Kerfuffle

[owlmoose]

Once again, Jon Carroll talks sense, this time about the Danish cartoon controversy.

I do not doubt that people were genuinely affected by the cartoons. Those of us with weaker ties to our supernatural belief systems have trouble empathizing with the anger felt by true believers over violations of their laws and customs. Add to that the "here's the West again, invading our countries, stealing our oil and mocking our religion" dynamic, and the whole thing becomes less puzzling. In the modern multicultural world, most people see something offensive to their beliefs pretty much every day. But these folks are not living in the modern multicultural world, and, given what they've seen of it, can you blame them?

On the other hand, crowds do not appear spontaneously in front of the Danish Embassy. (Quick: Where is the Danish Consulate in San Francisco?) Someone directs them there, someone instructs them that this is a useful way to defend their religion. It's a form of public piety, and I really distrust public piety in all its forms.

Me too, Jon. Me too.

I am not really sure what to think of all this. My first reaction had been to wonder why the eruption -- how was this different from editorial cartoons depicting Jesus, or other religious figures. Then I remembered Islam's prohibition of human depictions, and it made a little more sense. Even given that, I'm somewhat torn. Should American newspapers print them? I really don't know. I am pretty much a free speech absolutist. On the other hand, with that right comes the responsibility to accept that people might not like what you have to say, that they might react to you (speak back, protest, burn down your embassy, etc.). And is it worth inciting more bad feelings within a group that is (rightly, at least in part) pretty upset with us right now anyway? No answers, just questions. I seem to say that a lot when I think about world events these days.

Comments

I

[kunstarniki.livejournal.com]

I feel caught in the same web as you, being both a free speech advocate (Nazis in Skokie, et alia) and also having a distaste for vulgar provocation. However, another thing keeps deviling me. These cartoons depict Islam and Mohammed as espousing violence and intolerance and the reaction to them is strongly re-inforcing that view. It all seems quite childish and self-defeating for all parties in the long run.

Re: I

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

These cartoons depict Islam and Mohammed as espousing violence and intolerance and the reaction to them is strongly re-inforcing that view. It all seems quite childish and self-defeating for all parties in the long run.

Yes, I noticed that, too. It's a vicious cycle I've noticed in discussions around Islam before. No easy answers. Sometimes I wonder if there are even hard ones.

[anzubird.livejournal.com]

I'm glad you posted this. I was thinking about posting something too but had not quite gotten around to it yet.

There are a couple of things-
first of all (speaking as an art historian with a minor in Islamic art), yes, Islam does have a prohibition on depicting human figures, but Muslims have been depicting humans in art for as along as Islam has been around- even the Prophet, though that is rarer. Of course there is a very specific way of depicting the Prophet, usually with a flame or a halo on his head. I would not have recognized Mohammed in any of those cartoons if someone hadn't specifically said, "this is meant to represent Mohammed"

Secondly, the protests are not really about the depictions of the Prophet, they are about a group of people feeling like the rest of the world disrespects them, and yes, fear them, and realizing that they have the numbers and the power to make a statement.

And the last thing, which I didn't realize until I started talking with my nice, liberal, cousins last night, is that racism and anti-semitism (and I use the word to include Arabs, who are, after all, Semites) are alive and well in Europe. and it is getting ugly. I cringed to hear the things me cousin's husband was saying last night.

hmm... maybe I will have to write my own post about this at some point :)

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

I was hoping you would pipe up. :) Given all the background and perspectives you have around these issues, I would love to hear anything and everything you might have to say about it.

[coco-keesses.livejournal.com]

Here's a thought (which I am not versed enough to know the answer to) -- in the countries where the majority of protesting is taking place, do they have a deeply seeded belief in free speech? For us Americans, it has always been a Big Deal, even though in theory more than practice.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

in the countries where the majority of protesting is taking place, do they have a deeply seeded belief in free speech?

That is a good question. I don't know the answer, but offhand I would probably say no, or at least mostly no. It's my understanding that most European countries, at least, don't place nearly the emphasis on it that we do. (I'm thinking mostly of the Holocaust denial trials -- nothing like that could happen in the US, could it?)

[cosmorific.livejournal.com]

There isn't just a prohibition against human depiction, though - there's a specific prohibition against depiction of the prophet Mohammed.

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I remember that the prohibition against depicting the Prophet is stronger than depicting human figures in general, although both are part of a strict interpretation of Islam (although it's not always strictly observed -- see anzubird's comment above).