Visible Strategies and Worldwide Safety Research

Alongside poststructuralist approaches, vital safety research has been on the forefront of participating the visible in Worldwide Relations (IR). Rune Andersen and Juha Vuori’s (2018) edited quantity on visible safety research (VSS) is testomony to this and brings numerous disciplines collectively to concentrate on (in)safety and conflict. Acknowledging that we dwell within the ‘age of the picture’ (Williams, 2018), IR students are turning to the visible in numerous, progressive methods. Andersen and Vuori (2018) level out 3 ways the visible comes into worldwide safety: visuality as modality, the place photographs characterize and sign safety; as observe, the place photographs assemble (in)safety; and, as technique, the place photographs are a analysis instrument used to make safety seen. The primary two are the commonest method of participating photographs in IR: treating photographs as artefacts by which we come to know, make sense of, and act on the earth; by which we ‘see’ and ‘do’ worldwide politics.

These works emerge from the pictorial and aesthetic turns. Examples of such a work embody: Lene Hansen’s work on the Muhammad cartoon disaster (2011) and comedian books participating the Bosnian Conflict (2017); Axel Heck and Gabi Schlag’s research of a TIME journal cowl and the Afghanistan conflict (2013); Roland Bleiker’s work on representations of HIV/AIDS (Bleiker and Kay, 2007)and the dehumanisation of refugees (Bleiker et al., 2013); Vuori, Andersen, and Guillaume’s (2015; 2016) semiotic, chromatological method, which argues that color enacts and makes safety intelligible; Simone Molin Friis’ (2018) mixture of digital ethnography and visible approaches to check militant imagery; Helen Berents’ (2019) work on photographs of useless kids and the ‘telegenic useless’; Constance Duncombe’s (2019, 2020) work on photographs, emotion, and social media; my work on the usage of posters (2019) and comedian books (2020) to represent and/or contest gendered-sexualised-racialised (in)safety; and Megan MacKenzie’s research of soldier-generated illicit photographs, which reveals how they’re “central to, and reinforce facets of, navy band of brother tradition” (2020).

Within the much less widespread however rising strand, visuality as technique, Sophie Harman’s (2019) pathbreaking work, which I reviewed for E-IR and Dysfunction of Issues, makes use of narrative characteristic movie as a “technique of seeing those that are invisible from politics, coverage, and world well being analysis”, difficult how we ‘see’ worldwide politics and world energy constructions; Sara Särma (2018) makes use of collage to rethink the spatiality of worldwide politics; Debbie Lisle and Heather Johnson (2019), and Roland Bleiker (2019) use their very own pictures to sight, hassle, and rethink (in)safety; Cynthia Weber (2011) and William Callahan (2015) use movie as analysis output; and Benjamin Dix, participating with points like battle, migration, and asylum, works with marginalised people to supply comics ( from all three (not at all times separable) ‘strands’ of visible politics, in addition to the plethora of others not talked about, kind a part of ongoing and productive discussions about how we method the visible ontologically and methodologically. In different phrases, what photographs ‘do’ and the way we use/research them.

There is no such thing as a finish to the ways in which the visible may be introduced into the research of (worldwide) politics. The research I’ve talked about above are largely qualitative. That isn’t to say a quantitative method can’t be used: there are deserves to quantitative and blended methodologies that enable students to ask various kinds of questions. A quantitative method might, for instance, be higher suited to figuring out completely different patterns in massive knowledge units of photographs. Bleiker et al. (2013) use content material evaluation to analyse newspaper protection of asylum seekers, which opens area for various, extra nuanced, qualitative research of these photographs. This piece, subsequently, ought to function one in all many (many!) ports of departure that visible venturers can depart from. Higher but, it would take the thriller out of doing visible scholarship and encourage methodological play in a strong method that avoids simply ‘including photographs in as a result of it’s stylish now’.

