Monday, February 13, 2006

Cartoonists on the Danish cartoons controversy

Nearly all cartoonists worth their salt have enraged some portion of their readership, often when religious symbolism was part of the cartoon... This said, readers should know that cartoonists working for mainstream American newspapers--and there are more than 80 around the country--generally try to avoid negatively caricaturing any group just to make fun of them.
- Signe Wilkinson, Pulitzer prize winning cartoonist with the Philadelphia Daily #

It can be argued that the editor of Jyllands Posten committed an error in judgement in publishing cartoons of the Prophet. But let us leave that aside for a moment and examine what a cartoon sets out to do in the first place.

An editorial cartoon, also known as a political cartoon, is an illustration or comic strip containing a political or social message, says Wikipedia . Most editorial cartoons use visual metaphors and caricatures to explain complicated political situtations, and thus sum up a current event with a humorous picture.

Cartoonist Wilkinson notes, "The (Danish) cartoons were criticizing violence and suicide bombing in the name of Islam."

That, I think is a reality and cartoonists have every right to touch upon the subject. However, I do think using the metaphor of Mohammed was avoidable.

In a well reasoned article Hesham A. Hassaballa argues, "These caricatures of the Prophet is akin to publishing a cartoon of Jesus Christ as a Catholic priest being dragged away in handcuffs for sexually abusing a young boy. Christ is wholly innocent of the crimes committed by a minority of Catholic priests against young boys…”

However, he adds,"The Muslim reaction went way too far. Most definitely Muslims have a right to protest …but to torch a Danish embassy (Syria), throw eggs at a Danish embassy (Indonesia), take over a European Union office at gunpoint (Gaza), and even beat two employees of the Danish company Arla Foods (Saudi Arabia) is completely unnecessary and--dare I say it--barbaric".




Or, ‘self prophetic’ as this cartoon puts it – brilliantly.



I quite like this one too, and in fact would have loved to use something like this in the next JAM (after all, we are the only Indian magazine which publishes cartoons on its cover!)

But no, ‘judgement’ prevailed and we went with Brad and Angelina (I mean the Indian version – Abhishek and Aishwarya).

I think a cartoon commenting on the extreme reaction to the cartoons is definitely within the ambit of free speech. But given our country’s peculiar brand of ‘secularism’, even that is not a good idea…



You can see a bunch of brilliant ones - like this one - here

Daryl Cagle has a great blog running on the issue as well, from a unique point of view. That of the professional cartoonist.




And now, some serious observations
Hesham Hassaballa observes, "While I think it was wrong for the Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten to publish those cartoons, it cannot be denied that newspapers in Arab and Muslim countries have published cartoons that were offensive to non-Muslims, especially Jews."

This is an important point. In fact, let’s look at the issue more deeply. Muslims enjoy the right to practise their religion in democratic societies such as Europe, USA or India. But wherever they are in a majority, people of other faiths must abide by their rules. And these rules have a religious basis.

And this extends to an extreme level, as this news report makes clear:

Saudi Arabia police razes makeshift Hindu temple
RIYADH: Saudi religious police have destroyed a clandestine makeshift Hindu temple in an old district of Riyadh and deported three worshippers found there, a newspaper reported on Saturday.

Members of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, or the religious police, Thursday stumbled across a room converted into a temple while raiding a number of flats suspected of being used to manufacture alcohol and distribute pornographic videos, pan-Arab Al-Hayat said.

A caretaker who was found in the worshipping area ignored the religious police orders to stop performing his religious rituals, the paper added. He was deported along with two other men who arrived on the scene to worship.


Frankly, I don’t even remember this news being covered in India, leave alone any protests. And to think that despite this kind of attitude we invited King Fahd to be the chief guest at our recent Republic Day parade.

In a multi-cultural, globalised world Muslim societies cannot expect other faiths to ‘understand’ their sentiments. Unless they take some trouble to understand and live in a spirit of tolerance with these other faiths. Or even dissenters within their own faith.

The harassment of Aligarh Muslim University student Farah Khanum is a recent case in point. .

Farah was threatened by a section of the AMU students, who claimed they were interpreting what is moral in Islam, says, “Over a period of time, they had been harassing me and demanding that I quit wearing jeans and t-shirt and don a dupatta.”

Newsflash: Every Indian citizen has certain inalienable rights and freedoms.

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that Aligarh Muslim University – despite its nomenclature - cannot be given the status of a ‘minority institution’. Whichever way that controversy is resolved, the imposition of a dress code on the women studying at AMU would be unconstitutional.

Apply one standard!







