Quote abuse
Quotes underpin actions and statements and use the authority of the author to 'prove'
the own views . A quote can be a proof for something, only by the fact that the author is known. But what happens when the author is not known or is not mentioned?
This leads to misunderstanding and the relationship between the quote and its author no longer exists.
In a new context the quote could mean something totally different than originally intended. Hence a quote should not be used without mentioning the author because without the author the original context is lost and ends up as a fragment.
In my elaboration I show the incorrect use of a quote. The quote is not used in its right context, but in the new context it seems to be realistic and true. But if you know the author, the context and the statement appears in a different light. For example, a quote can look positive and emphasize good properties. In the original context, however, the quote has a different and more negative meaning. The author or the time, from where the quote is, pulls the entire impression into the negative.
A we see, the quote always has a connection to the author and his opinion. Accordingly, the credibility of a quotation increases or decreases. We could also say that the usage of quotations leads to prejudices.
I have illustrated this characteristic in my two motifs. The different authors and the wrong contexts lead the viewer on to a wrong track.
The solution can be found on the back. There is a text supported by a illustration which explains the correlations. The viewer is now able to reflect the different feelings.
(Illustration 1: Fire department | Illustration 2: Muammar al-Gaddafi)
(Quote 1: Swift as greyhounds, tough as leather, hard as Kruppstahl)
(Quote 2: Their children also shall be destroyed before their eyes, their houses looted and their wives ravished)