Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
E-mail Michael  |  On Facebook: Comic Riffs  |  On Twitter: Comic Riffs  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed
Posted at 11:15 AM ET, 05/20/2010

THEIR TURN: 12 top cartoonists offer their take on 'Draw Muhammad Day'

By Michael Cavna

"Shock for shock's sake." "Choreographed punditry." And "wrong, childish and needlessly provocative."

That's what some critics think of today's Facebook-ignited campaign titled "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day." But those aren't Islamic extremists speaking. Those are the words of pro-free-speech political cartoonists.

Some people are drawing Muhammad today as part of a socially networked protest to caricature the Islamic prophet. Just don't expect most professional political cartoonists to join in.

"I don't think it's kowtowing to be respectful of another's belief system," says San Diego Union-Tribune cartoonist Steve Breen. "I seldom participate in staged editorial events," says Seattle Post-Intelligencer cartoonist David Horsey. And "the 'Draw Muhammad Day' is a demonstration in the worst impulse for some editorial cartoonists," says Chicago Tribune cartoonist Scott Stantis.

Those sentiments reflect the official stance of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists. The group's president, Sacramento Bee cartoonist Rex Babin, says: "I would be opposed to our organization getting behind such an 'event' because ... something like that can be too easily co-opted by interest groups [whose agenda can go] beyond a simple defense of free expression." Past AAEC president Ted Rall also says he won't draw Muhammad on Thursday, either.

As a protest, "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" was planned after the creators of TV's "South Park" complained last month that Comedy Central edited their attempts to render Muhammad. Some Muslims consider any depiction of Muhammad to be blasphemous, though Islamic scholar Babak Rahimi, who teaches at the University of California San Diego, says: "It is a well-known fact that aesthetic depictions of the prophet have been and remain a major cultural feature of Muslim societies around the world."

On Thursday, Pakistan -- citing "derogatory" and "blasphemous" online references to Muhammad -- expanded its temporary Internet ban to include YouTube as well as Facebook.

Breen and Horsey are among 19 Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonists who signed a petition to support "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker. But they, as well as such other signees as Clay Bennett, Matt Davies, Mike Peters and Ann Telnaes, say they do not plan to publish a Muhammad cartoon Thursday. (Note: In recent days, The Post's Telnaes depicted Muhammad wearing a bomb-wicked turban, and Stantis republished one of Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks's controversial Muhammad-as-a-dog images on his Chicago Tribune blog.)

Also not a participant in today's "Draw Muhammad" protest: Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris, whose illustration last month spawned the campaign. "Fight for the right to draw Muhammad, then decline doing so," she says.

Norris's cartoon inspired Facebook pages, including one that has drawn more than 80,000 supporters who "like" the page. She says she has joined a Facebook page that decries the "Draw Muhammad" campaign -- "AGAINST Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" has attracted nearly 100,000 supporters.

But petition signee Mark Fiore, whose clients include, says his political animation Thursday will incorporate Muhammad.

And noted Islamic critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose book "Nomad: From Islam to America" was published this week, says the protest "is a positive campaign" that can "promote self-reflection among Muslims."

Still, Toronto-based political cartoonist Nikahang Kowsar, a once-jailed Iranian artist who describes his faith as "Muslim Lite," says: "I believe we have the right to offend, but when offense is seen as 'insult,' it might be a bad time to draw an offensive cartoon."


President, Association of American Editorial Cartoonists

I do not plan to draw Muhammad this week. Nor is the AAEC involved in plans to participate in any such "event." If there are individual cartoonists participating, I am unaware of it and as far as I tell there has been relatively little discussion.

Personally, I would be opposed to our organization getting behind such an "event" because as we have already seen, something like that can be too easily co-opted by interest groups who, I suspect, have an agenda that goes beyond a simple defense of free expression.

The AAEC has repeatedly stated for the record its unequivocal support for the right of free expression and categorically condemns any suggestions of violence that would lead to an erosion of that right.

Chattanooga Times Free Press

Do I plan to draw Muhammad this week? Well, yes and no. Let me explain. ...

