Study representation 1 and 2. They are both representations of how the Nazis were able to control Germany in the year 1933-1939. How far do these representations differ?

However, representation 2 is a historical account produced almost 70 years after the first representation in 2002. Representation 2 explores the factors which contributed to the Nazi’s rise to power. It points the finger at the German citizens, though Ben Walsh impartially gives reason why the German people allowed this to happen; and that comes down to the Nazi party’s scheming use of propaganda and threat. Because it was made for students, the author, Walsh was careful in that he does not just give conclusions, but instead gives an analytical as well as maintaining a factual prose. The representation also beholds a witty idiom: ‘carrot and stick’; a strategy that offers a combination of reward and punishment which as a result encourages a certain reaction or behaviour.

The two representations hold similarities because they both individually reveal the way in which the Nazis obtained support and then power. Representation 1 reveals to historians what devices the Nazis used to indoctrinate the Germans, but it also reveals how conspicuous their propaganda posters were; how they beheld a vast amount of connotations mainly shown via images. Representation 2 is made by a historian; he gives his own account of the events which allowed the Nazis to gain support. The two representations work in cohesion; representation 1, gives evidence of Nazi practise and representation 2 uses the evidence provided in the given poster as well as an array of other forms of evidence to make give fact and make an argument.

The two representations share similarities and differences because of a few considerable features. First of all the sources are different representation 1 is a primary source derived from the 1930’s and it belonged to the Nazi party’s manifesto, as aforementioned. Representation 2, essentially analyzes primary sources such as representation 1 to give information and opinions of the Nazi scheme. It is quite difficult to rationalise which representation is better than the other, because they both have different purposes and audiences. Representation 1, at the time, was produced to gain support from the German citizens in favour of the Nazis, therefore, it was completely partial and it did not explore ‘another side of the story’ merely because it was an election tool. And as for the second representation, it is a historical account for students in high school; it is written on a much later date and gives an evaluation. The similarities only exist because they both illustrate propaganda, though in different styles and for different objectives. But it is commonplace for representation 2 to prove to be the more favourable one, because it gives an ‘objective’ overview. Yet, I do not and cannot rationalise how one could come to this type of conclusion given the imbalance of differences over similarities.