Hey so this was written by me a LONG time ago (> 6 months) and I felt I wanted some fresh feedback on it just to see what I can improve on I guess. And I wasn't too sure if it was necessary to include bits and pieces in the speech (like my intro since it's not a part of the cartoon but from the article it was linked in...)
During late April of 2013, Britain's Chief Medical Officer announced that “antibiotic resistance should be ranked with terrorism as one of the major threats to society.” Sharing this opinion was the World Health Organisation (WHO) where in 2011 they made it their focus to avoid regressing to the pre-antibiotic era by introducing “a six-point policy package to combat the spread of antimicrobial resistance.” However most of the general public have very little idea on what this situation is about and how serious it could get later on in the future.
This cartoon published in the ‘Sydney Morning Herald’ on April 30th 2013 by cartoonist Pat Campbell under the title ‘Silent threat of the superbug’ comments on the looming future of antibiotics due to antibiotic resistance from bacteria. The tone is light-hearted and satirical using the imposing figure of bacteria swamping the diminutive doctor and his patient to convey the sense of urgency in the situation. Campbell’s target audience is predominantly the general public with an emphasis on the working class who are old enough to purchase medicines and antibiotics to cure their diseases and illnesses.
Most notable in this cartoon is the juxtaposition of the two key figures. The ‘shield’ associates itself with defence and protection and here it symbolises the role that antibiotics have which is to safeguard the ‘infected’. However the holes and cracks in the shield deliver the message that the security offered by antibiotics has begun to be breached by the commanding force of bacteria. Shaped and behaving like typical angler fish, the bacteria represent danger or in other words the ‘enemy’ as it overwhelms and surrounds the shield in all directions. On the contrary, bacteria are very miniscule as a whole yet Campbell has drawn them to be nearly of the same size as the shield. The suggestion therefore is that this occurrence is a negative one due to the sheer dominance demonstrated by the bacteria.
Campbell has chosen to concentrate most of the colour that appears in the cartoon in the shield which guards the doctor and his patient. The intended effect is to gain the audience’s attention due to the colour dominance displayed in that specific region in the cartoon. Looking in detail, the shield is not bright blue but rather there are patches of brown which indicate to the audience that the shield is imperfect due to the holes and discolouring of the shield. Lastly, the shading of the bacteria contrasts with the purple-pink background which adds to the foreboding feel to the cartoon in an upbeat manner.
Complementing the complexion of the cartoon is the exaggerated look on the patient. Campbell is satirising death which the patient exhibits that are characterised by the bulging eyes and the tongue hanging out in a comical manner. Accompanied with an intravenous drip (IV drip), the patient has a sense of vulnerability which is obvious as the doctor stands over his patient. Cowering behind the shield, the doctor is obviously distressed and puzzled by the overpowering force of the bacteria surrounding himself and his patient. Campbell has drawn the doctor as if they have no clue on how to react to the situation suggesting the possibility that doctors also play an important role in this dire situation.
Both individuals are dressed stereotypically where the patient has a blanket draped over them whilst the doctor is a middle-aged man dressed in the usual surgical gown equipped with a stethoscope and a light reflector. In essence, Campbell is initiating what is known as ‘farce’ to the audience due to the portrayal of the patient giving off the exaggerated expression of death and the stereotyping of particular characters in reality.
While this cartoon may be glossed over as a simple depiction of what the future may hold for antibiotics, a deeper meaning can be read when the universality of the figures are accepted. Employing a variety of persuasive and visual techniques, it can be concluded that Campbell may not only be commenting on the nature of how our doctors are going about treating their patients as well as warn the general public that we should not dismiss bacteria as harmless agents but instead recognise it as a troublesome force where in the future it could eventually take control of the ‘universe’ that is the human race and ultimately bring it to a standstill once and for all.
Home
Help
Search
Login
