|
Stultus Maximus posted:Yeah, I think it's a cultural difference. As an American, I see Colbert as the pinnacle of satire, both funny and incisive, whereas everything posted here from Charlie Hebdo seems crude and juvenile. French humor, I've found, is either incredibly sarcastic and outright insulting or just toilet humor. A good example is the contrepèterie, which is just a naughty spoonerism. They are really difficult to make and all the amount to is the fact that you said cock or gently caress in an otherwise clean phrase. They love stuff like that. Rorus Raz posted:Satire is truly dead. It really clearly is.
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
It would have made more sense for the label to be "Mainstream Media", but in the end Lester and McCoy are just using a tragedy to take potshots at people on their shitlist. Lester's is particularly bad since it's particularly transparent about its intent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Rorus Raz posted:It would have made more sense for the label to be "Mainstream Media", but in the end Lester and McCoy are just using a tragedy to take potshots at people on their shitlist. Lester's is particularly bad since it's particularly transparent about its intent. I honestly find it almost comforting. Terrible things happen, but Lester and McCoy will always be there, willing to hijack current events to express their petty grudges.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Ok cool so he is straight-up flat-out saying that what he wants is a new crusade against the entire Islamic world, just making sure Think more local: Red Scare, Japanese internment camps, deportation, etc. McCoy really doesn't give a poo poo about the rest of the world unless it vaguely affects him personally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
1) the freedom to blaspheme and offend is a core part of the freedom of speech 2) corollary to 1, just because being able to blaspheme and offend is part of the freedom, it does not follow that the more you blaspheme and offend the free-er you are, or that exercising your freedom in a way that doesn't blaspheme and offend is you selling out that freedom 3) generally speaking, the more offensive and blasphemous something is, the cruder it is and the less nuance and understanding is contained in it, making it less useful as speech 4) people using their freedom of speech to express that they found what you did to be blasphemous and offensive is not intruding on your freedom to have said it in the first place or to continue to do so, as freedom of speech in the form of criticism is distinct from violence. 5) corollary to 3 & 4, if there exists a large body of people out to do violence or murder over speech, and especially over crude and inarticulate speech, the more important it is that it be said. There, I think that about sums up the points everyone is trying to make as the talk over and past each other, and that point 2 is the main thing McCoy et al are missing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
By far my favorite response to this was a cartoon some pages ago where the guys were like "We could make a cartoon in response but we have no creativity, so let's just kill them instead". Responding to speech with anything but speech means you just lost the real fight, if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
I don't think everyone is talking past each other, Fried Chicken. There is some nuance to it. Some have expressed that the shock part of shock humor is effective because it immediately takes one out of complacency, while humor can otherwise serve as palliative cheerleading which shores up one's viewpoints instead of encouraging us to challenge them (I am paraphrasing, but I think I have their sentiment). I don't agree with that point of view, but I can understand that it isn't a binary proposition, and that something like Onion Kelly does have to use offensive images to get its point across (although, I think the Onion image of all the religious figures loving each other is unnecessary and a bit pointless).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
WitchFetish posted:Trust me, it's the first one. It's definitely intended to ridicule the conservative viewpoint of minorities getting all the benefits because : The mere fact it's so ambiguous to us is why the situation is volatile. While for you there is a correct interpretation of these cartoons that aligns with your (and probably the cartoonists') political beliefs, it doesn't actually matter when it comes to the wider discourse. How it's received is all that matters now. The fact remains that a subtle irony in the cartoons gets lost the more it's retweeted for ideological reasons. The fact remains that people are going to use this and their inflammatory style as a dogwhistle against Islam in toto, and that is a completely legitimate concern to have, even if it can be twisted into "liberals hand-wringing about 'but what about the Muslims' in wake of tragedy lol'  Just watch as "I am Charlie" becomes loaded with bigoted political weight. Only need to look at the McCoy cartoons to show how right-wingers are spinning this into 'left-wing cartoonists abandoned by their pansy liberal ideals". e: I'll be really interested to see how the next Charlie Hebdo reacts - whether it doubles down on the crass humour or what. We haven't seen the last of the kind of discussions this thread has seen is my feeling. Jrbg fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Young Ted Rall, no! What are you doing??? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
I hadn't heard that they were doing a remake of Re-Animator.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Why hatchets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:The mere fact it's so ambiguous to us is why the situation is volatile. While for you there is a correct interpretation of these cartoons that aligns with your (and probably the cartoonists') political beliefs, it doesn't actually matter when it comes to the wider discourse. How it's received is all that matters now. The fact remains that a subtle irony in the cartoons gets lost the more it's retweeted for ideological reasons. The fact remains that people are going to use this and their inflammatory style as a dogwhistle against Islam in toto, and that is a completely legitimate concern to have, even if it can be twisted into I feel like this is an important point. The Hebdo cartoons might be intended as satire - I'll defer to the actual French people in the thread on that one - but to someone who's not familiar with the publication, or with French humor in general, the caricatures are indistinguishable from actual racist cartoons ala Kirschen. It's really, really not the kind of thing that should become the face of free speech, and if Hebdo are as anti-racist as people have indicated, I doubt it's what they would have wanted either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Why hatchets. The black-haired man is Ramirez.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Considering that all the other caricatures are recognizable, it's weird that his Huckabee is so bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Apparently next week's issue of CH will be published on time with the assistance of various French publishing houses. Usual print run: 60,000. Next week's print run: 1,000,000.