« Why do people become scientists? | Main | Caviar »
February 02, 2006
The Muhammad cartoons : my turn
There's a review of today's Euro press on the BBC website featuring an excellent quote from a German paper:
Another German daily, Die Tageszeitung, which also reprinted the cartoons, says the media are "of course" entitled to subject religious symbols to satirical treatment."In a democratic and secular society, showing decency and respect for other cultures does not mean adopting their religious dogmas," the paper says.
But the paper adds that there are good reasons to regard some of the cartoons in question as "tasteless".
"Above all," it says, "in view of the current political situation in Denmark, they are a statement by the majority society vis-a-vis the Muslim minority in the country - a statement which can in fact be interpreted as racist."
Spot on. I don't condone the howling outrage the cartoons have triggered. I also believe that a free press is essential for a democratic society to function. But with that freedom comes a huge responsibility which every editor and owner of every paper in every free country has a duty to uphold. Jyllands-Posten editor Flemming Rose has failed in this responsibility. There is an ongoing debate in Denmark, as there is throughout Europe, on how Muslim immigrants and Christian Europeans can coexist, on how diverse cultural groups can live side by side. The debate has been hindered on both sides by conservatism and, too often, by extremism and prejudice. But slowly, on both sides, moderate voices were beginning to be heard and a dialogue in sensible tones was starting to gain strength. What Jyllands-Posten have done is tantamount to a journalist who is attending a crucial Israeli-Palestinian peace conference suddenly standing up and shouting bawdy Muhammad jokes. Is it legal? No doubt. Is it necessary, desirable, far-sighted or intelligent? Yeah, right. The fact that perhaps a small number of the people who hear you will find your comments deeply offensive, and are also somewhat beweaponed and more than a bit mad, is an added problem. Unfortunately, it's become a problem for all of us.
I would have had more respect for Jyllands-Posten and Rose if they'd got into this mess by having the guts to get some smart people to write some insightful articles on the problems with Islam instead of getting a bunch of cartoonists to mock it. The Muhammad cartoons were always likely to provoke a response, something that Rose is well aware of in the article which first mentions them. He appears to have been in doubt about whether to proceed, having consulted Tim Jensen, a religious historian at the University of Southern Denmark. Jensen basically pointed out that portraying Muhammad in any form, let alone as the bomb-wearing terrorist that Jyllands-Posten showed, is offensive to most Muslims and would be considered provocative. Actually, "like gasoline on a bonfire", is how he put it. So Rose went ahead anyway.
Jyllands-Posten's attempt was so heavy-handed and Neanderthal that it's probably put that dialogue back 10 years and given the stage back fair and square to extremist elements on both sides of the religious and cultural divide. Well done, Flemming Rose and Jyllands-Posten. You got what you wanted, I have no doubt.
Posted by daen at February 2, 2006 10:04 PM