• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Charlie Hebdo publishes cartoon of drowned Syrian toddler, "Muslims sink"

Status
Not open for further replies.

DECK'ARD

The Amiga Brotherhood
Thread title should be "Charlie Hebdo publishes cartoons criticising Europe's treatment of Syrian refugees, OP stinks".
 

MrHoot

Member
EDIT: eeeeeh people made a better point than me earlier and I don't want to add to the mess myself so i'll rescind
 
In the heat of the moments or events , satire can especially offend
yxeQdTD.jpg


Some countries have themselves sued over sensitive matters like South Africa

Sometimes it's just used by the other side to make fun of another

And sometimes satire really crosses the line

So you come to the realization that the freedom of speech doesn't equate that you should offend sensibilities, it means you have the responsibility to use it maturely, you certainly have the right to offend on sensitive matters but that makes you an idiot nothing more nothing less and does not move the conversation forward. Positive satire like Colbert moved ideas forward because he took the responsibility to use freedom of speech where he healed wounds with humor not take a pencil and jab it in the wound and laugh while saying that's just satire because you are not tending to that wound , that is what Charlie hedbo does
 
Most french people with the habit of that humor + the context will get it.

Everyone is forgetting a little something there with Charlie's shaming. Those drawings are not meant to be seen by an international crowd, they are local, and even more than that, they are really niche. That's not mainstream humor. Yet with internet it spreads in an unhealthy way everywhere around the globe where people have no clue what it is...

Satire is not pure humor. It's a literary art that's used to criticize and ridicule. If the people you criticize and ridicule don't get that you're doing that, and it only caters to a niche, it's not true satire.

In the case of this cartoon, if only a small handful of Europeans understand the point, it has failed to work as intended.

However, I suppose I can't really say it's failed, as I don't know how Europeans are responding to this.




To be honest, OP thread title is trash. Completely literal just to shock people, without even a hint of the message behind the cartoon.

I agree with this. Terrible click-bait title, even if it is technically accurate.



If they actually understand the satire, then I'm fine with it being viewed as being in poor taste. I just wasn't sure if that was the case.
 

KHarvey16

Member
In the heat of the moments or events , satire can especially offend



Some countries have themselves sued over sensitive matters like South Africa


Sometimes it's just used by the other side to make fun of another


And sometimes satire really crosses the line


So you come to the realization that the freedom of speech doesn't equate that you should offend sensibilities, it means you have the responsibility to use it maturely, you certainly have the right to offend on sensitive matters but that makes you an idiot nothing more nothing less and does not move the conversation forward. Positive satire like Colbert moved ideas forward because he took the responsibility to use freedom of speech where he healed wounds with humor not take a pencil and jab it in the wound and laugh while saying that's just satire because you are not tending to that wound , that is what Charlie hedbo does

I don't think you understand the points the Hebdo cartoons are making. Certainly if you equate them to any of the points made in the cartoons you cited here you don't.
 

CaLe

Member
Isn't the cartoon trying to bring home the point that Europe should be more accepting of migrants ? i.e., "You're dead because you're not white and christian like us", it's sarcastic.

Anyways, that's what I understood.
 
No, that's why it's satire. It's mocking how Europe is OK with Christian migrants, but hesitant about Muslim ones.
This.

It seems that most people are too stupid or too easily offended to understand it. The same thing happened after their office was attacked and people were judging their cartoons and deciding whether or not they deserved to die.

These children died because they had to sneak in rather than be let in.
 
Isn't the cartoon trying to bring home the point that Europe should be more accepting of migrants ? i.e., "You're dead because you're not white and christian like us", it's sarcastic.

Anyways, that's what I understood.

I know I'm going to come across as being extremely pedantic, but this cartoon is not sarcasm. This cartoon is making a point.

Sarcasm (if done properly) is something that is obviously not true in the sense that the statement is to be taken seriously, but funny because of the irony of it. It does not aim to deliver a message.
 
I don't think you understand the points the Hebdo cartoons are making. Certainly if you equate them to any of the points made in the cartoons you cited here you don't.

Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire

No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire
 
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire

They probably wouldn't like it, but there's this wonderful little thing called free speech, which is not beholden to the acknowledgment or respect of other people's misfortunes.

No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire

As most satire is.
 

injurai

Banned
They're making fun of the callousness of European culture towards the Muslims....by being callous. The French are weird.

Not sure if things have changed recently, but I always saw the French as being the most callous and intolerable of muslims out of the European nations.
 

KHarvey16

Member
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire

No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire

Charlie Hebdo is on those parent's side. They're arguing for them. The image being used isn't a "ploy," it's the whole damn point.
 

akira28

Member
Not sure if things have changed recently, but I always saw the French as being the most callous and intolerable of muslims out of the European nations.

Well...I was talking about Hebdo's intent for the cartoons, not French actions towards their muslim minority or muslim immigrants. Hell, they colonized a Muslim country, they should be better adjusted. But they're not.
 
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire

No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire

most good satire is insensitive and offensive.
 
They probably wouldn't like it, but there's this wonderful little thing called free speech, which is not beholden to the acknowledgment or respect of other people's misfortunes.



As most satire is.

