Charlie Hebdo makes fun of drowned Syrian boy.

Fukuyama

This cartoon is having the desired effect. Bravo to CH writers and staff for their bravery.

The Irish Navy picked up 600 migrants a few weeks back onto one ship. Loads of dead kids floating in the water there. The Defence Forces had to fly out councilors for the sailors after they dealt with plucking dozens upon dozens of bodies out of the water. And that was just one migrant ship people.

CH has just served up the most pungent, stinking, rotten dish to Europe. This will force people to really consider what's happening in the kitchen.

Better than Irish political satire. French satire doesn't only get to the heart of the issue, it gets to the heart of the reader.

It's a sad reflection on Western society that we need to be sickened before we will act. Not saying I'm any better, btw.

Nodin

Fukuyama wrote: »

The one with Jesus walking on water and the toddler drowned is dark as hell, yes. But I think it actually makes a good point. It's unsettling and surprisingly accurate in the point it makes.

Very few people would have actually bought CH before the attacks. It's a dark magazine and often pokes fun of at Islam for no reason.

I defend their right to freedom of speech no matter what - even if it means publishing tasteless cartoons. Doesn't mean I'll enjoy them.

It's also worth nothing that French political satire is traditionally a lot 'stronger' than British/Irish satire.

I get the second one (I think), its the first one with mc donalds that flies over my head.

HamsterFace

They've always been a d1ckhead magazine. It in no way excuses what happened to them but it doesn't mean they're not ****

Custardpi

Phoebas wrote: »

Was there some secret code printed in the cartoon to tell us how we were supposed to properly interpret it?

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

mahamageehad

Looks like the posts have been pulled, they worked the first time I clicked the link but not now.

Phoebas

Custardpi wrote: »

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

Fukuyama

My name is URL wrote: »

Wishful thinking there

People love a good high horse to jump on. We'll have lots of people, Sky News correspondents, politicians "condemning" ( :rolleyes: ) these cartoons. We'll all get together and say how awful it is to make fun of the refugees.

And it'll increase support for the refugees.

Anyone who paid attention in LC English should be able to spot this for what it is. A simple, dark, satirical cartoon that forces people to twist in their seat and think about how THEY think about the refugees.

melissak

Custardpi wrote: »

If your immediate reaction to provocative & challenging material such as Charlie Hebdo is to go "Waaah, that's offensive!!! Take it away!! :eek::eek::eek: " then you're probably not intellectually equipped to interpret the material in anything other than a superficial way. Best stick to cartoons & publications which make their points in a more direct & unambiguous fashion.

I hope the childs family are more intellectually equipped to decipher the point in a non superficial way. If i had just lost my two little boys and my wife and pricks like charlie were making money about how funny it was in the country whos terrible foreign policy and greed had ruined my country. But sure they're only muslims....

Autonomous Cowherd

Why does everything have to be irony nowadays, ranging from full-on no-fcuks-given satire to that modern, knowing, jaded apathy at the predictability of it all.

Pervasive irony rips the heart out of all good things, it seems to me, and like an accusation will always leave a taint in its wake, even if what it commented upon was innocent.

I think it is lazy. Not clever. Just a lazy way of looking at the complex world.

Custardpi

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

Then you'd be wrong. Charlie Hebdo was & is highly thought of among many French intellectuals, particularly those on the Left. After a previous attack on their offices staff from the magazine worked for a time out of the premises of Libération newspaper.

Nodin

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't know how to interpret that post!

Mind you, nor did I think that Charlie Hebdo's target market was the 'intellectually equipped'.

O they'd have to have some brains to speak the French at least.

osarusan

They make fun of everything.

If we (the general 'we') support their right to do so, they're eventually going to make fun of something that upsets us (the general 'us').

Fukuyama

Nodin wrote: »

I get the second one (I think), its the first one with mc donalds that flies over my head.

The big text translates to:

"So Close But...." and the reader hears in his mind "so far away". That is how we treat Syrian kids. They lie face down in the Mediterranean.

The MacDonalds ad is firstly a symbol of Western capitalism and society. It's also known for being a kids restaurant.

The ad reads "2 kid meals for the price of 1". So it's like the kid just innocently wanted a happy meal (an everyday item for EU kids) so he came to Europe. The 2 for the price of 1 shows how easily he COULD have been integrated with his fellow EU kids. He wouldn't have cost them much, if anything at all.

Again, it's dark. But I think it's a good reality check. Instead of showing us boring numbers (X amount of refugees cross the med every day bah blah blah), CH is showing us the need of these people through something every one of us enjoyed as a kid: a Happy Meal.

Martial9

Fukuyama wrote: »

UK, French, (western) EU and Irish politicians have had their electorates turn on them in the past month. Voters want MORE refugees in their countries.

Polls say different in all three countries.

strelok

osarusan wrote: »

They make fun of everything.

If we (the general 'we') support their right to do so, they're eventually going to make fun of something that upsets us (the general 'us').

no, muslims get upset about and demand censorship of stupid things. we're good europeans, when we get upset and demand that someones voice be silenced, we have good, moral, high-minded reasons.

we're just a better class of people.

Canadel

eet fuk wrote: »

They should be shot for that type of carry on

They were shot for publishing pictures of a fictional character who died thousands of years ago. They most likely won't be shot for this. I think that says far more about those doing the shooting than it does Charlie Hebdo.

Diabhal Beag

Who knew a magazine that depicted Jews in the most harsh fashion with their "edgy toons" could be so controversial.

Phoebas

Custardpi wrote: »

Then you'd be wrong. Charlie Hebdo was & is highly thought of among many French intellectuals, particularly those on the Left. After a previous attack on their offices staff from the magazine worked for a time out of the premises of Libération newspaper.

