Support NeoGAF

[xenist]

Oh wow.

You guys would have flipped your fucking shit if you were alive when Swift wrote A Modest Proposal.

Sometimes satire isn't even supposed to be funny. Did you know that?

 

[soul creator]

what does this have to do with this thread? please explain?

So there's this character in the 2014 Marvel release "Guardians of the Galaxy" named Drax the Destroyer. His background is one focused primarily on war, and honor in battle, with time for little else. Because of this, things like "jokes" or "symbols" aren't very well understood by him.

He encounters some other characters, who do have familiarity with those concepts and they, not realizing what type of person he is, use them in his presence. One such example is "it'll go over his head", which is meant to communicate how he doesn't understand these types of statements. But Drax responds, "nothing goes over my head, my reflexes are too fast", because he literally thinks they were referring to a physical object going over his head!

It's a great moment of levity, as the characters, who are our heroes, are taking part in a stressful prison escape at the time. But somehow, Drax just doesn't understand! Granted, our heroes weren't exactly making the most complex, world-changing metaphors, but it was pretty obvious what their statements were about. If Drax simply said "Starlord, I don't think your metaphors are very interesting to listen to", that would be understandable, and probably provoke a more interesting discussion. But literally thinking that Rocket Racoon is somehow celebrating a drow...sympathizing with anti-mu...was referring to a physical object going over his head? Wow!

Since that situation in the popular film, and most of this thread seemed to parallel each other (parallel means "similar" in this context, not the geometric concept of two lines that will never cross, btw), I decided to make my original reply. Hopefully, someone found it interesting!

 

[injurai]

I seek refuge from offense.

 

[Kinvara]

They don't make me feel anything, but they certainly get a react that draws attention to something. I can't speak to the "effectiveness" of art,

That's the thing- it's only drawing attention to their magazine.

We've spent way more time in this thread talking about the cartoon itself and how offensive it is than the message it was trying to convey.

As a marketing tool to get Charlie Hebdo's name out there, it's been very effective in that regard.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

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

That's how I read it too. Seemed obvious to me, but maybe thats just because I read about shit like that daily due to our ridiculous right wing party.

 

[DECK'ARD]

That's the thing- it's only drawing attention to their magazine.

We've spent way more time in this thread talking about the cartoon itself and how offensive it is than the message it was trying to convey.

As a marketing tool to get Charlie Hebdo's name out there, it's been very effective in that regard.

Most time was spent explaining the cartoon, and therefore the issues, though.

 

[brainchild]

that works both ways. lets agree to disagree

I'm gonna go with the assumption that you just have a hard time accepting the nature of satire, and allow your confirmation bias to feed into your bullshit theories about people offending simply to offend.

But you can keep pretending that we're on equal terms of argumentation if you'd like.

Sometimes satire isn't even supposed to be funny. Did you know that?

This is a great point.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

That's the thing- it's only drawing attention to their magazine.

We've spent way more time in this thread talking about the cartoon itself and how offensive it is than the message it was trying to convey.

As a marketing tool to get Charlie Hebdo's name out there, it's been very effective in that regard.

This is only because there were a few dense people who didn't understand the strip in the first place, including OP, who tried to imply that it wasn't even satire. You can hardly blame a strip with a pretty clear intention because a small subset of people don't understand what satire is in the first place. This isn't the first time people have spent pages trying to explain a joke to someone on GAF who doesn't get it.

And as DECK'ARD said, even the pages and pages people had to go through to explain what the strip meant is discussion being had about the issue the strip is talking about.

 

[BarringGaffner]

Charlie Hebdo has never been clever or amusing he caters to racist and intolerant crowd who finds it humurous simply because it is middle eastern/Islamic in nature.

now THIS post is good satire.

 

[PatThePassive]

will no one rid me of this turbulent thread.

For real how is this thread still going.

 

[brainchild]

now THIS post is good satire.

will no one rid me of this turbulent thread.

For real how is this thread still going.

It's simple. Someone posts satire that happens to be dark and offensive, some people don't even get that it's satire, and others don't think it's appropriate regardless of its satirical nature, so being the nice little altruistic gaffers that we are, we inundate this thread with truth bombs!

Turns out that it doesn't make for a very productive discussion though.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Corinne Rey, who uses the pen name Coco, drew one of the cartoons and responded to criticism of the McDonald’s image on Twitter, writing that “we are not mocking the child. Instead we are criticizing the consumerist society that is being sold to them like a dream.”

