|
Sir Rolo posted:Meanwhile, on a more nuanced corner of the internet: I wonder what would happen to these types if they understood that this reaction is exactly what the terrorists want 
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
 Ann Telnaes, winner of half as many Pulitzers as Ramirez, works for the Washington Post and is probably the stylish-est cartoonist out there. Unfortunately, the political animations she draws are usually only watchable on the Post's website. But this is some of her recent work.  "A cartoon defying the Paris terrorists"  "John Boehner readies himself for the vote"  "Stop the presses! SCOTUS to offer electronic files in 2016" Just look at Clarence Thomas.  "‘I can’t breathe’: After indictment decision, Eric Garner’s final words become a symbol of anger, frustration"  "‘Ban bossy’ and the bossy women in pop culture"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Prokhor Zakharov posted:I wonder what would happen to these types if they understood that this reaction is exactly what the terrorists want Oh they want this reaction huh?? Well what if I put . . . BACON FAT on it  Ann Telnaes is an incredibly talented artist and Lisa Benson tries so hard to imitate her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
My absolute favorite detail is that Clarence Thomas is silent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:I would bet good money these people think Mecca is the size of Vatican City. I'll take it further, I'd bet decent odds on a good chunk of them thinking Mecca is literally just the Kaaba and some, like...tents or something around it I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
I don't think the type of person to write that would seriously be bothered with wiping out a city of 2 million Muslims. Of course its probably all bluster and they (hopefully) wouldn't actually support such a thing if it had a realistic chance of happening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:
Those are exceptionally good caricatures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
Brannock posted:This is actually the sort of cartoon that Charlie Hebdo used to print all the time. If Fitzsimmons is acceptable, thus is Charlie Hebdo. Still have ten pages to wade through, but my opinion is that effective satire can be done without depicting Muhammad as a troll-doll/muppet. Fitzsimmons shows a bit more respect in the caricature while portraying the same message. Satire punches up, not down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Satire punches up, not down. You think punching at the founder of a religion with a billion followers and the ludicrously powerful clerics who interpret and enforce his life's work is punching down?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
A HUNGRY MOUTH posted:Oh they want this reaction huh?? Well what if I put . . . BACON FAT on it "B-B-B-BACON!!?" *terrorist hikes robe and windmills sandalled feet in place before zipping off in a cloud of dust*
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
Since we're thinking about Gay Abortions, I whipped up a list of perennialy-appropriate categories, mostly taken from last year's awards but with a little bit of organization to give some guidance to voters. Technical categories are for showcasing incompetence in the noble art of editorial cortooning, while style categories are for showcasing the most odious human beings in the field. Technical: Laziest cartoon Worst caricature Most easily reinterpreted cartoon, aka A Good Cartoon Greatest failure to achieve banality Nonsense, this is an election year! aka least intelligible cartoon The Ross Gosse Award for Excellence in Excessively Long or Otherwise Inappropriate Labels That Result in Overstretched or Mixed Metaphors, or Otherwise Belabor or Confuse the Point Overall worst cartoon of the trimester (technical) Style: Most self-congratulatory cartoon Least concealed bigotry in a cartoon Worst Middle East cartoon Worst victim-blaming cartoon Worst cartoon about a tragedy, not otherwise specified [catch-all for cartoons that don't fall into another topical category] [Other topical categories, to be determined] Overall worst cartoon of the trimester (style)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:You think punching at the founder of a religion with a billion followers and the ludicrously powerful clerics who interpret and enforce his life's work is punching down? He's a moral figure, like Jesus or Buddha, isn't he? Swing for the clerics, swing for people that misinterpret him. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
Someone colorize Scalia's head and put it on King Hippo's body, TIA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
There's an obvious tension between using satire to ridicule religious extremists (or the religion itself) and that satire reinforcing Islamophobia in a place where Islamophobia is a real and present threat. Charlie Hebdo mostly did the former imo. What's sick is people acting like the unthinking Muslim hordes are under a geas to murder those who insult the prophet
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:You think punching at the founder of a religion with a billion followers and the ludicrously powerful clerics who interpret and enforce his life's work is punching down?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
Rorus Raz posted:Do...do you think these cartoons are burns specifically aimed at Mohammed himself? There's a quote from one of the cartoonists describing how not attacking Islam would be disingenuous, based on how they go against established power structures, but it's hard because of general anti-middle easterner resentment in France. edit: quote:Another Charlie Hebdo cartoonist, Julien Berjeaut, or Jul, once spoke to the difficulty of making fun of Islam in France. “You can’t beat up on a minority religion in quite the way you can on the majority religion,” he said. “If there is so much hysteria provoked by these cartoons it’s because there is a lot of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism in Europe. But I find it totally abnormal that this business is not simply decided in the courts.” Team_q fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
That was mostly snark, but basically power is relative and a Muslim in the US is in a different power dynamic than one in Iran. Christianity is huge with powerful leadership and influence, but that means dick to a Christian in places with state religions that outlaw the practicing of their faith. It's still punching down if Muslims in France have little power and influece, regardless of how powerful their religion is on a gobal scale. And no, I'm not saying Charlie Hebdo was doing that before anyone says anything. EDIT This was written before reading the above post, but that's basically along the lines of what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
Kelly has learned to draw in multiple styles???
