That New Yorker cartoon: The Times tells Obama to get over it
The ed board weighed in today on the New Yorker's magazine cover — and in one of those rare moments, seems to agree with conservative commentator Michelle Malkin, who told the candidate to "grow a pair." From the editorial:
Let's be frank. People sophisticated enough to read, say, newspaper editorials are smart enough to know that the New Yorker's cover art this week — portraying Barack Obama as a be-turbaned Muslim and wife Michelle as an Afro-sporting terrorist with an AK-47 across her back — is a work of satire. But what about the millions of dumb Americans who will think otherwise?
Obama's campaign is deeply worried about the legions of morons who they apparently believe make up the heart of this great nation.
But, as Swati Pandey pointed out in yesterday's round-up, not everyone agrees that the cartoon actually works as satire. Here's Pandagon's Jesse Taylor:
... it’s like holding a satirized Klan rally by holding a Klan rally...with a laser show that makes a three-story image of a burning cross. A bigger, badder, better version of the thing you’re attempting to mock doesn’t constitute mockery, it just constitutes a gaudier version of the thing you’re addressing.
What do you think?
The point of satire throughout history, has been that the 'poking fun' or 'taking a swipe' at certain authority/political figures should be based in 'truths' otherwise not dared to be spoken. Historically, this has been the subversive way towards the TRUTH employed by satirical cartoonists, and long may that continue.....However, given that the point of satire IS to expose and exaggerate certain facts of reality, I remain at a loss to fathom the purpose of this particular cartoon?
I don't know what it was meant to portray. I guess it was a kind of ironic bit of reversal of the cartoon satire format, but the 'humour' definitely bombed for me.......no pun intended
Posted by: Posy | July 29, 2008 at 08:35 PM
I am a middle aged pair owning white person. I will only vote for Obama if McCain looks too close. I was furious though, when I first laid eyes on this cartoon. Satire, my behind. It smells like Karl Rove. Seems like a shrewd test of american public sentiment. Surely the editors knew there would be some level of row. Some of the comments indicate that a few of that significant portion of folks misinformed about Obama's religion (among other things) wrote in. My guess is that the group as a whole will take the iconography literally. If there had been a cartoon with different headgear, like maybe a yarmulke, I'm betting an organization like the ADL would have jumped into the fray.
The stakes are so high these days folks, and the -he's gonna hit me first- mythologies being tendered could very well be leading the world to a new war in the middle east. In this kind of context this kind of cover -so called- art choice IMO is at the least irresponsible for a peaceful intending or right on the money for a war intending, bully pulpit editorial control group.
Posted by: jgwiss | July 25, 2008 at 12:02 AM
Apparently, after laughing themselves silly over years of anti-Republican cartoons/images, very few of which could even remotely be deemed classy or tasteful (& some of which were extremely DIStasteful, especially ones dealing with Dr. Rice) the Democratic party is having a colossal collective cow over one (that's right, ONE) silly, goofy image (and from one of their own, for crying out loud). Well, as the great Gleason said, "How sweet it is!". Why did the chickens cross the road? To come home to roost with the Democratic party. Not being a New Yorker reader or a registered
Democrat, I must be one of those countless morons (or, other terms gleaned from Left/Progressive/Democratic websites: idiots, inbreds, mouth breathers, knuckle draggers, flyover staters, etc, ad nauseam) who just won't "get" this ridiculous image. A bit less of this WE'RE-the-smart-ones-they're-IDIOTS would be very much appreciated. My reaction to the image itself is to glance at it for a few seconds, forget it, & move on to something else, as I suspect would have been the reaction of most people if the sky hadn't fallen.
Posted by: Ron Hale | July 23, 2008 at 07:04 PM
If you offended by the cartoon you clearly didn't get it the first time and now can't understand why its funny after someone who isn't an idiot explained it to you. I understand that though, because jokes are never funny if you need it explained, and apparently most of you were somehow born without a since of humor or the ability to discern between oppression and, well, you know, a cartoon.
Posted by: Rep. Mike | July 22, 2008 at 12:20 PM
You can gripe all you want for or against this politial cartoon and no one has to agree with you in this country. Some of you are wanting to take constitutional rights away from others. If the shoe fits, it's time you took a reality check and lightened up..no pun intended.
