World War 2 discussion with professor sweeney

  • include 3-5 secondary or theoretical works (monographs, collections, articles, or journal special issues/edited collections) you will read on your own this fall;

John Dower, War Without Mercy –this book discusses Propaganda

Frank Capra-The Nazis Strike- World War 2 (Film) and Battle of Britain (Film)

Peter Paret-Persuasive Images

Triumph of the Will (Film) by Leni Riefenstahl

Sigmund Froid, Civilization and its Discontents

  • choose one academic journal of which you will survey the last year’s worth of issues;

One of the academic Journals that I found that will be helpful for my research is Nazi Influence Outside Germany Before and During The Second World War.

  • be informed by 1-3 far-reaching keywords or key terms.
  1. Roosevelt Speeches
  2. Propaganda
  3. Nazi Rallies
  • In addition to the three parts of the list you have above, I want you to write a healthy paragraph describing for your classmates and me how you put together this list and what kinds of questions frame your inquiry. This short accompanying essay should be in the range of 250-500 words.

 

I had a great discussion with Professor Sweeney about World War 2. Before our discussion I was very fixated on figuring out if Human Nature played an impact in World War 2. I was also curious to think about what John Locke and Thomas Hobbes would have thought about human nature if they were alive to witness this war. After I had my discussion with Professor Sweeney I wanted to focus more of my studying on trying to figure out how emotions played a role in World War 2. Specifically I wanted to focus more on how leaders, Nazi rallies, and propaganda may have had an emotional influence on the way that it impacted the German people. Professor Sweeney recommended that I look more into the Nazi rallies and specifically Nazi propaganda signs to see how the Nazi’s played into the emotional piece of how Germans viewed the Jews daily after seeing these advertisements on a regular basis.  She also discussed with me that leaders such as Hitler and Musselini hated liberal democracy so these two leaders played into the idea that if people emotionally became attached to them as leaders than they could carry out drastic plans as they knew that the people would follow their every move. Professor Sweeney also brought up another great point which was to compare how American Propaganda was different from German Propaganda and if there was any emotional pieces that the United States government or German government did to play into the lives of its people. Some of the questions that I asked her were, “Is there any films that you think I should watch for my research? Were there any other leaders that had a big influence on its people other than Stalin? Do you think that human nature played a part in World War 2?” Overall, after talking with Professor Sweeney I was able to narrow some of my focus down on selecting a few broad topics to choose from and dive more deeply into my research about Nazi Propaganda, Nazi rallies, and leaders.

 

 

 

2 thoughts on “World War 2 discussion with professor sweeney”

  1. Very cool idea about propaganda, especially American propaganda in comparison with German. Three years ago, as part of Professor Seiler’s War, Race, and American Literature class, we went to the Trout Gallery and were able to see many original pieces of wartime propaganda, mainly urging people to buy war bonds. If they are still there, you should go check them out! Additionally, I wonder if you would get anything from studying some psychological responses to propaganda, or appeals to civilian emotions by the government.

  2. I think that your topic regarding Word War 2 and its relation to the concept of human nature is really interesting, and you clearly benefited from your discussions with Professor Sweeney. Moving forward, the only thing that I might recommend is that you attempt to set forth a more narrow definition of what is meant by the term “human nature” within your thesis. For example, are you taking an approach that focuses more so on people’s inherent morals and their internal realization of what it means for something to be good vs. bad, or are you taking on a more scientific approach about why people act or behave a certain way? You can definitely engage in a combination of a number of these components, but I think that having a set definition will give your research and thesis a more clear cut focus. Other than that great blog post and thesis ideas!

Comments are closed.