This is the last cartoon published yesterday in the satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo.
STILL NO ATTACKS IN FRANCE? WAIT! WE HAVE UNTIL THE END OF JANUARY TO PRESENT OUR WISHES.
This seems to me to be a provocative and pointless magazine cover. When I said this to some work colleagues this afternoon, I was met with a chorus of “Mais non ! Democracy is freedom and that means freedom of expression. Especially freedom of the press !”
I shut my mouth and thought of Salman Rushdie and what happened to him.
It’s true of course, but…why push it? It seems a silly comment to publish. Needless and heedless.
And what about freedom? Doesn’t freedom come with responsibility? And maybe limits? So far I’ve heard no mention of this.
“We like Charlie Hebdo because the drawings are very humorous”, said a French colleague. “Well, it’s French humour.” she added.
Indeed it is French humour which most non-French people find decidedly unfunny.
I thought of you when I first heard about the massacre this morning in Paris, I hope this didn’t occur in your neighborhood and that you are safe.
Jim
Portland, Maine
That’s very sweet of you to write, Jim. I’m safe and sound in my apartment. Police sirens wailed throughout the afternoon. Now we’re all glued to our TV sets.
Best wishes for the New Year. I’m guessing it’s considerably more peaceful in Portland than it is in Paris.
Juliet
So happy to hear that you’re safe, yes it is peaceful but very cold in Portland and my heart is always in Paris.
Are you saying it shouldn’t have been published? That there should be a group of people that decide what is allowed to be published? Who should these people be?
Are you suggesting that the cartoonists were in some way responsible for their own deaths? Or that they deserved it?
You have full right to find Hedbo offensive, or unfunny but that is barely worth blogging about, and if that is merely your intention then your timing is dreadful. This month you will be misunderstood.
It is important to note that this was a magazine that people had to choose to read. Had to choose to buy. No one was forced to read it.
You can’t stand up for only the free speech that you like.
Are you saying it shouldn’t have been published?
NO, I’M NOT SAYING THAT, BYRON. WHERE DID I INFER THIS?
That there should be a group of people that decide what is allowed to be published? Who should these people be? I DON’T RECALL IMPLYING THIS. THIS IS YOUR OWN INTERPRETATION OF MY WORDS. YOU ARE ENTIRELY FREE, OF COURSE, TO INTERPRET AS YOU WILL.
Are you suggesting that the cartoonists were in some way responsible for their own deaths? Or that they deserved it? WHAT A GROTESQUE ASSUMPTION. AND, again, WHERE DID I SUGGEST THIS? WHO ON EARTH DESERVES TO BE GUNNED DOWN BY SAVAGE FANATICAL PSYCHOPATHS?
You have full right to find Hedbo offensive or unfunny…..THANK YOU FOR POINTING THIS OUT TO ME
…..but that is barely worth blogging about, and if that is merely your intention then your timing is dreadful. This month you will be misunderstood. WHY ARE MY COMMENTS RE CHARLIE HEBDO NOT WORTH BLOGGING ABOUT? AT A MOMENT WHEN THE ENTIRE WORLD IS TALKING ABOUT CH….AND FROM THE NUMBER OF VIEWS/VISITORS I RECEIVE, IT APPEARS THAT READERS ARE VERY INTERESTED IN MY PERSPECTIVE AS AN EXPAT WHO HAS BEEN LIVING AND WORKING IN PARIS FOR TWO DECADES. IF I WAS MISUNDERSTOOD, I AM SORRY FOR THAT.
It is important to note that this was a magazine that people had to choose to read. Had to choose to buy. No one was forced to read it. TRUE.
You can’t stand up for only the free speech that you like. I’M NEITHER STANDING UP OR SITTING DOWN. JUST GIVING MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION ON THE CARTOONS, BYRON. THIS IS MY BLOG AND I AM SUBLIMELY FREE TO SAY WHAT I LIKE. JUST AS THE CARTOONISTS WERE, MAY THEY REST IN PEACE. AND JUST AS YOU ARE TO RETORT.
You claim naivety. Well now you know that some (all?) people read your post as supporting the terrorists, asking for (self?) censorship, and telling off the now dead Charlie Hedbo cartoonists.
Some will give infer that you are only think Charlie Hedbo deserved to be told off. But others will be less charitable.
Now you know.
Huh?
What exactly are you saying, Byron Sharp? That Juliet is not free to express her viewpoint ON HER OWN BLOG?
My point is that she (like all us writers) should worry about clarity, about being misunderstood.
I accept her response that she was naive, that it was not her intention to give justification for murder, nor even to promote censorship (of Hedbo and Rushdie). But those who only read her original post see criticism of Rushdie and Hedbo and a call for censorship (or worse).
I think the problem is, Byron, that in the face of this terrible tragedy we are all struggling with our feelings. Having said that, I stick with what I said in my blog post. When I mentioned Rushdie, it was with feelings of WORRY, not censorship. Worry over backlash. I love Rushdie. Years ago, I stood in line for an hour so he could autograph one of his books that I bought. (see his comments below). As for criticism of CH, yes, I stand by my comment that some of their cartoons were in really bad taste and needlessly provocative. But that doesn’t mean that the authors deserved to be gunned down for them!
Y’know what? As I’m writing this I’m thinking – YOU are trying to censor my words!
Now, one week after the murders, the entire country (of France) is undergoing a massive self-examination process and collective hand-wringing. I just read this morning that one of the original founders of Charlie Hebdo published an article in yesterday’s mainstream magazine, Le Nouvel Observateur, saying that he holds a grudge towards the editor of CH for having “dragged the editorial team” to their deaths by publishing caricatures of a high degree of provocation which he finds regrettable.
Agree with him or not, but let him freely express his opinion.
Here’s what Rushdie says –