality of the war into the comfort of the living room. Vietnam

was lost in the living rooms of America-not the battlefield of Vietnam.”48

47 Martha Rosler: Positions in the Life World, edited by Catherine de Zegher (Ikon Gallery, Birmingham 1999) p. 22 48 Anthony Jay, Oxford Dictionary of Political Quotations (Oxford University Press 1999) p.234

37

Figure 27 Martha RoslerFrom Bringing the War Home: House Beautiful: Vietnam series

Figure 28 Martha Rosler, Figure 29 Martha Rosler,from Bringing the War Home: from Bringing the War Home: House Beautiful: Vietnam series House Beautiful: Vietnam series

Chapter 3A Force Still Today?

38

“Are images the terrain on which political struggle should be waged, the site on which

new ethics is to be articulated?”49 W.J.T. Mitchell

As I have discussed in the latter half of the last chapter, the political photomontages of

John Heartfield have inspired a knock-on effect of similar style work, by artists much

later on. A current practitioner who has certainly continued on the tradition is Peter

Kennard, who himself claims, “…my work is obviously related to the pioneering

photomontages of John Heartfield from the 19230’s.”50

Like Heartfield, Kennard also appreciates the power of political photomontage in its

ability to cut through lies, and ascertain brutal realities through recontextualization;

“The point of my work is to use these easily recognisable iconic images, but to

render them unacceptable. To break down the image of the all-powerful missile, in

order to represent the power of millions of people who are actually trying to break

them.”51

His anti-war, anti-nuclear posters which he has produced on behalf of the CND, are

notable for always being in black & white, never in colour; it serves in its purpose of

making them incredibly unnerving, for subjects like nuclear disarmament, are ‘black &

white’ issues. Kennard creates highly fatalistic images which attempt to sharply draw the

viewer out of their comfort zone, and face the chilling reality that mankind must act now

before its too late in the future. Figure 30 & 31 demonstrate the visual techniques for this

49 W.J.T. Mitchell, What Do Pictures Want? The Lives & Loves of Images (University of Chicago Press, 2005) p.3250 Peter Kennard, IMAGES for the END of the CENTURY-PHOTOMONTAGE EQUATIONS (Journeyman Press London 1990) see ‘Afterword’ paragraphs 16-1751 Again, see ‘Afterword’, paragraph 15

39

Figure 30 Peter Kennard Untitled poster Figure 31 Peter Kennard

Untitled

poster

40

Figure 32 Peter Kennard Untitled Poster

all too clearly; figure 30 (untitled) captures the precarious situation of the entire world,

caught in the danger of the Cold War. The multitude of nuclear missiles look as if the

may slip out from the gasmask at any moment, which only adds to the high anxiety of

41

possible Armageddon. Likewise, figure 31 (untitled) is a haunting photomontage and a

direct warning aimed at the United Nations; the UN international symbol sits at the

bottom of the sand timer (which is almost out of time) and the ominous figure of a

skeletal head above that, is a dire warming to the organization that its time to act is

running out.

Kennard as he has mentioned, does not only play to the audiences’ fears, but also

attempts to ‘empower’ them visually as one can see in fig 32 (untitled), whereby a human

fist is witnessed ‘breaking’ a nuclear missile; this practice of ‘destroying’ a image of such

magnitude and power, is a balancing of the ‘light’ (hope & human solidarity and

international action) against the ‘dark’ (remaining passive in the face of an ominous

nuclear threat).

In this debate of whether photomontage remains to be still an effective voice of social

commentary, there is an argument that is perhaps not. This challenge to the medium

comes from the illustration work of Olivier Kugler, who produces intimate documentary

drawings of the many interesting people and places he has visited around the world. His

distinctively loose drawings are scanned and coloured digitally, resulting stunning and

realistic reproductions of the places of his travels, and, he even confesses to having an

interest in photojournalism.52 Kugler a regular contributor to the Guardian, has visually

documented countless people and faces in his drawings, as and as he proves in his

illustration for The Guardian’s Shanghai special G2 supplement, titled Mr Ren’s bicycle

repair shop, (fig 33) he will explore his subject to great depth; this will include their

surroundings, belongings, the clothes they are wearing and more besides

It’s not to say that this medium is always appropriate for every situation. Would Kugler’s

work be effective if used to highlight serious world issues, as in the case of Kennard?

52 Angus Hyland, The Picture Book, contemporary Illustration (Laurence King Publishing, London 2006) p.64

42

Figure 33 Olivier Kugler Mr Ren’s bicycle repair shop Illustration for The Guardian’s Shanghai special in its G2 supplement magazine

I doubt so, for the simple reason that drawings are far too subjective in this regard. What

I mean by this is that if you were to design an antinuclear weapons poster a using

drawing technique, the vital message of the poster could be lost in its aestheticism; an

43

illustration may only serve in ‘simplifying’ or even trivialising such an important

message. Photographs and only photographs can make or destroy an image with a

complete totality maintained Susan Sontag, when she said “Cameras are the antidote and

the disease, a means of appropriating reality and a means of making it obsolete.”53

Photomontage is still very much alive and kicking within current editorial illustration in

the mainstream media. The German illustrator/ graphic designer Dettmer Otto,

incorporates photographic elements into his work in the form of silk-screen prints.

