Saturday, February 04, 2006

Are the Jyllands-Posten cartoons racist? Many people (including a spokesman for the US government interpreted by the press to be communicating the Bush administration position on the matter) have claimed so, and followed it up by saying that it was wrong to publish them. I've been unable to find a complete english translation of the cartoons, but wikipedia provides the following descriptions:

-The face of Muhammad as a part of the Islamic star and crescent symbol. His right eye the star, the crescent surrounds his beard and face.

-Muhammad with a bomb in his turban, with a lit fuse and the Islamic creed written on the bomb. This drawing is supposed to be the most controversial of the lot.

- Muhammad standing in a gentle pose with a halo in the shape of a crescent moon. The middle part of the crescent is obscured, revealing only the edges.

- An abstract drawing of crescent moons and Stars of David, and a poem on oppression of women "Profet! Med kuk og knald i låget som holder kvinder under åget!". In English the poem could be read as: "Prophet you crazy bloke! Keeping women under yoke"

- Muhammad as a peaceful wanderer, in the desert, at sunset. There is a donkey in the background.

- A nervous caricaturist, shakingly drawing Muhammad while looking over his shoulder.

- Two angry Muslims charge forward with sabres and bombs, while Muhammad addresses them with: "Rolig, venner, når alt kommer til alt er det jo bare en tegning lavet af en vantro sønderjyde" (loosely, "Relax guys, it's just a drawing made by some infidel South Jutlander". The reference is to a common Danish expression for a person from the middle of nowhere.)

- An Arab-looking boy in front of a blackboard, pointing to the Farsi chalkings, which translate into "The editorial team of Jyllands-Posten is a bunch of reactionary provocateurs". The boy is labelled "Mohammed, Valby school, 7.A", implying that this Muhammed is a second-generation immigrant to Denmark rather than the founder of Islam. On his shirt is written "Fremtiden" (the future).

- Another drawing shows an angry Muhammad with a short sabre and a black bar censoring his eyes. He is flanked by two women in niqaabs, having only their wide open eyes visible.

- Muhammad standing on a cloud, greeting dead suicide bombers with "Stop Stop vi er løbet tør for Jomfruer!" ("Stop, stop, we have run out of virgins!"), an allusion to the promised reward to martyrs.

- Another shows journalist Kåre Bluitgen, wearing a turban with the proverbial orange dropping into it, with the inscription "Publicity stunt". In his hand is a child's stick drawing of Muhammad, refering to Bluitgens upcoming illustrated childrens book on the life of The Prophet. The proverb "an orange in the turban" is a Danish expression meaning "a stroke of luck" , here the added publicity for the book.

- A police line-up of seven people, with the witness saying: "Hm... jeg kan ikke lige genkende ham" ("Hm... I can't really recognise him"). Not all people in the line-up are immediately identifiable. They are: (1) A generic Hippie, (2) politician Pia Kjærsgaard, (3) possibly Jesus, (4) possibly Buddha, (5) possibly Muhammad, (6) a generic Indian Guru, and (7) journalist Kåre Bluitgen, carrying a sign saying: "Kåres PR, ring og få et tilbud" ("Kåre's public relations, call and get an offer")
The magnified images, with partial english translations, can be found here.

None of this is even remotely racist. Most of this is commentary on the way Islam is often used to oppress women, encourage suicide bombing, or stifle free speech. This is not a criticism of a particular ethnicity or a particular religion; its a criticism of how a particular religion is used by extremists to propagate repression and violence.

I reject the idea that the "offensiveness" of these images ought to have stopped their publication. Are we also going to criticize research into the historical Jesus because Christians might find it offensive? Are we going to ask newspapers to refrain from publishing three-dimensional pictures of religious figures, because this is considered a grave sin in Orthodox Christianity? Broadly speaking, if we are going to criticize every statement that might offend people, we won't have any political discourse to speak of.

6 Comments:

At 12:38 AM, Blogger angela said...

"This is not a criticism of a particular ethnicity or a particular religion; its a criticism of how a particular religion is used by extremists to propagate repression and violence."

nice spin, baby

 
At 1:46 AM, Blogger alex said...

says the person who criticizes christian fundamentalists but resents being called anti-christian

 
At 3:48 AM, Anonymous Jochen said...

By depicting Mohammed as a terrorist, the cartoons unequivocally implies that every Muslim is a terrorist. This might not be the cause of the current troubles, as they're mostly casted by state governments, but it's the reason why the cartoons can not be protected by freedom of speech. Thus, it should be a case for the courts not for politicians or an inflamed public. Look here

 
At 8:20 AM, Blogger maccusgermanis said...

jochen,
You seem to carry rather lightly the burden to censure, for millions of people, that which you deem too offensive for them to see.

So what if I know muslims that are not terrorist, I also know several Baptist that like large amounts of alcohol. We need not give up our right to speak freely, without censor, for anything. And least of all things an assumption that people that claim to follow a murderous prophet will persist in their hypocritical embrace of enlightened ideals.

 
At 2:29 PM, Blogger alex said...

"By depicting Mohammed as a terrorist, the cartoons unequivocally implies that every Muslim is a terrorist."

The cartoons imply no such thing. The cartoons, in my opinion, are a reflection on the way Muhammed's teachings have been used to inspire terrorism. Even if you disagree with this, at the very least, the cartoons allow a multitude of interpretations, and do not "unequivocally imply" anything.

 
At 3:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the shoe fits--wear it.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home