Never speak ill of/joke about the dead?

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

Recently, as I'm sure many of you know, Nelson Mandela died. Well, shortly after his death, a syndicated political cartoonist and columnist named Ted Rall drew the following cartoon.

Spoiler: Cartoon

While it hasn't drawn a lot of attention (at least, not that I'm aware of), I have seen at least one person that I follow on Twitter criticize Rall for bad taste, saying that drawing that cartoon was worse that anything that was said about Ebert after he died, for the simple fact that Mandela was more important in the grand scheme of things than a movie critic.

Without taking sides, or agreeing with one person over the other, it made me think. Why is it that, after someone dies, stuff that was OK to say or do before they died is suddenly unacceptable, at least to some? If this cartoon had been drawn last week, while Mandela was still alive, it would not have drawn any attention. I see it all the time when famous people die. For years before Michael Jackson died, jokes about his child molestation charges, as well as about his odd personality in general, were widespread. It took at least 6 months after he died for it to become "all right" to joke about him again without getting glared at.

TL;DR: Why is it that when someone famous dies, people immediately not only start praising them, but criticize people for pointing out flaws that the recently deceased had, or joking about them?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Once you are dead, you can't defend yourself.

In theory, if Mandela was still alive, he could have seen that comic, explained how it was wrong, and then insulted the creator. Since he's dead, he can't fight back.

Also, there could be a thing with the timing of it, not the most tactful time to say this.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

I comes down to the equation of humor: Comedy = Misery + Context x (Timing / Expectations). If it's too soon when people have yet to come to terms with it, it'll be offensive.

 

[Zhukov]

A) Because dead people can't defend themselves from criticism. A live person can argue against what I say about them, or at least just tell me to go fuck myself. Dead person... not so much. It's a pretty cowardly act to fling turds at a dead person, doubly so if you didn't have the guts to fling them while your target was alive.

B) Out of respect for the feelings of their families/loved ones/etc. When someone dies there are generally going to be some people who are profoundly upset about it. Bad mouthing the dead person is likely to upset them further for no good reason. While there's no law against upsetting people, it's still a complete dick move.

So basically what I'm saying is that that cartoonist is definitely a dick, probably a cowardly dick and possibly an extra cowardly dick.

PS. What were people saying about Ebert after he hopped the twig?

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think it's perfectly fine to joke about the recently deceased, as long as it's not kicking them when they're down (and how much more down can you get). And this cartoon appears to be doing just that.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I think that rule exists to protect families of the deceased. If someone dies, talking shit about them is irrelevant. That is only going to hurt their family, which is the last thing they need. It's just basic human decency. It doesn't really have to do with the dead as much as with the living.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

A) Because dead people can't defend themselves from criticism. A live person can argue against what I say about them, or at least just tell me to go fuck myself. Dead person... not so much. It's a pretty cowardly act to fling turds at a dead person, doubly so if you didn't have the guts to fling them while your target was alive.

B) Out of respect for the feelings of their families/loved ones/etc. When someone dies there are generally going to be some people who are profoundly upset about it. Bad mouthing the dead person is likely to upset them further for no good reason. While there's no law against upsetting people, it's still a complete dick move.

So basically what I'm saying is that that cartoonist is definitely a dick, probably a cowardly dick and possibly an extra cowardly dick.

PS. What were people saying about Ebert after he hopped the twig?

I don't remember exactly who it was, but some rather visible member of the video game community posted a tweet a couple of days after Roger Ebert died, commenting on the irony of someone who said "video games can never be art" dying shortly after the release of Bioshock Infinite. I want to say it was Cliffy B, but I'm not 100% positive.

As for the rest of the comments, that all makes sense. I can definitely see where the people criticizing him are coming from now, which was my main goal. I still disagree about it being more acceptable to do it to people like Mandela than, say, Paul Walker, but I can understand about letting the family grieve.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Dont really care about Mandela. Though agree that some would be offended, but thats only if you liked the guy. Im sure there would be no one upset when they made jokes about Osama being dead. Any way, my issue with Mandela is people now ignore he was once considered a terrorist and did terrorist acts. Also he hasnt done all that much for Africa, parts of it are still corrupt, still areas living in mud huts and killing other tribes just because your from a different tribe. Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

My point is, offensive is just by your feeling for the person. So whether its wrong to joke about a persons death is down to what each person personal opinion of the dead person is. Personally i think you should make jokes about everything, other peoples opinions dont matter.

 

[Varrdy]

Generally I consider pretty much anyone to be fair game when it comes to humour as, if anything else, I like to think I am an equal opportunities piss-taker. So long as it's funny, it's all good.

That said, there is also the small matter of the "Too Soon..." rule, which is where the grey area comes into play.

If the person who died / was killed was a complete arsehole (i.e Osama Bin Laden) then no time is too soon - let the jokes commence while he/she is still warm, I say.

