It's Not That Long Ago

[poliphilo]

Back in the early '50s Malcolm Muggeridge (as editor of Punch) published a cartoon of Churchill (then prime minister) as a senile old man (which he was) with a caption politely suggesting it was about time he stepped down- and there was all hell to pay!

In the same era it was taboo to publish a caricature of the Queen. If you absolutely had to have her in your cartoon, it was allowable to show her from the back or with her face artfully concealed. I believe it was Gerald Scarfe in Private Eye who finally demolished that convention.

And of course cartoon representations of God and Jesus and other holy personages were absolutely unthinkable.

Comments

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

But if you go back even further, cartoons were very vicious. The mad King George was often caricatured, I believe, along with politicians. The pendulum of permissiveness swings too and fro.

[solar-diablo.livejournal.com]

I think for myself the crux of the issue (if this is, in fact, a reference to the violence related to the Danish cartoons) is one of double standard and political manipulation. Double standard in the sense that the Arab press in several Middle Eastern countries has no problem regularly printing anti-Semitic propaganda, which is often satirical if not outright vicious (where's the respect for the faith of another there?), political manipulation in that the fury these cartoons generated didn't even manifest until months after their original publication, when imams and other Muslim leaders decided to generate further anti-Western sentiment among the masses.

But you're right in that the West still has its censors and ocntention (I still remember the furor Last Temptation of Christ caused when it was released), although it's rare in the West when satirizing a religion results in mob violence and death.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That's right. The Georgian era was a golden age for political caricature.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I was making a sidelong comment. The point being that the freedom enjoyed by cartoonists in the West is of fairly recent date.

I agree with your point. The imams can dish it out, but they can't take it.

Though the whole thing has become horribly complicated.

Thanks to the Observer I discovered this morning that a short film called Visions of Ecstasy- which deals with St Theresa's "love" for the crucified Christ- is still banned in Britain under our archaic blasphemy laws.

[solar-diablo.livejournal.com]

a short film called Visions of Ecstasy- which deals with St Theresa's "love" for the crucified Christ

Interesting, I wonder whether Netflix would carry such a thing.

[four-thorns.livejournal.com]

yeah, but the difference is that (i'm guessing) no cartoons of the queen, churchill, god, or jesus resulted in buildings being burned, trade relations being severed, or people being killed.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

It must be available somehow, somewhere....

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That's true. History never exactly repeats itself, but themes recur.

I suppose I'm particularly interested here in issues of taboo and self-censorship. There were no legal sanctions against caricatures of the Queen (though there were and still are against "blasphemy") but cartoonists censored themselves rather than risk offending public opinion.

Have a piece of Loyal Toast?

[currawong.livejournal.com]

It certainly ain't the 50's any more. My all time favourite caricature of the Quer-ween was one by Martin Sharpe in "Oz" magazine ...it showed the Queen in the shower, lustily singing:
"God save their gracious ME,
Long live their noble ME,
God save ME,
Send ME victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over THEM,
God save ME!"
Fortunately, Royalists (though a little muddle-headed, at least here in Australia, dont seem to go around torching cartoonists ...but they did eventually try to gaol him.

Re: Have a piece of Loyal Toast?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I've been known to get a little emotional on the subject of our Royal family.

It's my settled belief that the Bolsheviks had the right idea.

Re: Have a piece of Loyal Toast?

[currawong.livejournal.com]

"You may well think that ... I couldn't possibly comment"
It amazes me to think that there are still classes of persons, (and Britain, with her monarchy and aristo hangers-on is not alone in this) who fondly imagine that their great achievement, (being born), entitles them to be drones on society with an entitlement to defference from the hoi-polloi. Bah!