Muhammed and Art
The rather wellknown author Muhammed, famous for his early work “The Koran”, has published his second book. This time the subject and the name of the book is short and direct: “Art”. The views on art is interesting. Muhammed means that “Art is One” and, with self confidence, “I am the best of the artists”. He does, though, pay respect also to other artists: “Those who fled at the battle of Uhud are also artists, but just by mercy.”
This picture of Muhammed is more friendly than those of the Danes. But Denmark started a debate and the country has now become famous. The Prime Minister has not yet understood the possibilities: There are beer to sell as well as pork and cheese. Maybe not to muslims, but there are a lot of consumers all over the world that could be attracted by the famous Danish image.
The friendly gesture, is friendly, thus less provocative, but also less interesting.
“As Muslims we are required to respect all religions, be it people who are Christians, Jewish, Hindu e.tc.”
ehemm hmmm. Does that include the respect of life of the cartoonist?
ehemmm, Does that include the Danish Embassy in beirut?
I think I have to consider the increase of my consumption of Danish Beer.
“Maybe people should read about Prophet Muhumad peace be upon him, and realise that he was a mercy to all mankind.”
No thanks, already read. I prefer to show you some respect and not to tell you what I think about that book.
Your holiness [*], you miss the point! Where did I say the images were not intended to offend? I believe they were designed to expose, in the sharpest possible way, some of the inhumanities committed in Mahomet’s name (as previously, of course, they have been committed in Christ’s or Moses’s). Such images are not meant to be soothing, or beautiful.
It is a dangerous thing to argue we should be quiet for fear of offending anyone. Exposing injustice is not a polite business!
[*] To non-Ladonian’s, I should explain that this was not heavy handed irony. The good woman is, in fact, our pope. Of course, some catholics may find that idea offensive, but time will tell if she will therefore stand down… :-)
Manny, how do you know that the images were not intended to offend muslims? I believe that they were. There is no other reason for a newspaper to produce offensive caricatures when the original question was about beatuiful pictures of Muhammed in a book for children. I will defend the right of Jyllands-Posten do print the caricatures til the day I die, but I also believe that it was a stupid and arrogant thing to do. And done by (done by, not reportetd about by) a large, powerful newspaper in one of the most islam-hostile countries in the world.
The picture above is on the countrary both respectful, intersting in that it shows Muhammad in a different role than that you normally think of him in, and a comment to an already existing debate.
I myself love the art in question, art is interpred in many ways. Many great artists were poor until the day they die because of public opinion and mories of the time. When such quarrelsome times are over, this piece of art may become quite famous.
As you say, perhaps you would not dream of offending against christianity or judaism, but you think nothing of maligning the freedom of speech which *I* hold sacred. The difference between us is that I defend your right to say things which I find offensive. You attack my freedom to offend you.
The images of mahomet which some brave souls have reproduced around the world are not designed to offend muslims, but to defend one man’s right to speak freely. If a man has his life or employment threatened because he spoke his mind, it is the duty of us all to defend him – including you. If you think society should protect your right to your faith (which I find offensive) then you should defend our right to faithlessness. Anything else is hypocrisy.
When the French state banned the hijab in schools, I marched with muslims against this oppression. I now stand with this man against yours. You may not like what he says, but then – and I will indulge no polite insincerities here – I don’t like what you say.
That’s freedom: and anyone offended by that deserves to be offended.
As Muslims we are required to respect all religions, be it people who are Christians, Jewish, Hindu e.tc.
So i’m really surprised at the pictures published in the newspaper, and also of their false nature. Maybe people should read about Prophet Muhumad peace be upon him, and realise that he was a mercy to all mankind.
Attacking the prophet peace be upon him by drawing such pictures is attacking Muslims directly.
We dont draw pictures of other prophets like Abraham, Moses, Jesus, infact we respect them, and would never think to do such drawings.