Support NeoGAF

[1.21Gigawatts]

Its like the pranksters on Youtube who step on peoples shoes in "the hood" and cry "Its just a prank! Its just a prank!" when someone is about to beat them upfor it.

Charlie Hebdo make racist cartoons and cry "Its just satire! Its just dark humor!" when people call it racist.

In my opinion they shouldn't get away with it that easily. Maybe its involuntarily racist because they suck at what they do, but its still racist.

 

[fatchris]

Being assholes has always been Charlie Hebdo's thing. In case you missed a chapter, the whole Charlie Hebdo terror attack thing happened because they made Muhammad cartoons.
Most people in France don't care about Charlie Hebdo either, you know. It's not exactly smart as far as satirical content goes.
The problem is foreigners misunderstanding completely what is basic satire, and thinking Charlie Hebdo is some far-right xenophobic magazine.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I hate to add to the back-and-forth between those who are criticizing Charlie and those who are defending it, but Christ, I never thought such a large portion of GAF (judging by the replies in this thread) would completely miss the point of the magazine and the [very French] ideals it represents.

It's depressing.

Yes, if you're offended by this cartoon, you lack the mental tools to deal with what is elementary satire. No, this isn't elitism.

 

[Sapientas]

Every time a comic from Charlie Hebdo is posted here the same thing happens. People are so eager so call them racists and bigots without even trying to understand the comic.
It might even be a shitty satire attempt, but condemning the journal for "attacking a dead Syrian child" shows how much you didn't get it.

 

[OverBlood 3]

Satire continues to confuse people.

Wonder what people in this thread would think of Brass Eye. 'Bad AIDS'

 

[ghostjoke]

It's getting to that point where it's hard to tell if people are being serious or making satirical posts. I have to appreciate the irony.

Its like the pranksters on Youtube who step on peoples shoes in "the hood" and cry "Its just a prank! Its just a prank!" when someone is about to beat them upfor it.

Charlie Hebdo make racist cartoons and cry "Its just satire! Its just dark humor!" when people call it racist.

In my opinion they shouldn't get away with it that easily. Maybe its involuntarily racist because they suck at what they do, but its still racist.

YouTube pranks are terrible comparison. You're comparing something with malicious intent vs a comic strip pointing out the ridiculous and fucked up nature of a situation.

They're addressing a story about racism and you don't think they should point out the racism? Even searching for this news story on Google reports "French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo". You can call it bad taste, but save the racism card for the actual issues going on in Europe at the moment. Considering how many people aren't getting it, Charlie Hebdo actually seem to be pretty good at what they do, sadly. I shutter to think about the outcome if some people watched/read Charlie Brooker's works.

 

[KooopaKid]

Colbert is more a comedian who confirms your views than challenging them. Nothing wrong with it but its basically a different genre.

Whereas CH tries to confirm views that don't exist.

 

[Moronwind]

The joke is that they even tell you how you should interpret that cartoon.

You really need to ignore everything on that page except that picture of that dead child to even have a chance to get something for getting butthurt.

People who can't read at least a little bit of French, or don't understand the meaning of context, really have no business commenting on these cartoons.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I can't be bothered to be offended by Charlie Hebdo because they just try too hard and it's sad.

 

[Skii]

Using a dead child for this type of satire is pretty disgusting. Imagine being the family of that kid and finding out about this (which they probably will). This is the second time now as well.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

It's getting to that point where it's hard to tell if people are being serious or making satirical posts. I have to appreciate the irony.



YouTube pranks are terrible comparison. You're comparing something with malicious intent vs a comic strip pointing out the ridiculous and fucked up nature of a situation.

They're addressing a story about racism and you don't think they should point out the racism? Even searching for this news story on Google reports "French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo". You can call it bad taste, but save the racism card for the actual issues going on in Europe at the moment. Considering how many people aren't getting it, Charlie Hebdo actually seem to be pretty good at what they do, sadly. I shutter to think about the outcome if some people watched/read Charlie Brooker's works.

Their cartoon is no different than something I would expect on a neonazi demonstration in Dresden.
Just that not even neonazis have come up with something like that, yet.

