Image Analysis

Bloody Sunday Mural Analysis

Formal Analysis

The coloration in the image creates an incredibly severe, somber tone and lends a sense of magnitude to the image. The black and white emphasizes the white handkerchief at the center of the photo. The faces of the people in the foreground and the background of the image are also considerably lighter and create contrast with the armed, black-clad figure standing on top of the banner, drawing the eye towards them. Red is the only color present in the mural, and the placement of the red solely on the “civil rights” banner in the foreground draws the eye to the cause and evokes blood. The figures in the center carry a boy slumped between them, but the blood only appears on the more universally interpretable civil rights banner.

Overall, the use of lines in the image furthers the sense of vulnerability of the people in the image. The lines used to draw them are softer and less rigid than those used to draw the soldier. The curve of the gas-like cloud towards the right middle ground of the photo encourages the viewer to first consider the events happening in the foreground of the photo and creates a physical separation between the background and foreground. It leads the viewer in taking in the mural, directing the eyes first toward the man holding the handkerchief, next, to the handkerchief itself, and then to the limp body. Line is also used to show the hunched posture of the civilians in the foreground, suggesting desperation and vulnerability. All of this is contrasted against the soldier on the left, whose line work is very rigid and unfeeling.

Contextual Analysis

Although the Loyalists, supported by the British Government itself, denied the peaceful nature of the original protest on Bloody Sunday, the mural’s artist seeks to enshrine the innocence of the protestors. All five of the central civilian figures are unarmed and defenseless, four of them hunched to support a slumped figure, carried in their arms. The rightmost civilian waves a white handkerchief, evoking the symbolic white flag of surrender. At the same time as it portrays the protestors as innocent, the mural vilifies the British soldier standing to the left of the civilians. His face and body are entirely concealed in heavy black gear. Combined with his stiff posture, this dehumanizes him, in contrast to the detailed expressions of the civilians. The lack of identity makes the soldier appear cold and impersonal: he is not a person, but a faceless representation of the opposition. His position on top of the blood-covered banner that reads “CIVIL RIGHTS'' argues that the British have no regard for the rights of the people. The artists’ choice to make the red blood on the banner the only colorful element in the mural further highlights their intention to spark solidarity, as the blood is not from an individual protester but spilled all over their cause. The gun in the soldier’s hand also contrasts with the priest’s handkerchief, depicting the British as militant authorities disrupting the peaceful work of the protesters. His indifference to the suffering taking place just steps away from him adds to his profile as an emotionless, uncaring figure.

Intertextual Analysis

Our image draws inspiration directly from three photographs taken on Bloody Sunday. The mural condenses three distinct photos of the events of the day from different points in time into one striking image. In the first photo, the background of the mural is evoked in an identical image of a mass of protesters carrying the Civil Rights Association banner. In another photo, an injured Jackie Duddy is carried by several civilians and shepherded by a priest waving a bloody handkerchief. This event is set in the foreground of the mural, just behind the banner from the previous photo. The third photo used to compose the mural the bloodied banner seen in the foreground of the mural is captured in the same state as it is represented in the mural: bloodied, trampled, and strewn on the ground. Together, these three images are used to create a near-chronological imagining of the events of Bloody Sunday, which move from the background to the foreground in a manner that portrays the protestors as victims of violent military force. Additionally, a deliberate decision was made by the artist to obscure the foreground soldier’s face and therefore identity. In additional original photos, this soldier is unmasked. The effect of adding the mask is to anonymize the figure, making it possible to relate his actions as a soldier in the middle of a civilian protest to many revolutionary situations. The organization of the mural encapsulates a very complex event into one image, an image that evokes emotions from the depths of one’s soul. The mural can also be considered symbolic of the entirety of The Troubles. An era with peaceful protests, violence, and a struggle for safety and freedom.

Conclusion

The mural was originally painted to commemorate the 25th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, but it serves to immortalize and universalize the event. The public nature of this piece of art, on top of its location in Derry, the city where Bloody Sunday took place, demonstrates the intent of the artist to ensure the tragedy would be remembered. Considering that the mural is still in place to this day, this mission could be considered a success. In the summer of 2010, the British government officially recognized the events of Bloody Sunday as being unjustified, and offered an apology to the victims and their families, marking the end of state-sponsored ignorance on the issue. This imagery serves as a symbol of sympathy and solidarity to future revolutionaries resisting military oppression.

Works Cited

“Bloody Sunday: What happened on Sunday 30 January 1972?” BBC,

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-47433319

The Bogside Artists. Bloody Sunday Mural. 1997, Derry, Northern Ireland.

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/bogsideartists/mural3/

Wallenfeldt, Jeff. “the Troubles.” Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/

event/The-Troubles-Northern-Ireland-history