Monday, May 6, 2002 |
21:20 - Okay, some elaborations are in order.
|
(top) |
Okay-- seems I was rather unclear in my statements about the recent slant on Doonesbury, and I must clarify and re-illustrate.
Back on May 2, I said this:
Shortly after 9/11, he tackled the problem of racial profiling by putting a scary-looking Arab on a plane, scaring the bejeezus out of his seatmate Mike-- until you discover that he's a baggy-eyed, cynical Palm-Pilot salesman who's just out to live the American Dream like the rest of us. That was fine, because at the time it was a very real concern-- we had no idea that events would transpire such that incidences of anti-Muslim aggression in the US would be so vastly outnumbered by incidences of anti-Jewish aggression in Europe. His concern has turned out to be a non-issue in the scheme of things.
But lately, it seems as though he's realized that what he'd figured would be important to lampoon has turned out not to be-- and so rather than drifting back towards center, he's slammed the rudder hard-a-port.
Read over the past couple of weeks' worth of Doonesbury strips. I knew Trudeau was a fiery liberal and all, but this is just weird. If it goes any further, he'll be comparing Sharon to Hitler-- and if you haven't read Lileks' latest Bleat on why that comparison can be ascribed to nothing but utter barking madness, you need to go do so right now.
And the current contention is that reading through the past couple of weeks of Doonesbury doesn't seem to reveal this biased leftward swing. In fact, it would seem to show equally weighted stabs at the Palestinian suicide bombers and at Sharon.
To witness I call the following:
Now, at first blush one might conclude that these are intended to ridicule the suicide bombers. But I don't agree. The interviewee is portrayed not as a religious nutcase or a raving lunatic or a fiery young Uzi-toting world-shaker with dynamite strapped to his toddler's forehead. Instead, it's a teenaged girl, with Trudeau's trademark cynical baggy eyes and full pouting Cover Girl lips and everything. She gets to defend her cause without so much as a wry, pointed, ironic question from Roland. All he does is ask her how old she is.
Then she gets to remain on the topic of the urgency of martyrdom-- which still is not portrayed as insanity. The ridicule is still not aimed at her, but at the shallowness of American youth-- you know, those blonde mallrat bimbos who represent all that is evil about America with their valley-girl vocabulary and their petty, provincial socializing. By contrast, the Palestinian girl is businesslike, focused, determined, idealistic-- why, she even would seem to make a strong case for blowing herself and the patrons of a pizza parlor into chunks.
After some sidelong ribbing at the "72 virgins" thing-- which manages to come off as a gentle, offhand guffaw on the part of both participants-- we're back to the idealism and the righteousness... until Roland brings up a parallel with Jewish culture, upon which the interview is cut short with the urbane curtness of a Hillary Clinton or a Bill Gates.
Maybe I am seeing this from a biased perspective. Maybe Trudeau did indeed mean in these strips to poke fun at the concept of suicide bombing. But to my mind, if that was his intent, he did an uncharacteristically piss-poor job of it. I can think of a dozen more scathing and funny ways to ridicule people who are willing to blow up civilians because of their religion, and I'm not even being paid to try to be funny. (And a good thing, too.)
Especially when these strips are immediately followed by a series on Sharon's rolling tanks through innocent civilian neighborhoods and crushing the downtrodden refugees under his jack-booted heel. If I were more petty about this, I could point out that even the Palestinians are admitting that the Jenin massacre never actually happened... but that would be "propaganda", wouldn't it?
|
|