Now In Cartoon Form . . .

Professors-JonathanTurleyDr. G. Tod Slone, Founding Editor of the The American Dissident (aka P. Maudit), has sent us this cartoon. (I never realized that I looked so much like Ted Cruz in cartoon form). It is a response to the blog on the “Yield For Sneaker’s Bacon” sign controversy. The cartoon shows, in addition to my need for better fitting suits, that academics make for lousy cartoon characters because we can only speak in 100 word increments. It does contrast the pro-free speech statement with a caution posting about George Washington University’s policies by The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) that I was not aware of.

I have added an enlarged version to be able to read the cartoon better but notes that FIRE criticizes GWU for a computer rule with a rather open-ended standard. FIRE actually lists a number of such policies that are matters of concern. The “yellow” light is clearly not great but it is not quite as bad as other schools. I have actually been critical of some GWU rules, particularly on the loss of due process for our students. However, I am deeply concerned about the reduction of free speech rights on campuses. Indeed, there has been a decline in the value placed on free speech as limits on hate speech, discriminatory speech, and even simply political have been imposed on campuses. The creation of “free speech zones” is the worse manifestation of these new restrictive policies.

I have been periodically lampooned in cartoons and I never come out Popeye buff-like (more Pillsbury dough-like). However, at least the cartoon recommends our blog!

Professors-JonathanTurley

37 thoughts on “Now In Cartoon Form . . .”

  1. G Tod, Thanks for coming over and hope you stay. A cartoon from you here when so inspired would blend in well w/ the eclectic nature of this forum. I’ll check out your place.

  2. Thanks much, Samantha! Please also note the question mark at the end of the title: The Intolerant of the Tolerant? I wanted to give Prof. Turley the benefit of the doubt prior to submitting the cartoon. In essence, I did not know whether or not he was aware of the speech codes present at his college university. Of course, I was hoping FIRE had given it a RED-light rating instead. 🙂 For other such cartoons, see wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com. And I hope I’m not pushing it by revealing that site here.

  3. G. Tod Slone, good comment and good point. Tone is part of free speech, too. And I agree, there’s too much self-censoring, and we know why. With your inimitable independence, you will always be out front.

  4. As a critical artist, I am evidently different from most artists because my concern is far more about the message than the technique. BTW, I think those two guys (oops, now three guys) who criticized my depiction of Prof. Turley were very uncivil! Their comments should have been deleted by the Chief Censor, uh Moderator!!!
    Just joking of course. True, I did have a tough time trying to get Prof. Turley down on paper and true the likeness is not one of my best. Some physiognomies are easier than others. And, yes, I am an autodidacte. The problem with Crumb is that he really doesn’t do any challenging cartoons. For me, RISK is key. I like to take risks with my cartoons and writing. Every artist and writer knows what he or she should not sketch or write. Break the taboos, I say! Sadly, most do not and will not. Hopefully, people understood the slight conflict depicted in the cartoon between the words and the two signs. Evidently, I am against civility rules. But that’s me. The tone is the message is the tone. In essence, some messages simply will NOT be perceived as civil in tone. Thus, the chief moderators will end up censoring them. Imagine I was censored by the Academy of American Poets, yet had issued no threats or prohibited four-letter words! Anyhow, bravo to Prof. Turley, for he is a rare academic. I have sketched MANY cartoons on academics and poets and journalists. Very, very few of the targets would respond, let alone actually publish the cartoons.
    G. Tod aka P. Maudit

  5. jonathanturley:
    “I have been periodically lampooned in cartoons and I never come out Popeye buff-like (more Pillsbury dough-like). However, at least the cartoon recommends our blog!”

    We bloggers like you both ways: strong and outspoken yet soft enough to be approachable.

    Pillsbury Doughboy 1982
    http://youtu.be/ynrsuuDZcCg

  6. “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.” At a minimum, this cartoon is a variation on that theme.

    Free speech is “hate speech,” “make you mad” speech, “tick you off” speech, “make you livid” speech, “insult you” speech, “disparage and belittle you” speech and every other kind of speech that denigrates and offends.

    All of that is Free Speech.

    The definitively most upsetting and dangerous (for the speaker) speech was that against the King. Woe to him who speaks against the Crown!

    That is exactly the point of having the Freedom of Speech. To tick everybody
    off, including the Royals.

    The inmates have taken over the asylum.

  7. Well, I guess critical attention is better than no attention at all. The caricature is not very good, however. I’ve always wanted to be drawn by R. Crumb.

    1. Mike A – if you ever saw the documentary on R. Crumb, you would never want to be anywhere near him.

  8. Samantha, WordPress is alse set to recognize more than two (or is it one?) link. Remove naughty words or extra links and resubmit. Or ask someone to retrieve it from spam.

  9. Samantha, Is it possible that your comments were eaten by WordPress? WordPress recognizes a few naughty words, otherwise it eats posts just because and puts them in the spam file. No human is responsible for that (well, maybe the programmer, but not JT or his designee). If that’s the case, there is usually someone with access who can find your errant missive and restore it.

  10. I guess those who dislike the civility rule haven’t been on a blog that doesn’t have one. It’s too bad that trolling hasn’t been added. I was one of three moderators on a political blog. 2 of the 3 had to agree to giving a warning. Trolling/personal attack was easily the most frequent violation. It took 3 warnings to restrict the person’s ability to post for a month. Those who then made personal attacks via email to the moderators got restricted for an extended indeterminate time. Some of the discussion got quite heated but not with personal stuff.

Comments are closed.