Your Opinion: Thought-provoking art of cartooning
Friday, January 24, 2014
Several subscribers of the News Tribune have noticed with interest the letter to the editor about a cartoon depicting the controversy about global warming. The letter published on Dec. 29 was critical of the global warming cartoon depicting Al Gore hurt because of the severe cold weather being experienced. The issue is whether global warming really exists. The objection raised assumes that the cartoon is an editorial opinion. May I humbly suggest that if it is the opinion of the editor, the opinion would be that weather has an effect on business, not that the editor is for or against global warming. Nor does the cartoon reflect any political preference. Let us review the facts:
• A cartoon is a “caricature, an exaggerated imitation of a person, literary style, etc. for satirical effect.” — Webster’s New World Dictionary.
• A professional is one who “engages in, or worthy of the standards of, a profession.” — Webster’s New World Dictionary.
• A journalist is trained to understand the significance of a depiction of an event by cartoon. — University of Missouri School of Journalism.
• Any citizen of the United States may express his view of the cartoon. — Bill of Rights, United States Constitution.
• The temperature in Antarctica has been 135.8 degrees below zero. — Weather Bureau.
The art of this thought-provoking cartoon is a gifted talent portraying recognition of events depicting the conflicting views on global warming expressed by the public. Some believe that it exists and others do not. This discussion would apply to recent news that the United States Navy is now preparing to protect a 19th century claim of the North Sea for future commercial shipping and mineral rights. This might lead some to believe because of global warming ships called ice breakers are now able to break through the thinning ice for commercial shipping never experienced before. I see another cartoon coming. There also could be speed boats on the North Sea. Can you imagine that? Would such a cartoon be a caricature or an exaggerated imitation for satirical effect? The subscribers would know.
Let us thank any professional journalist who comments for the opportunity to show the difference between facts and caricatures, as exaggerated imitations, for the record without objection. I enjoy cartoons because they ignite my imagination blended with levity for an enjoyable experience.
As for me I have followed the pros and cons concerning climate change for many years and have concluded that the change is a natural occurrence that has been repeatedly experienced over many centuries.