Autostereotypes and heterostereotypes in the visual propaganda of wartime: the dynamic aspect

. The article considers autostereotypes (representations about oneself) and heterostereotypes (representations about the enemy) of the conflicting parties in the wartime propaganda in the dynamic aspect. The material of the study is the propaganda materials of Great Britain, the USA, Germany and the USSR during the Second World War, as well as Ukraine, including the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and Syria of the modern period. It is established that auto- and heterostereotypes of perception of the belligerent countries in wartime materials are presented in general cognitive models with the opposite sign for the belligerents. It was revealed that these stereotypes are independent on time, since the image of the enemy under different time and socio-political conditions is translated by the common mental schemes: standard behaviors, zoo symbols and ornitosymbols, political doctrine, political and ethnic symbols, nationality, etc., built on archetypes and basic cultural models Analysis of gender stereotypes has shown that masculine gender image of Germany, Britain and the US demonstrates the archetypal "gender order". Ukraine and the Donetsk People's Republic are represented in feminine images. The USSR (Russia) is represented in a female image endowed with masculine features. The cognitive gender map shows Russia's special position in gender space. Stereotypes based on archetypes are most easily assimilated and effectively act on mass consciousness. It is promising to conduct an experimental study of the nature and extent of the impact of propaganda materials on the representatives of the conflicting parties, as well as to consider stereotypes in a more distant historical retrospective.


Introduction
Propaganda is an unconditional form of communication in situations critical for society, when speaking of "good" or "bad" propaganda [1; 2] does not make sense. Following P. Bourdieu's position that there is no public opinion [3], and E. Bernays's postulate that rational manipulation of public consciousness is a condition for the existence of a democratic society, [1] it is impossible to deny the necessity of propaganda in critical situations. The simplest and most effective way of forming public opinion is to build a system of stereotypes (simplified cognitive models) that, on the one hand, explain the surrounding social and moral chaos, and, on the other hand, have a defensive function, forming an understandable coordinate system [2]. Stereotypes based on archetypes are most easily assimilated and effectively act on mass consciousness. The purpose of influence in this case is irrelevant. It is no coincidence that the book by E. Bernays (who dealt mainly with "peaceful" PR: from the promotion of Sergei Diaghilev's ballet in the US, and then the products of "Procter & Gamble Company", "General Motors", "American Tobacco Company", "General Electric", etc.) "Crystallizing Public Opinion" (in the Russian edition -"Propaganda"), according to the propaganda minister Goebbels, formed the basis of the Nazi campaign against German Jews [4]. It is said that E. Bernays was shocked, as he was not only a nephew of Sigmund Freud, but also a great-grandson of the chief rabbi in Hamburg Isaac Bernays.
Wartime always brings chaos in the world order and the people's consciousness, which requires explanation, i.e. concluding this chaos in understandable cognitive models that organize consciousness and behavior of people in a critical situation.
The aim of the study is to identify autostereotypes (representations about oneself) and heterostereotypes (representations about the enemy) of conflicting parties in the visual propaganda of wartime in the dynamic aspect.

Material and methods of research
The material of the study was propaganda materials (about 350 posters, leaflets, cartoons, posters, photoadjacks, memes, demotivators, etc.) of the UK, the USA, Germany and the Soviet Union during World War II, as well as Ukraine, including the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), and Syria of the modern period. Ukraine and Syria are the territories on which military operations are being currently conducted. The methods of research are comparative semiotic and gender analysis. The time period for creating propaganda materials is 75 years (1942-2017), which will allow us to trace the dynamics of changes in autostereotypes and heterostereotypes in military conflict situations.   It is well known that patriotism is one of the main conditions for the victory in a military conflict. It is belief of people in the rightness of war, high sacrifice in the name of freedom and defense of the country, support on the centuries-old history, cultural and heroic traditions of the country. Analyzed visual materials exploit a sense of patriotism and reflect involvement of the warring parties in the history and culture of their country. This is usually a historical retrospective of warrior images (knights, revolutionaries) or historical figures of the past (Figure 3).
The reference to patriotism on the posters: "Ukraine to be! Thank you, patriots!" (Figure  1f), «Our cause is just. The enemy will be defeated" (Figure 1b), "He fights for freedom» (Figure 1c), "Americans are always fighting for freedom» (Figure 3c), "The Russian people fate is to repeat the feats of fathers defending their native land» (Figure 3h), etc. A typical technique for wartime propaganda materials is exploitation of children and women's images in two opposite positions: a happy baby on the hands of a warrior or leader of the nation (Figure 4), or, vice versa, suffering, murdered, mutilated by the enemy children or women ( Figure 5, 6).
Suffering children and women increase the emotional tension of propaganda, cause natural shuddering of human hearts, turning images of children and women into a powerful weapon of information war ( Figure 5, 6).
In modern propaganda, a typical technique is to show the leader of the country in the image of Hitler (Figure 10). The above cognitive models are universal and archetypal and are used in the propaganda of the Second World War and modern military operations. Differences are presented at the level of political and ethnic symbols and gender stereotypes.

Gender stereotypes
In gender autostereotypes Germany, Great Britain, the United States appear in male images. USSR, Ukraine, DPR -in the image of a woman (Figure 11). Ukraine (Figure 11g, 11h) and DPR (Figure 11i, 11k) in autostereotypes appear in the image of the young beauty to be protected, showing typical signs of femininity (subordination, weakness, impotence, chaos, passivity).
In autostereotypes of the USSR Russia appears in the image of a middle-aged woman, excluding temptation (Motherland). The feminine character is endowed with masculine attributes: strength, activity, rationality, masculinity (Figure 11e, 11f, 12). It is also an archetype (mother earth, mother nature), although many researchers link this image to the state formation of gender ("totalitarian androgyny").   In gender heterostereotypes European countries (Figure 13), Europe as a whole (Figure  13a), the US (Figure 13i) are often associated with the actualization of the typical signs of femininity (obedience, weakness, helplessness, chaos, passivity). Russia in modern Western propaganda appears exclusively in the image of Putin and the bear. If in the period of World War II the USSR was visualized as a disgusting Bolshevik (Figure 7d, 7f), a Jew (Figure 7e, 7f) or Stalin (Figure 8c, 8d), but all the same as a person, the promotion of modern image of Russia has finally lost his human form (Figure 14). Classification of countries-opponents on gender in auto-and heterostereotypes supports "gender order" in the broad sense of the word. The USSR (Russia) is an exception in autostereotypes: the feminine features are endowed with masculine features, which is also an archetype (mother earth, mother nature), although many researchers associate this image with the state formation of gender ("totalitarian androgyny"). The image of modern Russia is devoid of gender traits and is visualized through the animal, beast.

Conclusions
As a result of the study, it was established that auto-and heterostereotypes of warring countries' perception in wartime materials are presented in general cognitive models with the opposite sign for belligerents. These stereotypes do not depend on time: the image of the enemy is always transmitted by means of common mental schemes. However, over time, genres become more diverse (photoadjacks, memes, demotivators, etc.) and channels (social networks, the Internet, etc.) of communication. With the universality of the cognitive content of visual materials, differences only in ethnic and political symbols are observed. It is obvious that 'propaganda will live forever. And a reasonable person should understand that propaganda, in fact is a modern tool with which one can fight for fruitful work and bring order to chaos" [1]. The universality of propaganda techniques is conditioned by the specificity of mass consciousness and target audiences of influence. It is promising to conduct an experimental study of the nature and extent of the impact of propaganda materials on the representatives of the countries of the conflicting parties, as well as to consider stereotypes in a more distant historical retrospective.