Posted by: George | July 19, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Satire is based on "elements of truth. " The New Yorker says they were satiring American ignorance. But they didn't portray the ignorant Americans, so they failed in their objective. They directly satired Obama based on misinformation, not "elements of truth. "
Posted by: Christine | July 19, 2008 at 12:04 PM
We have approx (300) million people in our U S A and these are the Two BEST candidates we can come up with ???? Some of my local small business owners have a better grasp on reality
Posted by: justin Case | July 19, 2008 at 08:11 AM
The satire from the NEW YORKER must be right on ,why would any one be upset by this? Too close to the truth?
Posted by: nic schilder | July 19, 2008 at 07:52 AM
How sad.
It's not just a cartoon (and concerning that not very creative or sophisticated, by the way).
Those who say its comparable to any other random insults targeting previous presidents
or other presidential candidates must not have experienced or seen institutionalized
oppression. We live in a society that likes to think that we are so advanced and politically
correct, everyone is equal. Well, we're not. This is indeed a bigger badder version of a
burning cross, and it is so sad to see it at a time where change could happen, where we
have someone running for president who represents the mixed demographic that makes
America so unique, and who wants us to overcome our differences
....and who, most importantly could revive foreign affairs.
Just when the world tried to forget that this country accidentally elected and re-elected a
moron, there is yet another proof that we are also the "world leader" in self destructiveness.
How sad.
Posted by: maria | July 18, 2008 at 07:27 AM
I laughed out loud when i saw the cartoon on CNN.
In my view as an artist, it simply depicted Obama in what appeared to be the very outfit (including turban - see url) he wore to his father's country - Kenya recently. If the Missus projected an image as Mother Theresa (rest her soul), she would not have been portrayed as she was.
Sorry, obama supporters, but please realize these are humans and he is not a messiah or Allah for crying out loud!
Make the cartoon into anything else and risk joining our friends in Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, for instance who had a tizzy over the recent Danish cartoons. At least they could claim their religious sentiments were offended.
This is America! Build a big bridge and get over it. We have much bigger issues to concern ourselves with than a silly cartoon which is already old hat or should I say turban?
Posted by: BRYAN FEOL | July 17, 2008 at 06:26 PM
The over-reaction by Obama and his staff is yet another Democratic "Let's feel wronged and sue someone" attitude that is sweeping this country. Get over it. If you become a public figure, you get ridiculed. This "everyone is a winner" mentality is what has wrecked this country and promoted the "feel sorry for me because now I am a victim" routine. Has President Bush issued statements about the millions of cartoons that depict him in the many satirical ways? No. Get a life, vote your conscience and may God bless this country that was founded upon Christian values. I get tired of hearing that Bush is always to blame for everything-how about your senators and representatives that do nothing but sit back and collect a salary? They are the true voice of the people and if they don't hear you, they go with the popular majority vote. What have YOU done to change things? Have you contacted your representative or senator to express your feelings to him or her? Have you begun or joined grassroots organizations to attempt a change? If not, shut up; grow up and stand up for what you believe in and instead of complaining about Mr. Bush, complain to your representatives and demand change. For the record, I am neither a Dem or a Rep, I vote for the candidate that best represents my ideals.
Posted by: brad | July 17, 2008 at 08:45 AM
The thing what is so irritating about this cartoon, for me at least, is that like a poorly formed sentence you can’t quite figure out who the subject and predicate are. It bugs you (kind of like when Bush is talking... it really bugs you!)
The illustration's intent is unclear to someone who is not familiar with the New Yorker, and who will certainly not read the articles inside, because as a poorly formed sentence the subject and predicate are unclear. Especially because in satire the joke is on the subject - In this poorly conceived drawing and poorly judged editorial decision it is unclear if the joke is on Obama, or on the millions of morons that believe in the lies it portrays.
Because of that this cover is really bad (unless of course you are a fan of Fox TV)
Taking in consideration that the editors of the New Yorker are pretty intelligent people, it makes you wonder if that nuance was really missed by them. Or if indeed, this was just a very sneaky way to reveal their true feeling about a black president and a black first lady.
I will give them a vote of confidence: I will affirm their intelligence.
