Group avatar

Diversity Works

"Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true."

~ Martin Luther King Jr
...more »
  • Category: Race | Started Friday, May 11 2007

« more discussions

  • NighEve

    It Ain't Funny! Have the Editors of the New Yorker Lost Their Minds?

    Yesterday morning, when my sister called me in an incredulous huff about the cover of the New Yorker, I told her not to worry. "Anybody who would not get the joke," I assured her," is also not likely to read the New Yorker." TV news has snatched that security blanket away! WTF! I was quite naive to think this would stay indoors. Still, I have no sympathy for the smart folk at the New Yorker. Do you?
    NighEve started this discussion 3 months ago. ( reply )

25

replies
expand replies 
Sign in to participate in this discussion.
  • uplandpoet

    uplandpoet 

    yep! ever told a joke in a room full of folks and realized NONE of them thouight it was funny? me neither, but i bet that is how the NYer feels about now. I get where they are coming from, but didnt somebody have a little common sense on the whole management staff?

    You know, we have had a tradition in this country of having silly folks run for office, but they gotta figure this out, obama aint a silly man and this aint a silly time. he is matt dillon riding into town to clean up the mess at the ok corral, yuo wanna laugh at that? not me. i wanna strap on a leg on and ride in WITH him, not sit in the saloon and crackwise.
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • pampe

    pampe 

    Oh, sure, I believe their explanation....NOT

    I saw this yesterday on a newsstand and was appalled. Then last night they interviewed the cartoonist....PLEASE ..this is the kind of shit that stays in people's minds.

    I may or may not get the "joke" but it is not about me....it's about the millions of non-NEW YORKER readers who now have seen this all over the news.

    HOW SAD!
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • howard1004

    howard1004 

    This cover is going to sell their magazine. I have a lot of requests for it at my store. The New Yorker will feel completely justified when they see how many copies they move. I agree that many people will not "get" the irony. All you have to do is tune into some of the talk radio programs for a minute to realize how simple people can be.
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 1 reply
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue (edited)

      Yeah, with over A MILLION readers, I'm sure that's why they published that cover.

      The New Yorker routinely has satirical covers -- the March 24th issue (at the height of the Larry Craig scandal) shows a guy in business attire and boxers emblazoned with "The Great Seal of the State of New York" up against a police height chart; the March 17th issues shows Obama and Clinton in bed, clock in the background, hands at 3 am, both reaching for a red phone in the foreground) involving these in politics. That's what they do.

      Most of the New Yorker pieces I have read have shown Obama in a very positive light. MY largely positive opinion of Obabma, in fact, comes mostly from reading The New Yorker pieces.

      Black ain't got nothing to do with it - their covers skewer all kinds of politicians and the publics views of said politicians. This particular cover is entitles "The Politics of Fear," actually. Hello! They're not satirizing Obama or his policies, they're satirizing his opponent's attempts to create fear of his policy statements (i.e., his willingness to have discussions with leaders of perhaps terrorist organizations or countries that likey support them, and fears about his "real" religion.)

      Slideshow of some of Barry Blitt's covers, if anyone is interested:

      http://www.newyorker.com/online/covers/slideshow_blittcovers?slide=1#showHeader

      And a piece on the Huffington post -- interview with David Remnick, editor of TNY where he talks about a cover of Obama that they DIDN'T run, and why:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/david-remnick-on-emnew-yo_n_112456.html
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • garcialeon

    garcialeon 

    There is an article on Salon.com called "Rush Limbaugh was right" where he opines that the left has lost their sense of humor. I strongly disagree with him. Even if I weren't offended by it, I still wouldn't see the humor in it. It's not even objectively funny.

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/07/15/new_yorker_cartoon/
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • Marcus

    Marcus 

    As deliberate and calculated as CNN's 'gaffe' with "where's Obama?" :

    http://rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_comments_on_Obama_gaffe_in_0101.html
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 2 replies
    • Seeker of Truth

      Seeker of Truth 

      What a lot of people don't realize is the Repulicans are NOT the only ones that DON'T want to see a Black man become President. There are plenty of Racist Democrats too!
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • uplandpoet

      uplandpoet 

      yeah, seeker, but for every racist dem, there are two independents or republicans who are fed up with the bush crap and arent going for a third term, obama wins in a landslide!!! thank god!!
      i predict 55% of the vote and over 300 electoral votes
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • Karen

    Karen 

    Also, how do Muslims feel about the implication that they are to be feared? At present one in ten Americans still think Obama is Muslim, and the implication from the cartoon is that they think this is scary. The general public needs to be made aware that being Muslim does not automatically make one evil.
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 2 replies
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      Kinda the point of the satire, isn't it?
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • Karen