In a subsequent interview via Twitter, Ms. Rey explained that the magazine’s cartoonists used the image of the dead boy to denounce “the inertia of Europe and capitalist society,” in failing to deal with the migrant crisis before it led to such tragedies. “Europe, racism and capitalism are the targets of these cartoons,” she added, “Aylan is the victim of that.”

“The reference to McDonald’s,” she explained, is to “the capitalist dream that the smugglers” have sold to parents so desperate to reach Europe that they risk the lives of their children. “Refugees are instrumentalized.”

She also used the social network to reply directly to Mr. Herbert, arguing that the cartoons were a critique of the European Union’s response rather than incitement against the foreigners dying on Europe’s shores.

1. They weren't going to europe for the dream of a consumerist society, they were going as refugees to escape the war
2. this tragedy happened because of the war, not because of europe.
3. and then I think she realized what she said and changed the tune completely to say OH its about EU and its response and just before she said its about europe not being good enough for migration

almost as if she thinks migrants shouldnt come to europe is not good enough and thinking migrants are coming for jobs not escape.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/w...rian-boy.html?smid=tw-nytmedia&smtyp=cur&_r=0

 

[Siegcram]

Baseless conjecture, thy name is Maninthemirror.

 

[MUnited83]

1. They weren't going to europe for the dream of a consumerist society, they were going as refugees to escape the war
2. this tragedy happened because of the war, not because of europe.
3. and then I think she realized what she said and changed the tune completely to say OH its about EU and its response and just before she said its about europe not being good enough for migration

almost as if she thinks migrants shouldnt come to europe is not good enough and thinking migrants are coming for jobs not escape.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/w...rian-boy.html?smid=tw-nytmedia&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Making shit up as you go along once again?

Regarding point number 2: Do you really believe the casualties would be exactly the game if Europe was handling this whole thing in a decent way? It's pretty damn obvious that there would be less casualties across the board if Europe gave a crap. The innaction can and does lead to situations like these.
And point number 1: Yes, they want get the away from destruction and war, that's their main motive. But do you really think they aren't told fantasies of a absolutely amazing europe, of a place they could go to and be happy and lice in a society without war torning every single place. Do you really think the smugglers do not sing the praises of how good the refugees lives are going to be when they get there? How do you think the smugglers get so many people ponying up so many cash to be transported in such terrible conditions that often end in death?

 

[Kinvara]

Most time was spent explaining the cartoon, and therefore the issues, though.

This is only because there were a few dense people who didn't understand the strip in the first place, including OP, who tried to imply that it wasn't even satire. You can hardly blame a strip with a pretty clear intention because a small subset of people don't understand what satire is in the first place. This isn't the first time people have spent pages trying to explain a joke to someone on GAF who doesn't get it.

And as DECK'ARD said, even the pages and pages people had to go through to explain what the strip meant is discussion being had about the issue the strip is talking about.

Most of the discussion has been stuck circling around the offensiveness of it.

It's a comic that only resonates with its readers and other individuals that like this brand of satire.

(I'd elaborate more but I'm going to bed now though.)

 

[brainchild]

1. They weren't going to europe for the dream of a consumerist society, they were going as refugees to escape the war
2. this tragedy happened because of the war, not because of europe.
3. and then I think she realized what she said and changed the tune completely to say OH its about EU and its response and just before she said its about europe not being good enough for migration

almost as if she thinks migrants shouldnt come to europe is not good enough and thinking migrants are coming for jobs not escape.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/w...rian-boy.html?smid=tw-nytmedia&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Now you're just trolling.

6/10. Not bad, would not read again though.

 

[Neoriceisgood]

I understand how it can be easily considered as offensive since the image of the drowned child is powerful and a cartoon can be easily found as making light of the situation but I am a Muslim and I can understand the "point" they're trying to make just fine.

However IMO it is still such a crass thing to do.

This summarises my view on it pretty well.

 

[Spikematic]

You guys know that feeling when you know you shouldn't do something but then do it anyway and then keep doing it while your mind keeps screaming at you to stop? That's what happened as I kept scrolling through this thread. I shall now proceed to flee and pretend I didn't read some of the shit here that I just did.

 

[danthefan]

Oh wow.

You guys would have flipped your fucking shit if you were alive when Swift wrote A Modest Proposal.

Sometimes satire isn't even supposed to be funny. Did you know that?

Irish people are white though, there doesn't seem to be the same rush to be outraged.

 

[ManUnkindH]

Absolutely disgusting....The people from that magazine are insane and playing with matches.

 

[akira28]

Irish people are white though, there doesn't seem to be the same rush to be outraged.

people were outraged as fuck by Swift

but yes, the time to kill and eat all white people *IS* nigh.

