‘Reconnecting health and safety? Safety education and mass persuasion in twentieth century Britain’

Thursday, 10th February 2011, 12.45 pm – 2.00 pm
Venue: Jerry Morris B, Tavistock Place

The Centre for History in Public Health Looks really interesting, unfortunately I can’t get there!

Until now…!

The poster has had a resurgence, particularly since November 2008, when the credit crunch really hit, with many using it as a mantra to get through their daily lives.  Catching the mood of the nation it has been widely distributed, copied onto mugs, T shirts and student walls, and the message subverted in multiple ways.

The MOI, officially formed at the outbreak of the Second World War, was the central governmental publicity machine. Its role was to tell the citizen ‘clearly and swiftly what he is to do, where he is to do it, how he is to do it and what he should not do’. Their messages, which tapped into a sense of what it was to be British during the war, have continued to sell as items of nostalgia, and come to the forefront again during the current financial crisis.

This paper considers recent uses, including ‘Make do and Mend’ in times of austerity, ‘Coughs and Sneezes Spread Diseases’ for Swine Flu, and, most recently, the Green Party’s environmental ‘New Home Front’ competition, and what that indicates with regards to an underlying sense of ‘Britishness’.

Abstract for ‘The Second World War in Popular Culture and Cultural Memory‘, 13-15 July 2011.

13 July 2011 – 15 July 2011

Trinity College Dublin, 19-21 April 2011

The 4th biennial Media History conference, ‘Perception, Reception and Deception’, jointly organised by the Trinity Long Room Hub, Trinity College Dublin, the Centre For Media History, Aberystwyth University, and the journal Media History, will focus on the ways in which people have understood the social, cultural and political roles of the media over the past five centuries. The concept of ‘the media’ will be interpreted broadly, so as to include newspapers, magazines and one-off publications which included news and information, as well as manuscript, aural, visual, and broadcast and other electronic sources.

A great deal of work has been done by scholars on the institutional, political and cultural history of various forms of media. ‘Perception, Reception and Deception’ will build on this literature to explore the ways in which print, manuscript, visual representations and the broadcast media have been understood, conceptualised, and imaginatively represented in the societies in which they were produced. It will, in other words, focus not on media production but on the reception, depiction and perception of the media by individuals and groups of individuals in a variety of different contexts over time.

How have readers, consumers, and the industry itself framed arguments about the media as a force for good (or evil) at different points in time? Have contemporaries always seen the media as an agent of change, or is there a counter-history of the media to be written in terms of promoting conservatism, deference and order? How have people understood and represented the media in terms of concepts of personal and geographical space, time and changing belief systems?  Can we think ‘internationally’ about the similarities and differences between perceptions of the media in different states and nations over time, or is the media still best understood and examined in largely local or regional contexts?   How, in short, have men and women answered in different contexts the apparently simple questions, ‘what is the media, and what is it for?’

Abstracts, of no more than 200 words for papers of between 20 to 25 minutes duration, should be sent by close of business on 30 September 2010 to Mediahistory2011@gmail.com. We welcome proposals from a range of chronological, geographical and methodological backgrounds. Additional enquiries can be directed to one or more of the following: Dr. Jason McElligott jmcellig@tcd.ie , Dr Sian Nicholas shn@aber.ac.uk or Professor Tom O’Malley tpo@aber.ac.uk

I’m tempted to submit an abstract… with my interest here in Second World War Posters, and my current emphasis on new media!

On Saturday 15 May the University of Winchester’s MA in Religion, Rhetoric & Death held it’s first ‘Death Day‘, a really interesting event with a great balance of interesting speakers. I missed the first session, but then listened to really thought-provoking talks from Cribb’s funeral parlours, the UK Manager of Cemeteries, and a conductor of ‘secular funerals’ – covering a range of ideas about how the funeral business has changed and is changing. After an interesting lunch sat with a number of ‘Revs’ it was time to give my paper (above), combining with a paper from Helen Frisby on mourning practices in Victorian Britain… followed by a paper on the use of effigies before the ‘Rock & Roll’ session of the day: ‘Slasher movies’ and the use of obituaries for celebrities, especially when suicide is involved (and drew our attention to a new magazine: Eulogy). Lots of food for thought from the day, especially enjoyable when it’s a conference not related to either of the subjects I teach (History & Media Studies) and just a chance to enjoy!

I had to come up with a conference paper on the theme of ‘Keep Calm and Carry On’, so here is the link to the audiocast of it… it relates to Universities needing to be prepared for crises/disasters, with specific reference to electronic tools.

During the Second World War, the British government sought to use appropriate communications tools to convey policy to the populace, whether via posters, newspapers, radio, or legislation. Resource restrictions meant that there was not always a free choice in which to use.

Sound familiar? It should.”

Read the full abstract.

Strand: Either: ‘Death and the Arts’ or ‘Death and Culture’

Title: Death at War

Abstract:

In the Second World War, the second ‘total war’ of the Twentieth Century, death was a daily reality for both those on the fighting fronts and those on the Home Front in Britain.  The Ministry of Information (MOI), officially formed at the outbreak of the Second World War, was the central governmental publicity machine, working with other official bodies, including the War Office. Its role was to tell the citizen ‘clearly and swiftly what he is to do, where he is to do it, how he is to do it and what he should not do’.

Posters produced by the MOI needed to deal with the ever-present reality of death, whilst it was often difficult to be too realistic, as graphic images of death would not necessarily have been well received. How did governmental bodies deal with the representation of death, ensuring that the seriousness of their message was conveyed, whilst avoiding too “starkly realistic posters” for those who “already knew so much of reality”. Are there clear differences between the images aimed at soldiers, industrial worker and civilians? Was humour ever seen as an appropriate tool in relation to the possibility of death? What were some of the more subtle symbols of death which recurred within wartime posters, particularly within health and “Careless Talk” campaigns?

Biographical Details:

Dr Bex Lewis is Lecturer in History, Associate Lecturer in Media Studies and Blended Learning Fellow at the University of Winchester.  The focus of her research is upon British propaganda posters, further information can be found on http://www.ww2poster.co.uk. Her most recent publication is a chapter for London Transport Posters: A Century of Art and Design, and she was a major contributor to: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/theartofwar/.

For more: Facebook Group: Death at Winchester

Read more conference information.