No laws should infringe on the free speech of any person or the free expression of any artist, especially a religious law imposed through coercion and threats of violence. And while I support the civil disobedience being promoted ... I will not be be publishing a cartoon depicting the prophet. When a cartoonist is told, "You can't draw something," it only makes the desire to draw it that much stronger. But likewise, when a cartoonist is told, "You should draw something," the instinct to resist is just as strong.

Credibility is based on independence and objectivity. That credibility is paramount to any journalist who routinely express his or her opinions on the issues of the day. As an editorial cartoonist, it's up to me and me alone, to choose the subject matter for my work. ... With that independence in mind, I've always tried to avoid participating in any orchestrated campaigns to promote a specific topic or issue. So, as vehemently as I may defend the rights of the "South Park" creators who drew the prophet Muhammad, and while I universally condemn any attempt to intimidate other cartoonists from doing the same, I will not be participating in the "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day."

At least not officially.

Sharia Law forbids any depiction of the prophet Muhammad. ... Any drawing, even one rendered in private and never shared with another soul, is a violation of that law. So, that's how I intend to honor the protest. In the privacy of my office, I will draw a caricature of the prophet. To avoid any appearance of an orchestrated effort to sway public opinion, however, I will not publish what I draw.

San Diego Union-Tribune

No, I'm not going to draw Muhammad this week. I signed the petition because I'm against violence and intimidation by any group. That said, it is my understanding that any depiction of Muhammad, drawn, painted, sculpted, etc. is forbidden according to the Islamic faith and thereby offensive to Muslims. I don't think it's kowtowing to be respectful of another's belief system. I feel that "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" is wrong, childish and needlessly provocative.

The Journal News (N.Y.)

Unless he was ousted in a primary upset, concocted then shorted his own derivative or is accepting responsibility for the oil slick in the Gulf, I was not planning to draw Mohammad this week, no.

As a political cartoonist I don't really see the point in group actions poking at others' religious beliefs for sport alone. I signed the petition simply because I strongly support the right of anyone to draw whatever they want without fear of threats of violence. There are already some not-very-clever Mohammad cartoons in existence. I don't see any genuinely intelligent reason why I should add one more to the stack -- especially when there are so many matters of consequence piling up on our drawing boards these days.

MARK FIORE: et al.

I think every day should be draw Muhammad day, or draw Jesus day or draw Moses day. These prophet and messiah types can handle themselves -- I really don't think they're concerned about what cartoonists draw. Funny thing is, I didn't even know until [the other day that this is] "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day," but was already planning to do an animation dealing with the latest "South Park" issue and other recent attacks. Turns out my animation will be published on "EDMD," even though that wasn't my initial intent.

I'm a little squeamish about an organized day when everybody is supposed to draw Muhammad, mainly because it could easily cross the line into an organized effort to poke fun at a particular religion. In my mind, it really comes down to how a particular cartoon handles Muhammad specifically and Islam in general.I've drawn Muhammad before and will draw him again, although I'll leave Thursday's cartoon up to the viewer.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Obviously -- having signed the petition condemning the threats against the "South Park" creators -- I believe threats or acts of violence against any artists who are exercising their right of free expression are utterly wrong and unjustifiable, no matter whose beliefs or feelings or culture have been lampooned. Muhammad is a pivotal historical figure. Commenting about his influence on our world today is not something for which anyone should suffer retribution.

I'm not going to be drawing Muhammad this week, though, for two reasons. First, I seldom participate in staged editorial events, whether it is Earth Day or any other worthy cause. Something about these coordinated efforts makes me uneasy as a journalist and as an independent commentator. Second, I see no reason to purposely offend non-radical Muslims who take their beliefs seriously. When the right time to portray Muhammad arises, I will exercise my right to do it, but it will be my call. I'm not big on choreographed punditry.

New York Times Syndicate et al.

Actually I won't draw the prophet for many reasons. One is that it's not the best time to do so. Many people in the Islamic community have nothing negative with seeing a cartoon of the prophet, but a big majority cannot handle this matter. And if a Muslim does this, there will be a Fatwa issued against him.

