The Copenhagen Post

Wednesday
March 17th
Banner
Front page News International Publisher ousts drawings from book on Mohammed cartoon affair

Publisher ousts drawings from book on Mohammed cartoon affair

E-mail Print

A noted US publishing company has decided not to include the Mohammed cartoons in a Danish author's new book about their effects

Danish author and university professor Jytte Klausen is fuming over Yale University Press’s decision not to reprint the infamous Mohammed cartoon drawings as part of her new book, ‘The Cartoons That Shook the World’.

Klausen’s book, due out in November from the publisher, examines the influence of the drawings on Danish politics, how politicians used those images to serve their own goals, and how clerics used them to stir up anti-Western sentiment and even destabilise governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya and Nigeria.

When the drawings were first published in Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2006, rioting in several Muslim countries followed, including attacks on Danish embassies and threats against Danes in general from extremists.

But a statement from Yale University Press indicated that while it was ‘deeply committed’ to free speech, it had consulted with numerous experts prior to reaching its decision.

The company’s director, John Donatich, said the decision was ‘overwhelming and unanimous’.

'All (of the experts) confirmed that republication of the cartoons by Yale University Press ran a serious risk of instigating violence,' according to the statement.

But the publisher is not only excluding the 12 original drawings from Jyllands-Posten in the book, it is also refusing to print any of the illustrations Klausen had intended to have accompanying her text.

Klausen, who teaches at Brandeis University in the US state of Massachusetts, said she fought to have the illustrations included in her book.

‘People think they know the cartoons and actually, by printing them, I'm arguing that some of them are Islamophobic. But if we can’t look at them, how can we discuss this?’

According to the New York Times, Yale University Press went even further than simply refusing to print the drawings. The publisher also required Klausen to sign a confidentiality agreement if she wanted to read the consultants’ recommendations used to support the publisher’s decision.

Klausen said she perceived the request as ‘a gagging order’. She pointed out that despite the publisher’s decision, the drawings could be found on the internet and in many other places.

Both the International Free Press Society and the American Association of University Professors blasted Yale University Press’s refusal to reprint the Mohammed drawings. In addition, the New York Times found that Donatich’s claim that the decision of the experts consulted was ‘unanimous’ was actually untrue, and that at least one of them advised against the censorship.

Klausen said she asked the publisher to include a statement from her in the book detailing her stance on the issue.

‘I never intended the book to become another demonstration for or against the cartoons,’ she said. ‘I hope the book can still serve its intended purpose without the illustrations.’

Comments
Only CPHPOST registered users can write comments!
damestjernelys  - All I can say is..   |2009-08-20 11:38:59
Kudos to Yale University Press on their decision to NOT reprint these cartoons! Enough harm was caused by them already..
wilmot brown  - Typical....   |2009-08-20 12:41:39
....."Yale"ow Bellies. What an amazing example yet again of US hypocrisy. Totally OK to kill a few thousand Muslims around the world in The War on Terror and to keep another few hundred locked up in Cuba without trial, but god forbid hurting the sentiments and feelings of them by reprinting some cartoons in a book on home turf.
I hope Yale University Press are being consistent in their approach to not printing any form of cartoon that might offend someone,. That pretty much rules out most cartoons on the planet. Or are they only excluding cartoons that might offend people who are willing to kill based on their minority views?
Freedom of speech was so hard fought for, yet so easily is being lost through such reactions to intimidation.
Cheguevilla  - To wilmot brown   |2009-08-20 13:17:56
They're just americans, they think that brute force can substitute intelligence, like during the Roman empire.
JFD   |2009-08-20 14:09:57
Mr. Brown:

Please allow me to interject. First, this is in no way a sign of "US hyprocrisy" based on your logic below.

1st. Yale is a private sector university and therefore the Yale University Press as a division thereof, is a private concern. It is in no way attached to the voting will of the American population and political policies of its government that who runs "The War on Terror". So where exactly is the hypocracy?

2nd. As has been stated hundreds of times accross two presidential administrations around the world, the War on Terror is NOT a war on Islam. Therefore "to kill a few thousand Muslims around the world" is not its agenda. The War on Terror is about keeping the World safe from hate-filled people who want to kill for no other reason than hate.

3rd. Yale declined to publish the cartoons not to avoid "offending" someone, but to avoid "instigating violence". So, I wonder, if it is so bad for Muslims to die in the War on Terror, is it OK for Muslims and non-muslims to die based on violence carried out from offended minorities. Where is your concern for the families of the 5+ people who died and dozens more injured on June 2, 2008 when the Danish Embassy in Pakistan was bombed as a direct result of the cartoons?

4th. Freedom of Speach has not been affected in anyway. No one is trying to take away Yale's right to print the cartoons. And Yale has the right to print or not print whatever they want. Funny how no one (except you dame :-) seems to applaud them for exercizing their freedom of choice to prevent violence.

5. If anyone is being hypocritical, it is in fact YOU. Here's why: You imply through sarcasm that the US War on Terror is unjust. Then you lament that Freedom of Speach was "so hard fought for (by the American founding father who pioneered the concept by the way) yet so easily is being lost through such reactions to intimidation" Intimidation, implying terrorism, which is exactly what the War on Terror is try to rid the world of.

It is of no consequence to me if you might beanti-american. My country has committed sins and hypocrasy in the past, so the hate line is long. But sitting silent while you spew out illogical, disconnected slander, I think I'll invoke my right to free speach on that and hope it offends you since you seem to value this.
 

 

Focus on

 

Failing the grade

A lack of international schools, especially those offering the International Baccalaureat...

 

Home sweet home?

Take part in the on-going debate over the quality of life for foreign professionals in De...

 

A gift in a time of crisis

The national government owes it to the rest of the country to promote growth in Greater C...

Copenhagen Podcast



image

 



JP International

The Tales of Hans Christian Andersen