Monday, July 14, 2008

Forget satirical cover, Lizza's column is what should concern residents of ObamaWorld

Main Entry: sat·ire

1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly

I just want to sit that definition right up there as I write this, just to remind myself that -- I'm not losing my damn mind along with everybody else today!!

Here I was thinking, "Now you know they're wrong for that. They didn't have to slam the "bitters" or the Republicans that hard!"

In that quirky little way I have of looking at oh, I don't know - SATIRE, I saw them encapsulating all the things people seem to fear about the Obamas and skewering them as "issues" Americans maybe shouldn't be so worried about. You know, all those "issues" that keep popping up, forcing that instant and routine as of late, "chuck-you-under-that-big-ole bus" reaction. You remember those don't you?

I said to myself, "Self, now you know ObamaWorld is not going to find this funny - at all." They're going to see it as a full-scale attack!" I started ticking off in my head a list of the things I was sure would occur as a result of this cover:
  1. A whole lot of angry, divisive comments from Obama supporters, threatening to cancel their subscriptions to The New Yorker, berating the magazine and the artist with so many, "How could you do such a things?"
  2. A whole lot of schadenfreude, accompanied by anything from low snickers, to people rolling on the floor laughing, particularly from Democrats who don't support Obama and Republicans who, well, don't support Obama.
  3. A decidedly indignant, "no-chuckle-here," official victim statement from Camp Obama (Jeez! didn't The New Yorker know that it's absolute sacrilege to think, say, write or draw anything other than that which has been rubber-stamped by Camp Obama?!)
  4. A quick "It wasn't me" official statement from the McCain camp (though I'm sure they danced a little jig when they got their first glimpse of it!)
  5. Pundits and surrogates on the left, pundits and surrogates on the right, all of them trying to convince us that their realities should be our own
I was right and then some. Commenters everywhere are a little bit warm today. This, from a HuffPo reactionary:

"It is not satire, satire takes the TRUTH and shows an extreme absurdity of that truth.You have taken a MISCONCEPTION and tried to show it as an absurd truth."

O-o-okay! I really do get the first part of this, the second part - not so much. The "truth" in the cover is the way a lot of people think about who the Obamas are. Those ARE their truths. The artist has no misconception about that. Thanks to the mainstream media, talk radio and the blogosphere, we've all been inundated with these um, - "issues." Would that one and all had been so rabid about say-y-y FISA? NAFTA? Iraq? Campaign financing? The death penalty? Abortion? Grove Parc Plaza? But I digress. Look, this is just my pea-brained opinion but, this cover is not about the Obamas!

And this from an L.A. Times commenter absolutely basking in his schadenfreude:

"Beyond funny. I laughed out loud. After Sen. Obama's spineless performance this week... this strikes me as quite mild. He should be on the cover as the coward he is. That vote this week took away any consideration many democrats had for him being a " man of his word ". He should be a wolf on the cover hiding under sheep's clothing would be a more accurate depiction of the Sen. who spins and spins and rarely keeps his word or votes with the integrity he so vigorously defends."

Another HuffPo knee-jerker shared this rant:

"As of today, we have cancelled our New Yorker subscription. Although we get the purported irony of your Obama cover, we find that it completely crosses the line into outrageous prejudice and bigotry weakly disguised as a spoof. It's offensive, but our decision to cancel after decades as New Yorker subscribers is because your cover wantonly and irresponsibly fuels a malevolent ignorance with imagery that can easily be taken out of your ironic context..."

Now to whose "malevolent ignorance" might she be referring? Oh-h-h, I get it. It's okay to insult and demean others just as long as you don't even give the appearance of either questioning or insulting Sen. Obama. Too bad his supporters never believed in such reciprocity.

Nico Pitney, over at The Huffington Post, shared this email exchange about the new cover he had with the artist, Barry Blitt. In his update, he provided these other covers by Blitt:


I guess these can be considered satire since they have nothing to do with how people feel about the Anointed One. Let's be clear. Of course, the cover can be interpreted more than one way. But doesn't that depend on the lens through which one views it? And I know Sen. Obama has a little issue with the 4th Amendment, but doesn't the 1st Amendment protect The New Yorker's right to publish the cover?
Now I can understand how his frenzied flock might see this as a potential threat to the Big Coronation.