Via the empirical case of the pink triangle and US AIDS activism, I’ll current some instruments for these trying to have interaction with visuals of their work. What follows stems primarily from my very own work on the visible. It ought to not be learn as a blueprint, definitive ‘’ information, or a manifesto outlining what visible politics must be. It’s unproductive to police the boundaries of VSS and visible methodologies: a pluralist method is essential to understanding the complexity of the visible (Bleiker, 2015) and utilizing visuals as scholarly output may also help de-centre the epistemological precedence given to texts in academia (e.g., essays, articles). Visible students agree that the visible is irreducible to and can’t adequately be captured by written/spoken phrases. Nonetheless, we decide to making an attempt to seize their politics within the phrases we write; inevitably, we’ll at all times fail. This can be a onerous rigidity to barter. Probably the most thrilling a part of VSS is that it’s a transferring goal: new and progressive methods of utilizing the visible as technique and/or empirics are at all times rising.

Theorising the visible: A tripartite method

Drawing on poststructuralism, I’ve engaged with the visible as a part of discourse and, thus, as a website by which to see (in)safety (Cooper-Cunningham, 2019, 2020). I’ve engaged photographs as each representing and developing (in)safety; as modality and observe. Utilizing a poststructuralist-inspired method has implications for a way one theorises and engages the visible. How photographs ‘communicate’, what they ‘do’, and their ontological standing is an ongoing debate in visible politics. Like many visible students, I draw on Roland Barthes (1977) who argues that the that means of a picture can’t be pinned down definitively, that photographs would not have a single universally obtained message, and that photographs can’t be understood as telling a narrative in and of themselves. The way you and I interpret a picture shouldn’t be essentially the identical as a result of we draw on completely different private experiences and data to learn it.

We, subsequently, want to incorporate different texts and pictures in our evaluation as a result of these assist to attribute that means to the picture(s) beneath research; these are the ‘inventory’ that we draw on to interpret photographs(Hansen, 2011). Not solely are different texts and pictures necessary, we should additionally think about how a picture is circulated, how it’s used, and the way it’s spoken about: does it cross borders, get utilized in protests, or seize widespread consideration as an illustration? These all have an effect on the arguments we will make of a picture, how they may be learn, and what political standing they’re attributed: when a selected visible motif is utilized in protest marches, for instance, it acquires a unique standing than if it weren’t. Just lately, vital students have moved to have interaction with the aural, the sounds that accompany (transferring) photographs, and the way this imbues them with that means (Baker, 2020; Malmvig, 2020). A easy method of experiencing the highly effective visual-aural, visual-textual interplay, the impact of 1 on the opposite, is to show off the sound/visible in your favorite movie scene and to recall if you’ve encountered art work in a gallery and interpreted it very otherwise from the explanatory caption.

My theorisation of and relationship with the visible emerged from a theoretical-empirical downside. Theoretically, how feminist students take into consideration silence. Empirically, how British suffragettes resisted the oppressive silencing practices of a authorities looking for to make sure girls’s exclusion from public political fora. Working by the case of British suffragettes’ acts of resistance in opposition to the patriarchal system, I observed that they used a mix of phrases (written and spoken), photographs (posters/postcards), and embodied motion (hunger-striking) to contest and undermine the dominant narrative that ladies have been apolitical, incapable of politics, and that their participation in British politics by the vote would undermine (gendered) order and produce about chaos.

To grasp what was happening on this case, I introduced collectively Lene Hansen’s (2000: 300) argument that we must always deliver within the visible and the bodily as further epistemological websites the place (in)safety may be introduced with Karin Fierke’s (2013) work on ‘acts of speech’, communication with out phrases. From there I developed what I name a ‘tripartite mannequin’ to check (world) politics—notably safety—the place one brings in phrases, photographs, and our bodies into their evaluation concurrently. Put merely, because of this we shouldn’t simply take a look at the written/spoken phrases (e.g., authorities paperwork, press, activist statements) round political points (e.g., state homophobia, wartime rape) as a result of typically there aren’t any or they don’t seem to be the first method of saying (in)safety. As a substitute, for an entire host of causes, there may be (imposed or chosen) silence, or insecurity is introduced in one other method. For instance, by starvation placing, silent protest, making and circulating on-line memes, taking a harmful 100mile boat trip, self-immolating. Silence doesn’t imply absence, that nothing is occurring[1].

