It is often said that one day without laughter is a lost day. But are there limits to humor? Who determines what is funny and what not? Is there a universal language for humor? The irreverent jokes often embroider the limits of politically correct, but in the territory of comedy, the context is fundamental. Invite us to reflect and more and more often, debates on social networks and the mass media about these intangible limits are opened.
Not even the poor Queen Elizabeth II was able to rest in peace while her son became King Charles III. Figure of uncorrupted continuity for a nation shaken by change, disappointment and division, Elizabeth II said in some opportunity "I am the last bastion of the norms". But Charlie Hebdo is not governed by the rules. The left French satirical seminar, founded in 1992, is characterized by its provocative caricatures that revolted Muslims, Jews and Catholics. His work was a cause of trial, debates for freedom of expression, accusations of provocations to religious factions and attacks.
That's why it only took him a week to publish his copy N1573 by hitting the image of the new King of Great Britain. On this occasion, one can see on the cover a caricature of the new monarch on a throne on a car wheel, alluding to the automobile accident that occurred in 1997 that ended with the life of the Princess of Wales. With a label describing it as “the Lady Di Killer” and a dialogue bubble where the character exclaims " The crime paid!". In one hand sustains a saw and its facial expression demonstrates a dismantled cynicism, where the sovereign seems to enjoy the death of his children's mother and have planned everything in a strategy to achieve the full power and attention of the English people.
On Friday, April 9, 2021 Prince Philip of Edinburgh died at the age of 99, and from the publishing house they could not let this event pass. In this opportunity, the magazine[1] He published the following cartoon, where you can see the “tribute to Harry and Meghan” to Prince Philip. On the one hand, there is the grandson of the late dress and gesticulating as a Nazi agent, in relation to that occasion in 2005 when Prince Harry was photographed “disfused” with a ballpark on his arm. On the other hand, the former Duchess of Sussex is characterized by aborigen, practically naked with a banana taparrabo, grotesquely healthing the deceased. With racist and anti-Semitic insinuations, cartoonists point to burlar the British monarchy and the debacle of it with the events of recent years. Being a means that is identified with the left, it does not surprise the covetousness with the monarchical institution and all that it represents (a life of luxuries and privileges). But in addition to this agitating character of the journal's guidelines, we would have to analyze the context of the publication.
The third controversial publication that can be analyzed in a clear campaign of disrespect of the monarchy and its symbolisms of privileges has to do with a caricature that shows Queen Elizabeth of the United Kingdom kneeling over the neck of Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, in a clear reference to George Floyd's death. The cover caricature was published days after Meghan and Harry made a series of statements against the royal family in an interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which one was included on the skin tone of the couple's son, Archie, and as resulted in a discussion theme before birth. The caricature, published on Saturday, is entitled "For what is it?" with a drawn Meghan answering: "Because I couldn't breathe anymore! ". In the midst of a highly racist context, illustration charges another significance, both for this mother and for all those who can identify themselves with this suffering. Halima Begum, executive director of the racial equality group Runnymede Trust, stated on Twitter that this image does not challenge the limits, does not re-emerge or combat racism. It simply degrades problems and causes offences in all areas.
“A boundless society would be a senseless society of humor”, defends Javier Gomá. For the philosopher and director of the Juan March Foundation, the game that exists between respecting and questioning these borders is what produces the comic effect. It can be argued that, despite being the Royal family, it is also a family that crossed (in the case of Philip) and is traversing (in the case of Isabel) a painful duel or crisis (in the case of Meghan). Agreed to this, they must bear public scrutiny. What may seem like a provocative and tasteless drawing (in your line), becomes a barbarity when you know a little life of people.
“Any person has the right to say that a joke looks like a garbage to him without a loss to the freedom of expression of the chistoso. ” Jaime Rubio Hancock. For the journalist and writer, responsible for the special mood of the newspaper El País, each party is entitled to replication. The fact that someone says that “it’s just a joke” does not blind the comment against all criticism or compel others to laugh.
It can be said that this is an endless debate, because while some argue that there would be to review certain publications that in the name of humor only generate hatred, others argue that freedom of expression must be defended as the fundamental value of democracy.
Comments