 

[wildfire]

His argument was that the mere existence of this extreme anti-muslim/-immigrant sentiment in the wild somehow invalidated these cartoons as satire, which is insane.

Removing the context from satire may make it indistinguishable from something horrible, but that's not a knock against satire. That was my point, not the intricacies of hypothetical right-wing publications.

In light of this response I reread what you responded to so I see now your statement was more about the first paragraph than the second.


You're right that the existence of imagery being imitated by satire doesn't invalidate it. My concern was that you were agreeing with his second point that satire is indistinguishable from racist rhetoric. Technomancer inability to see the nuance in similar ideas expressed in different ways is his problem.

 

[Shuggananas]

He has a point.
I fail to see how it's anti-muslim.

 

[Ashes]

Whilst I recognise their intention, I think it's still pretty badly thought out, considering what the explicit joke is.

Seem more like black humour rather than satire per say. Terrible black humour too.

 

[wildfire]

That's the thing- it's only drawing attention to their magazine.

We've spent way more time in this thread talking about the cartoon itself and how offensive it is than the message it was trying to convey.

Yeah this is pet peeve that I mentioned earlier.

It baffles me that people are made at the magazine instead of the people who inspired the imagery.

It's misguided whining.

 

[Ashes]

Yeah this is pet peeve that I mentioned earlier.

It baffles me that people are made at the magazine instead of the people who inspired the imagery.

It's misguided whining.

In a thread about the magazine publishing the image, you're baffled that we're discussing that exact topic?

Cause there's tons of commentary about the refugee crisis around the world.

 

[wildfire]

Seem more like black humour rather than satire per say. Terrible black humour too.

You know if people who didn't get the satire said this I would understand the outrage.

At least they would think it was still critical of Europe, instead of Syrians, but the joke was done in poor taste.


Unfortunately they think it's an attack on Muslims.

 

[BocoDragon]

I like Technomancer a lot as a poster.. But in terms of strident and mindless liberal defense of any issue that happens to feature Muslims, this thread deserves 5/5 Ben Afflecks.

 

[Ashes]

You know if people who didn't get the satire said this I would understand the outrage.

At least they would think it was still critical of Europe, instead of Syrians, but the joke was done in poor taste.


Unfortunately they think it's an attack on Muslims.

The use of Aryan's death pic in a satirical manner is pretty abhorrent to my eyes. Though I suppose I was pretty badly affected by Aylan's death. I found the original picture hard to stomach. Humanity sucks.

Use of his religion to make their point is sad more than anything.

 

[wildfire]

In a thread about the magazine publishing the image, you're baffled that we're discussing that exact topic?

Cause there's tons of commentary about the refugee crisis around the world.

I barely paid attention to the crisis and it took me seconds to understand the subtext. I spent more time trying to see if there was any way the op was right that it was an attack against Muslims.

Even though these people seem to care about the crisis they clearly have done a terrible job keeping themselves up to date on current events.

 

[liquidtmd]

Corinne Rey, who uses the pen name Coco, drew one of the cartoons and responded to criticism of the McDonald’s image on Twitter, writing that “we are not mocking the child. Instead we are criticizing the consumerist society that is being sold to them like a dream.”

You aren't mocking the child, you're using the child to sell your agenda no better than the media agencies worldwide that revelled in the clicks the image bought them.

You want to critique the consumerist society that is being sold to us like a dream? Well done - you've reached the insight of a High school Sociology student. Try doing something a little more constructive than doodling a picture of a dead boy and selling it to an audience that already conforms to your ideology for 3 Euro a pop.

 

[Herb Alpert]

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

This.

 

[Ashes]

I barely paid attention to the crisis and it took me seconds to understand the subtext. I spent more time trying to see if there was any way the op was right that it was an attack against Muslims.

Even though these people seem to care about the crisis they clearly have done a terrible job keeping themselves up to date on current events.

Dude. Maybe you should think about how you prioritise news and commentary before looking down on other people's outlook on the news and commentaries.

 

[KlotePino]

I haven't read all 8 pages and I think the narrative in this thread has changed since the first page but I'm kinda disappointed at so many posters here being so dense and not understanding the comic. I agree that it's obviously meant to be shocking and I think the point could've been made differently but this needs to be able to exist.

 

[Ashes]

I haven't read all 8 pages and I think the narrative in this thread has changed since the first page but I'm kinda disappointed at so many posters here being so dense and not understanding the comic. I agree that it's obviously meant to be shocking and I think the point could've been made differently but this needs to be able to exist.

Is anybody arguing for the contrary? Why prop up arguments from a dated debate that's not happening right now?

