|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Nov 9, 2015 8:43:02 GMT -5
I recently stumbed upon some antagonism from a swedish friend solely based on the fact I was born french, as is the satyrical paper/fanzine Charlie Hebdo who recently published those two cartoons :  The first one translates into "DAECH, the russian fleet intensifies its strikes" The second one says "The dangers of russian Low Cost air companies" with the corpse saying "I should have boarded Air Cocaine", a pun on the recently discovered aircrew who repeatedly used a jet to smuggle cocaine (difficult to explain to a non french actualy...) So the first one stired up some really agressive and heinous reactions, apparently worldwide, but mostly in Russia. ... One should know that Charlie Hebdo is almost like a fanzine whose market is about 25000 french speaking anarchists free-thinkers. It's not available for free anywhere : yohave to buy it at a french press office or suscribe. Why would any russian victim family member stumble upon those french cartoons is beyond me. Or actualy it isn't, obviously someone/thing put those in front of their eyes and held a mike and a camera at the same time. What is disgusting? A cartoon making fun of the hipocrisy of the current way the syrian crisis is handled between the west and the east, the very act of barbarism that rusulted in hundreds of civilians getting killed, or the political explotation of satyre for a very devious political agenda against the western world in general and the french secularism in particular? Personnaly, I find the drawing kind of funny and not at all shocking : it doesn't talk about persons, doesn't mock victims at all, just the way the facts are presented in the media and take it to the extreme. What I would find really disturbing would be finding out I laugh at the same things Putin does! Seriously, people need to get a sense of humor. If we can't laugh at tragedy, then life becomes tragedy. There was time when the american authorities considered this unacceptable and destroyed many publishing companies :  Nowadays, we pride ourselves in having gone beyond our early conservatisms and learned (for many of us) to accept our difference and to not live in fear. I do not want to live in fear, therefore I strongly believe in the political un-correctness of art, and especially in cartooning/ comics. Ones limit is ones entry point, and even if in cases that might challenge our morals, we should at least find it interesting that those differences exists. Therefore, nothing should be beyond humor IMHO. This wasn't a very organized train of thought, but hey... one needs starting somewhere  |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 9, 2015 9:22:04 GMT -5
The first one about the Russians intensifying their air strikes actually made me chuckle a little bit but the second one didn't do anything for me, though I wouldn't say it too out of bounds though. I remember a similar cartoon after 9/11 that had a similar punch line( "I should have flown Delta" or something like that superimposed over an image of the towers), and while I found it to be in poor taste I wasn't about to say it should have been censored and I feel the same way about this one.
But even beyond the issue of censorship I don't think you should face any backlash simply because you are french and so is the cartoon. People are going to have differing views on censorship, I can wrap my head around that, but blaming the acts of a few on a whole group? I don't think there is a rational argument to be made for that stance.
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 9, 2015 9:59:55 GMT -5
...but blaming the acts of a few on a whole group? I don't think there is a rational argument to be made for that stance. True, although it rarely stops anyone from doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Nov 9, 2015 10:32:56 GMT -5
I mean, it wasn't mean spirited, and it was probably just a reflex. Which made me think about it and realize how politically engineered it was. I have no beef with that friend - even though I was at one point thinking about leaving the place where we he antagonized me since his then rhetorics made little sense to me - but this made me think deeper and more globaly about censorship and self-censorship.
I grew up in France, and when hte Charlie terrorist attack happened last january, I was already living in Sweden. As on 9/11, I spent the next few days lurking the internet for more info and emotional kinship. I felt very very sad : one of hte cartonist who was murdered, Cabu, he was one of the host of the child TV program me and most of those of my generation grew up with. He probably was for many the sparkle of political consciousness for my generation.
So as I saw the consecutive solidarity quickly turn to "it's not right they were killed, but they should have known better", the feeling that grew within myself hearing that made me feel at my most french ever.
In a global society where people come in all shapes and forms of mental/moral/cultural structures, it is crucial that nothing is sacred, otherwise, rampant antagonisms grow and turn in the long run into hte worst that we as a species are capable of.
Defience through laughter/satire is the most effective weapon against biggotery and rampant conservatism ever, and comics have a great role in this fight. I want to be a better person all the time ad accept as much from the others as I will give them.
It just sadly seems that these days, whenever one attempts at a joke, the media will seek through heaven and hell the shock value in it, becoming the least honest devil's advocates, and we all fall for it way too often. I'm sure If we were to look we'd easily find really shocking press about the western civilisation in Russia, but then again, that's what we'd expect, as much as anti-gay marriage objectyfing in southern states local papers. That's just the state of our current world, and we know that progress cannot be forced too much, there's no need to antagonize those people, they'll just come around for the most when modernity reaches them. Until then, comics and cartoons are a good and unharmfull way of reminding chaos forces that free thinking and scientific doubt still are cardinal values that won't let conservative agendas slide furthur down into our "modern" lives.