Spewing bullshit and then calling it satire or dark humor is cheap and weak.
I don't see any intelligence, wit or class in this cartoon. Its content is disgusting. Its message is bland and only existant with a lot of good will and benefit of the doubt.

 

[Turin Turambar]

If he just wrote "good thing he drowned or else he'd be molesting our women" as a sentence it wouldn't get as much support though

In fact it's so illogical that I thought it's satirizing people that think every refugee is a rapist, showing how with that line of thought the ones everyone felt pity for (like dead children) are also future rapists.

 

[Pizoxuat]

Using a dead child for this type of satire is pretty disgusting. Imagine being the family of that kid and finding out about this (which they probably will). This is the second time now as well.

According to post #150, at least some of the family has seen it and they are understandably upset.l

 

[nilbog21]

man, if people got upset about the ted cruz monkey metaphor, they are going to love this !!

 

[ghostjoke]

Their cartoon is no different than something I would expect on a neonazi demonstration in Dresden.
Just that not even neonazis have come up with something like that, yet.

Spewing bullshit and then calling it satire or dark humor is cheap and weak.
I don't see any intelligence, wit or class in this cartoon. Its content is disgusting. Its message is bland and only existant with a lot of good will and benefit of the doubt.

Wow. Just wow. Did you seriously just make that comparison? Part of me is hoping that you're referencing Slaughterhouse-Five as a subtle way of saying "I'm being satirical". Other than that... wow, I'm out. I am not going down this illogical hole.

 

[stufte]

Yah can we not abuse children (and dead children, ffs) for political points? Plz? I mean, do what you want Charlie Hebdo, but jeez.

 

[Turin Turambar]

Another poor cartoon from Charlie Hebdo.
What is it trying to say? Even "racists" don't think that.

There are racists that in fact think everyone from X is a potential rapist. But even from them it would be too much to accuse small children of being rapists/thieves/bad people in general so they are 'exempted'. Which of course it's stupid because when the child grow to an adult, they won't have problems to apply their racist views to them, even if somehow they din't apply when they were children. It doesn't make sense, it's just hypocrisy.
But of course it doesn't make sense, we are talking of racism here.

 

[OverBlood 3]

Their cartoon is no different than something I would expect on a neonazi demonstration in Dresden.
Just that not even neonazis have come up with something like that, yet.

Spewing bullshit and then calling it satire or dark humor is cheap and weak.
I don't see any intelligence, wit or class in this cartoon. Its content is disgusting. Its message is bland and only existant with a lot of good will and benefit of the doubt.

Absolute nonsense, they're mocking (satirising you might say) people with views that align with immigrants = rapists.

If you want an example of the kind of idiocy they're satirising look at some of the comments and response to that little kid used is daesh propaganda.

 

[astroturfing]

have they made grossly stereotypical and racist cartoons of jews? i wonder what the reaction would be then. would they avoid jail?

 

[Pancake Mix]

In before people who don't understand satire accuse a bunch of pro-immigration liberals of being racist fascists.

Whoops, too late.

This happens every thread about this publication too. I get that the cartoon is tasteless but still. I wouldn't buy the paper but it has the right to exist.

 

[Kinyou]

have they made grossly stereotypical and racist cartoons of jews? i wonder what the reaction would be then. would they avoid jail?

edit: nm, i think that was actually a mock cover

 

[dream]

Their cartoon is no different than something I would expect on a neonazi demonstration in Dresden.
Just that not even neonazis have come up with something like that, yet.

Spewing bullshit and then calling it satire or dark humor is cheap and weak.
I don't see any intelligence, wit or class in this cartoon. Its content is disgusting. Its message is bland and only existant with a lot of good will and benefit of the doubt.

Given that a good number of people do see the "intelligence" and "wit" in this cartoon--to the point where they can specifically identify how the satire in this cartoon functions--isn't the fact that you "don't see any intelligence, wit, or class in this cartoon" a failing on the part of you as the reader, and not the cartoonist as an author?

 

[BaronLundi]

have they made grossly stereotypical and racist cartoons of jews? i wonder what the reaction would be then. would they avoid jail?

