How to be brilliant or infamous in a tragedy.

By Paulo Nogueira, from Diary of the Center of the World

Creating a cartoon about a tragedy like the one in Santa Maria is a task for very few.

It's easy to mess things up, and it's hard to do something good.

In the Santa Maria tragedy, we had both situations. The cartoonist Carlos Latuff, who became famous in Brazil not long ago after being accused of anti-Semitism, shone.

Latuff mocked the abominable behavior of the media in the face of calamities like the Kiss nightclub fire. A reporter tries to extract words from a relative of the victim at the funeral, in an abject exploitation of the grief of others.

Clap, clap, clap. Stand up.

Latuff gave voice to millions of Brazilians who, in addition to their sadness over the hundreds of deaths, expressed outrage at the attitude of journalists who disrespect the pain of others and feign, like charlatans, a grief they do not feel.

The flip side came with Chico Caruso, in Globo. He depicted a prison in flames, where people are burning inside and a sinister smoke is billowing from it. Dilma, always Dilma, observes from afar and exclaims: "Holy Mary!"

Was it supposed to be funny? Readers thought not. But a second stage was to come. In a ridiculously incomprehensible decision, Ricardo Noblat republished the cartoon on his blog with the addition of the word "humor".

The reaction on social media was immediate. Caruso and Noblat were simply reviled. On Noblat's own blog, readers expressed their outrage. One of them noted that the pair managed to unite supporters and opponents of the Workers' Party in the same torrential disapproval of Noblat and Caruso.

Noblat defended Chico Caruso, and above all himself, in anthological line: whoever didn't like the cartoon, was what he essentially said after a comical interpretation of the drawing, didn't understand it. The readers are stupid, therefore.

I believe that part of the anger stems from the fact that both are strongly identified with Globo. Some of the rejection that exists in a large part of society towards Globo is transmitted to its employees.

But the issue goes beyond that. It's clear that creating decent cartoons for Globo Organizations is complicated. Latuff's cartoon would never be published by Globo. The company's deep-seated conservatism ultimately stifles the possibility of iconoclasm, of nonconformity, from Globo's cartoonists.

While the reactionary views in Globo's political columns may not be shocking, because they are expected, in cartoons they appear as a stigma. Artists are expected to have a different attitude, one that is more open-minded, more provocative.

Caruso, in the 1980s, stood out as one of the best cartoonists of his generation. He promised more than he delivered, it's true, but he had a good career.

Now, he will go down in history as the author of the most reviled and infamous cartoon in Brazilian media in many years — partly due to bad timing, partly because he proudly wears the badge of the Globo Organizations.