Learning Targets:
I can read closely to determine what the text says
explicitly/implicitly and make logical inferences from it; cite specific
textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the
text.
I can assess how
point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text, drawing on a
wide range of global and diverse texts.
I can delineate and evaluate the argument and specific
claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the
relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
painting made by French street artist Christian Guemy in tribute to the members of those killed in the attack on Charlie Hebdo attack in January 2015.
1) What is Charlie Hebdo?Charlie Hebdo French for Charlie Weekly) is a French satirical weekly magazine,featuring cartoons,reports, polemics, and jokes. Stridently non-conformist in tone, the publication has been described as anti-racist, skeptical, secular, and within the tradition of left-wing radicalism, publishing articles about the far-right (especially the French nationalist National Front party), religion (Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism), politics and culture.
The magazine has been the target of three terrorist attacks: in 2011, 2015, and 2020. All of them were presumed to be in response to a number of cartoons that it published controversially depicting Muhammad. In the second of these attacks, 12 people were killed, including publishing director Charb and several other prominent cartoonists.
Roger J. Kreuz Associate Dean and Professor of Psychology. “Charlie Hebdo Shootings Served as an Extreme Example of the History of Attacks on Satirists.” The Conversation, 28 Sept. 2020, theconversation.com/charlie-hebdo-shootings-served-as-an-extreme-example-of-the-history-of-attacks-on-satirists-145527.
**********************************************************************************
2) Some history of attacks on satirists.
The following article is from
As the trial of alleged accomplices to the attack on Charlie Hebdo recently got underway in Paris, the magazine republished caricatures of the Prophet Muhammed.
It was a defiant act. The same images were cited as the grievance that led two killers to shoot dead 12 people at the magazine’s offices in a terror attack in 2015.
Previously, the paper’s offices had been firebombed when a caricature of the Prophet Muhammed was run on the cover of a November 2011 issue. Charlie Hebdo runs cartoons satirizing other religions, including Christianity.
Depictions of the founder of Islam are forbidden in the Sunni branch of the faith. As a result, what was intended as satire was perceived as blasphemous by observant Muslims and as an unforgivable offense by extremists.
The attack on Charlie Hebdo was an extreme example of a long history of attacks on satire and those who create it. But satire can take many forms, as can its reprisals.
Satire as criticism
Indeed, condemnation of satirists has more commonly taken the form of censorship, public humiliation and imprisonment.
Aristophanes, who wrote satiric plays 2,400 years ago, was condemned during his lifetime for his depictions of citizens of Athens. Plato criticized the playwright for slandering Socrates as vain and arrogant in his play “The Clouds.”
In 1599, the bishops of Canterbury and London banned the publication of a variety of works, including those seen as satirical. Attacks on the privileged and powerful were seen as violating cultural norms and corrosive to social order.
And years before writing his best-known work, “Robinson Crusoe,” Daniel Defoe wrote satirical works that were critical of many prominent figures. Among his more popular work was “The True-Born Englishman,” which highlighted xenophobic prejudice in England against King William III, a Dutchman by birth.
In 1703, Defoe also criticized individuals who wanted to separate from the Church of England. In “The Shortest Way with the Dissenters” he accused separatists of being responsible for the English Civil War, among other crimes. Since Defoe was himself a separatist, his critique is considered to be a satiric attack on the leaders of the Church.
Defoe’s call to “crucify the thieves,” that is, the dissenters, led to him being accused of seditious libel. He was fined, endured public humiliation in a pillory and was then thrown in prison.
Authors of what is known as Juvenalian satire, criticism of contemporary persons or institutions, engage in a full-throated condemnation. In appearing to be advocating for the public good, they could also end up with outlandish suggestions. Perhaps the best-known example of this is Jonathan Swift’s 1729 essay, “A Modest Proposal,” in which he suggests that the Irish sell their babies as food for the rich. It was an attack on the attitudes of the wealthy and on British policies toward the Irish.
Needless to say, assaults like these can get under the skin of those being depicted as corrupt, cruel or dimwitted.
