The obvious reason is “for the ladies.”

It seems as though a fellow cVillain and UVA student by the name of Grant Woolard had played with fire in the not-too-distant past. His comic, Quirksmith, has created quite the stir. Indeed, O’Reilly had him in the hot seat for publishing two provacative cartoons.
Today, Grant has achieved Washington Post fame and has caused a major brouhaha in the professional offices of the Cavalier Daily: he’s out of the comic section of the Cav Daily because he ran a “racist” comic about starving ethiopians. The Daily Progress explains:
Nearly 200 University of Virginia students held a sit-in Wednesday night outside the Cavalier Daily, UVa’s student-run newspaper, to protest what they said was a racist comic strip…The strip, published in Tuesday’s edition, depicted nine nearly naked black men fighting each other with sticks, stools, boots and a pillow. Its caption reads: “Ethiopian Food Fight.â€
It’s dark humor in the least. It’s been called racist by some, but the uproar and national attention is fascinating. Grant wouldn’t return our emails. Click “Continue Reading” if you want to read Grant’s explanation…
Dear all,
I wish to explain my comic and the rationales behind its creation so that critics of the comic may know what they are condemning.
Despite what has been written about the comic, not a single source has consulted me concerning its meaning. So I would like to take this opportunity to, once and for all, explain this with my own voice.
What does this comic mean?
I would first like to disambiguate the caption, “Ethiopian Food Fight.†Let us examine the first word. Why use Ethiopia as an example, especially considering that the country is not currently suffering a famine? Although famine today has by and large been eradicated in Ethiopia, this problem has plagued the nation in recent memory. The devastating famine experienced by Ethiopia in the 1970s and 1980s remains indelibly imprinted in the minds of recent generations as of one of the worst cases of human suffering. Hence, I used Ethiopia not to perpetuate a false image of the country today, but to invoke a strong reminder of a hardship that actually occurred in Ethiopia and is still occurring in many parts of the world today. This was by no means intended to negatively portray Ethiopia or its people. Similarly, depicting the Irish Potato Famine by no means implies a negative portrayal of Ireland. As for the depictions of the figures themselves, there have been criticisms that they are unnecessarily crude in an attempt to disparage Africans. Browsing through any of my other comics will make it clear that this simply a consistent and distinctive artistic style.
Returning to the second half of the title, the term “food fight†was not meant to imply that the figures were fighting for food, but rather with food, as the common usage of the term suggests. In the most extreme cases of famine in many parts of the world, people have had to resort to eating what would otherwise be considered inedible in order to survive.
Therefore, I am implying that, in a hypothetical situation, were anyone to have a food fight during a severe famine, these seemingly inedible objects would be used as “foodâ€. This surrealistic hypothetical situation invites the reader to realize that what initially appears to be a joke reflects a sobering reality. For too many people in the world, this is what they have to eat to survive.
Does your comic trivialize starvation?
My comic does not trivialize starvation. Subject matter presented through the medium of a comic should not be assumed to be trivial. In fact, works such as those by Art Spiegelman, Marjorie Satrapi, or Peter Kuper, prove that comics can be a powerful medium for social commentary. Sometimes, the atrocities of the world are so outrageous as to render one speechless. At such times, comics can present the absurdities of reality in a way that other media cannot. This strip invites the reader to make a connection by presenting a hypothetical situation based on a serious reality.
The message of a comic must be terse by its nature. This, unfortunately, often lends itself to multiple misinterpretations. Needless to say, this comic has been widely misinterpreted and was by no means created to suggest that certain people are “barbaric†or “inferiorâ€, as others claim. As a comic artist, I feel that it is sometimes necessary to address sensitive issues. However, had I anticipated the number of people hurt by this comic, I would not have deemed it worth running. I am upset that, due to previous comics, Quirksmith has gained a reputation for being merely offensive. As any one of my fellow comic artists can attest, I have always devoted much thought, time and effort into every comic I produce. I try to construct a work with substance, so it pains me when the message is obscured by misunderstandings. In the future, if tackling a sensitive issue, I will exercise much more consideration as to what could potentially be misconstrued as hurtful. For those who have been hurt by this recent comic, please understand that I have no ill intent.
I greatly apologize to those whom this comic has hurt.
Sincerely,
Grant Woolard
Popularity: 3% [?]
Tagged as: Cavalier Daily, Charlottesville, Gripes, Questions, University of Virginia, UVA
Really!? No comments so far? Lets flip the switch for a second, in the conservative south and wild west country that we are now living in, if Grant drew a similar cartoon of say, Iraqis, Afghanis, or anyone else that happens to have a beard and on the occassion wear a turban (whom are all terrorists of course), would we have reacted the same?
The Hook’s blog has a copy of the cartoon posted. Seems fair to call it racist, or at least “country-ist” in that Ethiopians are apparently savages wearing loincloths.
Stupid, to say the least.
His other stuff offended me, and I’m hard to offend.
“Artist” is a stretch.
Judging from the three comics linked to above, I’d say those tries were completely unsuccessful.
I would be a rich man if I received money every time a cartoonist appealed to a certain exclusive artistic sensibility to justify stupid, offensive cartoons. Let’s call this what it is: a college kid’s attempt at intellectualism, which really comes off as a feat of mental masturbation.
Personally, I’m not offended by these, but then again, I’m not easily offended. At the same time, good cartoons pertaining to controversial subjects don’t require a 3 page treatise to explain them. Especially when dealing with touchy issues, it is incumbent upon the cartoonist to make his or intention explicitly clear through the medium, and not in an apology letter. Think Chappelle…offensive by every standard but brilliant and capable of mocking race in a way that forces viewers to understand the absurdity of racial prejudice. There’s a level of subtlety and calculation in those sketches that really isn’t present in “Ethiopian Foodfight.”
So Grant, either learn the skills necessary for effective satire or resign yourself to the fact that your cartoons will brand you a racist.
Either way, wank on, my friend.
that’s some fancy photo-editing you did in paintbrush. :p
Well put. When was the last time you saw a write up along side a cartoon in The New Yorker?
I sure hope this kid isn’t hoping to parlay this whole matter into a career. What I’ve seen is just plain bad.
sha nay - it was actually photoshop, but I have no idea what I’m doing
This site is too good to go the way of Perez Hilton. Please, no more photos like that!
Sorry I got tempted…
[…] you remember the cartoon shown above and our discussion; or, maybe you remember our critique of the Cavalier Daily when it published an article loosely […]