The purpose of free speech and satire is to bring to light underlying issues, not poke at the pain of individual loss of individuals offending sensibilities.

Would you be ok with ch satirizing a falling man from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The sensitivy among people regarding that image of the toddler is high and yet they made fun of it
 

MUnited83

For you.
Disgusting! I can't believe people actually defended this magazine. All they publish is hateful messages and yet they have a right to freedom of speech?

Louis-CK-Scratches-His-Head.gif


Some of the posts here are astonishing. Surely you can't really be that damn dense, can you?

So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?

Sure. Many did exactly that. I don't think you're understanding the point of this satire or any satire in general.
 

KHarvey16

Member
The purpose of free speech and satire is to bring to light underlying issues, not poke at the pain of individual loss of individuals offending sensibilities.

Would you be ok with ch satirizing a falling man from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The sensitivy among people regarding that image of the toddler is high and yet they made fun of it

They aren't poking at anyone's pain or making fun of it. You aren't understanding the point being made by the cartoons at all.
 

I can't think of any really good satire that takes into considering the feelings of others when making a point or pointing something out. Can you?

So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?

What exactly would that be used for as satire? Give me an example and I'll give you an answer.

Cause all I see you do on GAF is go to extreme examples to try to defend your point with no middle ground. Like when you said I supported the taliban and killing kids because I disagreed with your view point.
 
Has a parent or parents given any kind of reaction to the cartoons?


Not that I'm aware of, but I can't imagine they'd be overly thrilled with it. Maybe some would, who knows.

I just know that with the death of a loved one, even well-intended statements can be too much to handle if they're too humorous in nature, or too on the nose, as it may bring up feelings of bitterness.
 
I can't even build a coherent connection between that image and the TSA. What point is it making?

That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

And yes people who are fine with this will sweep this question under the rug and say they can't see it or can't imagine it. Typical ignoring the question
 

MUnited83

For you.
Would you be ok with a publication satirizing TSA security with a cartoon of a falling victim from the world trade centers ?

You're maybe forgetting to make the point that satire would be making. It's kinda required to be satire.


That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
There's no satire there, no message, no point. it wouldn't be satire.
 
The purpose of free speech and satire is to bring to light underlying issues, not poke at the pain of individual loss of individuals offending sensibilities.

Would you be ok with ch satirizing a falling man from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The sensitivy among people regarding that image of the toddler is high and yet they made fun of it

This is bringing underlying issues to light, not poking fun of the baby. You do understand this, right?

Where's the satire in that though? If there is a valid message being made I could digest it regardless of it being in bad taste.

Exactly this
 

injurai

Banned
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

It's not satire, I understand you're trying to draw an example, but you're going to have to do better. For the sake of this line of argument.
 

KHarvey16

Member
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

I can't answer your question unless you tell me what the point they're trying to make is. Your inability or unwillingness to address this is precisely why I keep saying you don't understand this issue.
 
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

No because the point being made is stupid and the connection between the two events are nothing.

If you wanted to compare a dude jumping off the twin towers to the thousands of innocent deaths in Iraq, you would have a point. Would people in America be pissed? Yea, but that's what satire does and it's showing a harsh but valid parallel.

There, I just made your argument for you.
 

railGUN

Banned
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

And yes people who are fine with this will sweep this question under the rug and say they can't see it or can't imagine it. Typical ignoring the question

You're asking people to respond to a satirical situation without explaining the satire. Think about what you're asking, :lol.
 
It's not satire, I understand you're trying to draw an example, but you're going to have to do better. For the sake of this line of argument.

But they are making a point that airport security is so lax and should be taken care of for safety of fliers and using the victim falling from the towers as a ploy for the satire piece. Of course you would find it offensive like I will but it's idiotic to use a victim of 9/11 as a ploy for satire yet for you it's fine to use a specific known victim of the refugee crisis as a ploy for migrant issue in Europe . Hypocrisy
 
No because the point being made is stupid and the connection between the two events are nothing.

If you wanted to compare a dude jumping off the twin towers to the thousands of innocent deaths in Iraq, you would have a point. Would people in America be pissed? Yea, but that's what satire does and it's showing a harsh but valid parallel.

There, I just made your argument for you.




giphy.gif
 
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?

And yes people who are fine with this will sweep this question under the rug and say they can't see it or can't imagine it. Typical ignoring the question
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is in the situation in this cartoon.
 

Opto

Banned
I can't think of any really good satire that takes into considering the feelings of others when making a point or pointing something out. Can you?
I think good satire comes from actually caring and being sensitive to people's pain. Colbert was pretty good about it.
 

KHarvey16

Member
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is between the situation in this cartoon.

I'm pretty sure that the problem is he doesn't understand the point being made in the Hebdo cartoons.
 
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is between the situation in this cartoon.

Well if you can't get it through your head then I can explain that for the families of the victim this is offensive even if the point is about Europe. That is the point why people are offended
 

akira28

Member
Maybe the US gov't/military grabbing their file on Iraq Invasion before the person falling hits the pavement?


.

..

Comics are hard.

that would be great...a few years after the fact. Remember it took a while to even get to Afghanistan, and most people bought the bullshit story. Come on. admit it, you bought the lie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom