Last week Ricky Gervais was forced to apologise for using a particular word to describe people he considered stupid. This week Jimmy Carr withdrew a tweet and apologised for its insensitivity and poor timing.
In our turbulent world, there’s something of a crusade underway. The chattering ranks of the media and professional commentators are on a mission to rid all communications of any content deemed offensive. To anybody. Scripts, ads, jokes and articles have all become subject to rampant scrutiny and ‘offensive’ elements must be exposed and eradicated. No problem, right? After all, who wants to be offended?
Well, I do.
First, let me try to define offensiveness. It’s a mobile notion and, of course, completely subjective. You may be offended by public nakedness, I may feel affronted by cucumbers – it’s almost impossible to point to a word, image or idea and confirm it as universally offensive or inoffensive. In fact, when we talk about offensive material, we’re actually referring to one person’s statement to which another takes a dislike. But the potential for ‘offense’ is present in everything we say, create, write or do. There will always be someone who objects to being exposed to any activity.
When the comedy musical ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera’ was staged in Bradford, a religious group, ‘Christian Voice’, marched on the theatre and demanded the show was banned on the grounds that it offended and insulted their faith. However, the show sold well and even won awards, so obviously there were many people who were keen on its content or at least didn’t mind being offended. Withdrawing the performance on the grounds that a few folk objected to it would have been perverse and unfair. Fortunately the production went ahead, otherwise a precedent may well have been set, allowing CV to have any number of creative works abolished if they ran contrary to their beliefs. This is the danger and pointlessness at the heart of a battle against offensiveness.
That said, we must not confuse offensive behaviour with cruelty. Making statements which satirise, mock or criticise a general grouping or ideology may be offensive, but they are the natural and fair use of our freedom of expression. Cruel or threatening outpourings are entirely different. Stating an objection to homosexuality and asserting it to be immoral or unnatural is unenlightened and even offensive, but a person has the right to express and hold the view. If that person then makes it their business to focus on a specific gay man or woman, stating they are ugly, vile, disgusting or in some way sub-human – or advocates physical action against gay people – they are breaking out of the freedom to offend and becoming cruel and threatening. This is rightly illegal and unacceptable. ‘Offensive’ statements may shock, but they almost never detract from the wellbeing and quality of an individual’s life. Any communications which do, are bullying and sinister, going
beyond offense to become menacing intrusions.
In 1977, Sex Pistols released ‘God Save The Queen’. The lyrics contained no swearing or sexual references, but were deeply critical of the monarchy. It was also perceived (inaccurately) the band was calling the Queen a moron. It seems ridiculous in the modern era, but this caused widespread offense at the time and the record was ‘prohibited’ from reaching the top of the charts in Silver Jubilee week. Today, of course, we would accept the group were merely exercising their right to protest, musically and politically. In short, they were entitled to offend.
The Gervais word was certainly juvenile and Carr’s message badly thought through, but were they offensive? And if they were, does that matter?
In our turbulent world, there’s something of a crusade underway. The chattering ranks of the media and professional commentators are on a mission to rid all communications of any content deemed offensive. To anybody. Scripts, ads, jokes and articles have all become subject to rampant scrutiny and ‘offensive’ elements must be exposed and eradicated. No problem, right? After all, who wants to be offended?
Well, I do.
First, let me try to define offensiveness. It’s a mobile notion and, of course, completely subjective. You may be offended by public nakedness, I may feel affronted by cucumbers – it’s almost impossible to point to a word, image or idea and confirm it as universally offensive or inoffensive. In fact, when we talk about offensive material, we’re actually referring to one person’s statement to which another takes a dislike. But the potential for ‘offense’ is present in everything we say, create, write or do. There will always be someone who objects to being exposed to any activity.
When the comedy musical ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera’ was staged in Bradford, a religious group, ‘Christian Voice’, marched on the theatre and demanded the show was banned on the grounds that it offended and insulted their faith. However, the show sold well and even won awards, so obviously there were many people who were keen on its content or at least didn’t mind being offended. Withdrawing the performance on the grounds that a few folk objected to it would have been perverse and unfair. Fortunately the production went ahead, otherwise a precedent may well have been set, allowing CV to have any number of creative works abolished if they ran contrary to their beliefs. This is the danger and pointlessness at the heart of a battle against offensiveness.
That said, we must not confuse offensive behaviour with cruelty. Making statements which satirise, mock or criticise a general grouping or ideology may be offensive, but they are the natural and fair use of our freedom of expression. Cruel or threatening outpourings are entirely different. Stating an objection to homosexuality and asserting it to be immoral or unnatural is unenlightened and even offensive, but a person has the right to express and hold the view. If that person then makes it their business to focus on a specific gay man or woman, stating they are ugly, vile, disgusting or in some way sub-human – or advocates physical action against gay people – they are breaking out of the freedom to offend and becoming cruel and threatening. This is rightly illegal and unacceptable. ‘Offensive’ statements may shock, but they almost never detract from the wellbeing and quality of an individual’s life. Any communications which do, are bullying and sinister, going
beyond offense to become menacing intrusions.
In 1977, Sex Pistols released ‘God Save The Queen’. The lyrics contained no swearing or sexual references, but were deeply critical of the monarchy. It was also perceived (inaccurately) the band was calling the Queen a moron. It seems ridiculous in the modern era, but this caused widespread offense at the time and the record was ‘prohibited’ from reaching the top of the charts in Silver Jubilee week. Today, of course, we would accept the group were merely exercising their right to protest, musically and politically. In short, they were entitled to offend.
I don’t respect Gervias for using that word. He’s an intelligent man and being childish and idiotic doesn’t suit him. Nevertheless, he was entitled to say it and entitled to face the consequences. Had he singled out an individual with Down’s Syndrome and repeatedly used the word against them, he would and should have been stopped. But he didn’t, he simply caused some general offense. Just as Sex Pistols did in 1977.
In a creative industry we depend on the freedom of expression for our very livelihoods. As luck would have it, we live in a society which values and protects this freedom and we should resist any attempts to diminish it. But this right comes at a price: the likelihood that from time-to-time we’ll read, hear or see something that offends us. Next time it happens to you, embrace it and enjoy it. It’s a symptom of being free.
In a creative industry we depend on the freedom of expression for our very livelihoods. As luck would have it, we live in a society which values and protects this freedom and we should resist any attempts to diminish it. But this right comes at a price: the likelihood that from time-to-time we’ll read, hear or see something that offends us. Next time it happens to you, embrace it and enjoy it. It’s a symptom of being free.