 

[G.ZZZ]

You aren't mocking the child, you're using the child to sell your agenda no better than the media agencies worldwide that revelled in the clicks the image bought them.

You want to critique the consumerist society that is being sold to us like a dream? Well done - you've reached the insight of a High school Sociology student. Try doing something a little more constructive than doodling a picture of a dead boy and selling it to an audience that already conforms to your ideology for 3 Euro a pop.

Still, many people who thought they were mocking the kid appeared in this thread. So apparently its audience wasn't only one that conform to your ideology.

 

[OverBlood 3]

I hope this thread stays open forever

 

[wildfire]

You aren't mocking the child, you're using the child to sell your agenda no better than the media agencies worldwide that revelled in the clicks the image bought them.

You want to critique the consumerist society that is being sold to us like a dream? Well done - you've reached the insight of a High school Sociology student. Try doing something a little more constructive than doodling a picture of a dead boy and selling it to an audience that already conforms to your ideology for 3 Euro a pop.

You should stay in your ivory tower. Asking an artist to do something more constructive than drawing a picture is pretty arrogant and unnecessarily dismissive.

 

[liquidtmd]

You should stay in your ivory tower. Asking an artist to do something more constructive than drawing a picture is pretty arrogant and unnecessarily dismissive.

Hey, I hear you. They are artists. That's their job. But positioning themselves in interview, like in the quote I reposted, like they are somehow providing some mystic insight by 'critiquing the consumerist dream that is being sold to us' - it's over intellectualizing themselves and making them sound like they sit in an ivory tower that is bigger than mine.

Can't have that

 

[wildfire]

Dude. Maybe you should think about how you prioritise news and commentary before looking down on other people's outlook on the news and commentaries.

Do I live in Europe? No.
Do I think the refugees need help? Yes
Are they getting help? Apparently.
Is my country helping them? Not good enough.

I acquired all the information I needed in 2 days and agonizing even more over it isn't productive. If someone needs my support to make change in our policy in America I can help, otherwise my influence is too limited and it's pointless to focus too much on a situation I can't impact.

Hey, I hear you. They are artists. That's their job. But positioning themselves in interview, like in the quote I reposted, like they are somehow providing some mystic insight by 'critiquing the consumerist dream that is being sold to us' - it's over intellectualizing themselves and making them sound like they sit in an ivory tower that is bigger than mine.

Can't have that

Fair enough.

 

[Siegcram]

Hey, I hear you. They are artists. That's their job. But positioning themselves in interview, like in the quote I reposted, like they are somehow providing some mystic insight by 'critiquing the consumerist dream that is being sold to us' - it's over intellectualizing themselves and making them sound like they sit in an ivory tower that is bigger than mine.

Can't have that

Not really, they sound like people explaining something that shouldn't require explanation in the first place. Not sure what was "overly intellectual" about either their cartoon or their answers.

 

[Ikael]

The caricature is taking a jab against Europe's hypocrite instance with the refugee crysis, not against muslims. It reeks of bad taste, but this is far from being bigoted, me thinks. Then again, there's a hell of a culture shock with non-iconoclastic cultures such as France's VS the likes of USA, but that's an entire different topic for another day.

 

[DrSlek]

So are we still Charlie?

 

[not psycho]

Not really, they sound like people explaining something that shouldn't require explanation in the first place. Not sure what was "overly intellectual" about either their cartoon or their answers.

Yeah. Maybe they're trying to explain it because they don't want to get murdered, but it needs no explanation and is unsuited to explanation in words alone.

The juxtaposition of the McDonalds advertisement and the drowned child is, as a picture, a compelling visual statement. You can try to explain it as "people are trying to come for this dream exemplified by McDonalds, and we're letting them die" or "look at us reveling in our capitalist culture exemplified by McDonalds while others are in a life or death struggle" but none of that captures the point. The point is you look at a picture that juxtaposes a drowned child and a McDonalds advertisement, and that visual statement may be more compelling than an entirely verbal one.

 

[The_Poet]

ITT: Americans dont understand satire.

 

[zoukka]

What's the joke? Is there a joke?

Christians feeling better of themselves by thinking that muslims don't float. I mean it's quite simple. It's aimed against christians.

 

[PdotMichael]

I hope this thread stays open forever

I love that there is a new that one guy when the last one disappears.

 

[Billy_Pilgrim]

Some pitiable intellectual cowardice in here.

 

[zoukka]

So are we still Charlie?

Of course.

 

[Ayt]

good satire requires taste and execution

Charlie Hebod is like a bunch of high schoolers or college kids coming up with bad cartoons convincing themselves that they are funny

Exactly. The taste of succulent Irish babies.