Introduction: This study examines the representation of resistance discourse in cartoons and graphic artworks related to the Iran-US war through the lens of Stuart Hall’s theory of representation. According to Hall, representation is not a passive reflection of reality but an active process of meaning production through signs, cultural codes, and systems of interpretation. Images do not simply depict events; they organize meanings by emphasizing certain values and constructing preferred readings for audiences. The main purpose of this research is to analyze how war cartoons and graphic works construct narratives of resistance and how visual signs contribute to the formation of national identity and political meanings. The study focuses on three interconnected dimensions: the representation of the enemy, the representation of national power, and the representation of resistance.
Methods: This research adopts a qualitative approach based on visual discourse analysis and semiotic interpretation. Selected cartoons and graphic works are analyzed through Stuart Hall’s theory of representation, with a focus on concepts such as signification, cultural codes, stereotyping, and preferred meaning. The analysis examines visual elements including composition, symbols, colors, characters, spatial arrangements, body language, and intertextual references. Through close readings of the images, the study identifies recurring visual patterns and explores how meanings are constructed through oppositions such as self/other, power/weakness, attack/defense, and defeat/resistance.The analytical framework is organized around three main categories: the representation of the enemy, the representation of national power, and the representation of resistance. This framework provides a systematic understanding of how visual codes contribute to the construction of war narratives and collective identity.
Findings: The findings demonstrate that war cartoons and graphic works function as active instruments of discourse production rather than neutral visual records. The first pattern concerns the representation of the enemy. Through exaggeration, symbolic reduction, and visual opposition, the enemy is frequently constructed as an aggressive, destabilizing, or vulnerable subject. These representations establish a distinction between the “self” and the “other” and contribute to the construction of a particular moral and political interpretation of the conflict. The second pattern relates to the representation of national power. The analysis indicates that power is represented not only through military technologies and equipment but also through symbolic elements such as national flags, cultural symbols, territorial control, and images of stability. In these works, national power is constructed as a combination of military capability, psychological strength, and narrative authority. Visual contrasts between calmness and anxiety, strength and weakness, and control and disorder reinforce particular understandings of power relations. The third and central pattern is the representation of resistance. The findings show that resistance is portrayed through collective endurance, unity, sacrifice, and active response. Symbols such as raised flags, clenched fists, collective bodies, damaged landscapes, and the presence of both civilian and military figures transform resistance from a military concept into a broader cultural and national value. Resistance is represented not only as opposition to an external threat but also as a symbol of identity, solidarity, and continuity.دFurthermore, the analysis reveals that many of these images rely on intertextual references and collective memories. Historical symbols, cultural motifs, and national myths strengthen the emotional and ideological dimensions of visual narratives, transforming specific events into broader narratives of perseverance and collective struggle.
Conclusion: This study shows that war cartoons and graphic artworks play an important role in shaping political meanings and constructing narratives of resistance. From the perspective of Stuart Hall’s theory of representation, these images should be understood as cultural practices that actively produce meanings rather than simply represent existing realities. The findings indicate that the discourse of resistance in these artworks is constructed through three interconnected processes: the representation of the enemy as the threatening “other,” the symbolic construction of national power, and the portrayal of collective resistance as a shared identity. Through visual signs and symbolic structures, these works construct a preferred interpretation of the conflict in which the represented community appears legitimate, powerful, and resilient. Therefore, cartoons and graphic works constitute significant fields of symbolic struggle where concepts such as identity, power, legitimacy, and resistance are negotiated. Their importance extends beyond artistic expression, as they participate in the formation of collective memory and political discourse.