First step I took was to get rid of the TV 6-7 years ago, best decision ever!
Those new Charlie cartoons don't tell me how to think, they just tell me "Think!", something TV doesn't seem to be able to do anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 9, 2015 12:26:22 GMT -5
I mean, it wasn't mean spirited, and it was probably just a reflex. Which made me think about it and realize how politically engineered it was. I have no beef with that friend - even though I was at one point thinking about leaving the place where we he antagonized me since his then rhetorics made little sense to me - but this made me think deeper and more globaly about censorship and self-censorship. I grew up in France, and when hte Charlie terrorist attack happened last january, I was already living in Sweden. As on 9/11, I spent the next few days lurking the internet for more info and emotional kinship. I felt very very sad : one of hte cartonist who was murdered, Cabu, he was one of the host of the child TV program me and most of those of my generation grew up with. He probably was for many the sparkle of political consciousness for my generation. So as I saw the consecutive solidarity quickly turn to "it's not right they were killed, but they should have known better", the feeling that grew within myself hearing that made me feel at my most french ever. In a global society where people come in all shapes and forms of mental/moral/cultural structures, it is crucial that nothing is sacred, otherwise, rampant antagonisms grow and turn in the long run into hte worst that we as a species are capable of. Defience through laughter/satire is the most effective weapon against biggotery and rampant conservatism ever, and comics have a great role in this fight. I want to be a better person all the time ad accept as much from the others as I will give them. It just sadly seems that these days, whenever one attempts at a joke, the media will seek through heaven and hell the shock value in it, becoming the least honest devil's advocates, and we all fall for it way too often. I'm sure If we were to look we'd easily find really shocking press about the western civilisation in Russia, but then again, that's what we'd expect, as much as anti-gay marriage objectyfing in southern states local papers. That's just the state of our current world, and we know that progress cannot be forced too much, there's no need to antagonize those people, they'll just come around for the most when modernity reaches them. Until then, comics and cartoons are a good and unharmfull way of reminding chaos forces that free thinking and scientific doubt still are cardinal values that won't let conservative agendas slide furthur down into our "modern" lives. First step I took was to get rid of the TV 6-7 years ago, best decision ever! Those new Charlie cartoons don't tell me how to think, they just tell me "Think!", something TV doesn't seem to be able to do anymore. I would disagree slightly with the "nothing is sacred" statement. I would say that while the comedian, cartoonist, editorialist, etc, doesn't have an obligation consider a person/object/organization/etc sacred, they should bear in mind that some people will. I've seen people say and do things that stomp all over someone else's "sacred cow" and then act shocked when they get a negative reaction. One of the cornerstones of the freedoms we enjoy in the US is, or course, freedom of speech which means we need to allow the same freedoms to people and viewpoints we disagree with. For example when the KKK organizes a rally, they have a right to do so, but shouldn't be shocked when there is a counter protest as well.
This should in no way be taken to justify any group expressing their disapproval through violence, or to suggest that the victims are to blame or should have known they would be attacked over a cartoon, editorial, joke, etc. Nothing said, drawn, sung, etc, can ever be enough to justify violence. But some people are nuttier than squirrel poop.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Nov 9, 2015 13:11:41 GMT -5
And if no one makes fun of them, the moral compass will slowly if not rapidly wind towards their agenda. I want to point out that your comparison is unfair though : the kkk is a political organisation with aim to fashion society. A cartoonist is not. You can't judge their actions with the same grill of analysis. The KKK is alowed to have a rally and columnist and cartoonists are allowed to make un of htem, because satire is alowed. But they aren't allowed to make racist statements, because that is illigal as it is hate speach, because they have a political agenda. Some of the best jokes of the pas 50 years are about the Holocaust and coming from jews. So I stand by my belief that in arts, nothng is sacred, nor should it be  As Shaxper noted on my guilty pleasure entry about Johnny Ryans most offensive cartoons, you would either be dishonnest or dumb to accuse him of picturing hitler in a positive manner because he draws him on a skateboard and calling himself "Hipler". Shock value is inherant to satire, otherwise it has no purpose : you just have to make a statement so much more absurd than the one you intend to critique that the initial one starts too look suspicious as well. |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Nov 9, 2015 18:06:11 GMT -5
AGS, have you seen many people accuse CHARLIE HEBDO of racism?
