Whaddya know – Jesus & Mo Author alerted me to the fact that one of the Charlie Hebdo protesters actually did listen and did learn and did reverse her position. It was reported in the Norwegian weekly paper Morgenbladet.
«Dårlig informert». – Jeg har akkurat bedt om at mitt navn tas vekk fra listen, skriver Jennifer Cody Epstein, bestselgende forfatter og oversatt til norsk to ganger.
Også hun har endret mening.
– Min opprinnelige impuls var basert på noen alvorlige feiloppfatninger som jeg frykter at flere andre underskrivere deler, selv om de kanskje ikke snur offentlig i en litt pinlig form, slik jeg gjør nå.
Epstein sier at hun misforsto Charlie Hebdos oppdrag og innhold fundamentalt, og etter hvert skjønte at Charlie Hebdo var satire, ikke et forsøk på å utnytte «rasismen, islamofobien og anti-semittismen som vokser frem rundt om i verden».
Google translate with some tweaks based on guesses:
Translation by Harald Hanche-Olson:
“Misinformed”. – I have just now requested the removal of my name from the list, writes Jennifer Cody Epstein, bestselling author and translated to Norwegian twice.
She too has changed her mind.
– My original impulse was based on some serious misunderstandings which I fear are shared by several other signers, even if they don’t turn around in public and somewhat embarrassingly, the way I am doing now.
Epstein says that she fundamentally misunderstood Charie Hebdo’s mission and contents, and came to understand that Charie Hebdo was satire, not an attempt at exploiting “the racism, islamophobia, and anti-semitism that are growing around the world”.
– After some investigating and soul searching, I have concluded that my opinion was based on information that was lacking and, to be quite honest, wrong – even if the intentions were good.
So, good for her. If only more would follow suit!
Good news.
The translation isn’t completely off the wall, except for the final paragraphs, which don’t match at all.
I’m on my iPad now, painful to write a long text here, but I’ll make an attempt when i get to my laptop later.
I have now translated the relevant section to the best of my ability. The confusion about paragraphs seems to come from snipping different paragraphs from the Norwegian and English translations.
I am posting my translation as the next comment. Ophelia, if you wish, feel free to paste it into the main post and delete the comment.
“Misinformed”. – I have just now requested the removal of my name from the list, writes Jennifer Cody Epstein, bestselling author and translated to Norwegian twice.
Shee too has changed her mind.
– My original impulse was based on some serious misunderstandings which I fear are shared by several other signers, even if they don’t turn around in public and somewhat embarrasingly, the way I am doing now.
Epstein says that she fundamentally misunderstood Charie Hebdo’s mission and contants, and came to understand that Charie Hebdo was satire, not an attempt at exploiting “the racism, islamophobia, and anti-semittism that growing around the world”.
– After some investigating and soul searching, I have concluded that my opinion was based on information that was lacking and, to be quite honest, wrong – even if the intentions were good.
Good for her, but I wonder how she didn’t already know that Charlie Hebdo was satire.
Does anybody here have any info on why Rebecca Solnit’s name appeared on one list of banquet boycotters, then disappeared from the next?
Sorry for how this came out, i do not know how to use the HTML thing to get spaces between paragrafs
I guess Oates halfway turns, being neutral. Whatever the fuck that means in this context.
Norwegian
Oates snur. Den kanskje mest kjente forfatteren som skrev under på brevet, var altså Joyce Carol Oates. På Twitter sammenlignet hun forrige uke Charlie Hebdo med Adolf Hitlers Mein Kampf. Til Morgenbladet skriver hun at hun nå, etter å ha lest alle argumentene for og mot, forholder seg nøytral til utdelingen.
– Hvis prisen ble delt ut på grunn av «mot», så er den berettiget. Jeg tror alle forfattere vil være enige i det, sier Oates.
Pen ble raskt kritisert for uklarhet da prisen ble kjent. For hvorfor gikk den til Charlie Hebdo? Pen-sjefene svarte at Charlie Hebdo fikk prisen nettopp for sitt mot, og ikke for innholdet. De siterte samtidig fransk SOS Rasisme, som har ytret at Charlie Hebdo er den viktigste anti-rasistiske ukeavisen i Frankrike.
In english:
Oates turn. Perhaps the most famous author who signed the letter, was Joyce Carol Oates. On Twitter last week she compared Charlie Hebdo with Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. To Morgenbladet she writes that she now, after reading all the arguments for and against, is neutral to the ceremony.
– If the prize was awarded because of «courage», then it is justified. I think all writers would agree with that, says Oates.
Pen was quickly criticized for being unclear when the price was announced. Why did it go to Charlie Hebdo? Pen-bosses replied that Charlie Hebdo got the award for its courage, and not for its content. They cited French SOS Racism, which has uttered that Charlie Hebdo is the main anti-racist weekly newspaper in France.
Came out better than i thought. Looked weird in the preview.
Many thanks, Harald!
‘Serious misunderstandings’ that are systematically fostered and reinforced. CH’s style was a bit of a jolt when I first saw it. But the default position rationalizing Islamist bigotry and violence is a real ‘thing.’
The appeasers and dhimmis were ready in the wings. Whatever outrage turns up, they have pre-fabricated distractions and excuses.