Mean or sarcastic?

[BT]

Meanwhile the controversy rages on at the HuffPo:

This is the print preview: Back to normal view ?
Yikes! Controversial New Yorker Cover Shows Muslim, Flag-Burning, Osama-Loving, Fist-Bumping Obama

Huffington Post   |  Rachel Sklar   |   July 13, 2008 06:20 PM

Who knows if they'll get this in Dubuque, but they sure aren't going to like it in Chicago: This week's New Yorker cover features an image of Michelle and Barack Obama that combines every smeary right-wing stereotype imaginable: An image of Obama in a turban and robes fist-bumping his be-afro'd wife, dressed in the military fatigues of a revolutionary and packing a machine gun and some serious ammo. Oh yes, this quaint little scene takes place in the Oval Office, under a picture of Osama bin Laden above a roaring fireplace, in which burns an American flag. All that's missing is a token sprig of arugula.

The illustration, by Barry Blitt,is called "The Politics of Fear" and, according to the NYer press release, "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama's campaign." Uh-huh. What's that they say about repeating a rumor?

Presumably the New Yorker readership is sophisticated enough to get the joke, but still: this is going to upset a lot of people, probably for the same reason it's going to delight a lot of other people, namely those on the right: Because it's got all the scare tactics and misinformation that has so far been used to derail Barack Obama's campaign ? all in one handy illustration. Anyone who's tried to paint Obama as a Muslim, anyone who's tried to portray Michelle as angry or a secret revolutionary out to get Whitey, anyone who has questioned their patriotism? well, here's your image.

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton called it "tasteless and offensive" and, according to Jake Tapper at ABC, another high-profile Obama supporter called it "as offensive a caricature as any magazine could publish."

The companion article by Ryan Lizza, who has written extensively about the campaign, traces Obama's early career and rise through Chicago politics. It's very long (18 pages!) and probably won't thrill a lot of Democratic party faithful, either, since it advances the image of Obama as a skilled and calculating politician who rose by becoming a master of the game:

    "[P]erhaps the greatest misconception about Barack Obama is that he is some sort of anti-establishment revolutionary. Rather, every stage of his political career has been marked by an eagerness to accommodate himself to existing institutions rather than tear them down or replace them....he has always played politics by the rules as they exist, not as he would like them to exist. He runs as an outsider, but he has succeeded by mastering the inside game."

Is it the New Yorker's job to write uniformly flattering profiles of Obama? Do they have a duty to avoid controversial imagery that plays off the most dogged and damaging campaign smears? Of course not. Still, as Tapper says, there are probably "some angry, angry people in Chicago right now." Not to mention Washington, New York, and maybe even Dubuque.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/yikes-controversial-emnew_n_112429.html?view=print

[Plane]

<<The article behind the cartoon:

<<The Political Scene
<<Making It
<<How Chicago shaped Obama.
<<by Ryan Lizza July 21, 2008>>

WhoaH!!!  TMI.  TMI.  Time out.  I just don't have the time to read that post.  It's huge.  However (and standing to be corrected by anything said by the artist in the post) - -

I want to revise my earlier opinion, simply because I did not realize this was an actual New Yorker cover.  That being the case, it's obviously a left-wing satire of the right wing's smears against Obama - - he embraces Angela Davis, who is still promoting armed revolution in the U.S.A. and they both venerate OBL and burn American flags.  It's a joke at the expense of the right-wing, crypto-fascist movement in America.

Hahahahahahahaha!

It is absurd to portray Obama as a Muslim and his wife as some sort of pistol-packing Black Panther. But this is the current main thrust of the Swiftboat attacks against him.

Hahahahahahahahah!

That is so funny !

I guess I can now suggest that the New Yorker cover is funny , since it is a leftist lampoon , the same cartoon would have been flung fecees if drawn by a right hand.

[Michael Tee]

<<I guess I can now suggest that the New Yorker cover is funny , since it is a leftist lampoon , the same cartoon would have been flung fecees if drawn by a right hand.>>

So I guess at this stage in your life, you are finally discovering the idea of parody.  A little late, IMHO, but better late than never.