Writing in the Los Angeles Times, Tim Rutten noted: Nothing ... quite tops the absurdity of two pieces on the situation done this week by the New York Times and CNN. In the former instance, a thoughtful essay by the paper's art critic was illustrated with a 7-year-old reproduction of Chris Ofili's notorious painting of the Virgin Mary smeared with elephant dung. (Apparently, her fans aren't as touchy as Muhammad's.)

Thursday, CNN broadcast a story on how common anti-Semitic caricatures are in the Arab press and illustrated it with -you guessed it - one virulently anti-Semitic cartoon after another. As the segment concluded, Wolf Blitzer looked into the camera and piously explained that while CNN had decided as a matter of policy not to broadcast any image of Muhammad, telling the story of anti-Semitism in the Arab press required showing those caricatures.

He didn't even blush.


No Indian publication - with the apparent exception of the Patna edition of the Times of India – has published the original Danish cartoons.

But this morning pg 14 of the Hindustan Times cheerfully carries a 2 column technicolour picture of ‘Bharat mata’ – the recent controversial painting by M F Husain ‘depicting the nation as a nude woman on a scarlet canvas with Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Gujarat and Goa inscribed across her body’.

No, it didn’t offend me – but the fact is some Hindu organisations have protested and the painting was removed from the auction. So technically, reproducing the image could have offended others.

And printing the cover ofthis magazine could, as well.

In the same edition of the newspaper, Vir Sanghvi, editor of HT writes

Of course we should be sensitive to religious sentiments. Of course we should try and avoid giving offence. But these are not absolute rules. If we do cause offence, then we are still within our rights as citizens of a free society to do so. And the people who are offended should simply avert their gaze.





I completely agree. But let this principle apply universally…







Breaking the silence
As Mr Sanghvi notes,
Liberal Hindus must end the double standard of the secular mindset and speak out as loudly against Muslim fundamentalism as they do against Hindu extremism.

If we do not do that, we discredit the whole concept of secularism. More important, we admit that our liberalism is not an absolute value but a convenient stick to beat Hindu extremists with while making shameful and unnecessary compromises with minority intolerance.


Well, I have taken his advice and added my voice. Please do not attempt to shout me down – as always, rational and well-reasoned arguments and comments are welcome!

And no, I will not 'balance' my views by also ranting against Hindu extremists in the same breath because that is irrelevant in the present context.

All cartoons featured here are copyright of the respective cartoonists and courtesy http://cagle.msnbc.com.

23 comments:

  1. If you haven't already done so, you might want to check this blog: http://muttawa.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow...That article was brilliant.

    I agree with you to a great extent. Except the statements about the anti-semitic article published by Islamic newspapers. Honestly, that has nothing to do with this issue at all. If a Dane had murdered a Muslim, could he have justified it by saying that Muslims had murdered a Dane? A classic case of two wrongs making a right.

    Freedom of speech is essential in today's society and if you start setting limits to it, the question is where do those limits end? Who decides what is right and what is wrong? That is why irrespective of whether it was provocative and caused a lot of destruction, the newspaper should not have apologized. However, there were was a valid statement of double standards that were raised by Islamic publications, about why Anti-Semitism is illegal in Europe (at least related to the Holocaust), and anti-Islamism isnt.

    While I do not agree with Europeans banning anti-semitic speech and denials of the holocaust, on further examination, it is not the exactly same thing. In the case of the holocaust, the jews were the victims, so anti-semitic speech is equivalent to the perpetrators of the crime ridiculing the victims. In this case however, most (if not all) modern terrorism is Muslims (a minority agreed,but Islam is the only common factor between them) hurting non-muslims, so it is a case of the victims satirizing the group whose members committed crimes against them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rashmi,
    I am actually surprised (and releived) that this issue has not blown up into something bigger in India. Seems to have been more or less contained in the editorials of the English newspapers and an odd demonstration in Kashmir and a couple of places.
    Maybe the Shiv Sena is busy with their Anti Valentine Day plans!
    Expecting a post from you on that soon!:)

    ReplyDelete
  4. A really good post..

    I believe freedom of expression should be used without hurting other people's sentiments.

    I dont see this whole incidence as a controversy, I see this as a tragedy

    Read my view on this..
    Toon Tragedy

    ReplyDelete
  5. point well made.

    i still feel that this cartoon was like poking a stick into the eyes of muslims.....that does not justify the violent response though.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Its sad that small things are considered a threat to such well established religions. Actually, more stupid than sad.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Rashmi!!
    Excellent compilation!! Your interpersed comments are very apt.
    I also condemn the brutal protests of Islam community over these cartoon issues. I think this points to the insecurity of the religion rather than the maturity of people embracing it. They are unable to come to terms with the contemporary world, they want luxurious lifestyle but when it comes to laws and rituals, they want to stick to their books. They need a self-introspection as to where they stand in the contemporary world. I felt that there are better ways of condemning and protesting instead of brutal bombings or torching of embassies. These point out to what extent they tread to let people know their voice. Holistic cleansing is what they need!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. a good post and seems that u do a fair amount of research before any post.
    Thanks for taking a different point of view from the pseudo-secular culture that is present among educated ppl in India.