The other thing is that I just started drawing Grand Ayatollahs a few months ago. I wasn't sure to do so, but I asked one of them if he thought it was the time to break the taboo. He said it was okay.

The problem is I believe we have the right to offend, but when offense is see as "insult" it might be a bad time to draw and offensive cartoon.

Atlanta Journal-Constitution

In this instance,I'm not going to draw Muhammad. I wouldn't insult any religion's prophet to make a point about free speech. if an issue arises and depicting Muhammad in a cartoon about that issue makes sense, I will. However, when putting a religious icon in a cartoon, you risk overwhelming the idea you're trying to get across in the cartoon, because readers can't get past the icon's depiction. I've done numerous cartoons on the catholic pedophilia scandal, but I've never used Jesus in one of those cartoons, because it would overwhelm my message. That said, I condemn those who threaten violence.

norris2.jpg (original illustration by Molly Norris)

Seattle's City Arts et al.

If I had wanted my one-off cartoon to be the basis for a worldwide movement to draw Mohammed, then at this moment I should be thrilled. But instead I am horrified!

My one-off cartoon that was specifically about Comedy Central's behavior vs. Revolution Muslim's threat leading to a slippery slope of censorship in America is not good for a long-term plan. The results have shown to be vitriolic and worse, offensive to Muslims who had nothing to do with the censorship issue I was inspired to draw about in the first place.

I attended a local Seerah Conference that was started by a local mosque four years ago after the Danish cartoon debacle. The folks there had to babysit me because I was so upset by this whole viral phenomenon. ... I have spoken with some women at that mosque about possibly making short documentaries about areas where they see there may be a need to help non-Muslims understand their culture. These could be both entertaining and informative -- I hope it happens!

Also: the nicest emails I have gotten during these weeks since my cartoon went viral are from Muslims. I joined "Against Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" and folks from there write to me.

Dayton Daily News

It's really amazing when the Danish cartoon thing happened. One of the editorial writers at my paper said that he thought we journalist should respect other peoples' religious beliefs. I told him that was B.S. Free speech and religious views have nothing in common.

I grew up Catholic. I've been condemned many times by certain priests when I would draw the pope in a bad light. Or when I would criticize the church over their horrendous views on women. I've drawn Jesus many times to make a political point about the hypocrisy of the religious right. I've never drawn Jesus in a bad way. Jesus has never been bad in my mind, Muhammad has never been bad.

When the Danish cartoon thing happened, I said to my wife: "Maybe I should do a picture of Muhammad in one of my cartoons." She said: "Have you ever done a Muhammad cartoon in the 45 years of drawing?" I said, "No." She said, "So why do one now?" I said: "Because they tell me I can't." And I realized that that was no reason to do it. Or to do a picture of Muhammad just to get people mad. But to do a picture of Muhammad to get a point across on the hypocrisy of the radical Muslims I believe could be legitimate reason. And I may do one -- but not today ,

Universal Press Syndicate

If there is support within the AAEC for "Everybody Draw Muhammed Day," it is statistically insignificant. While most AAEC members vigorously support free speech, many are uncomfortable with the idea of provoking the anger of devout Muslims with no other intent than to provoke anger. When there is a legitimate satirical and/or political case to make, few of us shy away from controversy -- but this seems more like a frat prank than standing up for free expression. It also doesn't help that the person who thought of the idea didn't approach other cartoonists about it and indeed disavowed it herself.

I suspect I will be among the overwhelming majority of editorial cartoonists in letting this week pass without a Mohammed drawing.

For the record, I did do a Mohammed cartoon a few years back--as a critique of the newspapers who thought that reprinting them was brave--but my syndicate censored it. They rarely do that, but this was one of those times.

Chicago Tribune

I am not much of a joiner. The "Draw Muhammad Day" was an interesting idea and I was disappointed that the woman organizing it felt compelled to drop it. ... As an exercise and example in free speech it has some merit and I totally understand the underlying motivation behind it.

As a practicing Catholic I have been deeply offended by innumerable despicable renderings of Jesus Christ [and] the Virgin Mary. I can say that at no time did I wish harm to the artist. I could protest or draw a cartoon about it. Even boycott the sponsor of the offending art.

