Tweet
Capitalism Magazine, Bahamas
July 22, 2006
"Insulting" The Principle of Free Speech
by Joseph Kellard (July 22, 2006)
The New York Sun reports on July 13 that the Turkish government may
jail a novelist because she supposedly "insulted Turkishness." The
government tried to prosecute this novelist, Elif Shafak, in June on
the same outlandish Turkish criminal code that prohibits denigration
of any aspect of Turkish culture. The charges were dropped after a
prosecutor argued that "the book is a work of fiction and therefore
does not represent the view of the author," according to the Sun. But
a higher court overruled this decision following complaints from a
group of nationalist lawyers.
Both Shafak and her publisher speculate that the alleged
"anti-Turkish" part of her novel concerns comments a character makes
about the Turkish massacre of 1.5 million Armenians in 1915. In
recent decades, the Turkish government has denied the massacre took
place.
Meanwhile, PEN, an "artistic rights" organization, defends Shafak on
the same awful grounds as the aforementioned prosecutor, that is,
"Writers shouldn't be held responsible for what their characters say
and do," a PEN director said.
Actually, a novelist who creates a fictional character is responsible
for whatever that character says and does. She is responsible for her
character's views, since the character is her creation, just as Ayn
Rand was responsible for creating Ellsworth Toohey. But all of this
is irrelevant to the fundamental issue involved in this case. That
is, like the Danish cartoonists who depicted Mohammad wearing a bomb
for a turban, Shafak has the right to write whatever she wants,
insults or otherwise, and whether or not they are her views. If what
she writes insults others, this violates no one's rights, but to
prosecute her for this reason violates her right to free speech.
Those who ignore or evade these fundamental facts must then scramble
for rationalizations, like arguing that a novelist who creates a
character is not responsible for that creation. Instead of condemning
the Turkish court for violating Shafak's right to free speech, and
upholding that right, PEN tries to deny that the novelist is
responsible for creating an "anti-Turkish" character, in a fruitless
attempt to distance her from any connection to violating an elastic,
irrational standard: denigrating Turkish culture.
Like the feeble, so-called defenders of the Danish cartoonists, PEN
needs a primer on why free speech is an absolute. Meanwhile, chalk up
another strike against this fundamental right, at least in Turkey.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4744
July 22, 2006
"Insulting" The Principle of Free Speech
by Joseph Kellard (July 22, 2006)
The New York Sun reports on July 13 that the Turkish government may
jail a novelist because she supposedly "insulted Turkishness." The
government tried to prosecute this novelist, Elif Shafak, in June on
the same outlandish Turkish criminal code that prohibits denigration
of any aspect of Turkish culture. The charges were dropped after a
prosecutor argued that "the book is a work of fiction and therefore
does not represent the view of the author," according to the Sun. But
a higher court overruled this decision following complaints from a
group of nationalist lawyers.
Both Shafak and her publisher speculate that the alleged
"anti-Turkish" part of her novel concerns comments a character makes
about the Turkish massacre of 1.5 million Armenians in 1915. In
recent decades, the Turkish government has denied the massacre took
place.
Meanwhile, PEN, an "artistic rights" organization, defends Shafak on
the same awful grounds as the aforementioned prosecutor, that is,
"Writers shouldn't be held responsible for what their characters say
and do," a PEN director said.
Actually, a novelist who creates a fictional character is responsible
for whatever that character says and does. She is responsible for her
character's views, since the character is her creation, just as Ayn
Rand was responsible for creating Ellsworth Toohey. But all of this
is irrelevant to the fundamental issue involved in this case. That
is, like the Danish cartoonists who depicted Mohammad wearing a bomb
for a turban, Shafak has the right to write whatever she wants,
insults or otherwise, and whether or not they are her views. If what
she writes insults others, this violates no one's rights, but to
prosecute her for this reason violates her right to free speech.
Those who ignore or evade these fundamental facts must then scramble
for rationalizations, like arguing that a novelist who creates a
character is not responsible for that creation. Instead of condemning
the Turkish court for violating Shafak's right to free speech, and
upholding that right, PEN tries to deny that the novelist is
responsible for creating an "anti-Turkish" character, in a fruitless
attempt to distance her from any connection to violating an elastic,
irrational standard: denigrating Turkish culture.
Like the feeble, so-called defenders of the Danish cartoonists, PEN
needs a primer on why free speech is an absolute. Meanwhile, chalk up
another strike against this fundamental right, at least in Turkey.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4744