    Well I feel that it is not wrong if cartoons make fun of a religion but they should not go out all the way to insult a particular sect. I agree that line b/w the two is thin but still..freedom of expression is important but so is respect for a particular religion. And I feel that the cartoons are well within the limits of decency. A nice work done by the cartoonist. The reaction of the Islamic world is totally uncalled
    for but in a way it was expected. And frankly speaking this is giving publicity to the cartoons themselves. If the Islamic world hadn't reacted this way most of us won't have saw the toons.

    ReplyDelete
  9. great post again rashmi...and i had a field day going through the cartoons. You should do a post on Google and its joining hands with China to create a custom-built search engine for China that blocks access to information sensitive to the Chinese authorities including "human rights", "democracy", and "freedom".
    I think all bloggers should take up this cause...after all this is as bad as a tsunami.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rashmi,

    This is a superb article.
    i dont know why there is such a big fuss made out of a cartoon. Come on, no god is so small, that he gets pissed because of a cartoon.

    The funny part is, A danish newpaper prints a cartoon of Muhammed there. All the way in afganisthan, people die because of the protests. Isnt that funny ???

    Abt pseudo secularism in india, well, nothing much can be said or done. The minorities can be as fundamental as possible, but if something is done by the Majority, they say its very communal.

    Reminded me of "Animal" the movie, where one of the character who is "Black" gets away doing watever he wants, coz he is black. [PS: that was a funny take by the movie makers]

    ReplyDelete
  11. I was planning to post on this yesterday, but gave it up in favour of frivolity. I think you've reasoned this out extremely well. I have my complaints against Muslim extremism - especially those frankly stupid calls for Holocaust cartoons - but I also think that the Western media, press and blogs, have treated the whole affair rather patronisingly. The rights to be partisan and therefore express anything racist/sexist/anti-anything becomes our inalienable right, but I don't understand how a debate about free expression in the media cannot be tempered by a discussion about social responsibility. Cartoons about the pope's edict against gay people or the pro-life fight in the States? Completely different, because there's a discernible debate raging around those issues.

    Hm, I think I will make that post today. Thanks for writing this. (And Happy V Day to you too. :) )

    ReplyDelete
  12. Would someone pl. care to explain to me(in a nut-shell) the difference between that freedom of expression denied radical Muslim clerics in the West from the one being peppered on white European cartoonists who also live in a same society as them?

    Much appreciated,
    TMWKTL.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think that post was a great summary of what I believe most of the world feels right now. Having been born & raised as a Muslim, I was initially shocked at the cartoons, but later "rationality" kicked in and my conclusions were exactly the same as yours.
    I would also like to add a comment in response to killswitch1 (not sure how his comment was in any way relevant to the topic of your post, but....). I am a Muslim woman married to a Hindu man, and infact I do know several such women myself and not just Indians.
    Perhaps what the world really needs is more of "live and let live" and less of instigation & violence.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't know ehethe you deliberately omitted this point or you jjust did not know it,that whole controversy started when a writer could not find anybody to make illustrations for his book on Muhammad for children. Recently they had a filmmaker murdered in Holland ,so this writer was(rightfully) aghast at self censorship imosed by European and specially Danish media.It was THEN that he asked various peole to make cartoons on freedom of expression in Islam and Muhammad. Those who are shouting at maximum of their voice for insensivity of Europeans ,more than half of people he approached declined to make cartoons.12 people obliged and out of thhem 2 were real critical of the paper and its approach.To their credit ,they published all 12 cartoons. But this was way back in October.Moreover onyl one cartoon shows Mohammad as terrorist ,others are pretty cool.(Like the one saying we have run out of virgins in heaven).Now nobody whispered at that time.A newspaper in Egypt also published same cartoons next month but no burning of Egyptian flag or torching of its embassay.Then a group of Dane Imams toured middle east and all this trouble started.
    As far as your take on MF hussain is concerned there are two very important points which you seem to ignore
    1. This person has again and aginn painted nude pictures of Hindu gods and goddesse.Taking no cove but shamelessly writing name of gods on painings.(One of them shows a naked sita on tail of a naked Hanuman. In 100 or so version of Ramayana prevlent in our country never did Hanuman rescue Sita,leave alone touching her.) ANother shows Parvati having sex with a bull while Shiva is watching. Now I don't know how come this not hurt any sensible person,unless he is going to put his own mother in similar position.
    2.I hope you remember movie MEENAXI. It had a song in which they used a phrase to describe beauty of heroine which was also used in Quran for Muhammad. Obviously Mullas opposed and this bloke gleefully took back the movie.
    After this two points I think it should be clear that why RSS people are offended by these cartoons.