Insecurity may be articulated in different methods: by the visible, for instance. On this sense, I theorise communication as one thing extra expansive and complicated, enacted by and exceeding phrases: phrases, photographs, our bodies ‘communicate’ collectively. That additionally means silence isn’t essentially simply vocal/textual: it encompasses the visible, too. Simply because there aren’t any phrases articulating (in)safety doesn’t imply there aren’t photographs doing the work. Neither the visible nor phrases have primacy: they will need to have equal analytic footing. Students should take into consideration different epistemological websites by which we will perceive and discover (worldwide) political phenomena. Once we are talking of points with such excessive stakes as safety, which may typically be (constituted as) existential for some people and collectives, you will need to take a look at a broad vary of supplies.

Pink Triangles

To floor this dialogue and put some empirical flesh on the theoretical bones above, I flip to the pink triangle, which was marked on (suspected) male gay our bodies throughout World Conflict II by the Nazis, and the ‘Silence = Loss of life’ pink triangle used throughout AIDS activism from the mid-1980s. Each connect with (in)safety, notably how sure collectives/people are constituted as threatening, and the way photographs and symbols are used to characterize, to name consideration to, insecurity.

The story of the pink triangle is definitely a story of two triangles: one triangle pointing up, the opposite down. This is a crucial distinction that marks two considerably completely different, even when overlapping, political makes use of. The downwards pointing triangle, was utilized in Nazi Germany to mark (suspected) non-heterosexual our bodies in focus camps. Within the 1970s, this triangle was appropriated by homosexual activists and have become an emblem of the homosexual liberation motion within the USA. You may also discover pink triangles all over the world memorializing each the punishment and killing of homosexuals throughout WWII, and the AIDS disaster. The Silence = Loss of life (upwards pointing) triangle emerged within the mid-1980s. It’s a repurposed model utilized by the artivist collective Silence = Loss of life—related to AIDS Coalition To Unleash Energy (ACT UP)—to name consideration to AIDS-related points.

Below Hitler many hundreds of males have been convicted of homosexuality. These convicted have been compelled to put on pink triangles figuring out their conviction for homosexuality, which was deemed unnatural and unlawful on the time. The pink triangle functioned in the identical method because the better-known yellow Star of David marking Jewish our bodies. 1 / 4 century after the top of WWII, in 1970s New York, this triangle began to be reclaimed and shortly turned an emblem of homosexual pleasure and was used to attract consideration to the oppression of non-heterosexual people, how they have been rendered insecure by excessive political and society-wide discourses developing them as ‘irregular’ and threatening.

An instance of this discourse of queer risk and its penalties is the USA’s queer panic in the course of the 1950s ‘Lavender Scare’ when homosexual males and lesbians have been faraway from state employment, deemed nationwide safety threats and attainable communist sympathisers.

Refashioning the Nazi pink triangle, it was utilized in a celebratory trend, an emblem for pleasure, solidarity and neighborhood, and the struggle in opposition to homophobia. What makes this image so necessary is its origins. The political energy of this image lies within the incapacity to extricate it from its historical past: with out this politically charged historical past, the Pink Triangle could be nothing greater than a randomly chosen emblem for the homosexual motion. Its visible hyperlink to the Nazi model is essential to its political impact and energy in reframing the safety discourse.

The optimism and hope of homosexual liberation in 1970s USA have been accompanied by elevated presence of this triangle. It was used equally to how the rainbow flag is at modern Pleasure occasions: as a celebration at marches and as a method of constructing queer area. Then, within the 1980s, because the AIDS disaster gripped the USA, the upwards-pointing ‘Silence = Loss of life’ triangle emerged. Whereas the distinction in level route seems small, there’s a completely different politics hooked up to every triangle: pleasure and celebration (determine 1) versus demise and resistance (determine 2).