Yes, plane, the idea of parody, the idea behind such things as the Colbert Report, where ludicrous ideas held in all seriousness by right-wing idiots are turned into comedy when repeated straight-faced by a mock-RW commentator, Stephen Colbert.  The same words that in the mouth of Rush Limbaugh are merely ignorant and infuriating are comic in the mouth of Stephen Colbert.

Once you grasp the basic concept, plane, you can graduate to literary parodies.  You can try Woody Allen's "No Kaddish for Weinstein," first published in, of all places, The New Yorker, or if you can still find a copy, look for Max Shulman's hilarious parody of "For Whom the Bell Tolls" as told or re-enacted by a drunken G.I. in "The Feather Merchants."

[Plane]

<<I guess I can now suggest that the New Yorker cover is funny , since it is a leftist lampoon , the same cartoon would have been flung fecees if drawn by a right hand.>>

So I guess at this stage in your life, you are finally discovering the idea of parody.  A little late, IMHO, but better late than never.

Yes, plane, the idea of parody, the idea behind such things as the Colbert Report, where ludicrous ideas held in all seriousness by right-wing idiots are turned into comedy when repeated straight-faced by a mock-RW commentator, Stephen Colbert.  The same words that in the mouth of Rush Limbaugh are merely ignorant and infuriating are comic in the mouth of Stephen Colbert.

Once you grasp the basic concept, plane, you can graduate to literary parodies.  You can try Woody Allen's "No Kaddish for Weinstein," first published in, of all places, The New Yorker, or if you can still find a copy, look for Max Shulman's hilarious parody of "For Whom the Bell Tolls" as told or re-enacted by a drunken G.I. in "The Feather Merchants."

Was it I ,who could not discern the diffrence between meanness and parody, or you?

[Plane]

" He runs as an outsider, but he has succeeded by mastering the inside game."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/yikes-controversial-emnew_n_112429.html?view=print

This strikes me as true , meaning that what he really thinks , wants and will do is an enigma.

A guide to what to expect from Barak Obama ,might be ,what he has done rather than what he has said.

[Michael Tee]

<<Was it I ,who could not discern the diffrence between meanness and parody, or you?>>

I don't know what you "discerned," but it boils down to this:  if you or anyone else knew the drawing was a genuine New Yorker cover, then pegging it as parody was a no-brainer.  To anyone who just assumed, as I did, that we were looking at a fake New Yorker cover, then based on that false assumption, it was a no-brainer to assume that we were being treated to unvarnished right-wing, crypto-fascist propaganda targeting primarily Obama but also the liberal media that allegedly "worships" him. 

My error, which in all modesty I have to say was a very small one, was merely in jumping to a hasty conclusion as to the origin of the material.  Your laughter, OTOH, was - - or seemed to be - - based on the concept that the cover could be one thing or the other, based solely on the origin of the material.  In other words, it seemed to me that you were unaware of the basic idea of parody and perhaps of parody itself, and were laughing at the very concept that makes parody work.

[Plane]

<<Was it I ,who could not discern the diffrence between meanness and parody, or you?>>

I don't know what you "discerned," but it boils down to this:  if you or anyone else knew the drawing was a genuine New Yorker cover, then pegging it as parody was a no-brainer.  To anyone who just assumed, as I did, that we were looking at a fake New Yorker cover, then based on that false assumption, it was a no-brainer to assume that we were being treated to unvarnished right-wing, crypto-fascist propaganda targeting primarily Obama but also the liberal media that allegedly "worships" him. 

My error, which in all modesty I have to say was a very small one, was merely in jumping to a hasty conclusion as to the origin of the material.  Your laughter, OTOH, was - - or seemed to be - - based on the concept that the cover could be one thing or the other, based solely on the origin of the material.  In other words, it seemed to me that you were unaware of the basic idea of parody and perhaps of parody itself, and were laughing at the very concept that makes parody work.

Delightfull , I have always liked Parody .

Unless I am very much mistaken you are presently engagued in unconchous self parody ,...

Which is of course the very best kind.

[Michael Tee]

<<Unless I am very much mistaken you are presently engagued in unconchous self parody ,...>>

LOL.  Aren't we all?

[Xavier_Onassis]

he embraces Angela Davis, who is still promoting armed revolution in the U.S.A. and they both venerate OBL and burn American flags.

========================
I know of no instance in which Angela Davis ever burned an American flag. She certainly has not done so recently.


