By Jaye Bartell on 03/07/2013 01:15 PM
Brent Brown's March 6 cartoon raised the ire of some readers who found the visual reference to the Ku Klux Klan disrespectful and "appalling," even in the satirical context. "I think it is extremely disturbing that the KKK is referenced in a comic strip as though that organization's history is in any way amusing," one reader wrote. Brown told
Xpress that there is "nothing racial about it" — the comic explores the absurdities possible within everyday language and situations (such as a KMart closing down). Are some situations too heavy to treat so lightly? Does freedom of expression have a social limit? What do you think? Let us know in the comments field.
Subscribe to XpressMail. Free Sneak Peek. Every Week.
Want to know what's coming out in Xpress this week before the paper even hits the stands?
We've got your free sneak peek, along with deals available in XpressMail, our weekly email newsletter. (It's the best we can do without time travel.)
It is next to impossible to express anything without someone somewhere taking exception to it; this usually translates into "I don't like what you say so I'd like to suppress or censor it."
Regardless of how boorish, insensitive or unfunny something may be to some percipients, unless there is a call to violence or is somehow designed to incite criminal behavior, then it's fair game. Those who take issue with it, as was done in this case, are free to express their own views.
Even characters as reprehensible as KKK members have the right to free speech. As Noam Chomsky wrote:
"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
By Dionysis
03/07/2013