This paper examines the escalation of the Muhammed-crisis, and in what way it influenced the entire debate concerning freedom of speech. First and foremost, this paper contains a descriptive definition of the concept freedom of speech, followed by an examination of the historical, philosophical background in a Danish context in 1770. Throughout an analysis of four different satire cartoons, two from the famous, French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo, and two from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, it is clear that there is a great deal of depth to each of the cartoons, and what they each strive to achieve cannot be understood, unless one has in-depth knowledge of the subject. Furthermore the paper contains a substantial introduction of three current writers, Frederik Stjernfelt and Jens-Martin Eriksen in opposition to Ejvind Hansen, and set writers arguments as to which approach society should take in the debate concerning freedom of speech. Finally this paper will discuss and evaluate, the previously mentioned writers arguments concerning the topic, and conclude that one must understand the context, have substantial art history knowledge and even an understanding of each specific analysis, in order to really comprehend each drawing and its purpose.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Humanistisk Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis|
|Udgivelsesdato||26 maj 2016|
|Vejledere||Esther Oluffa Pedersen|
- Charlie Hebdo
- Frederik Stjernfelt
- Ejvind Hansen
- Jens-Martin Eriksen