Therefore I have crossed this magazine, edited by very intelligent people, though “subtlety” frighteningly racist, out of my list of ones to buy at the airport to enjoy in my flights.
Hey, I have a good excuse for grammar errors: English is my second language. What’s yours?
Posted by: Marcia | July 16, 2008 at 09:09 PM
Muslim by blood? What does that even mean? And by the way all you repubs who continue to use the term osama obama need to get a life and grow a pair.
Grow a brain while you're at it
Posted by: Steve | July 16, 2008 at 07:07 PM
I am a college educated liberal, and my initial reaction was "what is this crap?". After seeing who published it I "got" the joke. I believe they have every right to publish it, but that doesn't mean they should have. As other posters have pointed out, by definition it is not satire nor caricature. I believe the NYorker's stated intentions backfired. And I also believe this is going to hurt the Obama campaign.
"Obama's campaign is deeply worried about the legions of morons who they apparently believe make up the heart of this great nation." Michelle Malkin
As they should be. As proof I offer up some of the posts here who believe the cover was a statement of truth. I also offer up the fact that more people voted on American Idol than for their president. What are the most popular shows on television? Reality TV. Look at the plethora of rags at the checkout line, National Enquirer, Star, etc. People evidently buy that junk, or they wouldn't keep printing it. Look at the crap that passes for dialogue or political discourse in this country. Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilley, Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken. We elect movie stars and professional wrestlers as leaders. In early 2002 what percentage of our country believed Iraq was responsible for 9/11? What percentage still do? I still argue with people today about it. How many people in this country believe OJ Simpson is innocent? How many people in my country can identify and given country on a map? And I am not talking about some small backwater country like Uzbekistan, but about large countries like Pakistan or India. How about states in their own country? I am from Chicago, Illinois and I continuously have to correct people on the correct pronunciation of Illinois. How can you grow up in this country and not know how to pronounce the name of the state that contains the 3rd most populous city in the country? Or is the home to supposedly one of the greatest presidents our country ever had? Do you need more examples?
I don't "apparently believe" that my country consists primarily of morons. I KNOW it. I am not an elitist, just a realist.
“No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.” - H. L. Mencken
Posted by: David Fisher | July 16, 2008 at 03:35 PM
Democrats are such patsies.........
You'll scream racisms on anything in this country. No wonder all the vitriol towards this country. When are you going to realize what is satire.....even if we go to the extremes did any of the great democrats like Reid, Boxer, Clinton, or the Justice League: Sharpton or Jesse Jackson ever condemed any of the racist cartoons published about Condi Rice and Justice Thomas, two of the greatest black leaders in our century, you tell me, look for your self:
http://newsbusters.org/static/2008/07/oliphant-rice.gif
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/08/71/29/image_129718.jpg
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/danziger_rice.jpg
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/doonesbury_rice.jpg
Osama Obama shields himself because he is black, and blacks continue with the same slavery mentality from old times. I think you guys need to listed to the Sage from South Central a.k.a. Larry Elder a bit, maybe he can bring some sense of most of your cry babies. If you are going to cry wolf, you better be ready.
Posted by: Roberto | July 16, 2008 at 03:29 PM
How can West Virginian be expected to understand "satire"? How can the New Yorker expect people--from the latest polls some 60% believe Obama is Muslim--to see this as satire?
This was nothing more that a cheap trick to sell magazines. Well my subscription is cancelled.
Posted by: Phil | July 16, 2008 at 02:22 PM
There's no validity to polls where the respondents get to select themselves. Why are you doing this and promoting it on the LAT home page? Is this one of Lee Abrams' notions?
Sad. The word "poll" used to mean something at the LAT.
Posted by: Tim McGarry | July 16, 2008 at 02:05 PM
I think half of the outrage would have be defused had the title of the artwork "The Politics of Fear" been included on the cover. The thin skin of today's political audience needs to have things spelled out for them or they will take offense.
Posted by: Laura | July 16, 2008 at 01:38 PM
I'm amazed at the uproar over this. There has been an ongoing smear campaign going through the emails that attempts to portray Obama along the lines of the New Yorker cover. This smear is not satire. Where was the uproar over that? Is it OK to slander a politician, but not ok to satirize the smear?