The "Draw Muhammad" Day is a demonstration in the worst impulse for some editorial cartoonists. Shock for shock's sake. I try and make my work have more depth then that. All of that being said I reserve the right to draw the prophet Muhammad at any time I feel it is warranted. Any jihadist with a problem with that can shove it up their fatwa.

By Michael Cavna  | May 20, 2010; 11:15 AM ET
Categories:  General, Interviews With Cartoonists, The Political Cartoon  | Tags:  Ann Telnaes, Clay Bennett, David Horsey, Mark Fiore, Matt Davies, Mike Luckovich, Mike Peters, Molly Norris, Nikahang Kowsar, Rex Babin, Scott Stantis, Steve Breen, Ted Rall  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Pakistan blocks Facebook in response to 'Everybody Draw Muhammad Day' pages [UPDATED]
Next: 'Draw Muhammad Day': Pakistan bans YouTube; Facebook still blocked [UPDATED]


Bad news for Scott Adams. I read contemporaneous descriptions of Muhammad and near as I can figure he's a bit paunchy, big nose, pointy hair. And after today's Dilbert, I wouldn't be surprised if there are protests against cabbages.

Posted by: MAL9000 | May 20, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I have a direct question for all of those cartoonists: If the Bush/Cheney Team had made similiar noises about anti-GOP cartoons, would you have respected that demand, or, would you have said......"FREEDOM OF SPEECH, damn the consequences"?

I suspect that ideologically all of you would have joined in the cartoon fest.....funny how non-violent demands get your goat...

Posted by: akiyama1 | May 20, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: muham | May 20, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

American cartoonists and journalists are politically correct cowards. They are nothing like the independent, critical thinkers of fifty years ago. Think I'm wrong? Then consider the following quotation, from an opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal on April 27, 2010:

"Another idea [to reduce the effectiveness of Islamist terrorists] is to do stories of Muhammad where his image is shown as much as possible. These stories do not have to be negative or insulting, they just need to spread the risk. The aim is to confront hypersensitive Muslims with more targets than they can possibly contend with.....Another important advantage of such a campaign is to accustom Muslims to the kind of treatment that the followers of other religions have long been used to. After the "South Park" episode in question there was no threatening response from Buddhists, Christians and Jews—to say nothing of Tom Cruise and Barbra Streisand fans—all of whom had far more reason to be offended than Muslims."

The writer? Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former member of the Dutch parliament and the author of "Nomad: From Islam to America—A Personal Journey through the Clash of Civilizations."

Posted by: HancockJM | May 20, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

just a bunch of mealy-mouthed justifications, really.. c'mon, just be honest and say it: "i don't want to end up like Theo van Gogh

Posted by: beastnow2010 | May 20, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Did R. Crumb have anything to say? I think these cartoon guys are just afraid some guy in a turban will show up unexpectedly at their doorstep with a large head chopping sword.

Posted by: johng1 | May 20, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Darn right, I posted a pic! In a civilization that is being deemed "too politically correct", this is yet another step in the WRONG direction. There is a very definite line that is being drawn by Muslims here, and that line crosses out yet another right held dearly by Western culture. What's next? Should I not eat a hamburger for fear of insulting the Hindu religion? The non-Muslims objecting to this movement should at least be honest with their objection and simply say. "We are afraid of violent repercussions as threatened in the past by certain Muslims." At least then I could call you an HONEST coward.

The quran does NOT forbid non-beleivers to draw Muhammed, and that's what really irks me. This is yet another overreaction to an imaginary stretch of the actual truth. And these pansy cartoonists are laying down and taking it. For them It's no problem to insult a non-violent status quo. But face them against something actual and real and they run like rabbits being chased by children.

Posted by: bond2 | May 20, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like they're just afraid of being killed. I'm not. Here's a picture of Mohammed wearing a white robe in a snowstorm:


Posted by: argh2 | May 20, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Morning Squirtz posted the best Mohammed toon months ago.