Angela Davis has pretty much vanished from the political scene, so far as I can tell. This does not appear tp be a drawing of Davis, who was always drawn wearing large round glasses. I THINK this is supposed to be Michelle Obama, but poorly drawn. Michelle is not really all that well known at present, and I doubt that any cartoon of her would be widely recognized.


Apparently, both the Obama campaign and the McSame campaign consider this cartoon to be offensive and tasteless. This might be, but it is also clearly satirical to all but those who are unfamiliar with the New Yorker, which is unfortunately, a rather large group. The New Yorker, Harpers and The Atlantic Monthly are the nation's best magazines.


Chelsea Clinton was, in my opinion, never ugly, and is now rather attractive.
In any event, Limbaugh calling her ugly was cruel and totally inappropriate-- even more so than calling Rush a fat drug fiend, because she was just a young girl who was not an actor on the political stage and unable to defend herself.

[Plane]

he embraces Angela Davis, who is still promoting armed revolution in the U.S.A. and they both venerate OBL and burn American flags.

========================
I know of no instance in which Angela Davis ever burned an American flag. She certainly has not done so recently.


Angela Davis has pretty much vanished from the political scene, so far as I can tell. This does not appear tp be a drawing of Davis, who was always drawn wearing large round glasses. I THINK this is supposed to be Michelle Obama, but poorly drawn. Michelle is not really all that well known at present, and I doubt that any cartoon of her would be widely recognized.


Apparently, both the Obama campaign and the McSame campaign consider this cartoon to be offensive and tasteless. This might be, but it is also clearly satirical to all but those who are unfamiliar with the New Yorker, which is unfortunately, a rather large group. The New Yorker, Harpers and The Atlantic Monthly are the nation's best magazines.


Chelsea Clinton was, in my opinion, never ugly, and is now rather attractive.
In any event, Limbaugh calling her ugly was cruel and totally inappropriate-- even more so than calling Rush a fat drug fiend, because she was just a young girl who was not an actor on the political stage and unable to defend herself.

I like the New Yorker too. In the New Yorker I can depend on finding at least one interesting subject being examined in detail and at length I don't read it frequently but often enough to be familliar with their style.

I agree that Rush Limbaugh was far over the line to criticise Chelsea for her looks , this was in bad taste for  the reasons you cite and others. I don't want to see the children of the Canadates picked on this year either , unless they are old enough and involved enough in the campaign to be considered consenting as an informed consenting adult.

McCain has a busy blogger daughter who might be due for criticism , but Obama's children are too young to be subjected to that .

[Cynthia]

Outrageous SATIRE!

Shame on the New Yorker~

[Michael Tee]

<<I know of no instance in which Angela Davis ever burned an American flag. She certainly has not done so recently.>>

Of course not.  Doesn't burn flags in the fireplace, doesn't have a photo of OBL on the wall, doesn't carry a long gun, probably doesn't even advocate armed Revolution any more.  These are all elements of the right wing's lunatic fringe cosmology, an alternate universe where Angela Davis IS as she and Barak were portrayed in the cover drawing.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The fact that some people incorrectly identified the female Black woman as Angela Davis rather than Michelle Obama sort of proves my point that Michelle Obama is not yet well-known enough to be caricaturable. It also seems as though the artist failed to capture the essence of her image. That does not seem to be her current hairstyle.

[Plane]

   This has been so badly misinterpreted.

   Respectfull burning is the proper disposal of a worn out flag, in this scene we see First Lady Michelle Obama and her husband , President O, celebrating their purchase of a new flag while they privately and properly dispose of their flag that they had displayed till it was too ragged to keep.

   Michelle is demurely enjoying her second amendment right and seems ready for her weekly meeting with her well ordered militia.

   On the wall they still have the same portrait of Osama Bin Laden that President Bush put up , this drawing is not detailed enough to show the text of the "WANTED dead or alive" text on it or the darts in it.

    President Barak H. Obama Is obviously about to make an OPEC leader welcome , walking hand in hand through the rose garden and making nice in the most diplomatic way possible President O will surely get oil deliveries increased enough to lower the average Americans fuel bill lowered to comfortable low levels again. God bless the good hearted.

[Plane]

She is pretty , but caricaturists won't have any trouble.