I was super-intrigued that Victor Navasky apparently chose not to reprint the Jyllands-Posten Muhammed cartoons in his book of reviews and essays about various political cartoonists and related issues. It makes sense to me, but not for the reasons cited: I'm not sure seeing the cartoons is as necessary as it was when that story broke. I don't mean that in the "it's google-able way" but straight up the value of seeing that work. That was always a key element of that story to me: seeing these images at that time seemed like it would have been a key step in letting people know about the sheer lunacy of what was going on, and was absolutely justified -- nearly every news organization blinked.
↧