Yes they have made provocative cartoons about Jews. And the reactions are the same. They are sued A LOT (mosty by catholics) and they win most of the time. And when they lose, they are fined. Why on earth would they go to jail anyway? And specifically when they target Jews? Your comment is more offensive than anything in this thread.

We can finally say it:
Hitler is super nice

- Hello Kikes!
- What's cooking?


Also Christians, Buddhists, left-wing politicians, right-wing politicians, rich people, poor people, vegans, circus freaks, librarians, Mc Donalds, fishermen, truck drivers, able people, handicapped people, singers, actors, people with cerebral palsy, corrida lovers, food trucks, tree huggers, popes, lawyers, workers, policemen, any and all religious figure or symbol. Do you get it now?

Here's a breakdown of their front pages from 2005 to 2015

2/3 are about politics
Not even 10% about religion, out of which 55% are about christianism

 

[KooopaKid]

There are racists that in fact think everyone from X is a potential rapist. But even from them it would be too much to accuse small children of being rapists/thieves/bad people in general so they are 'exempted'. Which of course it's stupid because when the child grow to an adult, they won't have problems to apply their racist views to them, even if somehow they din't apply when they were children. It doesn't make sense, it's just hypocrisy.
But of course it doesn't make sense, we are talking of racism here.

I don't buy that. 2 or 3 drunks at a bar maybe. A very small minority in any case. Probably most FN voters don't even think that. So who/what are they satirizing exactly?

 

[OverBlood 3]

I don't buy that. 2 or 3 drunks at a bar maybe. A very small minority in any case. Probably most FN voters don't even think that. So who/what are they satirizing exactly?

They're satarising the very thing that you arbitrarily dismissed.

 

[Siegcram]

I don't buy that. 2 or 3 drunks at a bar maybe. A very small minority in any case. Probably most FN voters don't even think that. So who/what are they satirizing exactly?

So is your gut feeling consulted by every satire publication, or do you have an exclusive deal?

 

[Dr.Acula]

have they made grossly stereotypical and racist cartoons of jews? i wonder what the reaction would be then. would they avoid jail?

Then they'd feel like Charlie Coulibaly.

 

[astroturfing]

Yes they have made provocative cartoons about Jews. And the reactions are the same. They are sued A LOT (mosty by catholics) and they win most of the time. And when they lose, they are fined. Why on earth would they go to jail anyway? And specifically when they target Jews? Your comment is more offensive than anything in this thread.

We can finally say it:
Hitler is super nice

- Hello Kikes!
- What's cooking?



Also Christians, Buddhists, left-wing politicians, right-wing politicians, rich people, poor people, vegans, circus freaks, librarians, Mc Donalds, fishermen, truck drivers, able people, handicapped people, singers, actors, people with cerebral palsy, corrida lovers, food trucks, tree huggers, popes, lawyers, workers, policemen, any and all religious figure or symbol. Do you get it now?

looks more like a caricature of Hitler than a jewish person IMO.

edit: and sorry if i was offensive, didn't intend to be.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

Absolute nonsense, they're mocking (satirising you might say) people with views that align with immigrants = rapists.

They just forgot the mocking/satirising part because all they did in their cartoon where saying the outrageously racist stuff they're supposedly mocking.

Given that a good number of people do see the "intelligence" and "wit" in this cartoon--to the point where they can specifically identify how the satire in this cartoon functions--isn't the fact that you "don't see any intelligence, wit, or class in this cartoon" a failing on the part of you as the reader, and not the cartoonist as an author?

There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

 

[dream]

There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

Well, yes. People do assume it's satire because it's by Charlie Hebdo. Could that be because Charlie Hebdo has a nearly half-century history as a locus of satire?

 

[Siegcram]

They just forgot the mocking/satirising part because all they did in their cartoon where saying the outrageously racist stuff they're supposedly mocking.

There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

lol this really is the Technomancer thread all over again. Almost verbatim the same, silly argument.

Turns out if you ignore the context of a publication, its articles, cartoons and pictures are easy to misconstrue. Mindblowing news.

 

[LaserBuddha]

There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

It sounds like you're demonstrating how context matters in order to argue that it doesn't.

