spiked

June 23, 2008

Admittedly, I arrived at work this Monday morning a bit out of sorts. It’s the first Monday in the summer, news is flat, I’m down on the quality of work I’ve been doing recently, so basically, I wasn’t in much of a mood for cartooning today. Apparently this afflicts people in other jobs all the time, but for me it’s a rare thing. I like cartooning – usually. But today following a period of melancholy, I decided to shake things up a bit – to test my boundaries more than usual. Forget about drawing something on Stephane Dion’s Green Shift carbon tax or on Hamilton’s LRT proposal, I thought. The gruel was thin in this morning’s reports and I couldn’t pin down a newsy subject that was worthy of cartooning on… except for the passing of the great comedian George Carlin:

Perhaps to little surprise this cartoon was spiked. I went into drawing this thinking it had a chance since newspaper editors often enter into heated discussions regarding the appropriateness of printing swear words. I suppose in this case the very act of making people think of the words I’m alluding to is too hot for print in a family newspaper, even though they were the very words which audiences expected to hear George Carlin utter whenever he took to the stage.

George Carlin was arrested for speaking these words before an audience back in the early 1970’s, and even after it went to the Supreme Court, the words were deemed obscene and to this day remain unmentionable on American network TV. Still, he was a pioneer of pushing the envelope on a vast array of touchy subjects and legions of comedy writers thereafter were able to expand the boundaries of expression thanks to the trail blazing of comedians like George Carlin.

In a perfect world the editorial cartoonist should be able to use his little rectangle on the Editorial page to state what ever opinion he wants to draw on the same way a comedian uses a microphone to state whatever opinion he wants to say. The fact is there are limitations on both professions of satire with examples ranging from the no-no of drawing an Islamic prophet to the taboo of uttering the “n-word” in a comedy club. Making people think dirty words in this particular mainstream daily family orientated daily newspaper is apparently another no-no. I’m not saying that’s a good or bad thing because I simply don’t have the energy to argue my freedom of expression over this cartoon all the way to the Supreme Court, or more realistically the Editor-in-Chief.

As a father of two little girls I’m like any other well meaning parent protectorate shielding their ears and eyes from the dirty words and images of society and teaching them not to say any of those words if they happen to get through the filters. (I’m not exactly an advocate of swearing anyway, as it would take the severing of a limb or a similar calamity before anyone would hear me drop the f-bomb.) Eventually, my kids will learn that the inappropriateness of swearing is as mythical as the existence of Santa. When they move on in later years to their jobs be they in retail stores, factory floors, or seated at boardroom tables, they’ll hear how George Carlin’s 7 dirty words have become an ingrained component of English dialogue.

What is it with the English speaking world that swearing is so tolerable and pervasive in conversation off the record but so taboo when in print or when recorded? Does this go on in other world languages? My impression is no, but who knows? What I do know is that making people think of bad words in an editorial cartoon is a taboo. Fine – lesson learned, now back to drawing boring politics cartoons…and… rest in peace George Carlin.

—————————————–Update—————————————–
Related to the issue of tribute editorial cartoons, Daryl Cagle asks on his cartoon blog why so many cartoonists drew George Carlin arriving at the pearly gates even though he was an avowed Atheist. He should’ve asked why cartoonists keep doing pearly gates cartoons everytime some personality dies. Pearly Gates cartoons are lame.

Recently discovered is this ancient stone engraving which may very well be the first pearly gates cartoon in the history of mankind. From a cavern from the western flank of Arabah valley in Jordan:

April 23, 2007

A new book is out in the store shelf devoted to editorial cartoons killed by editors:

Amazon.com summarizes the book as an intriguing selection of one hundred cartoons, many never-before-published, that were censored or suppressed for being too controversial, featuring the work of Gary Trudeau, Doug Marlette, Paul Conrad, Mike Luckovich, Matt Davies, Ted Rall, Norman Rockwell, Anita Kunz, Edward Sorel, and other notable artists…

…like me.

…and here’s the cartoon he’s talking about:

At the time I wrote on my website: “This one won’t be printed in The Spectator. Editors felt the image was too lite to comment on the passing of the Pope. I didn’t put up a fight. Cartoonists know all too well that even the very act of caricaturing the Pontiff is verging on blasphemy in the eyes of some devout Roman Catholics. It has been sent out to other newspapers through my syndicate and it’ll be curious to see if anyone picks it up. I guess the other problem was that at the time of completion the old man hadn’t yet kicked the bucket. It’s bound to be an interesting few weeks to come leading up to the selection of a new Pope.“

* * * U P D A T E * * *

Here’s (sound file) an interview of the author David Wallis from April 20, 2007, where he talks on New Hampshire public radio about the book. He talks about my cartoon around the 6:15 mark. Transcript.

Here’s the story on the NPR website.

Pope Cartoons are one of those issues which always provoke letters. You can read other blog entries here and here.

Monday May 15, 2006

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Monday May 15, 2006

Who’s minding the store?

Last week’s game of political dodge ball over the unionizing of city carpentry work was more evidence of a city hall malaise that should have Hamilton taxpayers incensed.

It’s not just the potential cost of this screw-up that’s troubling, though that aspect is deadly serious. The more exasperating problem is the culture of listlessness that, on too many days, seems to characterize municipal government.

In the carpentry issue, city councillors and managers failed to realize a union drive was taking place until it was too late — even though someone, somewhere at City Hall had been properly notified about it. Has anyone heard about communications protocols? How about accountability?

We now learn that the union monopoly over the city’s carpentry work, much of which was contracted out, could suck as much as $10 million a year from public coffers.

Guess whose pockets that will come from?

This debate is not about the merits of unions. It is about competency levels in a billion-dollar-a-year corporation called the City of Hamilton. Who’s running the ship, watching out for the public? The mayor? The city manager? Council? Staff? Hamiltonians should demand answers.

This debacle is the latest tile in a pattern that is unflattering.

Just last week councillors were startled to learn that a $14.5-million blue box contract with a private vendor has never been signed — after three years. There may well be good reasons for this, such as ongoing negotiations. But surely council — the corporation’s board of directors — should be kept apprised of such an important file as waste recycling.

Last month it was revealed that, for 10 years, city officials never conducted the mandatory annual performance review of Hamilton airport, a critical player in the city’s economic development, and which is contracted out to private operator TradePort.

The city of Hamilton is a big operation with thousands of employees. As with any large workplace, a certain percentage of things “fall through the cracks, ” and many dedicated people toil in thankless anonymity on tasks and projects that are well done. This spring’s rollout of the green cart program, for example, didn’t happen by accident. Many hands made it a success.

None of those facts, however, undo the expectation of accountability at both the political and staff levels. Public servants answer to the public. Government bureaucracies are often accused of lacking a sense of urgency, of being more concerned about surviving than thriving.

An unfair characterization of life down at City Hall? Given the nature and cost of the carpentry blunder, many furious Hamiltonians will think not and will want to know who is taking responsibility for this shocking disregard for public money in a city so strapped for cash. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial, A16, 5/15/2006)