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:The mere fact it's so ambiguous to us is why the situation is volatile. While for you there is a correct interpretation of these cartoons that aligns with your (and probably the cartoonists') political beliefs, it doesn't actually matter when it comes to the wider discourse. How it's received is all that matters now. The fact remains that a subtle irony in the cartoons gets lost the more it's retweeted for ideological reasons. The fact remains that people are going to use this and their inflammatory style as a dogwhistle against Islam in toto, and that is a completely legitimate concern to have, even if it can be twisted into While I don't exactly disagree with you, I'd like to point out that hateful racists like the McCoys, Lester and their ilk have shown no restraint in baselessly attacking muslims before anyway, so the current events won't change their output a lot, if at all. But otherwise I agree it's really important anyone who wants to know about the issue informs themselves as much as possible, and not limit themselves to just posting "I am Charlie" without understanding how french culture views freedom of speech and the relationship between church, state and the people. One of the big questions right now in France is on whether or not the far-right Front National should be allowed to take part in the demonstrations of support that should take place this Sunday. Personally, I have nothing against them being there for 2 reasons : first off, I don't think it's right to censor people from expressing what they believe, even if their ideas are absolutely repugnant, secondly, most if not all mainstream french Muslim groups and organizations have said that they would take part in the demonstrations, so I think it would be better to have them try to take part and end up being drowned out by all the good, honest citizens who believe it's possible to have a multicultural France in which it's possible to coexist peacefully. I think it's really important for us right now to show that we're stronger than hate and violence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Considering that all the other caricatures are recognizable, it's weird that his Huckabee is so bad. No, that's what Huckabee looks like now. He's filled out a bit since 2008.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-finally-put-in-charge-of-struggling-feminist-m,2338/ http://www.theonion.com/articles/black-guy-asks-nation-for-change,2409/ Are those satire articles sexist, racist, or classist? Calling Charlie Hebdo cartoons racist or whatever because you didn't understand it is on the level of the idiots in America who misunderstand Onion articles and Kelly. Would it be "understandable" for terrorists to attack the editors and writers of the Onion?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
This one needs to add the MS Paint icon pointed at the gunman to represent Kirschen's input on the matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:38
|
|
9
|
J_RBG posted:The mere fact it's so ambiguous to us is why the situation is volatile. While for you there is a correct interpretation of these cartoons that aligns with your (and probably the cartoonists') political beliefs, it doesn't actually matter when it comes to the wider discourse. How it's received is all that matters now. The fact remains that a subtle irony in the cartoons gets lost the more it's retweeted for ideological reasons. The fact remains that people are going to use this and their inflammatory style as a dogwhistle against Islam in toto, and that is a completely legitimate concern to have, even if it can be twisted into But enough about Kelly, the topic is Charlie Hebdo. When you buy Charlie Hebdo, it's because you know what's inside. You know that the contents are irreverent and satirical, but also anti-racist, anti-capitalist, anti-conservative, anti-fascist, largely ecologist, pro-animal rights, and so on. The cartoonists' respective styles are well-known, and a Luz, Charb, Cabu or Tignous cartoon will immediately be recognized as such. I managed to buy a copy of Charlie's latest issue. I'll photograph each page tomorrow, post them here with translations for each cartoon and context when needed. You'll get it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Honestly, I would have thought of Charlie Hebdo as something that would fit right in here on SA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Considering that all the other caricatures are recognizable, it's weird that his Huckabee is so bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Honestly, I would have thought of Charlie Hebdo as something that would fit right in here on SA. Are those supposed to be their Adam's apples in her hands, or did she pull their balls up through their clothes?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
It's a European cartoon so you have to assume balls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Are those supposed to be their Adam's apples in her hands, or did she pull their balls up through their clothes? Radish posted:It's a European cartoon so you have to assume balls. It's French, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Are those supposed to be their Adam's apples in her hands, or did she pull their balls up through their clothes? There are two for each guy, so I'm thinking balls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
I see a very abstract loss.jpg, because I'm a terrible person and spend too much time in the meme thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
prefect posted:There are two for each guy, so I'm thinking balls. The one guy in the middle is really getting the worst of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:The one guy in the middle is really getting the worst of it. That's Berlusconi, flanked by Strauss-Kahn and a random catholic bishop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Are those supposed to be their Adam's apples in her hands, or did she pull their balls up through their clothes? Balls. The three men are an incarnation of the Catholic church, Silvio Berlusconi and Dominique Strauss-Kahn. The woman is Inna Shevchenko, the leader of a ukrainian feminist movement called the Femen who staged a few actions some years ago, protesting against the control of women's bodies by men (mostly through blasphemous desecrations of holy places and happenings where they were naked). The title means "The Femen take the matter in their own hands", there's a pun on "choses" which can mean balls or matters. (Notice how there are no labels on the men, and yet they're instantly recognizable)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
A few late-breaking Hebdo cartoons. Branco packing heat while Ted Rall focuses on what's really important here. 1 2 3
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Rall 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
You cannot be loving serious
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
That is a fantastic edit. except next time don't color letters like that. Pretty sure even Rall wouldn't randomly color some letters red and others black like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
B-b-b-b-b-b-b-but what about Todd Rool's syndicate money, huh? WHAT ABOUT IT NOW????!?!?!?!??!?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:A few late-breaking Hebdo cartoons. Branco packing heat while Ted Rall focuses on what's really important here. This cartoon is literally the best thing I've seen all day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Hahaha get hosed you tremendous rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
He wrote an article about Charlie Hebdo that touches on the same theme: https://medium.com/the-nib/political-cartooning-is-almost-worth-dying-for-5fb3a0e79370
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:18
|
|