 

[OverBlood 3]

They just forgot the mocking/satirising part because all they did in their cartoon where saying the outrageously racist stuff they're supposedly mocking.




There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

Well they're a satirical magazine so they tend to focus on satire, just because it's not spoon-fed to you and you've missed the point doesn't stop it being satirical.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

Well, yes. People do assume it's satire because it's by Charlie Hebdo. Could that be because Charlie Hebdo has a nearly half-century history as a locus of satire?

Sure, but thats why people are angry. The cartoon is pure racism. There is nothing in the cartoon that makes it satire.
Is that peoples understanding of satire and dark humor? Just saying the same shit racists and assholes say but without actually meaning it? Man, thats really funny and smart!
And the high art of spotting the satire is nothing more than reading who made it?

Nah, thats not how it works.

 

[BearFlexington]

I see this as a "dead child" joke and am offended.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Pretty ugly comic, here. Do people actually find this humorous? Does this REALLY make someone pause and think? I'd like an outline of the persona of those who do. I'm really curious about what someone who is intrigued by this image does for a living, thinks about the world and people around him, and his place in it.

 

[King Tubby]

There is nothing in the cartoon that would suggest satire or anything. People just assume it is satire because its by Charlie Hebdo. If this very same thing were from any other source nobody would dare to defend it because its just blatantly racist and not intelligent, nuanced satire.

There is actually a very clear indicator of the satirical intent of the cartoon. It's the image of the dead child in the bubble.

Let me try to convert this into an American perspective. Let's imagine there was a prominent image of a Mexican child who died trying to cross the border with their family. An American satirical magazine could make the exact same cartoon, but in English. Would anyone sincerely think that said magazine was arguing it was a good thing that the child died, or would it not be immediately obvious that they are satirizing anti-immigrant rhetoric by making it seem incredibly callous and inhumane by pairing it with the very real imagery of the struggle those immigrants endure?

 

[Siegcram]

Sure, but thats why people are angry. The cartoon is pure racism. There is nothing in the cartoon that makes it satire.
Is that peoples understanding of satire and dark humor? Just saying the same shit racists and assholes say but without actually meaning it? Man, thats really funny and smart!
And the high art of spotting the satire is nothing more than reading who made it?

Nah, thats not how it works.

Let me refer you to post #141 ...

 

[Real Hero]

Pretty ugly comic, here. Do people actually find this humorous? Does this REALLY make someone pause and think? I'd like an outline of the persona of those who do. I'm really curious about what someone who is intrigued by this image does for a living, thinks about the world and people around him, and his place in it.

I'm sure if I was French and had encountered someone who conforms to the comics view of hypocrisy it would make me pause and think.

 

[ksan]

Sure, but thats why people are angry. The cartoon is pure racism. There is nothing in the cartoon that makes it satire.
Is that peoples understanding of satire and dark humor? Just saying the same shit racists and assholes say but without actually meaning it? Man, thats really funny and smart!
And the high art of spotting the satire is nothing more than reading who made it?

Nah, thats not how it works.

You're assuming that satire has to be funny, that's where you went wrong.

 

[dream]

You're assuming that satire has to be funny, that's where you went wrong.

Right. I think people keep forgetting that the point of satire is to evoke change, not to make people laugh.

 

[LaserBuddha]

Sure, but thats why people are angry. The cartoon is pure racism. There is nothing in the cartoon that makes it satire.
Is that peoples understanding of satire and dark humor? Just saying the same shit racists and assholes say but without actually meaning it? Man, thats really funny and smart!
And the high art of spotting the satire is nothing more than reading who made it?

First of all that is not what is going on here, but you are trying to reduce it to that to prop up a failed argument. And really, if we look at political satire cartoons, probably most of them contain words that just sound like what their target would say. The satire is usually in the drawing and how those words are depicted visually, showing ugly or ludicrous meaning behind the words. The point of this cartoon is that people are more concerned with bogus reports of molesters than they are about children dying.