      Karen 

      Indeed it is, Aimeesue. I guess my point was the satire of the entire picture is that is shows all the negative inane publicity that Obama has gotten and will continue to get from attackers as he campaigns, but there is a deeper layer in the Muslim representation with it's implication that Muslims are evil.
      Immediately after 9/11, there were progams on TV in which Muslims were interviewed showing that the mainstream believers did not support violence. I remember some really insightful ones in which young (teenage) Muslims, Christians and Jews discussed the issue among themselves with competent moderators. I think that more of this kind of programming should occur to further educate the mainstream.
      How sad it was that Obama's political team asked Muslim women with covered heads to sit in a different spot when they came to listen to Obama speak because his team feared that viewers would see Muslims in Obama's audience.
      I meant for my original post to emphasize that fear of Muslims needs to be addressed rather than ignored otherwise this issue will continue to haunt not only Obama's campaign but our country in general.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • NighEve

    NighEve (edited)

    "Kinda the point of the satire, isn't it? "

    One of the points Ralph Nader makes in The Seventeen Traditions (from which the quote that begins the "Ethnicity and politics?" thread is taken) is that since we do not respect and accept our differences, since racism is so pervasive, we have lost our ability to laugh at ourselves. He argues that if we had a healthy respect for one another we could appreciate the humor in good "racial/ethnic" jokes.

    But, we just aren't "there" yet (or again as Nader sees things). Yes, this is satire, but it is poorly timed satire. It is satire, but it is in very poor taste. Would satire be an appropriate excuse if it were a picture of Obama in a noose (I had to go there again. . .)? IMO, the current cover does more damage than a noose cover could.
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 4 replies
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      Interesting Nader quote.

      But Obama himself isn't being satirized. The voters and pundits who feed into this fear crap are. Blitt's cover is about what some uniformed, easily led (probably racist) part of the voting public FEARS about Obama and blows it up into characiture, rendering it ridiculous.

      Do we really believe that Obama has a pic of bin Laden hanging in his living room? That he burns American Flags? That he's really a war mongering Muslim? I think not. And that's not what the New Yorker thinks either.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      Not the noose!!! I can't handle the noose! ; D
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • NighEve

      NighEve 

      "Do we really believe that Obama has a pic of bin Laden hanging in his living room? That he burns American Flags? That he's really a war mongering Muslim? I think not. And that's not what the New Yorker thinks either. "

      Nope, we don't, but too many people do right now. I'd be able to laugh if this were July 2009 not July 2008.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • NighEve

      NighEve 

      "I can't handle the noose! ; D "

      Honestly? I can't either! LOL!
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • NighEve

    NighEve 

    Dowd and Nader seem to agree. From today's New York Times:

    May We Mock, Barack?
    By MAUREEN DOWD

    When I interviewed Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for Rolling Stone a couple years ago, I wondered what Barack Obama would mean for them.

    “It seems like a President Obama would be harder to make fun of than these guys,” I said.

    “Are you kidding me?” Stewart scoffed.

    Then he and Colbert both said at the same time: “His dad was a goat-herder!”

    When I noted that Obama, in his memoir, had revealed that he had done some pot, booze and “maybe a little blow,” the two comedians began riffing about the dapper senator’s familiarity with drug slang.

    Colbert: Wow, that’s a very street way of putting it. ‘A little blow.’

    Stewart: A little bit of the white rabbit.

    Colbert: ‘Yeah, I packed a cocktail straw of cocaine and had a prostitute blow it in my ear, but that is all I did. High-fivin.’ ’

    Flash forward to the kerfuffle — and Obama’s icy reaction — over this week’s New Yorker cover parodying fears about the Obamas.

    “We’ve already scratched thrift, candor and brevity off the list of virtues in this presidential cycle, so why not eliminate humor, too?” wrote James Rainey in The Los Angeles Times, suggesting “an irony deficiency” in Obama and his fans.

    Many of the late-night comics and their writers — nearly all white — now admit to The New York Times’s Bill Carter that because of race and because there is nothing “buffoonish” about Obama — and because many in their audiences are intoxicated by him and resistant to seeing him skewered — he has not been flayed by the sort of ridicule that diminished Dukakis, Gore and Kerry.

    “There’s a weird reverse racism going on,” Jimmy Kimmel said.

    Carter also observed that there’s no easy comedic “take” on Obama, “like allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing, or President Bush’s goofy bumbling or Al Gore’s robotic personality.”

    At first blush, it would seem to be a positive for Obama that he is hard to mock. But on second thought, is it another sign that he’s trying so hard to be perfect that it’s stultifying? Or that eight years of W. and Cheney have robbed Democratic voters of their sense of humor?

    Certainly, as the potential first black president, and as a contender with tender experience, Obama must feel under strain to be serious.

    But he does not want the “take” on him to become that he’s so tightly wrapped, overcalculated and circumspect that he can’t even allow anyone to make jokes about him, and that his supporters are so evangelical and eager for a champion to rescue America that their response to any razzing is a sanctimonious: Don’t mess with our messiah!

    If Obama keeps being stingy with his quips and smiles, and if the dominant perception of him is that you can’t make jokes about him, it might infect his campaign with an airless quality. His humorlessness could spark humor.