Determine 1 (L). CSLDC ‘Stonewall 10’ Sticker. Determine 2 (R). ACT UP ‘Don’t Be Silent’.

From the mid-1980s, there may be not often an event, a protest or march, when the ‘Silence = Loss of life’ triangle visible is absent. It functioned as a name to mobilisation, successfully saying: in the event you don’t come out, in the event you don’t struggle, in the event you keep silent, we’ll die they usually (the federal government) will allow us to; silence is killing us. When it comes to ‘into the streets’ demonstrations and materials produced to withstand gay demonisation and AIDS ignorance, the ‘Silence = Loss of life’ triangle was visually hegemonic.

Not like the reclaimed Nazi pink triangle, the ‘Silence = Loss of life’ model was not an completely queer image and it invoked a politics of worry and anger relatively than hope. ACT UP sought to sort out AIDS-related points and stigmatisation. And whereas AIDS overwhelmingly affected the queer neighborhood—notably males who had intercourse with males—ACT UP was not an LGBT organisation. It held intersectional values, which may be seen within the translation of its key messages into Spanish and the group’s concentrate on beforehand uncared for teams similar to girls with AIDS.

ACT UP, just like the British Suffragettes I’ve written about, paired theatricality and into-the-streets actions with coordinated visuals (the ‘Silence = Loss of life’ triangle being most well-known). Combining a unified visible aesthetic and direct motion, ACT UP drew consideration to oppressed folks’s insecurities and reframed the controversy on not simply HIV/AIDS however gender and sexuality. They made these left to die by a intentionally inactive US authorities the referent objects of safety. Each pink triangles are painful reminders that individual our bodies, human lives, have been focused and left to die due to their (suspected) sexual practices and assumed monstrosity and hazard to society.


It’s honest to say that visible scholarship has made a veritable affect on IR. There’s, nevertheless, nonetheless a lot to be completed. So, I’ll maintain my concluding remarks intentionally quick as a result of this piece ought to hopefully function a provocateur and empirical-theoretical inspiration. WJT Mitchell famously wrote that “all media are blended media” (2005: 260). Supporting the visible method, I’ve outlined above, Mitchell continued that: “the very notion of a medium and of mediation already entails some combination of sensory, perceptual and semiotic parts”. On this sense, I need to make one necessary level that visible students would possibly have interaction with transferring ahead: if texts anchor and provides visuals that means, then visuals may also be mentioned to anchor and supply that means to textual content. Seeing, combatting, and finding out (in)safety requires greater than phrases.

[1] Swati Parashar and Jane Parpart (2018) just lately printed an necessary edited quantity on ‘silence’, which is essential in deepening our understandings of the best way silence capabilities politically.


Andersen RS and Vuori JA. (2018) Visible Safety Research: Sights and Spectacles of Insecurity and Conflict, London:Routledge.

Andersen RS, Vuori JA and Guillaume X. (2015) Chromatology of safety: Introducing colors to visible safety research. Safety Dialogue 46:1-18.

Baker C. (2020) ‘Couture navy’ and a queer aesthetic curiosity: music video aesthetics, militarised trend, and the embodied politics of stardom in Rihanna’s ‘Onerous’. Politik 23:11-51.

Barthes R. (1977) Picture, Music, Textual content, New York:Hill and Wang.

Berents H. (2019) Apprehending the “Telegenic Useless”: Contemplating Photographs of Useless Youngsters in International Politics. Worldwide Political Sociology 13:145–160.

Bleiker R. (2015) Pluralist Strategies for Visible International Politics. Millennium Journal of Worldwide Research 43:872-890.

Bleiker R. (2019) Visible autoethnography and worldwide safety: Insights from the Korean DMZ. European Journal of Worldwide Safety 4:274-299.

Bleiker R, Campbell D, Hutchison E, et al. (2013) The visible dehumanisation of refugees. Australian Journal of Political Science 48:398-416.

