It is clear and inarguable that the January slaughter of 10 Charlie Hebdo staff members as well as 2 policemen in the Charlie Hebdo offices is sickening and tragic. What is neither clear nor inarguable is the decision to confer an award for courageous freedom of expression on Charlie Hebdo, or what criteria, exactly were used to make that decision. Indeed, the matter is fraught, complex, and very troubling...
I can hardly be alone in considering Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons that satirize Islam to be not merely tasteless and brainless but brainlessly reckless as well.
---D. Eisenberg.
The whole letter can be read hereI can hardly be alone in considering Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons that satirize Islam to be not merely tasteless and brainless but brainlessly reckless as well.
---D. Eisenberg.
'..[in] its satire it espouses a number of principles, which he listed: “Fighting against racism, fighting against all discriminations, discriminations against minorities, against women, against gay people, against weak people, socially weak people, poor people.”
“The thing is,” he answered, “when we make a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad, or Jesus, or Moses, we don’t mock or attack people. We mock or attack institutions. Representatives. Powers. And, again, political powers.”
Biard, from Charlie Hebdo.
"We are not naive".
Er..think again, my friend.
No comments:
Post a Comment