http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/17/world/europe/russia-pussy-riot-trial/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/arts/music/pussy-riot-was-carefully-calibrated-for-protest.html?hpw
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Article I- Pussy Riot
I'm pretty absolute in my belief of freedom of expression, so I would say I support Pussy Riot's antics. A recent poll (http://rt.com/politics/russian-embassy-pussy-riot-statement-541/)however, shows that the majority of Russians are not on my side, and, in fact, only 5% of the population thinks the band members should be let go without any sort of punishment. One could therefore make the argument that Pussy Riot does NOT support a silent majority which abhors the connection between Putin's government and the Russian Orthodox church, but instead are fringe instigators. However, that's not really the point. The whole point of freedom of expression is to give voice to unpopular opinions. If we only applied it to popular opinions, the whole idea would be bunk, because the majority opinion tends to be the government's opinion, and is ALWAYS the controlling opinion. Therefore, I believe that Pussy Riot should be freed, even though 95% of Russians think the band should at the very least get community service. Then again, United Russia is certainly getting the most international flack since they stole the Durma elections last year. When information about travesties is readily available, those travesties tend to hurt the aggressor more than the victim.
Article 2-
It certainly seems as though Pussy Riot was created with political, and not musical aims. Listening to the video, I couldn't help but wonder why a band with such bad music had to ascend to such a position of importance. Punk music has always been about un-melodically provoking people, so I suppose that this action by Pussy Riot was keeping with tradition.
I agree with the U.S. Embassy’s opinion that the sentence for the women was “disproportionate”. I feel that these ladies have every right to speak their minds about political matters and the fact that the Sirovaya “rejected the women’s defense that were acting from political motives” is just appalling to me. What else would they be doing? Causing hooliganism just for the sake of hooliganism? Unlikely. I do not find it surprising, however, that Western countries like the U.S. have taken this issue personally themselves. American always sympathize and root for the underdog. Perhaps it is because we are a country founded on rebellion and freedom that we do not take issues about standing up for your beliefs lightly. We are often criticized as a nation for getting to involved with other countries affairs because we love a victorious underdog. Russia, however, is probably completely different. I’m not too familiar with Russian politics but they probably see this issue completely different then we do and that is why 95% of Russians do not agree with them (or if they do, they may just be afraid of also being punished by the government. We will never know).
Article 1:
While it is definite that the actions of Pussy Riot were “politically motivated,” this does not change the fact that their sentence is, as was stated by Ashton, a “bitter blow for freedom of expression” in the country. There were no grounds for Sirovaya’s claim that their hooliganism was not a political action—Pussy Riot’s own protest song makes that point abundantly clear. Freedom of expression is still a relatively fresh concept in Russia, so the members of Pussy Riot should be all the more respected for making their opinions known in a place few have the courage to do so. Moreover, it seems that their sentencing has only strengthened the complaints against the Russian government, rather than refuting them. The Kremlin’s hair-trigger in regards to criticism is self-evident in this case, but unfortunately for them the charges laid against Pussy Riot and the now infamous treatment they received during their trial have made them into idols for Russian reform.
While this is definitely an issue of freedom of expression, I think it's equally important to take note of the fact that part of the reason for the protest was to express "anger about the relationship between the Russian government and the Orthodox Church." Pussy Riot conducted the protest inside of a church, and much of the decision to prosecute the women for hooliganism hinged on the fact that it was disrespectful to speak, dress, and perform the way Pussy Riot did in such a setting. The disproportionate punishment is glaring proof that the issue Pussy Riot has taken up is a legitimate concern. I'm not sure how the concept of separation of church and state functions in Russia, if that's a concept that exists within their legal system at all. However, it is clear that religious involvement in government goes hand in hand with repression of freedom of expression.
I have to agree with Lauren here. How can the judge (Sirovaya) possibly reject the idea that the protest was politically motivated? It was, obviously, completely motivated by politics (Unless shouting for Mary to drive out Putin is metaphorical for something else?). There was also public disrupt (thank you, roots of punk music) and (whether intentional or not) insult to the Church/religion. Do I think these women deserve a punishment as harsh as a two year imprisonment? Not at all. Perhaps a fine of some sort, at most? But, I'm not exactly surprised. When I think of Russia, I don't think of this thriving, blossoming land of the free where bouncing ideas and opinions is a celebrated or common activity (but what do I know about Russian culture? Should have taken it as a GE while I had the chance). I think, growing up in America, we have the notion of freedom of speech pounded into our heads, but I also think we're trained with a sense of entitlement and an almost delusional intuition that we're invincible to the justice system and our laws. I think it's this entitlement that trumps the true meaning and the true intentions behind granting Americans freedom of speech that takes something that should be really noble and pure and obscures it a little. Again, I'm quite the fan of freedom of speech, but I think there should be some thought behind it, some eloquence. I know I could easily get slammed with the "Well, it was THEIR voice and THEIR art" comment. Ok. Whatever. I just think that, in SOME cases, running around in a Russian Catholic church and playing punk music that slanders the government is necessarily the BEST option. At the very least, be prepared for some repercussions.
But, yeah, two years in jail over this is a real bummer.
I agree with the antics of the Pussy Riot being part of freedom of expression. This act is no different then an artist displaying a controversial piece of work at a museum. I'm sure officials in Moscow knew that something such as this riot was going to happen. If so, why didn't they mention anything before? They should not face jail time just for expressing their opinions, since they state numerous times that they do what they do because its an act of protest. Well at least after this scandal, people know how they feel.
Post a Comment