Spotting the satire is really about seeing the rest of the publication and understanding context and what they set out to do, but in absence of being able to read Charlie Hebdo, yes it is about hearing who made it and not being so stubborn and arrogant as to discount what everyone says the magazine's aim is, for no other reason than preferring your own knee-jerk reaction over the truth. French satire is a thing and this is how it works.

Nah, thats not how it works.

Well you're right about that.

 

[Clockwork5]

I see it as commentary on how quickly popular opinion changes from somewhat sympathetic to absolutely intolerant.

Is it an accurate depiction of society? Probably not. Is the subject used to convey this message in poor taste? I think so. Is it a racist slight on middle easterners? I really don't think so.

I could be wrong. That is the thing with satire... Unless the message is slapped across your face, it is really hard to tell.

 

[Thornquist]

Its hilarious how someone actually think this might be a right-wing cartoon.

Not even Hitler himself would have used dead children to promote racism.. are people really this dense?

 

[Real Hero]

Sure, but thats why people are angry. The cartoon is pure racism.
.

How is it racist? What racist thing is it saying?

 

[dream]

I see it as commentary on how quickly popular opinion changes from somewhat sympathetic to absolutely intolerant.

Is it an accurate depiction of society? Probably not. Is the subject used to convey this message in poor taste? I think so. Is it a racist slight on middle easterners? I really don't think so.

I could be wrong. That is the thing with satire... Unless the message is slapped across your face, it is really hard to tell.

I'm not even sure if it's that inaccurate of a depiction. We like to argue against the idea of hive minds or herd mentality, but public sentiment is absolutely a thing. And in that arena, we tend to see things swing from one extreme to another, and the public discourse seems to have gone from "we must save all refugees" to "all refugees are rapists."

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Hey look, another shitty cartoon by Charlie Hebdo. I'm surprised, I swear!

this.

 

[OverBlood 3]

this.

Nope.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

There is actually a very clear indicator of the satirical intent of the cartoon. It's the image of the dead child in the bubble.

Why? Actuall racists were just as fine with using the picture as anyone else.
Many people were shocked by the picture, some were delighted.

Let me refer you to post #141 ...

In that case it also failed miserably, because the racist logic regarding the boy was(and thats always the obvious route the far right takes) coming up with a conspiracy theory.
If this cartoon is supposed to anticipate the right wing/racist arguments then it failed.
Their reaction to what happened in Köln was a "told you so"-dance. They felt reassured.
There is a whole lot going on on right right now, but what the cartoon depicted isn't it.

The way I view it all they did was throwing a new highly racist remark out there that nobody made before. Exposing the racists thought process my ass.

I don't know when this cartoon was published, but if it was published after the news about the new child molestation allegations against the ex-popes brother, then this was a huge missed opportunity: "We don't need foreign molesters, our western-christian culture takes good care of the matter already."
Or something about good teamwork: "We take the children, you can have the women." *Pope and Mohammed shake hands*

The situation had plenty of potential for good satire. Satire with an actual message.
But they decided to against something intelligent and thats what they are beeing attacked for now. Nobody of the people criticising them actually thinks that Charlie Hebdo changed their minds and are now all of a sudden blunt racist right wingers, thats not what this is about.
Even most people here who try to defend the satire acknowledge that its not very good or funny.
And thats the point. Beeing a satire magazin and saying its satire doesn't excuse shitty, tasteless work.

 

[Clockwork5]

I'm not even sure if it's that inaccurate of a depiction. We like to argue against the idea of hive minds or herd mentality, but public sentiment is absolutely a thing. And in that arena, we tend to see things swing from one extreme to another, and the public discourse seems to have gone from "we must save all refugees" to "all refugees are rapists."

Yeah it certainly seems that way sometimes, doesn't it. I would only add that in my experience the media and vocal minority on the internet seem to be much more ready to froth at the mouth at these situations then the people I chat with about current events or the conversations I overhear in public. But again, it is a point worth bringing up; however, the author of this particular cartoon made a mess of the issue with such a sad story being used in such an ambiguous way.

 

[Real Hero]

Nobody of the people criticising them actually thinks that Charlie Hebdo changed their minds and are now all of a sudden blunt racist right wingers,
.

You called it pure racism, why is it pure racism?