No really! Think about it. If all you had was a selected nominee, with a tenuous resume and an egocentric, calculating agenda, accompanied by a penchant for shifting positons and people upon which his support was built, surrounded by power-hungry handlers who will say or do most anything to get what they believe to be their marionette into the Burning House, you might be a little frenzied too!

What I really found interesting and connective to the cover, in my little pea-brain, is the piece inside - "Making It, How Chicago shaped Obama" - by Ryan Lizza. Instead of worrying about the obvious absurdities portrayed on the cover, residents of ObamaWorld might just want to be a little more concerned about how Mr. Lizza’s factual account has ripped off that crazy “Change You Can Believe In” mask their guy’s been wearing for more than a year now, exposing the typical, inside-the-Beltway/Chicago-style politician that is the senator from Illinois.

In my “No permanent friends, no permanent enemies…” post back in April, I linked to Skeptical Brotha’s, "Barack's Betrayal" post which offers an excellent account of the ties that bind the Changeling to the Daley machine and the politics as usual against which he’s been so vehemently campaigning. It is a stinging indictment by a brother who pulled no punches and definitely worth a
read.

And you Obama supporters, calm the hell down please. His road to the Burning House has been so carefully and cunningly greased that I'm certain, nothing short of him getting up on TV and cussing everybody out will keep him from sliding right on in there - particularly since most of America seems asleep at the wheel. And again, there aren’t racists around every damn corner looking to cold-cock your guy. And if there are - you’ve been living with them all along with nary a peep of this righteous indignation.

10 comments:

Sugar said...

GREAT post! I was with you all the way to the end when you said you thought he would win. lol I heard some "pundits" punditing today and the one thing that made the most sense was this. In a year when Democrats should have been a shoo-in to win, why in the world is the race so tight between Obama and McCain? Polls will see-saw over the next several months, but after the Bush Years, Democrats should be thrashing any Republican nominee and yet Obama is neck and neck with the "Old Man" in the polls. We'll see what happens in the end, but I think that McCain truly is the luckiest man alive.

Deb said...

sugar...Thanks! I know, I know and I hope I'm wrong, but I've just got this gut feeling he's slipped through because people weren't paying attention. We'll see. There's nothing I'd like more than a Fannie Lou Hamer moment at the convention. :-)

They're neck-and-neck because, great oratorical skills notwithstanding, there's only so much padding of a resume they can do. But still, they may have done enough.

No doubt McCain is the luckiest man alive! Who woulda thunk it? His come from behind gallop to the nomination was indicative, I think, of all those "fears" coupled with a genuine respect for his Hanoi Hilton days.

We've only got four months to wait. Just hope I can survive this deluge of "I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message" commercials with both my voice, and sanity intact.

Vixen said...

great site Deb..

Deb said...

vixen...Hey! Thanks. I so enjoy the conversatons over at Sugar's so I'm really glad you stopped by! Drop in any time!

A Shell of Kitty Glendower said...

Deb, thank you for writing about this, I could not bring myself to give it anymore buzz. But you did an excellent job. I like the cover, and I think I fit in category 2 of your list. Lately I have been thinking about ditching The New Yorker (and I am subscribed through late 2009) because they have been so in the tank for Obama. Some articles I wish I never read they are so sweet on him. Hendrik Hertzberg leading the pack. Actually, I emailed The New Yorker a few months ago about Hertzberg and never heard back. I repeat, The New Yorker has been in the tank for Obama. Your category 5: PREACH IT! PREACH IT!

Never have I seen a candidate who supporters treat him as if he is so fragile. It’s like he is going to shatter into a million pieces any minute now. How horrible it must be to live with an ego that fragile. If he is all of that, why do they worry so much. And when he loses it will be all about racism of course, not because he has been a fraud, a flip-flopping lying fraud.

