Arnon Grunberg

Prize

Statisticians

“Great satirists — Jonathan Swift, Rabelais, Voltaire, Alexander Pope, Mark Twain, Stanley Kubrick — have all offended and been excoriated for it; Daumier was imprisoned after depicting a grossly overweight king excreting favors. Satire is often vulnerable to being construed as hate speech, especially at first blush. Many contemporary American voices jeer at vulnerabilities as a means of unmasking them — think of Joan Rivers, Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, Louis C.K., “South Park” or “The Colbert Report.” Charlie Hebdo’s staff members knew that producing satire aimed at venerated targets was dangerous. Their valor lies in their dauntless fortitude patrolling the outer precincts of free speech. While many question the defense of that far-flung territory because of the bigotry that can lurk there, Charlie Hebdo has guarded it vigilantly, keeping it open for all should a time come when we, too, may need to challenge taboos and risk sacrilege. Without those who stake out the border provinces, we would all be forced to dwell in an ever-shrinking expressive terrain.
Six writers of tremendous distinction — Peter Carey, Teju Cole, Rachel Kushner, Michael Ondaatje, Francine Prose and Taiye Selasi — have sent notes to us indicating that they were not comfortable attending our gala on Tuesday, in light of the award. Many other writers of distinction — including Paul Auster, Adam Gopnik, Siri Hustvedt, Porochista Khakpour, Alain Mabanckou, Azar Nafisi, Salman Rushdie, Simon Schama and Art Spiegelman — have made statements (some in public and some in private) in support of the award. Our goal has been to avoid a reductive binary; this is a nuanced question, and all of these writers have made persuasive moral arguments.”

Andrew Salomon and Suzanne Nossel in The New York Times.
(Read the article here.)

Without the Kouachi brothers no award would have been given to Charlie Hebdo.
So one could argue that the award is not so much in favor of Charlie Hebdo, but against the Kouachi brothers.
As I said before, the Kouachi brothers made satire and avant-garde from yesteryear famous, fashionable and controversial.

Salomon and Nossel again:

“The leading French anti-racism organization, SOS Racisme, has called Charlie Hebdo “the greatest anti-racist weekly in this country.” Its current editor, Gérard Biard, says it deplores all forms of racism. According to Le Monde, of 523 Charlie Hebdo covers published from 2005 to 2015, only seven singled out Islam for ridicule (ten were cited as mocking multiple religions); many more mocked Christianity and the racism of the French right.”

Numbers don’t lie, do they?

It’s time for an organization: Statisticians again Racism.

And another organization: Mock Me, True Believers for Satirists.

And since Peres, Arafat and couple of American presidents got the Nobel Peace Prize we should not be too strict when it comes to lesser awards.

The best argument to be against an award for Charlie Hebdo is that it would be too flattering for the Kouachi brothers.

But with a bit of tolerance and Taoism all nuanced questions can be answered. And after that, it’s time for satire again. (I’m not sure about Kubrick as a satirist though.)

discuss on facebook, 2 comments