Visual Culture and Environment America\'s

Visual Culture and Environment

America's cultural propensity to act, look and think of itself as the protector of the free world is perpetuated by hundreds of cultural practices, viewed with more or less distaste by various nations of the world and even made fun of by some Americans. Yet, the propensity of Americans to attribute a great deal of personal power to the president of the U.S., no matter who he is historically troubling, as other nations and her people simply do not see it this way. For Americans the president is the scapegoat, and bad decisions of international interest are solely his responsibility. Where are the cultural propensity of a more logical world view is to see the nation as a whole, with a face changing regime, that often makes poor international relations and protection decisions, often without thinking about the will of the people the nation effects with its self serving actions.

It would seem that most Americans think of the president as the wielder of an all powerful decision making body. The "administration" is headed by an individual who is the face of the people, a people who seem to believe that he is capable of making all the decisions, despite the fact that he is not and that historically there is rarely a real change in policy, from an international perspective when a "new" head of state takes office. Korea itself is particularly interesting when it comes to this issue as the division between North and South Korea, despite the regional desire for unity, with different terms for unity causing the continual rift was in part supported and created by the U.S., when a completely different "head of state" was in charge. Many people in the world and especially in Korea see the U.S. As a meddler, seeking to continually serve its own interests all over the world and some of these interests give no credence to the people the "president" is seeking to protect and with only limited belief that the president in charge really makes a difference. (Donaldson, 1996, p. 4)

"As shown in the figure, only about one in five of those who had an unfavorable view of the U.S. In the summer of 2002 attributed it to President Bush, whereas nearly three out of four expressed the far more troubling view that it was the result of "a more general problem with America." (Larson, Levin, Baik & Savych, 2004, p. 72)

So as a nation, we choose to culturally perpetuate the idea that the president is the reason for success or failure in any given international decision, while an outside perspective supports the idea that the U.S. has a history of meddling that overarches the wishes of others. An example of this scenario can be seen even in the 1943 Korean War negotiations, as the president is shown in a light that supports democratic solutions and independence, even though the end of negotiations bring little of what he supports. In other words the president (because he was popular) has been historically exonerated for his actions because "deep down" he didn't really believe in the results. "Roosevelt was an ardent anticolonialist, and he hoped that a postwar Asia would be free from the suppression of Western colonial domination." (Donaldson, 1996, p. 4) It would seem then the president only really has power when his decisions are favorable to democracy and these other players, at the 1943 Cairo Conference usurped his authority for their own interests, when in reality the U.S. And her international relations policies set the stage for division and occupation in Korea.

"Any public opinion about the United States in Korea, therefore, ought to be taken as an opinion about an America stereotyped by the unique terms of the Korean-American encounter. Furthermore, different Koreans have experienced Americans differently, so they do not all have the same stereotype. Instead, their attitudes are shifting combinations of several basic -- and sometimes contradictory -- impressions: America the Historic Helper, America the Careless Colossus, America the Ailing Giant, and America the Ruthless Hegemon." See Clark ((1991), p. 151. (Larson, Levin, Baik & Savych, 2004, p. 112)

While American's think of president Bush as the mastermind behind the development of North Korea as one of the famed "axis of evil." Koreans often see the whole nation making historically bad decisions to undermine the wishes and will of other nations.

Many in the U.S. also see North and South Korea as completely different nations, even though this is only partly true and they are both populated by Koreans, who were once doggedly unified but have been constantly segmented and separated by colonial interests and war, first by colonial interest in Asia, as Japan and China "annexed" her for their own interests and then by the European power in the 1950s. (Auerback, 2006, p. 465) This perpetuation of international selfishness, even though Roosevelt was exonerated, is the historical trend, despite the "man in charge" and the visual cultural image of the president as a fundamentally omnipotent character. Liberals and conservatives alike, give the president this fundamental imaginary power, some making fun of him, and others supporting him, like he really is in charge of every decisions, good or bad that the whole body politic of the U.S. makes. "I would be more impressed with some of you if you field the notion that North Korea is not an enemy of America - it was crafted into one by George W. Bush." (Blogger: "Constructive Feedback" April 5, 2009)

Now as the U.S. heads into a new "administration" aptly titled the "Obama administration" the visual images are changing from largely negative and comical to patriotic and fantastic. Though the image of Obama as a super hero is relatively jaded, a satire by an American of the fictional power we give to the president at any given time, to save the world, save the economy and right all the wrongs of the past, there are still a great many people in the U.S. who believe he is wholly in charge of all decisions and actions taken by the U.S., when really at best he wields a great deal of influence. The hope that this wholly different individual, seeking and espousing change will somehow transform hundreds of years of colonial and fiscal personal interests, at the expense of other nations. In South Korea, despite the fact that the North Korean leader is a dictator who does wield the kind of power attributed to a U.S. president, still know in their hearts that their South Korean brothers are in favor of nationalistic unity and don't buy every word the dictator espouses. (Lankov, 2006, p. 105) the fantastic popularity of iconographic images of Obama during and after his election and subsequent inauguration, coupled with thousands of hopeful articles, newscasts and even books demonstrating just how different he is and just how he can change the U.S. And the world, in many ways no president really has the power to control that the U.S. people are really putting a great hope into the ideology of the president as the end all be all decision maker in real actions and standards.

When someone from inside or outside the U.S. analyses this image and the other hundreds of images of this hopeful bringer of change we must look reflectively at the history of the U.S. And the fact that even a superhero will have a formidable task in remaking the actions rather than the image of the U.S. Though images do go a long way they are simply images and history, as it has done so many times does have a significant habit of repeating itself.