Posted on 02/05/2006 12:33:30 PM PST by naturalman1975
Surely the people of a sovereign state should be allowed to decide which jokes they tell and the circumstances in which they tell them, contends Paul Comrie-Thomson
SOME Muslims just can't take a joke. Following the publication in a Danish newspaper of a series of caricatures featuring the prophet Mohammed, 300 militant Indonesian Muslims went on a rampage in the lobby of a building housing the Danish embassy in Jakarta. Indonesia's foreign ministry spokesman Yuri Thamrin was unapologetic. "It involves the whole Islamic world vis-a-vis Denmark and vis-a-vis the trend of Islamophobia," he said.
From Pakistan has come a Senate resolution: "This vicious, outrageous and provocative campaign cannot be justified in the name of freedom of expression or the press."
In New Zealand, following the decision of The Dominion Post to publish the cartoons, the president of the New Zealand Federation of Islamic Associations threatened: "Muslims will make their own decisions about this and, as you know, they've taken drastic action against Denmark." In Syria demonstrators have set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies.
In Britain, following television broadcasts of the caricatures, a Muslim crowd gathered in central London shouting, "7/7 is on the way": a call for more atrocities along the lines of the July 7 London bombings. Two of the placards brandished by the crowd read: "Be prepared for the real Holocaust" and "Butcher those who mock Islam".
The Europeans have not taken this lying down. France and Germany have upped the ante. "Enough from these reactionary bigots!" wrote France Soir editor Serge Faubert. The newspaper's front page carried the headline: "Yes we have the right to caricature God", accompanied by a cartoon depicting figures from the Muslim, Jewish, Christian and Buddhist faiths on a cloud. The Christian figure was shown saying: "Don't complain, Mohammed, we've all been caricatured here."
Germany's Die Welt reprinted the original caricature. "It's at the very core of our culture that the most sacred things can be subjected to laughter," says editor-in-chief Roger Koppel. "Without this there would be no Life of Brian."
Monty Python's film delighted many Christians and exasperated some. But as Boris Johnson wrote in Britain's The Daily Telegraph last July in the wake of the London bombings: "It is time the discussion was opened up not just to reason, but to reason's greatest ally, humour. Islam will only be truly acculturated to our way of life when you could expect a Bradford audience to roll in the aisles at Monty Python's Life of Mohammed; and when an unintentionally offensive newspaper article about Islam is requited not with death threats but with the exasperated but essentially kindly letters one might expect from Christians."
We may have to wait a while for that. But on the West Bank there's a Hamas joke doing the rounds at the moment about the new regime's traffic police handing out tickets, not for speeding, but for violations of Muslim rules on purity.
And at the second Dubai International Film Festival last year, American comedian Albert Brooks, previewing his new film, Looking for Comedy in the Muslim World, elicited robust laughter with his tale of a failed comic sent on a top-secret assignment by the US State Department to find out what makes Muslims laugh.
In one scene he has a meeting with executives at al-Jazeera, only to find they want him to star in a new sitcom called That Darn Jew.
In Britain, comedian Shazia Mirza came to prominence when, shortly after 9/11, she would begin her show, in hijab, deadpanning: "My name's Shazia Mirza. At least that's what it says on my pilot's licence ... Anyone with a moustache is now a target. My mum's been attacked."
So some Muslims can make a joke and, indeed, take a joke. In Australia, the land of Roy and HG, Kerry O'Keefe et al, we know why this is vital. The Vietnamese-Australian comedian Hung Le explained some years ago the appeal of the hit stage show Wog-a-Rama: "People of southern European descent or whoever gets called wog would come to [Sydney's] Enmore Theatre in packs and keenly wait to hear the piss being taken out of their nationality. After the show people would complain if their country hadn't received equal piss-take time."
And as Hung Le explained, such slagging has long-term consequences. "When packs of boys in Monaros roared past me in the street yelling abuse, they meant it as a sign of affection. For two years and 500 shows, 'Hey Ching Chong' meant 'Love your work, China!"'
So what is this potentially explosive issue about? The editor-in-chief of Belgium's De Standaard expressed it succinctly: "Two values are in conflict here. One is respect for religion and the other is freedom of speech."
For Isaiah Berlin, such conflict is inevitable in liberal democracies. As he wrote: "Values may easily clash within the breast of a single individual; and it does not follow that, if they do, some must be true and others false. Justice, rigorous justice, is for some people an absolute value, but it is not compatible with what may be no less ultimate values for them -- mercy, compassion -- as arises in concrete cases." To live with values is to live with a high degree of difficulty. Berlin concludes: "We are doomed to choose, and every choice may entail an irreparable loss." The best we can hope for, he concludes, is a "precarious equilibrium".
The shaky nature of this equilibrium, the constant frustrations we feel, finds expression in humour. The peculiarities of any nation-state are expressed by that nation's jokes. Many Americans just don't get Roy and HG, and during the Sydney Olympics a Canadian commentator complained that the comedy duo's piss-take on Greco-Roman wrestling was labelling the Canadian participants as homosexuals. But we Aussie viewers got it and laughed.
We know what is funny for us. Should Roy & HG have apologised for offending Canadian sensitivities? Surely not; surely the principle to be defended here is this: we will decide what are jokes for us and the circumstances, within our nation-state, in which they are told.
Paul Comrie-Thomson is a Sydney writer.
Some muslims can't take a joke?
No muslim can take a joke. Unless they themselves are the jokers. And Jews or Christianity is the butt of their jokes. Or the U.S.A. And they aren't really joking at all.
My advice - be careful of people who keep saying 'vis-a-vis.....'
know what I mean like......?
How Would Mohammed Vote? Hilary for President!
There seems to be something inherent in Islamic culture which disallows the ability to see itself in a funny way.
Muslims seem overly serious about themselves which is strange because as a civilization they have done so badly.
Why are they so protective about Islam, a backward, evil, women-hating, anti-modernist collection of countries all of whom are trying to get to second world status?
Maybe it's shame?
I gotcha!
Now THIS is funny religious humor:
http://menino.com/wp/2005/07/24/terminator-and-jesus/
Ya think??
___________________________________________________________
Question:
I understand that pious, traditional Muslims do not smile when posing for a photograph. Why is this? I was told it is based upon a hadith.
Imam sez:
Answer 13839 2005-02-02
According to the Shari’ah, it is not permissible to take photographs of animate objects whether the person smiles or not. Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] mentioned great warnings for those who are involved in picture making of animate objects.
In certain circumstances, the Ulama have allowed the taking of a photograph, for example, to acquire a passport. The act of photography is a despised act, lthough in such circumstances it is allowed because of need. Smiling is an expression of pleasure. Why should we show displeasure over an act which, in its original cotext, is a despised act. We should show our displeasure.
Dear Senators,
I hate to be argumentative, but I consider carbombings, suicide bombings and decapitating a human being with a big knife to be a vicious, outrageous and provocative campaign.
A cartoon is a form of written media meant to illicit a laugh or make a point.
Can you see the difference?
bump
Too funny. Madd TV at it's best.
But I saw it more of a send up of Hollywood than religion.
The Islamic uproar is simply the PC police run amok.
Agreed. It's actually not blasphemous at all, with the 'He'll be back' statement.
God definitely has a sense of humor- there are some hilarious stories in the Bible. The Philistines getting smitten with hemmorhoids, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.