Of cartoons and satire

There has been a huge row around the publication of some cartoons of Mohammed (the prophet) depicted as a terrorist and other more banal characters. Muslims claim that it is an insult and constitutes religious hatred. But it begs a series of questions and issues that have not been addressed so far.

On the one hand, I am all for satire. Without it we would never 'see the flaws' of the system. Satire has an important role to play in our society: the emperor's new clothes story is all about it. But satire is also about poking fun at authority. Hence the question, whose authority?

I can make fun of my authority, but can I make fun of somebody else’s' authority, too? For instance, can a catholic make fun of the Jewish church? Can a Jewish make fun of the Catholic Church? (They seem to do) It

In this globalised world, is there still a division between what is mine and not? Is it as clear as it was before?

On the other hand, how do we define authority? Catholicism has become such a prominent institution globally that could be seen as everyone's authority. Where as Islam has remained as the underdog and therefore we cannot legitimacy claim to have the right to satirize it.

If it is not our authority it is not satire. It is only ridicule.

But having said that, there is another problem. For Islam, religion and life are one and the same. The boundaries between the religious life and the private life of individuals is not as clear as in western societies (well, except among the ultra fundamentalists). It is OK to make fun of a figurine or a character from the bible, because most of what religion tells us is interpreted when applied to our own lives. The moral codes of conduct of the catholic west can also be followed by non-believers (for instance, me).

If there is no such separation, satire is impossible. You would not be poking fun at authority but at yourself. And undermining exactly what you are. If Muslims living in the west want to be part of the west, then the line will have to be marked more clearly and satire needs to prevail. For the benefit of all; in particular the Muslim community.

A life without satire....

There is an argument that suggests that the west must show restraint; become more sensitive about this. Why tempt the waters? Why play with fire? Well, I am not sure this is an easy, or safe, thing to do. The same argument was given in Kenya about the opposition party demonstrating against the proposed constitution: they knew that there might be some violence. This argument means that if you know that someone will react violently, even if they are breaking the law and what you do is right and legal, then you'll have to stop it. That only leads to self-censorship.

On the other hand, the Islamic world must show restraint as well. And their depictions of Catholicism and Judaism need to be as respectful as what they demand.

But what kind of world would this be without satire? I often find it difficult to imagine a Tory or a Republican satirist. Can they poke fun at authority? Its mostly the liberals who do this. Conservatives and fundamentalists cannot do it as easily because they are so much involved in the authority itself. And if you cannot question what you do, and nobody else does it either, change and progress slow down. This probably explains the incredible advances Islam has given the world and its relative slowness in progress since.

Or maybe not.

But with satire, taboos are dropped and debate is promoted. With satire, one can discuss issues that nobody would normally address. With satire, religion (and in this case, Islam) could reach more people; carrots, not sticks!

This whole thing reminds me of the Seinfeld Joke about his dentist converting into Judaism to, according to Seinfeld, be able to tell Jewish jokes (as well as Catholic ones); this offended him, not so much as a Jew, but as a comedian.