I was struck yesterday by the coincidental timing of two major news events in the last two days, which the editors and producers at PRI’s “The World” seem to have purposely chosen to report one right after the other on yesterday’s broadcast to create a jarring juxtaposition in the minds of listeners (well, in the mind of this listener, at the very least). I am referring to the fact that yesterdaty marked the opening of the trial in Germany of 89-year-old John Demjanjuk for Nazi war crimes and that on Sunday the Swiss people voted to ban any future construction of minarets in their country. While both take place in Europe, the first is likely to be the last occurrence of its kind, and the second appears as though it may be on the vanguard of a political and social shift, with more similar events yet to come.
The most striking element of yesterday’s news was not anything I heard or read, but rather something I saw:

This is the poster that the right wing, anti-immigration (ie. anti-Muslim) SwissPeople’s Party used to persuade citizens to vote for the ban on minarets. It appears that many (the majority of the 53% voter turnout) were, indeed, persuaded.
Nazi prison and camp guards, like the accused Demjanjuk, were shown posters, too. Here are a few examples:



My purpose is not to draw an equivalency between what happened under the Nazi regime during WWII and the situation in Europe right now.This is primarily because there is no such equivalency, but also because a comparison of the two situations would require a long, highly informed and well researched article that goes beyond the scope of this post. I will say, however, that no matter what would be written in such a piece, I am quite confident that the terms propaganda and xenophobia would make an appearance.
The point I want to make here is about visual literacy. I suppose this must be due to the fact that I once worked as a museum educator, which has led me to strongly believe in the ability of images not only to inform, but also to inspire and persuade. Consequently, I argue that it is necessary to teach young people to be visually literate (or to “read pictures,” as it is explained to the little ones). To be visually literate means not only to be able to interpret what you are seeing, but also to think critically about it.
In many ways, and for many people, images are more powerful than words. They are subliminal and intuitive, and they elicit strong subjective impulses and responses. For this reason, parents and teachers do a disservice to children and teens if they fail to teach them to analyze images. Just as discussing current events with kids in age appropriate ways is crucial to their development into engaged citizens and moral human beings, so too is taking the time to interpret images with them essential to their making meaning, forming opinions and taking ethical stances.
Young people need to learn the importance of and skills for viewing an image objectively either before or at the same time as relating to it subjectively. I am not advocating that kids should be taught to ignore their emotional responses to an image. Often, an emotional response is exactly the right one to have, but it needs to be moderated and mediated by cool intellect. Otherwise you lose your independence of thought. Images are often meant to provoke, and it can be good that they provoke us to action…so long as we are first provoked to think carefully. Just as a speech can whip you up into a frenzy or mislead you, so too can a poster or a front page photo.
Visual literacy comes in handy in our highly technological society, enabling kids to distinguish among the millions of images bombarding them almost constantly. In our consumerist culture, it helps them figure out what is a true message and what is a marketing pitch for their money. Most importantly, visual literacy contributes to their ability to function in and preserve our free, tolerant and pluralistic democracy.
A picture is often worth a thousand words. But which words? It’s up to us grown-ups to help our kids figure that out, and to decide whether they agree with them or not.
© 2009 Renee Ghert-Zand. All rights reserved.