On January 7th, 2015, a brutal massacre took place in Paris, France. The massacre was a result of strong, religious disagreement with the material cartoonists created for Charlie Hebdo newspaper. The cruel murder of the 12 employees working for Charlie Hebdo magazine was devastating, but also brought unexpected positives to a dark situation. On January 11th, 2015, over 2.5 million people and over 40 world leaders, met in Paris for a rally of national unity. People from all over the world showed empathy and compassion for the victims and the victims’ families. The rally also symbolizes the support for freedom of speech and fight against terrorism. The statement ‘Je Suis Charlie’ (I am Charlie) was used in the hashtag “#jesuischarlie” on Twitter and began quickly spreading worldwide. The powerful trending statement represents freedom of speech and self-expression.
The Je Suis Charlie movement has stirred up much controversy, claiming the Charlie Hebdo magazine depicts Islam and Prophet Mohamed in an undesirable way. However, I disagree with this false claim. First off, whether the cartoons created by Charlie Hebdo magazine crossed the line or not, violence is never the answer to solve problems. A peaceful protest could have occurred if people disagreed with magazine’s illustrations. If enough people disagreed peacefully with the company’s cartoons, the magazine would have most likely changed what they were publishing to benefit their customers. Secondly, I believe that the cartons created by the controversial magazine weren’t made for violent purposes. The cartoons were an act of self-expression, religious opinion (which people are able to disagree with), and freedom of speech through artwork.
The tragic massacre in Paris makes me reflect on society as a whole. After learning about Je Suis Charlie, I’ve been pondering whether parts of the world that claim they’re a “free country” are actually free or not. I knew the massacre of the 12 magazine employees could have easily happened in the United States, a place with “freedom of speech”. If people don’t speak up and act against these terroristic attacks, then they may continue to happen or even gain support. The ability to speak, draw, and express your opinions are rights that society needs to treasure and strongly protect. If people aren’t able to voice their opinions without consequences, the world won’t have free countries, we’ll have dictatorships.
I believe the background of the blog with Charlie Brown symbolizes the pain and distress that Paris has gone through recently because of the massacre. Charlie Brown has always been displayed in television, books, and movies to be a fun-loving, enthusiastic character. However, he’s frowning and looks defeated in the blog’s illustration of him. I think the purpose of having the sad Charlie Brown as the blog’s background wasn’t just to reflect on the situation, but to empower the students. The famous statement “Je Suis Charlie” is inspirational because it shows how millions of people came together to honor the lives and bravery of the cartoonist and self-expression. I personally like how the Charlie Brown picture is the background because it reminds me of my right to express myself through writing and it’s inspirational.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
feedback was requested.
feedback was provided. —DSH
LikeLike
Tagf, I’m going to break with my own tradition and begin with global comments (overall essay) first, then offer some local (paragraph and sentence level) feedback. My hope is that while revising to respond to the global critique you’ll make enough changes so that the smaller local blemishes will disappear. Once the post shapes up, we can concentrate on minor copy-editing matters of grammar and punctuation. I’ll still identify the paragraphs in my comments as P1, P2, etc.
Global Comments:
You clearly have writing skills, tagf, and you’ve used them to craft a credible first draft here. I hope I can help you see the need for revision, and that you won’t be too resistant to shredding what might seem an already accomplished version.
There is no good reason not to open with a claim about the slogan, “Je Suis Charlie.” Writers are often trained to delay the “main point” or “thesis statement” of an introduction until the last sentence, but usually this results in much wheel spinning and throat clearing while the readers are left to guess whether anything they’re reading will be relevant to their lives. Rather that lead with the massacre, as background, why not lead with Je Suis Charlie as a powerful statement of solidarity among millions who stand defiantly against terror? The details of the magazine, the cartoons, the rally, will be more relevant to readers who have already decided they’re interested in the slogan.
Who claims what is very unclear here, tagf. And your description of the “sides” of the argument is confusing. You can be right in claiming that violence is not “the answer” to resolve controversy or to avenge insults, but still be wrong in claiming, as you seem to claim, that the cartoons were not insulting.
You can also be right to claim that “a peaceful protest could have occurred” and still be wrong in claiming that the cartoonists assumed the reaction would be civilized. You also make a very dubious claim of your own that peaceful protests would have changed the magazine’s editorial position.
It’s an odd claim to say that the cartoons were not created “for violent purposes.” It’s hard to imagine how cartoons could be considered violent although obviously the reaction to them can be. Another challenge to your claims: what religious opinion do the cartoons express?
There’s no contradiction between freedom of speech and suffering consequences for speech, tagf. We are free to insult whomever we wish, but we can’t insult our boss and then complain when she fires us. Freedom of speech as a constitutional right is not a free ride. So: people can voice their opinions if they’re willing to suffer the consequences, just as others can react violently and suffer the consequences. Make sense? Countries still support freedom of speech even if provocateurs get beat up.
I’m a little surprised to hear Charlie Brown described (not only by you) as carefree and fun-loving. It seems an odd characterization for a character whose most famous catch phrase is “Good grief.” Dogged he is, and unfailingly hopeful, but certainly not optimistic or cheery. Hopeful, I think you could claim. And determined, even in the face of perpetual disappointment. That could still be inspirational, couldn’t it?
Local Comments:
Eliminate all expressions of what you believe, tagf. Essays are understood to be expressions of your opinions and beliefs. However, they strive to be more than that, and you reduce your effectiveness by reminding readers that what they’re reading is just one person’s guess.
Grade Code 3D6
Critique the critique: If you appreciate receiving feedback, tagf, please reply to indicate whether you found the critique helpful or not, and if so, how it was helpful.
LikeLike
This is not the grade you want, tagf. Revisions highly recommended. Leave a feedback request when you’re ready.
LikeLike
Sadly you never revised.
LikeLike