Editorial cartoons aren’t for entertainment
Our opinions page today contained two complaint letters about an editorial cartoon on that same page last Thursday. Two readers also called to complain about the same subject.
The cartoon, by Pulitzer-prize winning editorial cartoonist Mike Peters of the Dayton (Ohio) Daily News, showed a couple apparently attending a funeral, holding a program that said “Charlton Heston.” The cartoon also pictured a coffin, with an arm extended upward holding a rifle. The visiting man in the cartoon was saying, “He looks so natural.”
It was an outstanding editorial cartoon because it did exactly what it was supposed to do – it stirred controversy, jolted people out of complacency, and made readers think.
Editorial cartoons, unlike the cartoons on the “comics” page, aren’t about entertainment; they’re about generating thought and evoking a response. The Enterprise could have run a cartoon that was a take off on the stone tablets Heston held in his role as Moses, maybe saying, "Rest in Peace, Charlton Heston." How boring would that have been?
In the same way that it’s important that columns on the editorial pages take a stance on something, it’s important that editorial cartoons also raise eyebrows and provoke discussion. Editorial columns that played every issue right down the middle would be worthless. Cartoons filled with happy faces and flowers and nary a true commentary or criticism would be a waste of time and newsprint.
Some people thought the cartoon was disrespectful of Heston. I’d argue that it was absolutely respectful of his opinions and his hard-line stance against gun control as the former president of the National Rifle Association. I know a thing or two about the group. My own father was a lifetime member.
We’ve all seen the bumper stickers and the T-shirts that say, “They’ll get my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.” I think that’s a sentiment shared by many serious gun owners and, certainly, one by which Heston lived.
I’d like to think he would have “gotten” the controversial cartoon, and that it would have made him proud to know he was remembered beyond his acting for his hard-line stance on an issue he obviously thought was extremely important.
The cartoon, by Pulitzer-prize winning editorial cartoonist Mike Peters of the Dayton (Ohio) Daily News, showed a couple apparently attending a funeral, holding a program that said “Charlton Heston.” The cartoon also pictured a coffin, with an arm extended upward holding a rifle. The visiting man in the cartoon was saying, “He looks so natural.”
It was an outstanding editorial cartoon because it did exactly what it was supposed to do – it stirred controversy, jolted people out of complacency, and made readers think.
Editorial cartoons, unlike the cartoons on the “comics” page, aren’t about entertainment; they’re about generating thought and evoking a response. The Enterprise could have run a cartoon that was a take off on the stone tablets Heston held in his role as Moses, maybe saying, "Rest in Peace, Charlton Heston." How boring would that have been?
In the same way that it’s important that columns on the editorial pages take a stance on something, it’s important that editorial cartoons also raise eyebrows and provoke discussion. Editorial columns that played every issue right down the middle would be worthless. Cartoons filled with happy faces and flowers and nary a true commentary or criticism would be a waste of time and newsprint.
Some people thought the cartoon was disrespectful of Heston. I’d argue that it was absolutely respectful of his opinions and his hard-line stance against gun control as the former president of the National Rifle Association. I know a thing or two about the group. My own father was a lifetime member.
We’ve all seen the bumper stickers and the T-shirts that say, “They’ll get my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.” I think that’s a sentiment shared by many serious gun owners and, certainly, one by which Heston lived.
I’d like to think he would have “gotten” the controversial cartoon, and that it would have made him proud to know he was remembered beyond his acting for his hard-line stance on an issue he obviously thought was extremely important.
posted by Sheila Friedeck at 11:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home