Well, if leftist French intellectuals think its ok, then .....

Fukuyama

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Why does everything have to be irony nowadays, ranging from full-on no-fcuks-given satire to that modern, knowing, jaded apathy at the predictability of it all.

Pervasive irony rips the heart out of all good things, it seems to me, and like an accusation will always leave a taint in its wake, even if what it commented upon was innocent.

I think it is lazy. Not clever. Just a lazy way of looking at the complex world.

There's nothing ironic or jaded about the cartoons? I can't detect any irony. Where is the irony?

This isn't something an emotional teenager scribbled in a notebook.

I think they're very deep, clever cartoons if you give them the time of day. Quite effective too. They strike a chord in a way the UN Report on the Syrian Crisis, Volume 14 never could.

Custardpi

melissak wrote: »

I hope the childs family are more intellectually equipped to decipher the point in a non superficial way. If i had just lost my two little boys and my wife and pricks like charlie were making money about how funny it was in the country whos terrible foreign policy and greed had ruined my country. But sure they're only muslims....

Charlie Hebdo has never been particularly successful financially. I doubt they'll make much money out of this or most of their other issues. If I was the kids family I probably would have more things to worry about than what some magazine in a country I'd never been to was publishing. As for the "only Muslims" aspect why would you assume that Muslims are incapable of understanding the intent of the cartoon? Isn't that setting low expectations of them? That sounds pretty bigoted to me.

Fukuyama

Phoebas wrote: »

Well, if leftist French intellectuals think its ok, then .....

I suppose the difference is that they'd actually think about the cartoons.

Fukuyama

frozenfrozen wrote: »

You don't have to like them or enjoy them but if you don't understand them or satire in general then you should just look away, no point in getting yourself upset over it.

I like the second one, it's clever.

The more I look at the first one, the more I think it works better. Particularly because there's no religious message in it.

My name is URL

Fukuyama wrote: »

People love a good high horse to jump on. We'll have lots of people, Sky News correspondents, politicians "condemning" ( :rolleyes: ) these cartoons. We'll all get together and say how awful it is to make fun of the refugees.

And it'll increase support for the refugees.

Anyone who paid attention in LC English should be able to spot this for what it is. A simple, dark, satirical cartoon that forces people to twist in their seat and think about how THEY think about the refugees.

Nah, you're just talking nonsense.

I'm not sure you even believe that yourself but hey, if it feels good to say it!

If global coverage of an actual dead kid wasn't enough to change the hearts and minds of the 'send-em-back' brigade, then a cartoon in some semi obscure Parisian magazine isn't going to do it.

Fukuyama

My name is URL wrote: »

Nah, you're just talking nonsense.

I'm not sure you even believe that yourself but hey, if it feels good to say it!

If global coverage of an actual dead kid wasn't enough to change the hearts and minds of the 'send-em-back' brigade, then a cartoon in some semi obscure Parisian magazine isn't going to do it.

This cartoon seems to be more upsetting to people than the actual picture of a dead child.

We're desensitized to pictures of dead kids, women, soldiers now.

But CH cartoons are different. They don't shock by how graphic they are. Nor how realistic. They shock because they message they carry angers and upset us. When really we should be more angry and upset by what's actually happening in Syria.

Media organisations are going to ride whichever wave is bigger - support or condemnation of CH cartoon. They're only reporting on it for them sweet sweet page views and click-bait journalism.

If people condemn this, then it says a lot about what people will get "up in arms" about, and what they won't.

frozenfrozen

Fukuyama wrote: »

The more I look at the first one, the more I think it works better. Particularly because there's no religious message in it.

I'm thinking of the second more in terms of white christians. So race as well as religion for those making the journey over.

I'm not really sure I get the first one fully, two for one is throwing me off a bit. I get the general gist but I'm probably missing another layer of meaning to it. Is the two for the price of one referring to how the amount of refugees being taken in is just seen as a number and how some countries are doing almost like promotional offers with x amount of refugees if other countries are matching that number etc?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Custardpi wrote: »

Whatever about the current images you're talking about a magazine which has faced down death from people who were merely offended by a cartoon. Whatever they may be they certainly are not cowards. The "bottom feeders" are people who would kill over images & words, regardless of how "offensive" they are. People who give creedence to such offense taking such as yourself are almost as bad.

I'm being compared to a terrorist... well done, :rolleyes:

Ave Sodalis

Nodin wrote:

I get the second one (I think), its the first one with mc donalds that flies over my head.

I think it's aimed at people who think along the lines of this:

goose2005 wrote:

Ultimately it makes a valid point; the migrants are seeking material prosperity, not safety. They already have safety where they are.

Nodin

sup_dude wrote: »

I think it's aimed at people who think along the lines of this:

Yeah, like pissing against the wind though.

padd b1975

crazygeryy wrote: »

theres a name for it and it isnt that!
anyone that finds this even remotely amusing needs there head examined.
****ing idiots deserve everthing they get.

You don't necessarily have to be funny to be satirical.

Fukuyama

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I'm thinking of the second more in terms of white christians. So race as well as religion for those making the journey over.

I'm not really sure I get the first one fully, two for one is throwing me off a bit. I get the general gist but I'm probably missing another layer of meaning to it. Is the two for the price of one referring to how the amount of refugees being taken in is just seen as a number and how some countries are doing almost like promotional offers with x amount of refugees if other countries are matching that number etc?

To me, 2 for the price of 1 made me think of how easily this kid could have been integrated. He wouldn't have cost us that much (in relative terms).

So, he could have made friends with a European kid and bunked into a 2 for the price of 1 meal deal with him. It's a simplistic message but it works IMO.