Are We Charlie?

In the aftermath of the recent massacre of journalists working at the satirical publication Charlie Hebdo at the hands of terrorists, the citizens of Paris, France, and many others throughout the world, donned clothing and brandished signs bearing the mantra ‘Je Suis Charlie,’ or ‘We Are Charlie.’  This was done in support of the Charlie Hebdo publication, and was a symbolic and defiant gesture to let the perpetrators (and those of their ilk) know that the supporters of the victims would not be intimidated or deterred from living life in the manner they choose. 

To be abundantly clear, these were barbaric, horrendous, and unwarranted murders of innocent people.  There is no justification for such inhumanity…AT ALL!!!

With that stated, I must admit that I disagree with the common media characterization of Charlie Hebdo as merely a satirical publication.  Though I’d never heard of Charlie Hebdo prior to this event, I have no doubt there have been many clever (and indeed satirical) articles dreamed up and published by the journal.  However many of the works that have come to light in the days following the attack do not, in my opinion, fall underneath the category of satire.  Instead many of these works appear to be simply insulting without transformative value. 

There is no debating that satire can play a very vital role in society.  Satires (whether in print, television or the movies) have been used to challenge the actions of those in power, as well as the thinking of the general population on a wide range of issues.  For example, television shows like Saturday Night Live, have satirically challenged every US President since the show’s inception, regardless of political affiliation.  This has helped to challenge our leaders on issues as diverse as race relations and fiscal responsibility.  This “poking at the bear” nature of satire is what makes it such a potent tool, because it deconstructs negligence and misbehavior by powerful individuals, while addressing perverse societal norms. 

Satire is not the same as being unnecessarily insulting or offensive.

Just because Charlie Hebdo made any and all religious institutions (e.g. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Catholicism) the subject of its ire doesn’t make any or all of its works socially valuable; and it certainly doesn’t make the work satire.  Of the half-dozen or so Charlie Hebdo publications I saw pertaining to Islam, I found them distasteful, but more importantly, I fail to see how those works were meant to benefit any of the 7 Billion people on planet Earth.  Other than being willfully, knowingly and outright offensive to Muslims, they seemed to address none of the gripes many people have with how certain factions of those professing Islam think, behave and operate…and there are indeed gripes to be had and addressed.   

I do not think for one moment that a thoughtful satire would necessarily go over well with many in the Islamic community, especially if it includes the image of The Prophet.  However, I can’t get onboard with the ‘Je Suis Charlie’ mantra knowing that many of the satires used by Charlie Hebdo weren’t satires at all, but rather insulting bits a print.

But you know what, in addition to the ‘Je Suis Charlie’ mantra came the symbolic gesture of merely carrying an ink pen and holding it high in the air.  Though some interpreted this gesture as being a nod to free speech, I interpreted it as a powerful reminder of the age old adage that ‘the pen is mightier than the sword!’ 

Now there’s a message I can fully support!

-Maelstrom