Reply to terrorist attack in Paris

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "terrorist attack in Paris "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele]Separate from the discussion of the killing in Paris -- and maybe this needs its own thread -- but is anyone bothered by how Muslims are portrayed in the cartoons? I emphasize that no matter how distasteful I might find the drawings, the magazine still has the right to publish them and there is absolutely no justification for the killings. But, that said, the drawings I've seen emphasize Semitic features such as long noses, etc. If these drawing were depicting Jews, I am fairly certain they would be criticized as anti-Semitic. In that case, I don't think we would be seeing such strong defenses of freedom of expression as we are now seeing. I suggest that we might want to distinguish between the artists -- whose rights we support -- and the art -- which I personally am not sure I want to defend.
[/quote]

I think it depends on how all other groups are depicted.  If everyone is in caricature, then who cares?  Are the actual people being depicted and caricatured?  If so, making a big-eared person have really big ears seems like what cartoonists do, not offensive.  Not sure noses should be any different.
However, if all non-Muslims are portrayed with "normal" features and only one/two groups have features emphasized, that's more troubling.
But, again, I think we risk conflating two questions: 1) Should the free speech rights of these artists be defended and the killings unequivocally condemned? (Right answer: yes.); 2) Is this art offensive? (I don't know the right answer to that one.)
I think that we shouldn't even be discussing Question 2 at this point.  It's irrelevant.  It's a question for another day, because it doesn't impact the answer to Question 1, which is what's at issue today.[/quote]

The two questions you pose exactly outline the distinction I suggested. I agree and concur with your answers to both. I disagree that this is not the time discuss the second question. Ironically, saying that we shouldn't discuss that question because doing so is insensitive or whatever is exactly the same as saying the magazine shouldn't have published the cartoons because they would upset people. I agree with the expression, "I don't agree with what you are saying, but defend your right to say it."  Based on what I know about Charlie Hedbo, I think stressing the potential for not agreeing with the publication is probably important.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics