Abstract
Shh, Respect Freedom of Speech: The Reasons Why Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Ismail Kadare Have Not Been Awarded the Nobel Prize Abstract The terrorist attack on the satirical French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, at the beginning of this year, intensified the unremitting debate over the right to freedom of speech and expression, as well as its limitations. Nonetheless, it was almost unanimously agreed that the human right to express personal beliefs, regardless of the fact that they could be in deep disagreement with or even insulting towards the values of certain individuals, groups, or worldviews, should be defended and promoted by the whole human community. It goes without saying that the role of intellectuals and, especially, that of the academia, in promoting tolerance, diversity, and dialogue is essential. However, this does not seem to have been one of the criteria on which the Swedish Academy based its choices, over the past years, for the awarding of the Noble Prize in Literature. Focusing on the literary contributions of Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Ismail Kadare, two repeated nominees for the Noble Prize, this paper will attempt to shed light on the reasons why these two “heroes” of free speech and representation have not been awarded the prestigious prize.
Highlights
The terrorist attack on the satirical French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, at the beginning of this year, intensified the unremitting debate over the right to freedom of speech and expression, as well as its limitations
Written by the editorial board of the newspaper, in this article, it was maintained that “media in democratic nations must consciously commit themselves to rejecting intimidation by Islamic extremists or any other movement that seeks to stifle free speech through violence” (2015)
Beyond the Islamophobic nuances, the debatable suggestion that freedom of expression is exclusively a western value, the Orientalism-rooted stereotyping of Muslims, and the indirect marginalizing approach to the non-western communities in the First World incorporated in this article, the Washington Post editorial succeeds to emphasize the importance of the right to freedom of speech and expression, both on a national and international basis. It sheds light on the prevalent intellectual and mediatic approach that defends the human right to express personal beliefs, regardless of the fact that they could be in deep disagreement with or even insulting towards the values of certain individuals, groups and communities, or worldviews
Summary
The terrorist attack on the satirical French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, at the beginning of this year, intensified the unremitting debate over the right to freedom of speech and expression, as well as its limitations. It is suggested that freedom of speech should be non-discriminatively defended and promoted, as an essential right of being human in a world that aspires democracy.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
