Sep 2015
Howling Frog Books: "Banned Books Week is coming up.."
“...Remember just about ten years ago, there was a big kerfuffle in Europe over some editorial cartoons? Flemming Rose, a new editor at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, was hearing more and more that people were self-censoring on the subject of Islam. An illustrator asked to work on a children's biography of Muhammad said that he would do the work, as long as his name did not appear on the book. Well, Rose thought that was maybe not so good and everybody should start talking, so he asked a whole lot of cartoonists to submit portraits of Muhammad. Twelve ran, and pretty soon there was a mess. Death threats, murder attempts, incitements to riot in Islamic countries, and a lot of yelling ensued. Rose (who had actually spent most of his career in Russia) was both taken aback by the reaction, and upset to find that an awful lot of people thought that censorship of one kind or another would have been better than running the cartoons.
Here, Rose talks in some detail about the whole incident, and then moves into a wider context, giving his arguments against the idea that only "punching up" is acceptable (power dynamics are a lot more complex than that) or that minorities ought to be protected by legislation. He gives his thoughts about European worries about free speech over the past 70 years or so. He also talks about his time in Russia and the severe curtailment of free speech that has been habitual there. Finally, he gives some specific incidents from Islamic countries showing that anti-blasphemy laws are mostly used to oppress, not to protect vulnerable minorities.
It's all quite fascinating and very worth reading; a valuable addition to the ongoing discussion of what free speech means and how far it can or should be taken...”
Read more
Here, Rose talks in some detail about the whole incident, and then moves into a wider context, giving his arguments against the idea that only "punching up" is acceptable (power dynamics are a lot more complex than that) or that minorities ought to be protected by legislation. He gives his thoughts about European worries about free speech over the past 70 years or so. He also talks about his time in Russia and the severe curtailment of free speech that has been habitual there. Finally, he gives some specific incidents from Islamic countries showing that anti-blasphemy laws are mostly used to oppress, not to protect vulnerable minorities.
It's all quite fascinating and very worth reading; a valuable addition to the ongoing discussion of what free speech means and how far it can or should be taken...”
Read more
Institute of Public Affairs Australia: Free speech lost in translation
“...In 2005 Rose was the culture editor of Jyllands-Posten. He commissioned and published the cartoons in his section of the paper. And it was Rose who, more than anyone else, bore the brunt of the backlash-as well as being the most prominent defender of the decision to publish. First published in Denmark in 2010, his book was written at first to justify his actions and respond to critics. It has just been republished by the American free market think tank the Cato Institute, but developed into a longer discourse about free speech and censorship.
The purpose of the cartoons was to take a position in favour of free expression, and to editorialise against self-censorship in Denmark. The Jyllands-Posten editorial team were interested in the fact that a Danish children's author, Kåre Bluitgen, had only been able to get an illustrator for his book on the life of Muhammad if the illustrations were done anonymously. In the middle of a Danish debate on selfcensorship, this was an opportunity for the paper to take a stand: not a stunt, or an experiment, but a statement of principles...”
Read more
The purpose of the cartoons was to take a position in favour of free expression, and to editorialise against self-censorship in Denmark. The Jyllands-Posten editorial team were interested in the fact that a Danish children's author, Kåre Bluitgen, had only been able to get an illustrator for his book on the life of Muhammad if the illustrations were done anonymously. In the middle of a Danish debate on selfcensorship, this was an opportunity for the paper to take a stand: not a stunt, or an experiment, but a statement of principles...”
Read more