In the case of someone like Mandela, who may have not been a total saint but was a bloody good man all the same and a real inspiration to millions, I'd give it a few weeks / months before I'd consider jokes to be acceptable.

I actually had a discussion with a colleague about this a while back; why do we as a nation seem to delight so much in jokes about dead / disgraced people so much, even if they were good / great people? The conclusion was that "gallows humour" is a way of coping with the loss / disappointment. Many of these jokes really do push the boundaries of good taste sometimes but I wont lie - many of them are bloody funny all the same!

In the case of the OT and the cartoon shown, I'd call a definite "Too Soon..." on this one. It's also not even funny and wouldn't be in six months or even six years time. It's not even a joke or satire; it's a pretty lame hack-job on the character of someone who left this world a freer place than it was when he was born.

Not many people can say that.

 

[TekMoney]

Also he hasnt done all that much for Africa, parts of it are still corrupt, still areas living in mud huts and killing other tribes just because your from a different tribe. Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

He was a South African revolutionary and politician who devoted his life to ending apartheid. And you're criticizing him for not fixing Uganda or the Congo?

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Also he hasnt done all that much for Africa, parts of it are still corrupt, still areas living in mud huts and killing other tribes just because your from a different tribe. Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

He was a South African revolutionary and politician who devoted his life to ending apartheid. And you're criticizing him for not fixing Uganda or the Congo?

He lived well on his fame even though he was originally a terrorist. He did fuck all for Africa, except only in South Africa. Dont know why he is held up as some kind of savior when the rest of Africa is racist and corrupted. Same way the IRA are now in politics to solve their problems, but still shouldnt forget all the the people that have been killed.

So yes, he helped with apartheid, as did hundreds of other people. Still doesnt make him akin to a saint in my eyes.

 

[TekMoney]

Also he hasnt done all that much for Africa, parts of it are still corrupt, still areas living in mud huts and killing other tribes just because your from a different tribe. Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

He was a South African revolutionary and politician who devoted his life to ending apartheid. And you're criticizing him for not fixing Uganda or the Congo?

He lived well on his fame even though he was originally a terrorist. He did fuck all for Africa, except only in South Africa. Dont know why he is held up as some kind of savior when the rest of Africa is racist and corrupted. Same way the IRA are now in politics to solve their problems, but still shouldnt forget all the the people that have been killed.

So yes, he helped with apartheid, as did hundreds of other people. Still doesnt make him akin to a saint in my eyes.

How is criticizing him for not fixing other countries in any way valid? They're his responsibility because he's from the same continent? He did some good, but not all the good, so screw him?

 

[CrazyGirl17]

I prefer not to speak ill of the dead... unless they were complete assholes in life. Then they're fair game. Though it might depend on what one thinks of said dead person...

 

[Simonism451]

Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

This sounds so stupid that I'm fairly sure I misunderstood you, but in case I didn't, you do realize that the entirety of Africa was colonial at some point and not just South Aftica?

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

This sounds so stupid that I'm fairly sure I misunderstood you, but in case I didn't, you do realize that the entirety of Africa was colonial at some point and not just South Aftica?

I guess i meant that the parts of Africa that are doing well are normally old colonial parts. Where as there are huge areas of africa where nothing has changed at all. So him being considered some kind of saviour seems silly as the only change their has been are in post colonial areas, not non colonial ones. I just dont think he has done all that much for Africa as a whole. Granted he has started something that will be built on and in the future things will be better for all Africans. But i dont think he deserves all the credit he is being given. But thats just me.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Also he hasnt done all that much for Africa, parts of it are still corrupt, still areas living in mud huts and killing other tribes just because your from a different tribe. Its still pretty much the same apart from South Africa, though i would put that down to it being colonial at one point.

He was a South African revolutionary and politician who devoted his life to ending apartheid. And you're criticizing him for not fixing Uganda or the Congo?

He lived well on his fame even though he was originally a terrorist. He did fuck all for Africa, except only in South Africa. Dont know why he is held up as some kind of savior when the rest of Africa is racist and corrupted. Same way the IRA are now in politics to solve their problems, but still shouldnt forget all the the people that have been killed.

So yes, he helped with apartheid, as did hundreds of other people. Still doesnt make him akin to a saint in my eyes.

How is criticizing him for not fixing other countries in any way valid? They're his responsibility because he's from the same continent? He did some good, but not all the good, so screw him?

I agree, he did help with the apartheid movement in SA. But the news an programmes he has done amazing stuff for Africa. He hasnt. Not belittling his accomplishments, just those news/documentaries that are making him out to be something he wasnt.

 

[TekMoney]

I agree, he did help with the apartheid movement in SA. But the news an programmes he has done amazing stuff for Africa. He hasnt. Not belittling his accomplishments, just those news/documentaries that are making him out to be something he wasnt.

Okay, but you are criticizing the leader of one country for not fixing the problems of the entire continent.