Caroline Monnot, the newspaper’s Directrice de la rédaction (managing editor) said: “This drawing can indeed by interpreted as a minimisation of the seriousness of incestuous acts and makes inappropriate reference both to the victims and to transgender people.”
Mr Gorce rejects this reading of his cartoon as absurd. “It was an ironical comment (on those who asked) if this was truly incest (if a step-father was involved) as if that in some way reduced the offence,” he told the magazine Le Point. “I was pointing out that modern family structures might muddle the concept of incest… but paedocriminality remains indisputably a crime.”
“Laughter is a defence. It is a critical commentary. It’s never a mockery or humiliation.”
Fluidity of gender is one thing. Fluidity of commitment to press freedom on the part of a great newspaper like Le Monde is another. If it’s permissible in the name of free speech to offend Muslims (even though that was not the intention of the Charlie cartoons) is it not permissible to offend transgender people (even though that was not Gore’s intention)? Is incest — long a taboo subject in France, as elsewhere — completely off-limits for satire or humour?
The French commentariat has been deeply divided on the subject. Caroline Fourrest is a columnist and film-maker who has often eloquently attacked the US media for misunderstanding France’s commitments to secularity and freedom of speech. Fourrest has been equally eloquent this week in defending Mr Gorce and his politically incorrect penguins.
“It is perfectly reasonable not to like this drawing,” she tweeted. “But there is no reason for a torrent of insults…. We live in an epoch in which everything has become a cause for instance offence… This will end up by persuading us that nothing is terrible because we are told that everything is terrible.”
Mr Gorce, who considers himself Left-wing, has often bruised leftist or anti-establishment sensibilities in the past. During the 2018-19 gilets jaunes rebellion in rural and suburban France, he drew a group of penguins wearing yellow vests who announced: “We are asking for stuff but don’t try to trick us by asking what.”
In his interview with Le Point (for which he also works), Gorce said: “There are people who don’t want to understand anything but prefer to devote themselves entirely to their own indignation… They have an ideological agenda and want to stir up the masses rather than laugh or think because they think that will advance their cause.
“It’s not an exaggeration to say that this has become a kind of inquisition… A religious tribunal which decides whether things are decent or not. I thought we had got rid of that thanks to our secular state… which guarantees freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.”
Le Monde’s editor, Jérôme Fenoglio, replied in a statement that the newspaper believed that “freedom of the press is a vital element of our democracy” and “indivisible”. However, freedom also meant “responsibility”, and this included recognising the newspaper’s “error” in publishing a drawing “which could be read as a minimisation of the gravity of incest, at a time when society is just facing up to its extent”.
Sources within Le Monde say that its staff have been deeply divided on the apology. Some say that the cartoon was clumsy at best and open to misinterpretation; others that, seen in the context of Gorce’s other work, it was obvious that the cartoon intended to mock the contorted arguments of France’s great and good, not to mock transgender people or victims of incest.
My own view? The incident is complicated. I found the cartoon subtle and funny. I can see why others misinterpreted it. But I believe that Le Monde made a mistake.
After 12 people were killed in the Islamist terrorist attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices in January 2015, Le Monde wrote in an editorial: “They died for our freedom. They died for a few cartoons. Through them, the target was free speech… The killers were aiming at the freedom to inform and to be informed, to debate, criticise, understand, persuade, the free spirit, the necessary and vital audacity of freedom.”
The newspaper — and France as a whole — was absolutely right to defend the Hebdo Mohammed cartoons, even though some of them were unfunny and poorly drawn. Le Monde should also have defended Gorce’s penguins, which are usually wise and witty and beautifully drawn in a minimalist way. If the joke failed on this occasion, the paper should at least have given Xavier Gorce an opportunity to explain himself.
Freedom, especially in satire, means freedom to push the boundaries of taste. To quote Le Monde’s own 2015 Charlie Hebdo editorial back at them, Gorce’s penguins embody “the free spirit, the necessary and vital audacity of freedom”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeHow could anyone truly even consider that this cartoon is not a slam-dunk classic freedom of speech case? Remember, nothing is above satire if free speech truly exists – nothing.
As for the transgender lobby: one could call their bluff here and ask, if you so want to be seen as “equal normal every-day” members of our society, when are you going to allow us to include you in our dialogue (and jokes) as a peripheral part that serves to illustrate that “normality” but doesn’t warrant comment?
The cartoon caption seems to be a perfectly reasonable question that anyone – penguin or otherwise – might ask, and not remotely controversial or even particularly amusing.
For me the cartoon cleverly highlights the near impossibility for a child to make sense of all this stuff that increasingly swirls around them.
I also wonder at what age it is fair and responsible to expose children to this type of conversation ?
it is almost impossible for most adults – except those of very sound mind and possessed of a deep knowledge of historical parallels and an ability to identify BS and its consequences — to make sense of all the stuff that swirls around us. So, as you say, the kids have no chance, which is probably why so many kids are struggling with their ‘mennal ‘elf’, although of course the Mental Health Industrial Complex is also playing a major role here.
I find much French humor not “particularly amusing”…but that is not unusual. I mean, Jerry Lewis?
No, the French don’t really seem to do humour, although the Maginot Line was quite funny.
