Many political cartoonists will include caricatures of well-known politicians, which means they’ll exaggerate their features or bodies for humor, easy identification, or to emphasize a point. For example, an artist might make an overweight politician even larger to emphasize their greed or power.
For example, if the cartoonist shows wealthy people receiving money while poorer people beg them for change, they’re using irony to show the viewer how wrong they believe the situation to be.
For example, the stereotype of a fat man in a suit often stands for business interests. If you’re analyzing a historical political cartoon, take its time period into account. Was this kind of stereotype the norm for this time? How is the artist challenging or supporting it?
For example, a cartoon about voting might include a voting ballot with political candidates and celebrities, indicating that more people may be interested in voting for celebrities than government officials. The effectiveness of allusions often diminishes over time, as people forget about the trends or events.
If you need help, google the terms, people, or places that you recognize and see what they’ve been in the news for recently. Do some background research and see if the themes and events seem to connect to what you saw in the cartoon.
The view might be complex, but do your best to parse it out. For example, an anti-war cartoon might portray the soldiers as heroes, but the government ordering them into battle as selfish or wrong.
For example, a political cartoon in a more conservative publication will convey a different message, and use different means of conveying it, than one in a liberal publication.
Does it make a sound argument? Does it use appropriate and meaningful symbols and words to convey a viewpoint? Do the people and objects in the cartoon adequately represent the issue?