Interestingly, he admitted in a talk which he gave to Illustration students at the University

of Westminster on December 4th 2007 that his main inspirations had been the

photomontages of the Russian Constructivists El Lissitzky and Gustav Klutsis. He

demonstrates the effectiveness of combining photographic images in his editorial

illustration for The Economist (fig 34) published on September 6th 2007. It is for an article

explaining about the expanding of new power stations in the USA, and he based his

image on the key words “nuclear renaissance.”54

His two self promotion illustrations for the 2006 AOI annual Orpheus (fig 35) and

Hunger (fig 36) bear the hallmarks of Constructivism in their design approach. They are

much closer in relation to Klutsis’ more symbolised and geometric stylisation. Likewise,

Otto seems less interested in the aesthetic quality of the images, but more with the

message which his trying to effectively convey.

Finally, another editorial illustration which I feel successfully works as a social

commentary, is by the illustrator Martin O’Neil and for an article in The Guardian’s

Guide supplement. The article of the 19th January by Sian Thatcher, comments upon

various Christian websites’ view that they find many ‘innocent’ movies for children to be

immoral. O’Neil’s illustration (fig 37) does what the article intends in making mockery of

the ‘nannying’ reaction of the various outraged Christian websites; they are represented

53 Jessica Evans & Stuart Hall Visual Culture (Sage Publications, London 1999) p.9354 http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9762843

44

Figure 34 Dettmer Otto editorial image for The Economist, September 6th 2007

Figure 35 Dettmer Otto Orpheus Figure 36 Dettmer Otto Hungerself promotion from Images 30 self promotion from Images 30

45

Figure 37 Martin O’Neil, editorial illustration for Sian Thatcher article dated January 2008-01-19 in The Guardian supplement, the Guide

by a hand emanating from a television screen, which is about to show a movie to two

young children. Again, I think that photomontage serves this type of article topic well,

because it able to convey the Christian paternalism in action, when it may have been

more difficult to express in any other medium.

46

Conclusion

47

From the research which I have gathered and in the many points I have made along the

way, I now feel inclined to believe that photomontage still remains an effective voice of

social commentary. Furthermore, I would say also that as a technique that thrives on

recycling mass produced photographic imagery, it is the best equipped to provide an

‘alternative’ viewpoint; it can in fact, take icons, ideologies, customs etc, all of which

gain status through photographic reproduction and circulation, and break them down

through the same process; an example of this would no doubt be George Heartfield’s

destruction of the Fuhrer myth. It is a technique which can make visually possible what

would be impossible in the physical world, such as the crushing of a nuclear missile in

the clenched fist of one’s hand or the construction of the future.

Bibliography

48

Douglas Kahn, John Heartfield Art and Mass Media, Tanam Press, New York 1985

Richard Hollis Graphic Design A Concise History, Thames & Hudson world of art, 2001

Victor Margolin, The Struggle For Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy 1917-1946 University of Chicago Press 1997

Donald Treadgold, Twentieth Century Russia 6th edition ed. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1987)

Dawn Ades, Photomontage revised & enlarged edition Thames & Hudson 1986

Brandon Taylor, Collage, The Making Of Modern Art, Thames & Hudson, paperback edition 2006

Bojko Szymon, New Graphic Design in Revolutionary Russia (London, 1972)

Courier Dada author’s translation Paris, 1958

Kazmir Malevich, “From Cubism to Futurism to Suprematism,” in K.S. Malevich, Essays on Art 1915-1928, vol.1, ed. Troels Anderson (Copenhagen: Borgen, 1971)

Mary Warner Marien, Photography a Cultural History, (Laurence King Publishing 2002)

Dietmar Elger, Dadaism (TASCHEN, 2006)

Jessica Evans & Stuart Hall, Visual Culture (SAGE Publications 1999)

Philip Hofer, The Disasters of War By Francisco Goya (Dover Publications 1967)

John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler ( Hazan Edition, Paris 1997)

George Lukacs, “Realism in the Balance,” in Ernst Bloch , et al., Aesthetics and Politics. London, 1977

Oron J. Hale, THE Captive Press In the Third Reich, (Princeton University Press 1973)

Herbert Marcuse, The Aesthetic Dimension (THE MACMILLAN PRESS LTD, London 1979)

John Hite & Chris Hinton, Weimar & Nazi Germany, (Murray 2000)

Martha Rosler: Positions in the Life World, edited by Catherine de Zegher (Ikon Gallery, Birmingham 1999)

Anthony Jay, Oxford Dictionary of Political Quotations (Oxford University Press 1999)

