The Stupidity of Charlie Hebdo

libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/01/12/je-suis-hypocrites-authoritarian-anti-free-speech-politicians-pose-for-staged-photo-op-in-paris/

Yes. That's the one Obi.

Not only is the cartoon( can it really be called that?) sick and heartless, but it doesn't do it's job.....cartoons are meant to be amusing.Had never heard of Charlie Hebdo until the 'Prophet' debacle, but that cartoon wasn't amusing either, but did carry a subversive religious point, but this present one does nothing but disgust.

I felt for the Parisians I know and love throughout the charliehebdo debacle but to be honest I don't think much of the French sense of humour and never have. Generally I have liked Sempé. Struggled with most others.

Cartoons are not all meant to be amusing. Some are just meant to make people think. The CH ones are the second sort.

I think the CH cartoonists see what they are satirising and mocking as disgusting, vile, sick, etc. That's the point that a lot of people don't seem to get. You aren't supposed to 'like' the cartoons or to find them amusing. They are supposed to disgust you, but the disgust is supposed to be directed at the subject of the cartoons, not at the images themselves.

I am speaking from a position of detachment here, having not seen many CH cartoons. They are not my style. But I think I understand their purpose, their aim. I would probably dislike them as intensely as anyone on here, but I get the point. Seems a lot of people don't.

Are you saying that the italian earthquake ones are ok?

but the disgust is supposed to be directed at the subject of the cartoons

the wounded?

Really not sure what is being satirised here though thatbags. Nobody was responsible for this earthquake. It was a tragic effect of nature. I think that is why it is so inappropriate, and to me totally unacceptable. The cartoonist should be taken to speak to those injured and who have lost family, friends and their homes. Hopefully s/he would feel ashamed. They should be!

I haven't seen the Italian earthquake ones.

Have a look.

OK. I have now. I have to say I don't 'get' that one. It is very odd.

But I also think some supposedly excellent literature is odd and revolting and disgusting and cruel too. And films. All sorts of stuff really. Why's everyone fixated one weird cartoons?

Paintings too.

Check the op bags. Absolutely agree that it's quite wrong to expect all cartoons to be amusing - thereby missing the whole point of satire. However these are partcularly disturbing.

I just dont get why you dont get it like nearly everyone else does. Particularly as I generally agree with you.

If it is ok to ask, has something happened in your life, or in how you grew up, to contribute to the way you think about this?

post to thatbags

Their aim is to shock. They paid a huge price for that before. Why are they doing this? Who benefits? What do they think they are doing? It all has a very adolescent feel about it and we should not take them seriously as a worthwhile publication.

I think their aim is to be very very hurtful.

Sorry bags crossed posts.
What I don't understand is that last post.
Someone disagrees with the majority so that means they'don't get it'?
Everyone doesn't have the same simplistic philosophy.
Surely that's self evident.

and mock[carries on from last post]

I think Bags posted before she had looked at the cartoon.

I don't understand it. Their cartoons would normally have some sort of 'back story', but this is just plain nasty and cruel. There is nothing they are railing against.

I don't get the Italian one because I don't know what the cartoon is getting at. We all know people get injured in earthquakes. Good cartoons have a 'back story'. This one just strikes me as a kind of reproduction of many of the kind of photos and film there is always a lot of when something like an earthquake happens. Nobody objects to the photos. They probably don't 'like' the photos but they don't want them banned.

Maybe that's the point.

Plus that images of the mess people are in after such disasters has made someone (the cartoonist) think of food images. If that's how someone thinks, it's just really weird in my view. No worse than some Salvador Dali paintings. Better ignored than banned.

But the point is they are hurtful.
Would you want a member of your family, depicted in that way?
Perhaps that is ok with you?

Or Hieronymous Bosch.