Incidentally, I highlighted that Iran cover back in October:

http://egarooo.blogspot.com/2007/10/to-new-yorker-well-done.html

Deb, I am so glad you posted something. It was a long time between posts. I was beginning to worry. I should have emailed you. I’m so bad at it. You have been so open with me and I just let it ride. I always do that and I have been examining why, but have not found a solution yet.

Sugar said...

"Just hope I can survive this deluge of "I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message" commercials with both my voice, and sanity intact."

I know!!!!!! I think heard two of them on my tube last night within 30 minutes of one another. Arghh!!!! Even on the Tom Joyner Morning Show, I always flip to another station during their news lead in when they play that sound that chants "O-bomb-uh! O-bomb-uh!" I can't stand it!

Deb said...

Miss Kitty Glendower!!...How the hell are you??!! ("Shell of Kitty Glendower??" Gir-r-r-r-l, email me. We can commiserate over our "shells" together!) See, that's what I like about this blogging thing! If one of us can't bring ourselves to give an issue “anymore buzz,” there's always one of us to step in and put in our two cents!

While I've been "going through it”, I’ve been reading sisters, like you, Sugar and BLACKWOMENBLOWTHETRUMPET who all kept right on giving important issues the ” buzz” they deserved. Your yearbook post was great! I'm sure the uproar in the blogosphere helped in the school's decision to do what the hell they should have done in the first place! Brava!!

I like the cover too! No, I LOVE the cover!! Like you, I'm, unashamedly, in the #2 category. I left a comment at Sugar's saying, "To be honest, I snickered a little. No, let me stop lying, I cracked the hell up!!!"

I chuckle everytime I think about it - one of the reasons I just renewed my subscription. What can I say? Yeah, they stroke him, but I was reading them long before him and he won't spoil that for me. Hell, I may win that damn Cartoon Caption Contest one day! :-)

"Your category 5: PREACH IT! PREACH IT!

I know right!?! They're wearing me the hell out. I've been trying to cut back on all that noise, Roland Martin particularly.

"Never have I seen a candidate who supporters treat him as if he is so fragile."

Hey, getting him elected means no more racism, no more white guilt right? Of course if he loses, you KNOW that's what they're all going to say - Black and white.

I think they know, somewhere deep down, this man is sorely lacking. They figure if they can just prop him up for a little while longer, he can slide on in.

THEY seem to think thier purpose in life is to protect his fragile ego and he's more than happy to oblige them. Even if he loses, he's won! More contacts and connections, cash, more book deals, documentary made about him, worldwide recognition - you name it. And while I think his arrogance hides a very fragile sense of self, I think he'll come around to that same conclusion if the seat eludes him.

I hadn't found you yet back in October. You're right though, the cover did speak for itself!

Yep it's been awhile since I posted (started plenty though!). Thanks for thinking about me. So much happening, just been trying to figure it all out and move forward. Yes, you should have emailed me, but it's not like you didn't tell me a while back you were bad at it!! :-) I knew I'd hear from you or I'd come over to talk to you sooner or later. I enjoy our chats Kitty. Hope you are well. Keep "examining," the why's - I know I am.

Deb said...

Sugar...Yep, that's what all those "small, $10 internet donations" are paying for! I keep the remote close at hand too! :-)

I've gotten to the point that I don't even want to hear this man's voice! I wanted to watch Fareed Zakaria's new show last Sunday, but I just couldn't because Obama was his first guest. I went online and read the damn transcript at Lynn Sweet's blog and got the information without the irritation.

The Fabulous Kitty Glendower said...

Well I got my copy in the mail yesterday (two days later than normal). Once again Hendrik Hertzberg writes a piece in "The Talk of the Town" basically expressing that he would like to have Obama's baby. rolling my eyes.

Deb said...

kitty...I've still not gotten my copy yet. I'll wait a week and then call them. No doubt sales have skyrocketed because of that cover.

There's no stopping those who love him nor those who hate him kitty. I can't wait until this shit is over! And I don't want to hear JACK!! from the misguided who've positioned the Changelng to walk into the White House when he gives them all his ass to kiss by being a little, chocolate-covered George Bush.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...