Bleiker R and Kay A. (2007) Representing HIV/AIDS in Africa: Pluralist Images and Native Empowerment. Worldwide Research Quarterly 51:139-163.

Callahan W. (2015) The Visible Flip in IR: Documentary Filmmaking as a Essential Technique. Millennium 43:891-910.

Cooper-Cunningham D. (2017) Analysing however Not Seeing: What’s Lacking When We Neglect Photographs in IR. E-Worldwide Relations.

Cooper-Cunningham D. (2019a) Evaluation of Seeing Politics: Movie Visible Technique and Worldwide Relations (Sophie Harman). E-Worldwide Relations.

Cooper-Cunningham D. (2019b) Seeing (In)Safety, Gender and Silencing: Posters in and concerning the British Girls’s Suffrage Motion. Worldwide Feminist Journal of Politics 21:383-408.

Cooper-Cunningham D. (2019d) Displaying, Talking, Doing: How ‘Seeing Politics’ Forces Us to Rethink Epistemological and Methodological Biases in Worldwide Relations. The Dysfunction of Issues.

Cooper-Cunningham D. (2020) Drawing Concern of Distinction: Race, Gender, and Nationwide Id in Ms. Marvel Comics. Millennium: Journal of Worldwide Research 48:165-197.

Duncombe C. (2019) The Politics of Twitter: Feelings and the Energy of Social Media. Worldwide Political Sociology 13:409-429.

Duncombe C. (2020) Social media and the visibility of horrific violence. Worldwide Affairs 96:609-629.

Fierke KM. (2013) Political Self-sacrifice: Company, Physique and Emotion in Worldwide Relations, Cambridge:Cambridge College Press.

Friis SM. (2018) Digital Violence: Militant Imagery, On-line Communication, and the Islamic State. College of Copenhagen.

Guillaume X, Andersen RS and Vuori JA. (2016) Paint it black: Colors and the social that means of the battlefield. European Journal of Worldwide Relations 22:49-71.

Hansen L. (2000) The Little Mermaid’s Silent Safety Dilemma and the Absence of Gender within the Copenhagen College. Millennium Journal of Worldwide Research 29:285-306.

Hansen L. (2011) Theorizing the Picture for Safety Research: Visible Securitization and the Muhammad Cartoon Disaster. European Journal of Worldwide Relations 17:51-74.

Hansen L. (2017) Studying comics for the sector of Worldwide Relations: Concept, technique and the Bosnian Conflict. European Journal of Worldwide Relations 3:581-608.

Harman S. (2019) Seeing Politics: Movie, Visible Technique, and Worldwide Relations, Qeuebec:McGill-Queen’s College Press.

Heck A and Schlag G. (2013) Securitizing Photographs: The Feminine Physique and the Conflict in Afghanistan. European Journal of Worldwide Relations 19:891-913.

Lisle D and Johnson H. (2019) Misplaced within the aftermath. Safety Dialogue 50:20-39.

MacKenzie M. (2020) Why do troopers swap illicit footage? How a visible discourse evaluation illuminates navy band of brother tradition. Safety Dialogue.

Malmvig H. (2020) Soundscapes of conflict: the audio-visual efficiency of conflict by Shi’a militias in Iraq and Syria. Worldwide Affairs 96:649-666.

Parashar, Swati, and Jane Parpart, eds. 2018. Reconsidering Gender, Silence and Company in Contested Terrains. London:Routledge.

Särmä S. (2018) Collaging Iranian Missiles: Digital Safety Spectacles and Visible On-line Parodies. In: Vuori JA and Andersen RS (eds) Visible Safety Research: Sights and Spectacles of Insecurity and Conflict. London:Routledge,114-130.

Weber C. (2011) I’m an American: filming the worry of distinction, Bristol:Mind.

Williams M. (2018) Worldwide Relations within the Age of Photographs. Worldwide Research Quarterly 62:880-891.

Extra from E-Worldwide Relations

Supply hyperlink

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *