Freedom is not just for gatekeepers
JVL Introduction
Muslim protests against the film The Lady of Heaven, about Muhammed’s daughter, claimed it showed “disrespect of our Prophet”.
The result? The film being withdrawn by commercial cinema chains.
But, as Kenan Malik argues forcefully, who determines that a film is “disrespectful”? And to whom?
The film was written by Shia cleric Sheikh Yasser al-Habib. It deals with issues which are live – and divisive – within Muslim communities. No doubt it gives offence to some.
As Malik points out, “Debates about the giving of offence are rarely about offence. They are mostly about gatekeeping: that is, debates over who has the right to police communities and determine what can be said about a community and by a community.”
No community is homogeneous, and we give community leaders control of what can and can’t be said in their name at our peril: “They protect not the marginalised but the powerful.”
We, as Jews within the Jewish world, sometimes cast out as not “proper Jews”, know what Malik is talking about.
This article was originally published by the Observer on Sun 12 Jun 2022. Read the original here.
Film bans are less about offence, more ‘community leaders’ showing who’s boss
Pulling The Lady of Heaven from cinemas is a win for self-appointed gatekeepers of Islam
Loading article text…
who said “Religion is big business”? Lots of gatekeepers no doubt.
This is an excellent article. My only gripe is that Kenan Malik has so far failed to make any statement that I know of regarding the “gatekeeper” issue when applied to the Jewish “community”. Of course, this may be that he feels that that is a matter for Jews to address, not him. That’s understandable but in the end it smacks of the same kind of identitarianism that he is usually quick to criticise.
“There can be no freedom of religion without the freedom to give offence”. Well written Kenan Malik.
Great article thanks Kenan. Many ethnic groups like to capture their people, preventing them assimilating into host community
A really compelling and complex analysis
I demand the right to be offended.
Riding both Shia (surely as representing, even if not a representative of, Iran) and Sunni (Afghan Taliban). The principles of free speech are vital, and the devil(s) is often in the detail.
Excellent article. I learned a lot from it,
Talking of bans and freedom of expression, tonight I got an e-mail from the BBC to say that a message I had posted to its website on the drama Sherwood, about the murder of victimised Nottinghamshire miner, Keith Frogson, by a UDM scab, had been pulled because it broke the BBC website House Rules.
The only “offending” word must have been “scab” (despite the fact that scabs deeply offend me!)
An interesting read – the JVL introduction compares the points raised with the “no-platforming of some Jewish groups and the similarities can be seen.
Christian denominations encompass different interpretations of belief and (mostly) now exist in friendly co-operation but occasionally have major disagreements where sectarianism in Northern Ireland is still being resolved. Differences involve other factors than belief – with issues such as ethnicity and politics difficult to separate.
The political element meant that in NI one group were in government from the 1920s until the Belfast agreement and in a sense were the permanent “gatekeepers “with consequent violation of human rights. It suited the main political parties in the rest of the UK – for a time – to turn a blind eye to such violations. Worse – some in the conservative party even nurtured these differences which were “weaponised” (and they still are).
There are obvious similarities of Northern Ireland (as was) with some countries with two (or more) ethnic communities, one of which outnumbers the other.
Every religious/ethnic community has its divergent groups/factions with associated loyalties. Political parties unfortunately ally themselves with particular factions out of a mixture of ignorance and calculation and for them the easiest way is to listen to the gatekeepers. Those with the loudest voices are deemed (sometimes wrongly) to have the most influence on votes.
The MSM have their own particular stance – in regarding themselves also as “gatekeepers” – for their various reasons mainly related to intolerance. The more extreme the gate keeper the more publicity from some in the MSM.
It is unfortunate that in the particular case of this film – cinemas find themselves caught in the middle of this – and I guess just want a quiet life. Meanwhile the many diverse and nuanced Muslim voices are lost in the shouting.
As stated in the article – gatekeepers exist in every community – I remember attending a staff/student liaison meeting where there were a large number of students. Two or three stood up and complained at length about their course – which was apparently too theoretical and not fit for purpose etc. The rest of the students remained silent so I asked a question which put forward a slightly different point of view and was approached afterwards by a quiet student who thanked me saying “most of us do not agree with X and Y – we are fairly OK with our course but they shout the loudest.”