I ask this specific question because my nephew (who is half-Muslim in ancestry if not actual faith) says that he thinks their cartoons are racist against assorted Middle Eastern ethnic groups. He claims that he has no problem with it if CH simply criticizes the faith or the political institutions, However, he did not cite specific "racist cartoons," and I haven't found anything online that I would deem racist, though of course many of the cartoons I did see were deliberately inflammtory in other ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Nov 10, 2015 5:52:41 GMT -5
Reading nothing but the question in your title:
No.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Nov 10, 2015 5:53:38 GMT -5
Good question. I've heard and read people accuse them of that, but each time, after checking the cartoons in question, there was no racism to be found, just very strong political satire, if not as you put it, "inflammatory". In short, it is hypocritical and/or dishonnest to deem the authors of Charlie Hebdo racists as they've all been recognized members of various anti-racist & pro-immigration movements. That they could prodce a cartoon that would walk on the thin line of racism/satire of racism is what probably happens a lot as you cannot control the level of culture and humor of the reader. Charlie Hebdo works in the french cultural debate dynamics, and no one there with a spark of honesty would attack them on that. The only sustainable attack would be tastelessness in various occasions, but then again, almost every time I hear that is an occurence of ones lack of understanding of the way debate works in France. Charlie's modus Operandi is usually pretty simple : they take to unrelated hot topics and mix them together to underline a more global observation. And it also is very self centered in the sense that most satire they produce is about France itself, self irony (most typical french humor).  This famous exemple about the Boko Haram crisis is probably the best as Charlie produced a few covers that provoked plenty of attacks of racism back then. As here, a question is asked and the first couple of answers explain in detail and with eloquence what the deal really is, so check : www.quora.com/What-was-the-context-of-Charlie-Hebdos-cartoon-depicting-Boko-Harams-sex-slaves-as-welfare-queens |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 10, 2015 7:07:51 GMT -5
In a global society where people come in all shapes and forms of mental/moral/cultural structures, it is crucial that nothing is sacred, otherwise, rampant antagonisms grow and turn in the long run into hte worst that we as a species are capable of. Defience through laughter/satire is the most effective weapon against biggotery and rampant conservatism ever, and comics have a great role in this fight. I want to be a better person all the time ad accept as much from the others as I will give them. Well said, well said. Yes, with unfettered free speech we will witness excesses. But there is no such thing as partial free speech; it's like being a little bit pregnant. There is also no such thing as a right to never be offended. People who find Charlie Hebdo, South Park or Cyanide & Happiness offensive, unfunny or insulting are quite free to find their chuckles somewhere else. God knows there's a lot of bad " humour" out there... but it's no reason to curtail our freedom of expression; we stand to lose so much of what makes our society work. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 10, 2015 10:33:45 GMT -5
In a global society where people come in all shapes and forms of mental/moral/cultural structures, it is crucial that nothing is sacred, otherwise, rampant antagonisms grow and turn in the long run into hte worst that we as a species are capable of. Defience through laughter/satire is the most effective weapon against biggotery and rampant conservatism ever, and comics have a great role in this fight. I want to be a better person all the time ad accept as much from the others as I will give them. Well said, well said. Yes, with unfettered free speech we will witness excesses. But there is no such is as partial free speech; it's like being a little bit pregnant. There is also no such thing as a right to never be offended. People who find Charlie Hebdo, South Park or Cyanide & Happiness offensive, unfunny or insulting are quite free to find their chuckles somewhere else. God knows there's a lot of bad " humour" out there... but it's no reason to curtail our freedom of expression; we stand to lose so much of what makes our society work. That, "This offends me, it shouldn't exist!" mentality has never made sense to me. There are plenty of things that don't jive with me, but I just choose to ignore them and I'm the happier for it. |
|
|
|
Post by gothos on Nov 11, 2015 15:50:45 GMT -5
AGS, thanks for your reply. I suspect that some of the mislabeling of CH's cartoons as "racist" depends on the current meme: "If you make members of any underprivileged group look in any way ugly or even just homely, you're persecuting the race and/or ethnicity as a whole." Not to get too far off the HEBDO subject, but I recently wrote this essay on my blog in response to an online comment that Connie of TERRY AND THE PIRATES was a "racist caricature." |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Nov 11, 2015 15:59:23 GMT -5
Indeed, in that Boko Haram cartoon, the subject isn't those women but the perception the far right has of imigration : The far right percieves and depicts immigrants (People of darker skin-tone) as social system leaches, so CH takes it to the extreme, showing that the people who'd be in most need of imigration/political asylum would still first be percieved by those people as leeches before if even as victims.
|
|
