The Cartoon Conundrum
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Last week a friend of mine asked me if I could shed any light on why the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad had the Muslim world in such an uproar. I have avoided writing back, resisting the challenge of attempting to voice my own uncertain perspectives on the issue. This is however, is my attempt to respond, not to answer the question, but provide some perspective and help inform so that everyone can form their own opinions.
I truly don’t think most people in the West understand what is so upsetting and many are genuinely shocked at the momentum and level of anger this controversy has generated. I think extremists are exacerbating and manipulating the situation and it is important for everyone to do their best to learn and inform themselves on this. Not just about cartoons. But about the bigger picture. Because these are the tips of some very large icebergs that are not going away any time soon.
There are a few (may I stress few) facts. Most other information is tainted by subjective interpretation, political, religious or cultural spin of varying degrees.
Fact: The cartoons were published last September. Little controversy was raised at the time. The BBC has a useful timeline of events outlining key events from the publication through to today.
Most people have not actually seen more than one or two of the cartoons, and it's no surprise the most provocative ones are the most re-published. The wide array of creativity and emotions depicted in the full spectrum of cartoons provides a more thought-provoking perspective on their publication and those involved in the issue. If you would like to you can see them here.
Fact: According to Islam, the Prophet Mohammad is not supposed to be ‘depicted’ (Despite this fact, there are numerous historical examples of this, by both Muslim and non-Muslims alike. There is GREAT website exploring some of these images in the present and historical contexts.)
The cartoons are also perceived by some as an attack on the Islamic faith and culture designed to foster seeds of hatred. As the BBC notes,
An attack on Mohammad (which is how the cartoons are perceived by some Muslims) is like an attack on Islam. I have seen a few descriptions explain this mentality like this: Imagine if someone was defaming or denigrating your wife or your family? Now Mohammad is someone that is beyond even that.
On one hand those protecting the cartoons and their publication have anchored themselves firmly to the ‘freedom of the press’ defense. As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines in Article 19, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
That being said, there are professional, moral and ethical responsibilities that come with this freedom and power.
As one opinion article in The Daily Star, the largest English newspaper in Lebanon, noted:
Part of the problem with comedy, in my opinion, is that most humor is rooted in some element of truth. The Muslim/Arab world (which are not the same, but that is another discussion entirely) knows this. These images were not published in a void, but at a time where tension is already running high.
A few other articles I highly suggest reading (and I’ve read literally about a hundred now so I really suggest you read a bunch. Then judge for yourself.):
Before reconciliation with Muslims, things will get worse by David Inatius
The Right to be Offended in The Nation
Editorial from The Jordan Times (link no longer active)
What Mohammad Means to Muslims (link updated, original no longer available)
Last week a friend of mine asked me if I could shed any light on why the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad had the Muslim world in such an uproar. I have avoided writing back, resisting the challenge of attempting to voice my own uncertain perspectives on the issue. This is however, is my attempt to respond, not to answer the question, but provide some perspective and help inform so that everyone can form their own opinions.
I truly don’t think most people in the West understand what is so upsetting and many are genuinely shocked at the momentum and level of anger this controversy has generated. I think extremists are exacerbating and manipulating the situation and it is important for everyone to do their best to learn and inform themselves on this. Not just about cartoons. But about the bigger picture. Because these are the tips of some very large icebergs that are not going away any time soon.
There are a few (may I stress few) facts. Most other information is tainted by subjective interpretation, political, religious or cultural spin of varying degrees.
Fact: The cartoons were published last September. Little controversy was raised at the time. The BBC has a useful timeline of events outlining key events from the publication through to today.
Most people have not actually seen more than one or two of the cartoons, and it's no surprise the most provocative ones are the most re-published. The wide array of creativity and emotions depicted in the full spectrum of cartoons provides a more thought-provoking perspective on their publication and those involved in the issue. If you would like to you can see them here.
Fact: According to Islam, the Prophet Mohammad is not supposed to be ‘depicted’ (Despite this fact, there are numerous historical examples of this, by both Muslim and non-Muslims alike. There is GREAT website exploring some of these images in the present and historical contexts.)
The cartoons are also perceived by some as an attack on the Islamic faith and culture designed to foster seeds of hatred. As the BBC notes,
Many Muslims say that the cartoons are extremely and deliberately offensive, expressing a growing European hostility towards and fear of Muslims. The portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad and Muslims in general as terrorists is seen as particularly offensive.
An attack on Mohammad (which is how the cartoons are perceived by some Muslims) is like an attack on Islam. I have seen a few descriptions explain this mentality like this: Imagine if someone was defaming or denigrating your wife or your family? Now Mohammad is someone that is beyond even that.
On one hand those protecting the cartoons and their publication have anchored themselves firmly to the ‘freedom of the press’ defense. As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines in Article 19, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
That being said, there are professional, moral and ethical responsibilities that come with this freedom and power.
As one opinion article in The Daily Star, the largest English newspaper in Lebanon, noted:
These rights must be carried with reason, conscience, and shall be implemented in a spirit of brotherhood (the same set of standards which are widely applicable to any portrayal of the suffering of Holocaust victims). Furthermore, the offensive nature of the cartoons and the ill informed messages they carry do not meet the minimal standards of journalistic integrity and professionalism. Finally, a word of caution must be said: while the cartoons in themselves underlined the immediate causes of the current crisis (the spark that unleashed hell), its underlying causes are rooted deeper within much of the Arab and Muslim world.
Would these mass protests have been as violent before the U.S. carpet bombing of Afghan refugee camps following the September 11, 2001, attacks, before the deceptive American war against Iraq, under the false pretext of eradicating Saddam's WMD, or before the horrors of Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, among other atrocities committed in the name of "democracy" during recent years?
Part of the problem with comedy, in my opinion, is that most humor is rooted in some element of truth. The Muslim/Arab world (which are not the same, but that is another discussion entirely) knows this. These images were not published in a void, but at a time where tension is already running high.
A few other articles I highly suggest reading (and I’ve read literally about a hundred now so I really suggest you read a bunch. Then judge for yourself.):
Before reconciliation with Muslims, things will get worse by David Inatius
The Right to be Offended in The Nation
Editorial from The Jordan Times (link no longer active)
What Mohammad Means to Muslims (link updated, original no longer available)
posted by prairie at
11:13 PM
2 Comments:
Well written. Thank you for shedding some light on the subject. Hope all is well.
By
Anonymous, at 7:22 AM
Hi Prairie,
Jenny forwarded me this link to your blog. Dave is right, this is a great piece. One of the more objective ones I've read. Kudos...and see you tonight.
Juliette
By
Anonymous, at 12:32 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home