Mild or hidden satire
But there isn’t one form of satire. Satire can be fairly gentle as well. An example of so-called Horatian satire is Alexander Pope’s 1712 “The Rape of the Lock.” The poem describes a mundane incident – the cutting of a lock of hair without permission – in mock-heroic terms.
Pope’s poem is relatively good-natured. His goal was to poke fun at his own society and is therefore not particularly judgmental.
Then there is the use of caricature as a form of satire, which often gets away merely by exaggerating the physical characteristics of its intended targets. Barack Obama’s ears and Richard Nixon’s nose, for example, were often depicted as comically large by cartoonists during their respective presidencies.
But then, a work intended to be satiric may cease, over time, to be recognized as such. As I describe in my book on irony and sarcasm, an example may be the Historia Augusta, a fourth-century collection of biographies of Roman emperors.
Scholars Justin Stover and Mike Kestemont have pointed out that the manuscript is unusual in its “lurid focus on emperors’ peccadilloes and personal habits to the detriment of their political accomplishments.” There has been some discussion over the intent and purpose of such a text. Scholar Shawn Daniels, who has studied the text closely, concluded that the language of “quips and bad puns” suggest that the work was intended as satire.
Free speech and satire
In modern times, the liberty of free speech can often protect even harsh examples of satire.
In the U.S., for example, criticism of public figures is protected speech, so satire cannot be used as a basis for libel or to seek damages for emotional distress. In countries such as Italy and Germany, satire is explicitly protected by the Constitution. And France has a long tradition of satirists mocking religious and political institutions.
With regard to Charlie Hebdo’s caricatures of the prophet, there are those who question whether religious sentiments should not be taken into consideration. Many have described the caricatures, such as one depicting a bomb hidden in a turban, to be offensive to religious feelings and in poor taste. There have been protests across several countries condemning the republication.
********************************************************************************
3) NPR A 3 minute listen and then read short article on the attack.
laughed in the face of violence 3 min
4) Article based upon interview with Editor in Chief of Charlie Hebdo
Despite a 2011 firebombing at the Charlie Hebdo offices, and continuing threats and heightened security around the building, according to its editor-in-chief, the staff of the weekly never slowed down.
"He used to say, well, you know, 'I don't have a car, I don't have a wife, I don't have children, so what could they do to me?' You know, 'I'm not scared.' But I guess he got it wrong, because we have to take this very, very seriously."
James Poniewozik, a senior writer at Time, says the massacre poses a threat to any satire.
"Nobody ask, 'Uh, what we do now?' " editor-in-chief Stephane Charbonnier told Drew Rougier-Chapman of Cartoonists Rights Network International six months later
The magazine, which Rougier-Chapman describes as "a cross between Mad Magazine, Playboy cartoons and The Daily Show," was founded in the 1960s by cartoonists and journalists who wanted to use humor, as one of them put it, as "a smack in the face" to celebrities, politicians — and definitely to religion.
So the first issue following the attack had a cover cartoon that showed two men kissing: one a Muslim, the other a Charlie Hebdo editor.
"It's a good French kiss," Charbonnier told Rougier-Chapman with a laugh. Elsewhere in the interview he said that if Muslims considered Muhammad too holy to be the target of humor, "your God is very, very small; your prophet is a midget."
Charbonnier, who was among the dozen killed in Wednesday's attack, was fearless, says Jean-Luc Hess, a journalist and former head of Radio France.
The genre already is treated skittishly by media companies, as seen in Sony Pictures' initial decision to pull the North Korea-mocking comedy The Interview following a hacking and threats of violence.
And when the TV cartoon South Park was planning to depict Muhammad in an episode, "it didn't require anyone physically attacking the Comedy Central offices for somebody to get nervous and say, 'Oh, you know, this isn't worth it,' " and censor the offending image, says Poniewozik.
Such moves are unacceptable to author Salman Rushdie, a fatwa-targeted novelist who released a statement Wednesday urging people to defend satire, "a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity."
Those words probably would have been appreciated by Charbonnier, who in the interview with Rougier-Chapman after the 2011 firebombing said there was no way Charlie Hebdo would back down.
"We have no choice," he said. "If we [cease] to publish, we are dead."
