7/24/2019 Charlie Hebdo Response

1/2

Sam Grant-Williams

2/1/15

English Composition IIWriting Project 1

Response Paper: I Am Not Charlie Hebdo

!he article I Am Not Charlie Hebdo"# $a%i& 'roo(s is an attempt to anal#)e* critici)e* an&

respon& to the gro+ing tone o, mart#r&om in response to the terrorist attac( against the Charlie e"&o

satirical maga)ine. e ma(es the point that i, the contro%ersial cartoons +ere p"lishe& in 0merica that

the# +ol& ha%e "een rejecte& "# "oth the e&itors an& the p"lic an& hea%il# critici)e&. !he athor o,

the article states that in these particlar cartoons the illstrators ha& crosse& a line ,rom satirical to

o,,ensi%e an& that i, the# ha& not "een (ille& "# the terrorist the# +ol& ha%e ,ace& hea%# criticism

aron& the +orl&. !he (e# point o, the article is that the %ictims o, the terrorist attac(s shol& not "e

%ie+e& as mart#rs ,or ,ree speech an& that their &eaths shol& ser%e as a +arning that +e mst "e

constantl# a+are o, e%er changing cltral "on&aries +hich satirist mst pa# homage to in their

+or(. $a%i& 'roo(s arges against an increase in la+s to &eal +ith o,,ensi%e speech "ecase +e &ont

nee& repressi%e legislation - +e nee& responsi"le social "arriers3

0s I +as initiall# rea&ing this article I ,elt that $a%i& 'roo(s langage +as rather insensiti%e to

the ,act that people ha& "een (ille&. I ,elt he +as sa#ing the maga)ine po(e& the sleeping "ear so its

not srprising the# got male& to &eath an& m# internal response to the ,irst paragraph +as oh* #o

jst &ont get it "t the more I rea& the article the more I ,elt li(e ma#"e I jst &i&nt get +hat $a%i&

'roo(s point +as "t as I rea& on an& then re rea& his article the more sense he ma&e.

I agree +holehearte&l# that there is a ,ine line "et+een "eing satirical an& "eing cltrall#

o,,ensi%e or jst plain racist +ith ,ree speech potentiall# "or&ering on hate speech. 'roo(s ma(es the

point that the satirist jo" is to +al( on a (ni,es e&ge* Satirists expose those who are incapable of

7/24/2019 Charlie Hebdo Response

2/2

laughing at themselves and teach the rest of us that we probably should e goes on ,rther to sa#:

Healthy societies! in other words! don"t suppress speech! but they do grant different standing to

different sorts of people #ise and considerate scholars are heard with high respect Satirists are heard

with bemused semirespect $acists and anti%Semites are heard through a filter of opprobrium and

disrespect &eople who want to be heard attentively have to earn it through their conductI

thoroghl# agree +ith this latter passage.

!o sm things p* +hile I still "elie%e he +as insensiti%e to their &eaths* $a%i& 'roo(s ma(es a

compelling argment a"ot personal responsi"ilit# in regar&s to the sage o, ,ree speech especiall# in

terms o, ,orms o, me&ia sch as cartoon images.