thedrifter
02-10-06, 06:34 AM
This Conflict Has Little To Do With Drawn Lines
By Frank Salvato
February 10, 2006
I have often felt that the comics section was the most poignant and meaningful section in any newspaper. On those pages many of society's ills are addressed, presented in a fashion that allows us all to dismiss anything we may find to be offensive or distasteful as nothing more than a poorly drawn, and less than completely thought out joke. After all, comics -- or cartoons -- are drawn in parody. It would seem the innocence of "the cartoon" is now to be added to the myriad things denied to us by those possessing the bull-horn mentality and the saif.
There have been two instances recently regarding editorial cartoons that have caused people to become outraged. One was of a quad-amputee US soldier used by the syndicated editorial cartoonist Tom Toles to deliver his opinion on what he believes Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld feels about US soldiers currently in harms way. The other is the ongoing -- and dangerous -- situation surrounding the twelve editorial cartoons depicting Islam's Muhammad published in the Danish publication Jyllands-Posten. The twelve cartoons illustrate each artist's opinion of how they view Islam and Muhammad in today's light.
While there are some fundamental differences between these two events (there is some question as to whether iconography is prohibited by the Koran), there are some very basic similarities. One thing is for certain, the resulting "outrages" have been dramatically different.
In the case of the Toles' cartoon, the outrage and the protest to what many -- including me -- saw as an unfeeling, poorly thought out and offensive editorial cartoon came in the form of letters to the editor, calls to the Washington Post (where the cartoon was initially published) and expressed outrage in the new media.
To many, the thought of using the plight of a severely wounded US soldier in caricature was distasteful. It crossed a "good taste" line. Quite frankly, the cartoon itself wasn't funny nor was it thought provoking, but for the bad feelings it created. It didn't have much of a message but to convey that Mr. Toles thinks he knows what Secretary Rumsfeld is thinking at any given time, an arrogant thought to have. It was a politically motivated slap and beneath Mr. Toles' abilities as an artist.
Similarly, it can be argued, the twelve editorial caricatures of Muhammad published in Jyllands-Posten also crossed the line of "good taste." Many believe they were a slap aimed at the radicals among the Islamic faith and a taunting, lashing out at those Muslims who are apathetic to the atrocities committed in the name of their faith. The Jyllands-Posten artists depicted Muhammad as symbolic of those who slaughter, today, in his name.
The difference in this instance is that tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of mainstream Muslims took to the streets of Denmark, Lebanon, Iran, Norway, Britain and countries all over the world demanding that the editorial cartoonists who drew the offending caricatures be put to death or at the very least demanding that their hands be cut off, literally. This lends credence to a growing perception that Muslims actively expect the world to conform to their ideals.
One has to wonder if Tom Toles would be so quick to use insensitive caricatures of individuals who deserve gratitude and respect if instead of nasty letters and phone calls he was met at his desk by people ready to saw his hands off. If he were threatened with the loss of limb he cavalierly sketched to further his agenda his affectation of principled arrogance would evaporate.
One of the greater observations that should be taken away from the Muhammad caricatures event is that the people running amok in the streets of Tehran and London and Beirut and Oslo are not al Qaeda members, although there may be some within the ranks, and they aren't wearing suicide vests packed with C4. They are rank and file Muslims, the normally silent and apathetic Islamic community that stands idle in the face of atrocities committed in the name of their religion. Judging from the responses to opinions in the media -- both old and new -- and in comments sent to me via email, this is the face of the majority of those who practice Islam.
If mainstream Muslims reacted to the atrocities committed by their own with the same outrage as they have to the editorial cartoons now published worldwide, perhaps the catalyst for the cartoons wouldn't have existed in the first place; perhaps the distrust and the ill feelings toward Islam wouldn't exist; perhaps the world wouldn't be at the brink of a global conflict brought about by extremism, arrogance and intolerance.
There are those in Washington, London and all the other capitols of free nations who continue to look at the current global conflict -- this War on Terror -- in respect to nations. Many such as John Murtha, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry (not to mention the cerebrally challenged Cindy Sheehan) continue to speak of this conflict in terms of Afghanistan and Iraq. This view of the conflict is not only shallow and lacking in vision; it is an invitation to catastrophe both here in the United States and abroad.
If the Muhammad cartoon demonstrations -- riots if you will -- have taught us anything they have taught us that this conflict has less to do with lines on a map and conflicts between nations, than it does with ideological lines drawn in the sand.
In light of the evidence Islamic protestors have provided, it would be wise for the reactionaries who criticize those who draw in ink to re-evaluate the urgency of the conflict at hand and start criticizing those who draw in blood. The survival of the planet may very well depend on it.
