This essay will analyze a poster for Wm. H. West’s Minstrel Jubilee, highlighting the ways in which imagery was used to reinforce racial hierarchies and normalize racist stereotypes. By exploring the morphed blackface caricature and its contrast with a esteemed white figure, this piece examines how minstrel shows served as tools of racial oppression and the furthering of the racial stereotypes of black people that persist till this day. With the use of semiotic theory and representation, we can see how such images both reflected and shaped public perceptions of race, contributing to a broader system of racial inequality.

This advertisement for Wm. H. West’s Minstrel Jubilee is one example of how imagery was used to further racial stereotypes and reinforce societal biases. Minstrel shows in the 19th and early 20th centuries, were performances where white entertainers used blackface to imitate and dehumanize African Americans. Minstrel was not just a parody, it was an actual genre in film. The widespread normalized use of such imagery further allowed for racism to be normalized on a far reaching scale.The character on the right, with exaggerated features like dark skin, oversized lips, and wide eyes, promotes a harmful and false representation of Black people. This kind of imagery wasn’t just meant to entertain but to support the idea of white superiority and the notion that Black individuals were inferior and laughable.

This poster shows how media helped solidify racial hierarchies. The caricature of Blackness works to make people believe that Black individuals are not only different but less human. Black people were often portrayed with animalistic features, further othering them from the clean, pure image of white people. According to Stuart Hall’s theory of representation, “media doesn’t just reflect reality—it shapes it”. This advertisement flattens Black identity into a one-dimensional, negative stereotype. As a result, this helps perpetuate a system of racial inequality, because it convinces viewers that Black people don’t deserve equal treatment or respect.

In Roland Barthes’ semiotics, images function on two levels: denotation (what is literally shown) and connotation (what is implied or culturally understood). In this case, the denotation is simple: two figures side by side, one white, one in blackface. But the connotation is what gives the image its power. The white figure on the left represents civilization and dignity, while the blackface figure on the right is a disrespectful and exaggerated mockery, symbolizing chaos and stupidity. This contrast reinforces the visual separation between the two figures. One side; clean, bright, hair neatly combed, visually refined, and elegant. The other side; messy hair, Blackface, grotesque features, and an air of chaos. The visual markers perfectly combine with the connotative aspect of the image. In Saussure’s theory, the two figures act as signifiers—images that point to a larger meaning. The white man symbolizes power and respectability, while the blackface character symbolizes ignorance and inferiority. Using Peirce’s triadic model, the blackface figure can be seen as an icon (a visual representation of Blackness, though distorted), an index (pointing toward societal beliefs about race), and a symbol (of racial degradation and mockery).

If this image were released today, a global audience would likely be outraged and offended. In recent times, there has been a visceral shift in the understanding of blackface and its damaging legacy. For most people, this image is a clear symbol of racial exploitation and oppression. With movements like Black Lives Matter bringing more attention to issues of racial justice, blackface is no longer seen as just offensive—it’s recognized as part of a larger system of racial dehumanization. At the same time, Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model reminds us that different audiences might interpret this image in different ways. While many people would instantly recognize the racism in this image, some—particularly those unfamiliar with the history of blackface—might not fully understand why it’s so offensive. There are also those that would be familiar with the image of blackface but have a different connotation attached to it. Even so, the image would likely spark strong reactions, whether from anger or confusion, because it taps into the painful history of racial exploitation.

Using Barthes’ semiotic theory, along with insights from Saussure, Peirce, and Hall, it’s clear that this minstrel show advertisement is not just a piece of entertainment marketing. It’s a powerful representation of racial power dynamics and a tool used to perpetuate harmful stereotypes. While today’s audience would likely view it with condemnation, this image serves as a reminder of how far we’ve come—and how important it is to continue challenging media representations that reinforce racial bias and inequality.

Rough Draft

Print this page