A couple of mornings ago I heard the news headlines on Radio 3 as I was waking up. The first item was news of record profits announced by BP and other oil companies resulting, so it was said, from the increase in oil prices. The second was that one of Saddam Hussein's ministers, Tariq Aziz, was going on trial accused of having executed businessmen for profiteering. I would like to think this was a deliberate juxtaposition of items, but I fear probably not.
More madness - I read in this morning's paper that the people of Lesbos are objecting to 'Homosexual & Lesbian Rights groups' because they insult the good name of the people of that island. The surprising thing I suppose is that it's taken them this long to get round to it.
More seriously it does raise the problem of the things that people are determined to take offence at, whether it be Muslims who may for all I know never have heard of Denmark getting 'offended' by cartoons in that country about Mohammed or whether it be drivers on the London Underground getting 'offended' by a comedy film (which seems in rather poor taste) about suicides on the Underground. 'It's not a laughing matter' we are told. But has comedy ever been a laughing matter (in that sense)? Back in the days of the Ealing comedies, one film that I remember was 'Kind hearts and Coronets' where the leading character systematically removes all the members of his family who stand between him and a title. We could argue that the idea of a man doing such a thing is no matter for laughter - and we would be right. Yet the film is funny. Of course comedy offends - that's what it's for. It exists in order to make the pompous look foolish; to make the unthinkable something we an laugh at instead of be frightened by.
It seems that the law of our land both allows anyone to offend anyone they wish, and at the same time encourages those who feel offended to say that their rights are being overridden.
Much of this offence is not genuine, of course. It is an act on the part of people who want to be taken seriously, and it should be disregarded. The best respone to it is a raspberry.
At the risk of upsetting artists I point out that the engraver who depicted the pelican (see last post) had probably never seen one. In case pelicans might be offended at being depicted in that light I post a picture of what a real pelican looks like - and they don't feed their blood to their young either. Of course I must not upset any vampires by suggesting there is anything wrong with that either......
Have a nice day!
No comments:
Post a Comment