I’ve heard some great comic stories from French people told with a completely straight face about how they liberated Paris and defeated the Nazis. They had me rolling around in laughter and yet they didn’t even show the hint of a smile. And then there’s the one about Johnny Holiday being better than the Beatles.
Ah Fraser! Blasphemy! Surely so many of their movies are masterpieces of humour?
Interesting that I couldn’t easily find any sign of the actual cartoon anywhere, even by clicking on all links (has Le Monde now expunged it?). Is Unherd unable to publish it here because of copyright, or do they too lack the courage to do so?
[Great article btw – not criticising the author]
It’s in the first five Google Images result for “Xavier Gorce”.
Thanks, I found it. It’s completely innocuous – as you would expect given the hair-trigger sensitivity of trans activists.
Yes, I thought it was wonderfully pitched from the point of view of humour (although I’m not French), was relatively tame, and made the point perfectly.
Thank you very much, Stuart. I couldn’t find it either. You’re a buddy. It was good to see the great French cartoonist Plantu defending Gorce on Gorce’s Twitter feed. Plantu thought Gorce’s cartoon was brilliant (génial).
Thanks Stuart. Is Google braver than Unherd here? I doubt it actually, and I would suspect that both the ready availability of it on Google and the lack of an image here is due to it being in French. Is it time to make all our kids learn French again?
https://www.bing.com/images…
It must be exhausting to be perpetually offended by something.
No, it is invigorating…outrage and moral posturing are the stimulant drugs of choice for many in our confused present.
I increasingly observe that merely mentioning any group of people is racist/sexist/otherist . Referring to Trans people at all – immediate offence. Referring to Black people at all- racist . Referring to [ choose any religion} -intolerant.
Wrong.
Referring to things or groups genders ethnicities etc has to be possible – how else can you discuss anything ?
Agreed. To simply mention a race or even the possibility of a race is immediately shut down as “racist”, while the regressive left are obsessed with race, both Blackness and whiteness (and please remember, “whiteness” must have no capital). In fact their fervour in regard to race means we are never allowed to forget it for a moment, while we all must pretend its very existence is a figment of our imaginations.
Glad to see our woke warriors have their priorities right and are offended by a cartoon and not by the sexual abuse of a 14 year old boy by his stepfather or by the fact that every adult who knew about it did nothing.
Exactly the cartoonist’s point. All the froth over the “offence” obscures this point. The newspaper reacted too quickly and too cowardly.
Breaking News! Due to a world wide shortage of inhibitors hormones, the transgender community has been wiped out of the planet. No drugs, no trans. Some commentators have stressed the point that Nature cannot be fooled.
No…only people, it seems.
Free speech matters. As soon as denial of free speech arises -you have to ask “Who Decides” ? (Jordan Petersen) .
Are the left / Trans Gender/ etc -content to let a right of centre Govt decide what is permitted ? Of course not . So why shoulda country be content that the Left decide what is permitted ?The Left have no majority of morality- their history has as much if not more blood on its hands as the Right. All extremist are bad -and free speech is our only defence against extremists.
Fear is the food of mobs. When appeased, they are emboldened, rather than satiated.
Let’s remember that these Twitter-generated “conflagrations” simply wooosh above the head of 98% of the population. Fortunately.
It’s a good point. However I fear it’s recently become quite a lot lower than 98%, due to the militancy of the regressive left. Even my 90 yr old uncle and aunt are at least aware of the egg-shell nature of these issues and know to guard their speech over certain issues.
That is not true. The mass media and social media have an incestuous relationship. The media mainstreams twitter outrage and can create entire stories just from the social media reaction. So unless 98% of the population lives in a cave, these furores reach them.
For those of you who understand French (:)) here is a recently posted interview with Xavier Gorce: https://www.youtube.com/wat…
thanks but not allowed in our country;
Why am I not surprised by any of this?
Alas cowardice and narcissism appear to be the prime values of our ‘elites’ today, yet another illustration of this.
The West is in trouble
It sounds almost as if Mr Fenoglio is afraid this cartoon might tip the potentially incestuous over the edge.
I have googles
“Xavier Gorce”,but have still not been able to find the cartoon, or an English translation. If someone could put in a link I would be grateful.
What’s next for the Twitter and Woke folks – are they going to suggest we all stop having a laugh- or are they going to suggest we start giving hormone drugs to penguins. It’s hilarious to even contemplate responding to this shit.
As I said at the time about the cartoons mocking Islam and the murder of Charlie Hebdo staff(which I condemned unreservedly) would it still be funny if a cartoon of Jesus with a missile inserted in his a**s was published? Because that was one of the cartoons Hebdo published featuring Muhammad. How was that funny?
It may or not be funny; surely that is not the question. the question is whether the press is free to offend. With Charlie, apparently yes, with Le Monde apparently No.
This comment has been edited above for “obscenity”.
Was there obscenity? Was there comething more than a reference to a particularly form of sexual relations? The uncensored version of that is not an obscenity.
Exactly Andrew. Just to be clear: my comment was an ironic jab at the rather Victorian Unherd censoring algorithm.
It’s a very important question Robert, but I’ve seen many Charlie cartoons also mocking Christianity (and anything else). One was of the Son having an*l int*rco*rse with the Father while having the Holy Ghost do the same to him – I trust that satisfies the criteria.
I’ll miss those penguins… perhaps M. Gorce could be offered a job on this side of the Channel (joke)…