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:22
|
|
2
|
Rorus Raz posted:Do...do you think these cartoons are burns specifically aimed at Mohammed himself? No, but they're not specifically aimed at your average French muslim either. They're aimed at clerics and fanatics, who claim to represent the will of Mohammad and attempt to imitate him, viciously oppressing the communities in which they assume leadership roles in so doing. It's precisely because muslims aren't any less intelligent or peaceful on the whole than any other large grouping of people that the vast majority of them don't go and shoot up satirical newspapers. I can think of few things more insulting to muslims generally than the 'understanding' Western latte-liberal who says, "Of course you were going to get upset by those silly cartoons in that comedy publication." Like, how loving stupid do you have to think your average adherent of Islam is that they don't know where the punches are being aimed? Triskelli posted:He's a moral figure, like Jesus or Buddha, isn't he? Swing for the clerics, swing for people that misinterpret him. That's exactly what you're doing when you draw attention to how horrific many of his deeds and sayings were. You're ridiculing by proxy anyone insane enough to think that a strict interpretation of prescriptions which were probably originally pretty conservative for 7th Century Arabia is in any way compatible with modern civilisation (i.e. fanatics). You can do this with any religion and its loonies, and Charlie Hebdo does exactly that. The thing about non-fanatics is that they know they're not fanatics and they don't go apeshit when you make fun of fanatics. Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 07:40 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:
Wait is this an actual cover they're going with?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
So I found an old freeper thread discussing R. Crumb, wherein certain freepers bemoan their hatred for Ted Rall and his lack of talent and love Crumb becausequote:He's put out some pretty misanthropic stuff that's a good fit with some freepers some of the time, including me. He is very politically incorrect and insulting to women, blacks, not gays as far as I've seen
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:
that RBG 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:Wait is this an actual cover they're going with? Yeah. I reminds me of the De Gaulle cover that had cause their predecessor magazine to get banned, I mean not exactly, but in spirit. Kurtofan fucked around with this message at 07:42 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
That is the rawest thing I have ever seen in my life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Cartoonist tears are the best
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
It's hilarious to me that while the rest of the cartoon world is bitching about their jobs or trying way too hard to be poignant, CH is going "good news everyone, we're hiring!" e joeburz posted:That's not from them, it's a mockup from Les Guignols. Wish it was real though. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
That's not from them, it's a mockup from Les Guignols. Wish it was real though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
Cruel and Unusual posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:24
|
|
|
joeburz posted:That's not from them, it's a mockup from Les Guignols. Wish it was real though. Whoops! Pretty good though, usually les guignols are much less funny (in my opinion).
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:25
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:I don't know Scalia well enough to know why he's yelling I BET ITS A CAMERA but I cracked up. scalia is evil and gigadumb and he has admitted his rulings are sometimes based on TV shows
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Even if it isn't real, it's far more appropriate than any number of Crying Pen Saluting the Tricolor cartoons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:I don't know Scalia well enough to know why he's yelling I BET ITS A CAMERA but I cracked up. Pretty sure it's a reference to the Supreme Court's bizarre refusal to allow cameras at oral arguments. My grandpappy had to wait for the official transcripts, and cragnabbit you can too!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
We don't even have to look at Kelly to find satire that's very dependent on cultural context and the ability for the audience to comprehend the tone, I mean look at this disgustingly racist dreck from goons of all people:   
Dr. Killjoy fucked around with this message at 08:36 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:33
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:
 One thing that I've learned the past couple of days is the differences between American satire and European satire. Then again, in this modern communications age, those lines are blurring. DuffelBlog: http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/tea-party-attack-charlie-hebdo/
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:39
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:No, but they're not specifically aimed at your average French muslim either. They're aimed at clerics and fanatics, who claim to represent the will of Mohammad and attempt to imitate him, viciously oppressing the communities in which they assume leadership roles in so doing. The fact is, though, that you can satirize the extremist views of fanatics without portraying said fanatics in a racist manner. For me, that's really been the sticking point when people are saying, "You don't understand! It's actually satire of people who believe these things!" Moreso than words, pictures have an emotional and cultural currency and I feel it really weakens the satire to portray the individuals one is satirizing in a racist manner. I feel like I haven't seen a serious defense of this, other than people saying that French humor is necessarily coarse and scatological. But humor can be coarse and provocative without being racist. For example, take the "1000 lashes if you don't laugh" cover. What would have been lost from that cartoon if the artist had drawn the character in a way that indicated he was Muslim without using racist indicators? To me, it would have been a more powerful satire because its reach would have been broadened and the message - hey! these guys are saying crazy and terrible things! - wouldn't be lost in the muddle of a strongly negatively loaded image. For a counter-example, Bors made a comic last year about racial attitudes towards open carry. It featured a white character telling a black character "Now turn white! Be a white person now!" This was also a satirical portrayal of extremist views with a racial motive, but it didn't rely on racism to carry the message! Maybe my objection is partially stylistic - Latuff's images are on the whole more effective than Rall's partially due to artistic finesse. Maybe if you want to do great satire you should refine your style a little more so you don't look like a racist rear end in a top hat every time you try to draw a Muslim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
Funny you should mention Latuff as a good example of satire because this thread has spent dozens of pages going around and around as to whether his cartoons were antisemitic. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 09:03
|
|
|
 1He changed the attribution from "UN speech" to "motivational speaker" for whatever reason.  2 3 4 5 6
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
Okay, from what I recall about the "controversy" with the rape thing is that Rolling Stone pumped out an article about the experiences of one woman who said she was in a gangrape, some conservative blogger made a concern-trolling critique of the article, and all right wingers think the story was faked now as a result? Or at least they did so a month ago when people actually cared about the story - which assuming the two week delay still holds true means Tinsley started writing these even when noone was talking about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 09:20
|
|