----------
Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, socio-political education project. His pieces are regularly featured in over 100 publications both nationally and internationally. He has appeared on The O'Reilly Factor, numerous radio shows coast to coast and his pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict. He can be contacted at oped@newmediajournal.us
Ellie
By Frank Salvato
February 10, 2006
I have often felt that the comics section was the most poignant and meaningful section in any newspaper. On those pages many of society's ills are addressed, presented in a fashion that allows us all to dismiss anything we may find to be offensive or distasteful as nothing more than a poorly drawn, and less than completely thought out joke. After all, comics -- or cartoons -- are drawn in parody. It would seem the innocence of "the cartoon" is now to be added to the myriad things denied to us by those possessing the bull-horn mentality and the saif.
There have been two instances recently regarding editorial cartoons that have caused people to become outraged. One was of a quad-amputee US soldier used by the syndicated editorial cartoonist Tom Toles to deliver his opinion on what he believes Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld feels about US soldiers currently in harms way. The other is the ongoing -- and dangerous -- situation surrounding the twelve editorial cartoons depicting Islam's Muhammad published in the Danish publication Jyllands-Posten. The twelve cartoons illustrate each artist's opinion of how they view Islam and Muhammad in today's light.
While there are some fundamental differences between these two events (there is some question as to whether iconography is prohibited by the Koran), there are some very basic similarities. One thing is for certain, the resulting "outrages" have been dramatically different.
In the case of the Toles' cartoon, the outrage and the protest to what many -- including me -- saw as an unfeeling, poorly thought out and offensive editorial cartoon came in the form of letters to the editor, calls to the Washington Post (where the cartoon was initially published) and expressed outrage in the new media.
To many, the thought of using the plight of a severely wounded US soldier in caricature was distasteful. It crossed a "good taste" line. Quite frankly, the cartoon itself wasn't funny nor was it thought provoking, but for the bad feelings it created. It didn't have much of a message but to convey that Mr. Toles thinks he knows what Secretary Rumsfeld is thinking at any given time, an arrogant thought to have. It was a politically motivated slap and beneath Mr. Toles' abilities as an artist.
Similarly, it can be argued, the twelve editorial caricatures of Muhammad published in Jyllands-Posten also crossed the line of "good taste." Many believe they were a slap aimed at the radicals among the Islamic faith and a taunting, lashing out at those Muslims who are apathetic to the atrocities committed in the name of their faith. The Jyllands-Posten artists depicted Muhammad as symbolic of those who slaughter, today, in his name.
The difference in this instance is that tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of mainstream Muslims took to the streets of Denmark, Lebanon, Iran, Norway, Britain and countries all over the world demanding that the editorial cartoonists who drew the offending caricatures be put to death or at the very least demanding that their hands be cut off, literally. This lends credence to a growing perception that Muslims actively expect the world to conform to their ideals.
One has to wonder if Tom Toles would be so quick to use insensitive caricatures of individuals who deserve gratitude and respect if instead of nasty letters and phone calls he was met at his desk by people ready to saw his hands off. If he were threatened with the loss of limb he cavalierly sketched to further his agenda his affectation of principled arrogance would evaporate.
One of the greater observations that should be taken away from the Muhammad caricatures event is that the people running amok in the streets of Tehran and London and Beirut and Oslo are not al Qaeda members, although there may be some within the ranks, and they aren't wearing suicide vests packed with C4. They are rank and file Muslims, the normally silent and apathetic Islamic community that stands idle in the face of atrocities committed in the name of their religion. Judging from the responses to opinions in the media -- both old and new -- and in comments sent to me via email, this is the face of the majority of those who practice Islam.
If mainstream Muslims reacted to the atrocities committed by their own with the same outrage as they have to the editorial cartoons now published worldwide, perhaps the catalyst for the cartoons wouldn't have existed in the first place; perhaps the distrust and the ill feelings toward Islam wouldn't exist; perhaps the world wouldn't be at the brink of a global conflict brought about by extremism, arrogance and intolerance.
There are those in Washington, London and all the other capitols of free nations who continue to look at the current global conflict -- this War on Terror -- in respect to nations. Many such as John Murtha, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry (not to mention the cerebrally challenged Cindy Sheehan) continue to speak of this conflict in terms of Afghanistan and Iraq. This view of the conflict is not only shallow and lacking in vision; it is an invitation to catastrophe both here in the United States and abroad.
If the Muhammad cartoon demonstrations -- riots if you will -- have taught us anything they have taught us that this conflict has less to do with lines on a map and conflicts between nations, than it does with ideological lines drawn in the sand.
In light of the evidence Islamic protestors have provided, it would be wise for the reactionaries who criticize those who draw in ink to re-evaluate the urgency of the conflict at hand and start criticizing those who draw in blood. The survival of the planet may very well depend on it.
----------
Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, socio-political education project. His pieces are regularly featured in over 100 publications both nationally and internationally. He has appeared on The O'Reilly Factor, numerous radio shows coast to coast and his pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict. He can be contacted at oped@newmediajournal.us
Ellie