Posted by: slimredninja | May 20, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

In the spirit of South Park, here's a good "is he or isn't he?" take from the conservative daily "Hope n' Change Cartoons."

Posted by: Printdevil | May 20, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I suppose sit-ins at the the whites-only lunch counter are just stunts, too, and these noble cartoonists would oppose them. Or the display of Piss Christ; oh yes I recall well the editorial outcry against displaying that piece of art.

What a pack of cowards these people are. Take note Americans - violence works to silence the press.

Posted by: michaelmagnus9 | May 20, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I am astonished and enraged by the cowardice and excuse-making here. If you cannot see the difference between organized murder and a protest AGAINST it, you are part of the problem. Shame! Especially YOU, Molly. Shame!

Posted by: ultrafem | May 20, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

"Past AAEC president Ted Rall" is all you really need to know. The man who had no problems depicting the 9/11 widows as greedy vultures and spent the entirety of the Bush administration vilifying everyone to the Right of himself is suddenly concerned about "provoking anger"?

I'm not surprised that a man who would blame 9/11 on Americans would decide against criticizing Islam's most aggressive, freedom-hating adherents.

Here's mine, for the record:

Posted by: mysterycycle | May 20, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

shame on you.

Posted by: mehmoodlaiba | May 20, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

we can expect same thing from you characterless poelples so called cartoonist.

every one have freedom of right to say any thing.

Posted by: mehmoodlaiba | May 20, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Are the followers of the Islamic faith that weak in their belief? Do they really feel that the drawing or depiction of Mohammed will lead to massive idol worship of the man who revealed this religion? Come's time the Islamic faith come to grips with itself and focus more on being a personal religion and rehabilitating its followers. They need to salvage their reputation from a religion of terror and pettiness--to something more substantial.

"Be the change...that you want to see in the world..." Mohandas Gandhi.


Posted by: shalshah | May 20, 2010 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Cluck, cluck... cluck. Well strong words are the only words fit for describing such weak, sissified, chicken-shyte, cowardly, afraid-to-put-their-money-where-their-mouth-is, so called "editorial cartoonists." I've never read such a bunch of excuses and dodges. Now we know how some of the older one's avoided Viet Nam service.

The pen may be mightier than the sword, but you'd never know it from these clowns. They have put their pens in their pockets while putting their heads in the sand.

Not that it's an example to such cowards, but I've drawn my cartoons. And I'd draw more if I could figure out how to draw a passable sheep... The pro's should be leading the way on this though, showing how it's done, and standing up for one of their own. The fact that they are too afraid speaks volumes about them, or what they lack.

Maybe somebody could suggest that the "grow a pair."

Posted by: mccheese0 | May 21, 2010 12:34 AM | Report abuse

Go to India and visit any ancient temple. You will find that the centuries old sculptures were broken and destroyed by the muslim invaders and conquerors because of a couple of reasons. Firstly, depiction of divinity in any art form is "sacrilige" per Islam.."worship of idols and sybols". Second, by destroying their temples, plundering their wealth and raping their women proves the "might" of Islam.

To just get a glimpse of this mentality, here is one example:

However, somebody drawing a cartoon of a pedophile murderer is so offensive to these folks that they call for killing these poor cartoonists!!

Posted by: roberto3 | May 21, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

A caroonist sure wouldn't want to be "childish and needlessly provocative". Would they??? Isn't that what makes their best cartoons?

The cartoonist's statements will be up there with all of history's policies of apeasement.

Oh but they signed petition??? Who the hell are they going to present it to? Bin Laden? They need to be provocative or get out of the business.

Play safe! Make cartoons about American leaders and leaders of Isreal. Make cartoons about Pat Robinson...because it is safe! They won't hurt you.

The 12 cartoonists are cowards!

Posted by: aagatton | May 21, 2010 9:34 PM | Report abuse

The new year approaching, click in. Let's facelift bar!
====== =====
fr ee sh i pp ing

(jordan shoes) $32

(air max) $34
++++ ++++++++++



▍ ★∴
   ....▍▍....█▍ ☆ ★∵ ..../

Posted by: itkonlyyou77 | May 23, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company