49

W.J.T. Mitchell, What Do Pictures Want? The Lives & Loves of Images (University of Chicago Press, 2005)

Peter Kennard, IMAGES for the END of the CENTURY-PHOTOMONTAGE EQUATIONS (Journeyman Press London 1990)

Angus Hyland, The Picture Book, contemporary Illustration (Laurence King Publishing, London 2006)

Image References

Figure 1 Lissitzy –USSR in Construction, issue 10, Cover page, 1932 Victor Margolin The Struggle For Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy p.173

50

Figure 2 Lissitzky –‘The Current is switched on’ USSR in Construction issue 10 1932Victor Margolin The Struggle For Utopia: Rodchenko Lissitzky Moholy-Nagy p.178 Figure 3 ‘The Task of the Press is the Education of the Masses ‘Photofrieze for the International Press Exhibition, Cologne 1928 3.8 × 23.5 metres, Brandon Taylor, Collage The Making of Modern Art, p.86Figure 4 Millions of Workers Take Part in Socialist Competition 1927-28Brandon Taylor, Collage The Making of Modern Art, p.88Figure 5 Gustav Klutsis Dynamic City 1919-20 Dawn Ades Photomontage, p.67Figure 6 Gustav Klutsis The Electrification of the Entire Country 1920, Dawn Ades Photomontage p.70Figure 7 El Lissitzky, montage from USSR in Construction, no.10, 1932, Dawn Ades Photomontage p.96Figure 8 Gustav Klutsis, Photomontage for a special edition of Molodaya gwardya 1924 Dawn Ades Photomontage p.71Figure 9 Alexander Rodchenko The Crisis 1923, Dawn Ades Photomontage, p.72Figure 10 Alexander (Xanti) Schawinsky Year XII of Fascist Era 1934 96.5 × 66.5 cm, Alston W. Purvis & Martijn F. Le Coultre, Graphic Design 2Oth Century, p.226Figure 11 Paul Citroën, Metropolis 1923, Dawn Ades Photomontage, p.98Figure 12 Raoul Hausmann, The Art Critic 1919/20, Collage, 31.4 × 25.1 cm, Dietmar Elger, Dadaism, p.37Figure 13 Hannah Höch, Incision with the Dada Kitchen Knife through Germany’s Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch 1920 Collage 114 × 90 cm, Dietmar Elger, Dadaism, p.45Figure 14 Pablo Picasso, Guernica 1937, John Berger The Success & Failure of Picasso, p.164-65Figure 15 Francisco Goya What more can one do? 1863Etching from ‘The Disasters of War’ p.33Figure 16 Francisco Goya Nothing. We shall see 1863 Etching from ‘The Disasters of War’ p.69

Figure 17 John Heartfield Goering: “The Third Reich’s Executioner” AIZ, September 1933 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p.130Figure 18 “A pan-Germanist” AIZ, November 1933 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p.135Figure 19 Death sowing his seeds: “Everywhere in the country where Death passes, he harvests hunger, war and fire.” April 1937 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p.135 Figure 20 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p129Figure 21 “The Wise Kings in a Troubled Land” January 1935 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p149Figure 22 “What? No butter or lard? Well then, eat your Jews!” October 1935 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p.154Figure 23 originally posed photograph, Graphic Design A Concise History by Richard Hollis, p.61Figure 24 Book cover for Macht Man Dollars by Upton Sinclair 1931 John Willet Heartfield versus Hitler, p.98

51

Figure 25 John Heartfield ‘Hurray, the Butter is all gone!’ 1935 Photomontage 38.7 × 27.3 cm The 20th Century Art Book Phaidon Press 1996, p.194Figure 26 ‘Just What is it That Makes Today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing?’ 1957 Collage, 26×25cm Brandon Taylor, Collage The Making of Modern Art, p.161Figure 27 from Martha Rosler: Positions in the life world p. 19Figure 28 from Martha Rosler: Positions in the life world p. 16Figure 29 from Martha Rosler: Positions in the life worldFigure 30 Peter Kennard Untitled poster IMAGES for the END of the CENTURY-PHOTOMONTAGE EQUATIONS (Journeyman Press London 1990) p. 9Figure 31 untitled from p.61 of Domesday Book by Peter KennnardFigure 32 untitled from p.10Figure 33 Olivier Kugler Mr Ren’s bicycle repair shop Illustration for The Guardian’s Shanghai special in its G2 supplement magazine, p.66-7 of The Picture Book by Angus Hyland, published by Lawrence King Publishing LtdFigure 34 Dettmer Otto editorial image for The Economist, September 6th 2007Figure 35 Dettmer Otto Orpheus self promotion from Images 30 The Best of British Contemporary Illustration 2006 AOI p.61Figure 36 Dettmer Otto Hunger self promotion from Images 30 The Best of British Contemporary Illustration 2006 AOI p61Figure 37 Martin O’Neil, editorial illustration for Sian Thatcher article dated January 2008-01-19 in The Guardian supplement, the Guide

52