(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
September 2, 2020 marked the start of the trial against the terrorists who attacked Charlie Hebdo. Since then, there have been several terrorist attacks in France and Austria carried out by Islamist extremists. Two of them can be linked to the fact that Charlie Hebdo has printed cartoons criticizing terrorism in the name of Allah, as in the horrific attack on the teacher Samuel Paty, who used caricatures in his teaching. Paty was killed because he wanted to explain to his students what freedom of speech means within French law, especially the Freedom of Expression Act of 1881, in which blasphemy is neither criminal nor insulting.
Several Muslim leaders, like Ahmed al-Tayeb, Imam of Al-Azhar i Cairo, leaders of nations where the majority are Muslims, such as Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have loudly criticized this "French vision" of freedom of expression – to insult religions in the name of freedom of expression is to "ask for hatred", it says. Such an attitude is wrong; Charlie Hebdo does not insult religions, but theocracies and terrorism carried out in the name of God / Allah, and such an attitude is also radical – a way to justify terrorist attacks, and a covert support for such barbaric acts.
Discussing freedom of expression is impossible without addressing the theme of satire, whether it is in drawings, film or the written word. This is especially true of satirical cartoons, not only because the attack on Charlie Hebdo in 2015 and the beheading of Samuel Paty is an expression of extreme hatred, but because satire has always provoked strong reactions and can therefore be said to be an extreme form of freedom of speech.
Criticism of power
Satire, despite its often exaggerated form, has always been a fundamental element in criticism of economic, political or religious power. Its goal is to strike as hard as it can, spare no one and show neither consideration nor courtesy. The graphic and ceremonial violence of the caricature is often proportional to the abuse or repression of the power it attacks. It tends to take a moral and political position. The caricature is, in its essence, an excellent counterweight to abuse and oppression.
Satirical caricatures disrupt the status quo. They are characterized by disturbing, exposing and asking questions, whether it concerns dictatorships, racism, extremism of all kinds – on a par with film and literature in general. Knowledge, combined with Emmanuel Kant's admonition to have the courage to use his intellect or free will, is insufficient if courage is not widespread or freedom of thought does not lead to freedom of expression with the risk it poses to public exposure and criticism.
Exaggeration is the raison d'être of caricature, it can be universal because it uses visual means and not language, while the humor lies at the bottom and evokes laughter while provoking reflection – in this way satirical caricatures become a basic instrument in the practice of it. Kantian intellect, for both writer and reader: It leads them back to their knowledge, assumptions and prejudices.
But if the satirical caricature is to have meaning, it must immediately make the point, based on an analysis of the nature of things as it is perceived by the artist, who makes use of his intellect – and who remembers that the caricature will make people laugh. The mechanisms of laughter, as presented by Aristotle, Bergson and other philosophers, are diverse. Laughter triggered by satire, however, can not be based on good behavior.
Satire has always provoked strong reactions and can therefore be said to be an extreme
form of freedom of expression.
This does not mean that satire must be vulgar, obscene or eschatological, but given its inner logic it cannot be condemned if it is. Artists who are vulgar, obscene and eschatological will, as long as they have talent at the same time, be in good company of Dante, Rabelais, Boccaccio, Lucas Cranach or Hans Holbein, Daumier, George Grosz – to name a few of the greatest thinkers of our culture.
True satire must therefore be powerful, violent, provocative, sometimes vulgar and exaggerated, it must not spare anything or anyone. But this violence cannot be free: it must be a real political struggle, without the taboo of being "politically correct" – it would be contrary to the purpose and its raison d'être.
Privatization of censorship
Very often these are taboos of respect and tolerance (without the content necessarily being well-defined or universally understood), including "cancel culture", "woke" (alertness to racism and discrimination) and trigger warnings, just an excuse to censor criticism.
A good pretext for all kinds of powers, lobbies and press groups to introduce censorship is to use social networks and media as weapons – without going through the judicial system, and thus privatizing censorship. One is forced into a form of self-censorship that is increasingly practiced by publishers, TV channels, social network operators, artists, writers and journalists – an example is the New York Times' cowardly decision in April 2019 to stop political cartoons in its international edition to "avoid offending readers." [The decision was made a month after the newspaper received sharp criticism for a drawing of Trump and the Israeli prime minister that was branded anti-Semitic, see ill., Editor's note]
In general, but unfortunately not always, the goal of provocative criticism or caricatures is not to hurt the other party, but to open up to a different view, to arouse reflection. Art Spiegelman, illustrator and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for comics Mouse about concentration camps, points out: «By definition, a caricature is a 'charged' image, its soul originates from the visual find that skillfully expresses a point of view. A reduction of ideas that turn into an expressive image allows the drawing to creep into the depths of the brain… The graphic vocabulary of graphic satire is in practice limited to a handful of symbols and easily recognizable visual 'clichés'. Language consists in capturing a personality through a few physical attributes and facial expressions. It takes talent to use these 'clichés' to magnify or undermine the poor language. Caricatures give the greatest aesthetic pleasure when they are able to say what they do with power, not when they torment those affected. "
It is important that we learn to laugh at ourselves again.
A well-executed disrespect can be considered the engine of the critical spirit, the basis for the progress of knowledge and our ability to live together – even if it is vulgar, obscene or carnivalesque. The critical spirit is often perceived as dangerous, because as Plato argued, it is more comfortable and safer to remain in his own cave than to face reality and sunlight – or to attack the messenger instead of reflecting on the message.
A reflection on the theme of freedom of speech and the "violation" that accompanies an apt satire should perhaps be included in Tacitus' framework: "Offenses committed against the gods are the business of the gods", or as Orwell claimed: "Talking about freedom only makes sense to the extent that it is the freedom to tell others what they do not want to hear. "
Deeper than the selfie community
In a democracy, everyone should learn to move beyond their own narcissistic boundaries and accept that their beliefs can be debated, whether it is religious, political, sexual or philosophical. Unlike many other types of information, satire does not seek a protagonist – it goes wider and deeper than the selfie and entertainment society, with its negative development amplified by the use and misuse of social media and the unstoppable tsunami of unverifiable information.
When satire is made by professionals who respect their audience, it aptly points to everything that is wrong in politics, society or economics, and ironically that we are abandoning our democratic and European values, such as solidarity, secularism and freedom of speech.
Satire has a whiplash effect that can help trigger debates, initiate protests and provide constructive criticism. Well-made satire often asks important questions, often with irony, which by its nature is biting. Satire raises questions that politicians, journalists, people in power and specialists should be eager to answer – questions that are necessary in a healthy political and democratic debate. Questions where citizens have the right to get real and unpolluted answers.
At a time when we are more closely linked globally, the art of satire has become more difficult and more dangerous, despite the fact that it has shaped our European culture for hundreds of years.
It is important that we learn to laugh at ourselves again, with the distance and intelligence that belong to critical thinking, so that we can be better equipped in the face of the evils of the times and our fragile democracies. Satirical cartoons will help us do this, as long as they are published and defended by the media and readers.
