“I Am Charlie” emerged as a powerful symbol of solidarity following the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attack, created by Joachim Roncin. Initially a personal response, it transformed into a worldwide rallying cry for freedom of expression. Despite attempts to trademark the slogan, Roncin ensured it remained a collective symbol. The phrase sparked debates on identity and secularism, while its misappropriation by various groups raised concerns about its original meaning and intent, leading Roncin to take legal action against its political use.
The Impact of “I Am Charlie” on French Society
For the past decade, three powerful words have echoed throughout French society. On January 7, 2015, Paris was rocked by a jihadist attack that targeted the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. In the tragic events that unfolded, eleven individuals lost their lives in the newspaper’s offices, and a police officer was killed as the terrorists fled. This act of violence sent shockwaves across the nation. In the aftermath, Joachim Roncin, an art director, turned to his computer and created a poignant visual. At 12:52 PM, he shared a stark image on Twitter: ‘I am Charlie,’ rendered in white text against a black backdrop.
This spontaneous slogan quickly gained traction, resonating worldwide. In the days that followed, it morphed into a powerful symbol of solidarity, with millions of people taking to the streets to chant it. The image was displayed on prominent buildings across the globe and even featured on Google’s homepage. But how did this idea originate? In his book, ‘A Crazy Story: How I Created I Am Charlie and the Absurd Journey That Followed,’ Roncin, who now serves as the design director for the Paris 2024 Olympics, shares his story.
Joachim Roncin’s Connection to Charlie Hebdo
On that fateful day, you posted the ‘I am Charlie’ image shortly after learning about the attack on the publication. Can you tell us about the creation of this slogan?
Joachim Roncin: The creation was entirely instinctual. At that time, I was working in the art direction of the magazine Stylist. After hearing news of the attack, one of my colleagues informed me, and I felt compelled to respond. Drawing from my experience with visual communication, I quickly crafted that image. The words ‘I am Charlie’ just came to me.
Your relationship with Charlie Hebdo is personal. Can you elaborate on that?
Charlie Hebdo holds a significant place in my childhood. Growing up in the 1980s, I often came across the magazine at my father’s home. It evokes memories of carefree days and a sense of counter-culture. The creators of Charlie Hebdo have profoundly influenced who I am today. Therefore, my expression was deeply personal; I never anticipated it would garner such widespread attention.
Despite your intentions, the slogan gained immense popularity, becoming a rallying cry at protests and appearing on major global landmarks. How did that make you feel?
Honestly, it was overwhelming. I never sought that kind of recognition. I was astonished to see my words displayed alongside messages from global leaders, like President Barack Obama and the Pope, at Twitter’s offices. By sharing this message, I relinquished ownership. Those three words transformed into a collective symbol, belonging to everyone.
The Evolution and Misappropriation of “I Am Charlie”
You have consistently resisted allowing ‘I am Charlie’ to be trademarked. Why is that?
There were attempts to trademark the slogan through the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI). With support from Emmanuel Macron, who was the Minister of Economy at the time, I ensured that ‘I am Charlie’ would remain unowned. This decision was intentional; it allows the symbol to belong to all who resonate with its message.
The slogan sparked the debate ‘Are you Charlie?’ Can you share your insights on that discussion?
The phrase quickly became politicized, with some countering it by stating ‘I am not Charlie.’ This gave rise to significant questions surrounding secularism and the nuances of blasphemy in our society. We took our freedom of expression for granted, only to realize it requires constant vigilance and defense. The question of identity in relation to ‘Charlie’ will persist in an increasingly polarized society. However, protecting freedom of expression is foundational to France.
Over the years, ‘I am Charlie’ has been appropriated in various contexts, often straying from its original intent. Can you comment on that?
Absolutely. The phrase stands for freedom of expression, press liberty, and the right to caricature—core humanist values that promote fraternity and coexistence. Unfortunately, not everyone has respected its essence. For instance, shortly after the attacks, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s version, ‘I am Charles Martel,’ felt deeply inappropriate and jarring during such a sensitive time.
Recently, you filed a complaint against the National Rally for attempting to use the slogan in their campaign for the 2024 European elections. What motivated this action?
Initially, I maintained my belief that this slogan represents a certain ideal of freedom of expression. However, the National Rally’s appropriation of it for their political agenda goes against my values. Consequently, I filed a complaint with the public prosecutor—this is the only legal action I’ve taken regarding this slogan.