*************************************************
5. Please read the following article from the New York Times
Charlie Hebdo Republishes Cartoons That Prompted Deadly 2015 Attack
Charlie Hebdo Republishes Cartoons That Prompted
Deadly 2015 Attack
The
decision by the French satirical magazine to recirculate cartoons about the
Prophet Muhammad and Islam coincides with the start of a long-awaited trial for
the attack that killed 11 of its staff.
A memorial in January marked the fifth anniversary of the deadly attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris. Credit...Christophe Petit Tesson/EPA, via Shutterstock
Sept. 1, 2020
PARIS —
The French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has
republished the same cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad and Islam that
prompted a deadly attack on the magazine in 2015, an act
that will be seen by some as a commitment to free speech and by others as
reckless provocation.
The
publication coincides with the start on Wednesday of the long-awaited terrorism trial of
people accused as accomplices in the attack — potentially cathartic for a
nation that was deeply scarred by that act of brutality. The magazine posted
the cartoons online on Tuesday and they will appear in print on Wednesday.
The
trial and the reappearance of cartoons that are seen by many as offensive come
as France is seeing protests against racism and calls for reflection on the treatment of minorities in its
society, past and present.
The growing sensitivity
to race, ethnicity and religion has clashed with France’s traditionally
forceful commitment to freedom of expression and secularism. Many
traditionalists have expressed concern that the country is yielding to
American-style identity politics, long widely rejected in France.
Charlie
Hebdo’s editors wrote in the new issue that it was
“unacceptable to start the trial’’ without showing the “pieces of evidence” to
readers and citizens. Not republishing the caricatures would have amounted to
“political or journalistic cowardice,’’ they added. “Do we want to live in a
country that claims to be a great democracy, free and modern, which, at the
same time, does not affirm its most profound convictions?’’
President
Emmanuel Macron recently found himself trying to navigate the shifting lines of
cultural sensitivity. Last year, he faced widespread criticism for giving a
long, exclusive interview to Valeurs Actuelles, a right-wing magazine, and
defended himself by saying that he had to speak to all French people. But over
the weekend, he joined other political leaders in condemning the same magazine
for depicting a Black lawmaker as an enslaved African.
The
attack on Charlie Hebdo was the first of a string of major Islamist attacks on
Paris.
On Jan.
7, 2015, two French-born brothers of Algerian descent, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi,
stormed the offices of Charlie Hebdo. They killed 11 people inside with
automatic gunfire, including the top editor and some of its leading
cartoonists, then killed a police officer on the street as they made their
getaway. Several people were wounded.
The
brothers identified themselves as belonging to Al Qaeda and left the magazine
stating that they were “avenging the Prophet,’’ according to survivors of the
attack. Two days later, a friend of theirs, Amedy Coulibaly, took hostages and
killed four people at a kosher supermarket in Paris.
The worst of the assaults
came 10 months later, when a group of Islamic State gunmen and suicide
bombers killed 130 people and injured more than 400 at
multiple sites across the capital region.
Mr. Coulibaly and the Kouachi brothers
were killed in standoffs with the police, so after nearly six years, the trial
of suspected accomplices, which is scheduled to last two months, will mark the
most complete airing of an incident that became a national trauma.
The
defendants, including some who are not in custody and will be tried in
absentia, are charged with aiding the three main attackers, including some who
provided weapons and financing.
The kosher supermarket where four people were killed by a gunman
in 2015.Credit...Thomas Coex/Agence France-Presse —
Getty Images
Charlie Hebdo, which has a long history
of skewering diverse subjects across the political spectrum, had also long been
accused by detractors of recklessly publishing material considered racist and
anti-Muslim.
But
after the massacre, huge rallies were held in support of the magazine in Paris
and elsewhere. “Je suis Charlie,’’ or “I am Charlie,’’ became a slogan used
even by people who disdained the magazine, a way to express not only support
for the victims but also for free speech and a free press.
Thousands of people gathered in demonstration at the Place de la
Republic following the attacks as part of a march against terrorism in Paris.
Credit...Fredrik Von Erichsen/EPA, via
Shutterstock
On Tuesday, Mohammed
Moussaoui, the president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, the main
organization representing French Muslims, said that attention should not be
paid to the republished cartoons.
No comments:
Post a Comment