    About double standards of Muslim.leave Saudi Arabia ,take example of Malaysia so called liberal Islamic country. A mount everest winning muntaineer fro mthat country some Mr Murthy died and it was claimed that he converted to Islam just before his death ,so he should be buried.His wife contended that no he was a Hindu.Now guess which court decided the matter Shariat court ( not civil court).When minority ministers in govt wrote a letter (just wrote a letter .no agitation) to PM,he advised them not to do any such thing in public.
    Are these things reported in pur media?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Nice Article.
    My idea of a cartoon is something that invokes humor by taunting at somebodies shortcoming.
    In that respect the cartoons were superb.
    But then what else do we expect from muslim fundamentalists?
    People like them exist in every religion.
    The only difference is that they form a minority in other religions.
    I feel we are right in mocking Allah for creating a religion that wasnt strong enough to keep its followers sane and up with the times.

    ReplyDelete
  16. someone commented that muslim girls do not date/marry non-muslims. Not quite. I know of a hindu guy marrying a paki muslim girl. Muslim fundamentalists causing so much chaos are a handful minority and they are not at all reprenstative of muslims in general. Esp the younger generation muslims. Dating a non-muslim is not that big a deal for a muslim girl (even if she is a paki). And likewise for muslim guys. I can say that from personal experience.
    Just like a Godhra is not a referrendum on hindus in general, hardcore lunacy of one small section of muslims too is not a true representative of reality. Of course, countries like Saudi have a universal 'ewwwie'ness (going by what some of my paki friends say).

    ReplyDelete
  17. good one Rashmi!
    and asusual our 'seculars' have no time for this saudi episode but all time and resources for the mohammad cartoon issue..and who cares if the protestors are burning the danish flag or offices or citizens..this does not 'hurt' any one!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I had been checking out your blog to see when you would cover this. You say "However, I do think using the metaphor of Mohammed was avoidable."

    But that is the whole point why were the cartoons were commissioned in the first place - The Bosten Globe did an excellent editorial on the issue - link is on my blog, did you read it, had sent it to you earlier......talk about looking for comedy in the muslim world ;) btw that is one movie I DO want to see.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Killswitch1 I agree. You have to actually go and see other forums and chatrooms. You will be surprised at the amount of venom spewed by Muslims against Hindus and particularly women. It is as if raping Hindu women is their birthright.

    and yeah, i agree with your observation again. you will see more hindu women marrying muslims rather than the other way round. Thats because any muslim woman marrying a nonmuslim is seen as a threat to islam ("islam khatre mein hai. Jihaad !!"). I have read about hindu men being murdered for having fallen in love with muslims.

    Then again, its Darwin.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I sometimes wonder how can people butcher others so mercilessly, just for the *supposed* reward of 77 virgins or 28 young boys in heaven.

    Anyway, Rashmi, great work. Jam absolutely rulez !! And also this blog. It is good to read such rational and sane thoughts. Wish to see more pages of fun in Jam.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous9:53 AM

    I think you've got a fairly representative set of comments here :) from the liberal to the right. Which does credit to the blog.

    I find it easy to understand the why so many liberal Muslims are upset over the outrage because I tend to think like them. But to think the universe is made only of one set of people and only their views are the correct ones would be a mistake.

    So I must agree with Hassaballa when he says that the caricatures of the Prophet were akin to publishing a cartoon of an abusive Christ.

    I made much the same comparison myself with some Hindu deities, provoked by a sensible and controlled reaction to the cartoons that I saw in the Muhammad Ali area of Mumbai. Are the Muslims wrong in being upset over it? I think not. Their hurt is real and very understandable.

    It's only fatwas that deserve to be condemned.

    ReplyDelete
  22. hi!

    Just to throw some more light on the same, this article in the mediamonitors.net an independent news site offers some great insight. do read the link

    http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/26890

    ali

    ReplyDelete
  23. Yes I agree there could be things done which were not done ex refrence to the holy prophet.
    But my point is someting else...
    If I respect all religions i am a secularist and if I dont respect any religion am i still a secularist?
    It is a big question which needs to be answered but on one seems interested everhyone is busy with their own respective religions.

    ReplyDelete

Disqus for Youth Curry - Insight on Indian Youth