UPDATED |WashPost Runs Cartoon Depicting Drunken Bishop, Refused to Run Strip by Same Artist Mocking Muhammad
Updated at 22:51 EST (see bottom of post) | Wiley Miller's "Non Sequitur" strip is syndicated in newspapers throughout the country, including the Washington Post. To the extent Miller delves into politics and social or religious critique, it's generally from the left.
Today, the day before Ash Wednesday, Miller's February 21 cartoon was entitled "Divine Intervention" and depicted a bishop in ecclesial dress at a bar, with five empty communion chalices in front of him, being cut off by his bartender (see cartoon below).
It's obviously a gratuitous attack on Catholic priests, but the Post apparently had no problem with it. Miller himself is an equal opportunity offender, having drawn a cartoon in October 2010 that mocked Islam founder Muhammad. When it came time to publish the cartoon, however, the Post refused to print that strip, even though it didn't even depict the prophet.
Update (Feb. 21, 22:51 EST): Wiley Miller emailed me with his reaction to this post and granted my permission to append it as an update for the benefit of his take on my analysis:
A reader just sent me a link to your article on my cartoon today. While I agree with your overall point regarding the hysterical overreaction by the Post (and every other major newspaper in the country) over my "Where's Muhammed" cartoon (ironically validating the point of the cartoon by refusing to run it), I have to ask how you come away from this cartoon with the notion that it's a "gratuitous attack on Catholic priests"? Exactly what issue do you see in this cartoon that is being attacked? The cartoon is nothing more than a word-play gag. There was absolutely nothing of editorial commentary intended in it.
As you noted, I'm not shy about satirizing big targets in society, but it simply is not the case in this instance. If I was going to "attack" the Catholic church, it would have been more obvious and clearly on a specific issue. I don't do "gratuitous attacks" on any specific religion. On religion in general, sure. But if there's something to hit a specific religion on, I will attack that issue, not the religion itself.
I hope this clears things up for you. It never ceases to amaze me what people will read into a simple cartoon. Such is the abstract nature of the beast, I suppose, but more often than not, as Freud famously said, a cigar is just a cigar.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
That's because they're chicken shiite.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:28pm.
The Catholic (and other Christian religions) gave up killing their enemies 700 or 800 years ago.
Mooooooooooslems, on the other hand, still love to kill, kill, kill, and they need very little reason. Maybe 700 or 800 more years and these barbaric fools will move into the 21st century, but I ain't counting on it.
Aloha, gang, from an
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 8:27pm.
Aloha, gang, from an afternoon off over here in Asia/Hawaii....................I see that my 'boyz' are all over this shiite!!! And I've been trying to make a comment on the riots and mayhem going on in Afganistan due to some horrific abuse of the Koran, or Quran, written by Mohemmend, or Muhammed, as a life/religious guideline for moooooooooooooooooslems, or muuuuuuuslims, or whatever the hell it is.
Seems like these guy just LOVE chaos, mayhem, disorder, rioting, violence, death, destruction, pain, and suffering - not only in their typical day-to-day actions of either killing or maiming each other, but also the Jews, infidels, and anyone else that they deem to be the enemy of the 'religion of peace'. And then - if they ever HEAR of some Quran 'desecration', they just go off the deep end, and it usually ends up with more injuiries, destruction, damage, chaos, death, and misery.
For some reason, I can't recall ONE instance of any of us EVIL infidels rioting, burning, looting, destroying, killing, or maiming other people or other property for ANY instance of the moooooooooooooooooooooooslems destroying the Bible, or burning our flag (although I have yet to see them burn the Obama flag - now THAT might elicit a response from the REGIME!!! Boy Barry's thin skin, ya'know??), or threatening us with death and destruction, or any of other common crap that comes out of their depraved mouths and minds.....................although I DO believe that they are serious, which is more than I can say for our so-called 'leaders'.
Here's some more news on the Islam front.
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 8:18pm.
First, seems the Taliban frowns on the possession of satellite phones. Must be the Safelink plan of free cell phones isn't available in Helmand Province.
Then there's this, seems the Taliban's recruit class for 2012 has been found to be ineligible, at least for bombing.
I tend to agree with the author of the post at Blackfive, Islam is "a twisted death cult".
"Islam is 'a twisted death cult'."
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 8:04am.
It really is, UpNorth. The original aassassins grew out of Shia Islam, and I don't think that they have changed much over the centuries.
Check it out:
http://asianhistory.about.com/od/iran/p/assassinsprofile.htm
Well, it does explain a lot.
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 2:08pm.
The followers of the Religion of Perpetual Outrage are still locked back in the 7th century. And, I don't see them ever getting out of the time warp they're in.
I think the latest death
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 6:32pm.
I think the latest death count on the Quran burning riots is at about 80 people, which is similiar to a typical mosque or marketplace bombing, but more than an Argentinian train wreck. It's hard to keep up with those moooooooooooooooslems.
Dear Wiley Miller,
Submitted by Tim Graham on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 3:50pm.
I understand you think this is merely a "word play" joke. But you have portrayed a bishop complete with his bishop's mitre and bishop's staff being publicly drunk -- which would be a very big newspaper story if it actually happened. Then you have him getting drunk by tippling sacred vessels, which would also be scandalous. All that strongly underlined "set up" for your "word play" makes an anti-clerical impression.
At least you didn't have the bartender call him "O'Malley" so you could add Irish-alcoholic stereotypes.
It's a pun.
Submitted by BosTarus on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 5:37pm.
I think you're reading way too much into this-try lightening up a bit.
He asked the question 'I have
Submitted by Sude23 on Thu, 02/23/2012 - 11:29am.
He asked the question 'I have to ask how you come away from this cartoon with the notion that it's a "gratuitous attack on Catholic priests"? Exactly what issue do you see in this cartoon that is being attacked?' He was only answering his misguided question and we will lighten up when our beliefs are not being attacked on a daily basis. It's fine to have a little humor in everything but when there is such a thing of beating a dead horse and as a Catholic I am tired of it.
C'mon people. As a catholic
Submitted by golfer88 on Thu, 02/23/2012 - 9:50am.
C'mon people. As a catholic I completely get the joke he was going for here. Let's not get our knickers in a bunch because somebody portrayed a bishop as a drunk in need of divine "intervention"... It is no different than the cliche joke that begins with "a priest, a rabbi and a minister walk into a bar...". Whehter they were sacred chalices or not, he is not depicting that it was the sacred Blood in them. The artist is right - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar - though not when Bill Clinton is involved... :) The fact that the Post refused to run his Mohammed cartoon is the only issue here. Not that he poked fun at a bishop.
Yeah, I'm a Catholic too-and
Submitted by BosTarus on Thu, 02/23/2012 - 3:35pm.
Yeah, I'm a Catholic too-and this is certainly no worse than any of the jokes we tell each other in my family...
Sure Bos*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 02/23/2012 - 3:41pm.
Since I am also Catholic, I have heard many funny Catholic jokes. But they are "insider' jokes that we can better understand. THIS joke was meant to be insulting and demeaning, not meant to be funny.
Course, lets make a joke about Mohammed and see how funny that turns out.