Bunny who?

Why? Who? What's this blog about? It's about MEEEE!

Being a Widow

My experience of dealing with grief as a widow


About Jane's brain tumour journey: Astrocytoma.co.uk

More (or less) freedom of speech

20 December 2004

On another issue of freedom of speech, a writer has been chastised for saying that murdered film maker Theo van Gogh's film 'Submission' was a piece of juvenile shock-horror art. So, because the guy is murdered for making the film means the film is now beyond criticism?
Saying that Van Gogh abused his right to free speech with his anti-Islam tirades is 'vile vomit'? That is what Germaine Greer called the article.

People let me explain:

The personal circumstances of the artist do NOT make the art better or worse!!

We should be outraged by art being judged by the circumstances of its maker. Just because Van Gogh was murdered because of the film does not mean it is a good film. I for one agree that Van Gogh was a vile pig who constantly overstepped the boundaries of freedom of speech. This is the man who once filmed kittens being mangled to death in a washing machine because he found it a hilarious sight......Freedom of speech and expression?

I suppose if he has been shot by an animal activist over that film, we would not suddenly have though that killing kittens was beyond criticism.

First we are not allowed to criticise other religions, now it seems we are no longer allowed to criticise those who criticise other religions. Just because he was murdered by a religious nutcase does not mean it proves his point.

Freedom of speech is either ok for everyone or for nobody. Not just for those whose point you happen to agree with. It should always be expressed in writing/speech and never turn violent (like the Sikh protest of my previous post). But there should always be a right to express yourself.


Post a Comment