These are responses to this story from another Blog spot blog:
"james said... If Klausen's book "Cartoons that shook the world" is censored, what about the new book published this week entitled "How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad's Daughter Tells It All" by Noor Barack. In this one, available on Amazon, Mohammed is described as 'a imbecilic, drunken pimp' who owns Mohammad's saloon & brothel. It is wickedly funny but some people might be in a mood for a fatwa. Jim Murray."
August 14, 2009 1:25 PM
"Michael Rushton said... I think that part of the point of Klausen's book is that written or visual material offensive to Muslims might be all over the place - indeed it is, as it is for people of any religion - but these *specific* cartoons were chosen for protest because it happened to suit the political goals of a small group of people. So I don't think every satirical novel about the history of Islam that comes along is going to generate protest.
That's what makes the Yale UP decision so odd...did they really believe this scholarly analysis would be a spark to some great outpouring of protest?
To give another example: the infamous "Sensation" exhibition at the Brooklyn museum generated much protest and press and threats. But the *book* about the episode, "Unsettling 'Sensation'", edited by Lawrence Rothfield, published by Rutgers University Press, and containing images from the exhibit, specifically Chris Ofili's "The Holy Virgin Mary" right on the cover, went by pretty quietly."
...and sometimes they make nasty art about it. There are songs that attempt to instigate violence. That goes beyond inflammatory, in my opinion. These cartoons are just inflammatory, and they're cartoons.
Having free speech is good, because it can distinguish the alarming from the subversive.
Unless they are explicitly trying to instigate violence, I don't think the artist that created the art is to blame for the violence others bring to people, including themselves. The guilt belongs to the extremists that killed them.
These are responses to this story from another Blog spot blog:
ReplyDelete"james said...
If Klausen's book "Cartoons that shook the world" is censored, what about the new book published this week entitled "How Fatima Started Islam: Mohammad's Daughter Tells It All" by Noor Barack. In this one, available on Amazon, Mohammed is described as 'a imbecilic, drunken pimp' who owns Mohammad's saloon & brothel. It is wickedly funny but some people might be in a mood for a fatwa. Jim Murray."
August 14, 2009 1:25 PM
"Michael Rushton said...
I think that part of the point of Klausen's book is that written or visual material offensive to Muslims might be all over the place - indeed it is, as it is for people of any religion - but these *specific* cartoons were chosen for protest because it happened to suit the political goals of a small group of people. So I don't think every satirical novel about the history of Islam that comes along is going to generate protest.
That's what makes the Yale UP decision so odd...did they really believe this scholarly analysis would be a spark to some great outpouring of protest?
To give another example: the infamous "Sensation" exhibition at the Brooklyn museum generated much protest and press and threats. But the *book* about the episode, "Unsettling 'Sensation'", edited by Lawrence Rothfield, published by Rutgers University Press, and containing images from the exhibit, specifically Chris Ofili's "The Holy Virgin Mary" right on the cover, went by pretty quietly."
August 14, 2009 2:50 PM
Censoring books of any nature is a self defeating occupation for any institution of higher learning.
ReplyDeleteCartoons don't cause violence.
Trouble is these cartoons have caused violence. Beheadings in fact...
ReplyDeleteStill no reason to censor this book. I thought College was a place of learning, and personal growth...
I imagine if it were a book of anti-Christian material it would be just fine and us Christians, would just have to deal with it...
By the way if it were an anti-Christian book I still wouldn't want it censored...
No, that would be a knife, not a cartoon. When someone kills people because of a play, the deaths occur because of the killer, not the play.
ReplyDeleteCartoons don't cause violence.
It doesn't matter which particular fairy-tale nonsense the art is responding to: art does not cause violence.
I could draw a picture of Jesus having sex with Mohammad, that does not cause violence.
ReplyDeleteViolent, crazy people cause violence.
...and sometimes they make nasty art about it. There are songs that attempt to instigate violence. That goes beyond inflammatory, in my opinion. These cartoons are just inflammatory, and they're cartoons.
ReplyDeleteHaving free speech is good, because it can distinguish the alarming from the subversive.
Unless they are explicitly trying to instigate violence, I don't think the artist that created the art is to blame for the violence others bring to people, including themselves. The guilt belongs to the extremists that killed them.
ReplyDelete