The New Yorker deserves credit for bringing this ugliness to the surface for all to see. Kudo's to them. Ultimately, I believe it will help the election process: the cover satirized the smear, not Obama. Of course, those who read New Yorker will get it. Those who don't, won't. Those who, for whatever their makeup, are inclined to believe the ugly smears would probably never vote for Obama anyway.
Posted by: Bill P. | July 16, 2008 at 01:20 PM
Gekkobear, the New Yorker should admit to what mistake? You mean, admit that many people willfully mistake the obvious meaning of the cartoon? The most dangerous thing in America today isn't any political cartoon, but the decline in political discourse. This reminds me of the flap in Europe over depictions of Mohammad, and the people upset about that were mostly those indoctrinated by religious teachings that are opposed to the humanistic values we supposedly hold sacred in our own country. I am an Obama supporter, by the way. But in this case, as in some others, I think he needs to elevate the discourse.
Posted by: Russ | July 16, 2008 at 12:18 PM
It just wasn't funny.
I may be one that understands the satire, but many don't! The magazine is read all over, I've seen it in my doctor's office. I live in Canada.
So, the excuse that the New Yorker has a specific target audience who have the ability to understand that it is Satire, and the implications, and intent of the cartoon are well understood by it's readership, is just bunk!
It's on the front page anyone looking at a magazine rack in a store will see it and pick it up for it's sensationalism.
This will result in many people seeing and believing that all the things they have heard on Fox, CNN, and other such networks are true.
Just look how the news media has shown it over and over again.
THIS CARTOON IS DANGEROUS TO THE OBAMA'S IN MANY WAYS.
THE New Yorker magazine needs to see what they have done, admit to the mistake, and try to repair the damage.
Posted by: Willow | July 16, 2008 at 11:42 AM
This is like when Letterman mocked McCain's age and called him senile, a "wal-mart greeter", etc.
Of course the outraged group here were equally outraged then, and they can point to all their protests against that insensitivity masquerading as satire as well. Yeah, right.
But maybe this was worse because the New Yorker reaches everyone, but few have a TV and watch Letterman? Wait, that can't be right... um it's racist? No we've over played that...
I know, its "intolerant to Mulsims". There we go. Lets go with that as our answer today.
And those that think this is just whiny opportunistic hypocritical actions? Can we re-use racist yet? Damn, we'll respond to them in a couple days then.
Humorless whiny prigs the lot of ya.
Posted by: Gekkobear | July 16, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Oh, for goodness sakes! Of course this magazine cover is satire. I am a hard-core liberal who supports Obama and it didn't even make me flinch. Why is it when art holds up a mirror people can't handle it? Is the truth too much to take responsibility for? It is We The People who have perpetrated this myth about Barack and Michelle - not the artist.
Posted by: CatG | July 16, 2008 at 11:31 AM
to the New Yorker:
Dear Editors,
You helped cement an image of misinformation and fear -- and helped those like Fox News keep many American citizens of color feeling under siege and attacked for being brown/black/mixed/whatever in our own country.
The cartoon cover of the Obamas makes fun of stereotypes where for many of us, there is much more pain and no fun to be had.
I fight against stereotypes everyday from mean and/or ignorant people. And it hurts so very bad. Those types feel empowered by what you did and while I can't escape the image anywhere in the media, whatever "good intentions" and/or humor is little-where to be found.
Seems unless we have more multicultural education, history, sensitivity and EMPATHY, people like you guys are bound to continue hurting people more than wish to acknowledge and take responsibility for.
Your magazine is awful for this and I will never forgive the staff for thinking it's OK via intellectual argument to cement the image of Muslim dress and afro hair as "boogeymen," scary or just plain "other." Never. I am really, really hurt by your actions and feel persecuted enough by the likes of Sean Hannity and his ilk. Did you really have to give them a hand?
------
Posted by: Julie | July 16, 2008 at 11:05 AM
There are people who are going to "get it" and people who won't. Those who don't "get it" will hold up this magazine cover as truth. They're the same ones who voted for Bush TWICE. I don't share the opinion that Americans are smarter than that. They aren't and we're paying for it now--with a depression. And an administration that doesn't care. Unfortunately our news sources have become the newsmakers---and our country is suffering for that, as well.
Posted by: LC | July 16, 2008 at 10:48 AM