    On Tuesday, Andy Borowitz satirized on that subject. He said that Obama, sympathetic to comics’ attempts to find jokes to make about him, had put out a list of official ones, including this:

    “A traveling salesman knocks on the door of a farmhouse, and much to his surprise, Barack Obama answers the door. The salesman says, ‘I was expecting the farmer’s daughter.’ Barack Obama replies, ‘She’s not here. The farm was foreclosed on because of subprime loans that are making a mockery of the American dream.’ ”

    John McCain’s Don Rickles routines — “Thanks for the question, you little jerk” — can fall flat. But he seems like a guy who can be teased harmlessly. If Obama offers only eat-your-arugula chiding and chilly earnestness, he becomes an otherworldly type, not the regular guy he needs to be.

    He’s already in danger of seeming too prissy about food — a perception heightened when The Wall Street Journal reported that the planners for Obama’s convention have hired the first-ever Director of Greening, the environmental activist Andrea Robinson. She in turn hired an Official Carbon Adviser to “measure the greenhouse-gas emissions of every placard, every plane trip, every appetizer prepared and every coffee cup tossed.”

    The “lean ‘n’ green” catering guidelines, The Journal said, bar fried food and instruct that, “on the theory that nutritious food is more vibrant, each meal should include ‘at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white.’ (Garnishes don’t count.) At least 70% of the ingredients should be organic or grown locally, to minimize emissions from fuel during transportation.”

    Bring it on, Ozone Democrats! Because if Obama gets elected and there is nothing funny about him, it won’t be the economy that’s depressed. It will be the rest of us.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/opinion/16dowd.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 4 replies
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      " eat-your-arugula chiding"

      Can't. Stop. Laughing. ; D

      (At the PHRASING, not Obama. Apparently, he's just not funny.)
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • uplandpoet

      uplandpoet 

      i wonder how far back nadar wants to go to find racist jokes funny, 1964, 1948, 1865? he is a real idiot!!!!!
      I like dowd, but i think america is tired of the bumblin idiot for president is kinda cute dont you think, mentality. maybe obama could start smoking in public again so they have some crap to write about.
      i cant believe that the media folks dont get that this time it is serious. we have a huge mess to clean up and obama may not be the perfect shoveler, but he beat mccain by a mile. let him get in office and some of his quirks will come out and they can make jokes about him then. i think NighEves point aboutt he calendar makes a lot of sense. many of us are worried silly that something is going to get smeared all over him, and as impossible as it seems (remember how impossible it seemed the w would be president in 2000, and even more so in 2004, and yhet we had 8 years of the only president i know of who could make lbj look ood on war and nixon look good on civil liberties! lets get past nov 4 and even past jan 09 and then you can make fun of him for his name, his ears, his wife, his skinnyness, whatever, you can even start doing n**ger jokes if it will make our beloved Ralph nadar happy, but dammit, get him elected, then get silly!
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      "i cant believe that the media folks dont get that this time it is serious."

      Isn't it serious every time? Why are we suddenly not allowed to laugh at or near the candidates? Or THIS candidate? McCain seems to be OK to giggle around, particularly on the age issue.

      How is this election any more important than the 2000 election? It was all good to laugh at Bush and Gore back then. SNL had a field day with it. During the election process.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      And I just have to add: It's not like people aren't aware of who Obama and McCain ARE at this point, and what the "issues" about their characters are.

      No one who has a foot in the real world is going to see this and say "Golly! So THAT'S Obama?? Gosh, I'd better vote for McCain!!"

      Will it appeal to some right wing fanatics? Undoubtedly. But it's only going to reinforce the opinions they already hold, and they are going to see it in terms of making fun of Obama, not as making fun of THEM (which is really is).

      People are going to see it in light of their own previously held beliefs, unless they've been living on Mars.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • Ida_Ming_Tao

    Ida_Ming_Tao 

    I haven't seen the cover of the New Yorker to make a personal judgement but I agree with Aimeesue that political satire and parody are incredibly important as tools of the press and I give her props for defending the purpose behind these legally sanctioned allowances to point out flaws in political discussion by using a satirical light.

    Has anyone noticed that this cover has generated more positive press condemning the negative and false remarks against Obama than the usual sugar coated Kennedy-esque posed photograph ever would have? That is directly the point of satire. It turns up the heat, and you know what they say about the heat in the kitchen.

    Did anyone see the New York Magazine cover with Obama and McCain doing the knuckle high five sitting on the beach together? It's quite funny. New Yorker isn't the only magazine doing parodies of the political candidates. I've seen many nasty parody images of Clinton all over the place, and Bush? My favorite is one of Clinton's face supplanted on the iconic image of Che Guevara - also in New York Magazine. I think the harshness of the New Yorker cover may be that it is a drawn illustration, so the hyperbole is subtle if you don't know the normal style of their artwork. I could be mistaken, but the style most people seem comfortable with these days is the photo montage, where bits of images are obviously manipulated in the design, and so the over the top nature of the joke is clear. I'd like to think New Yorker had the sense and taste to come up with a cover that was clearly over the top. It may be however that they were not extreme enough - hitting to close to the target of what some people are actually trying to pass off as fact.
    posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    show 3 replies
    • Karen

      Karen (edited)

      Today, in my local paper, there was a political cartoon that I wish I could show here, but I'll have to describe instead.
      A miniscule picture of the now infamous New Yorker cover is in the top corner. Under it it says, "For all the irony-challenged literalists who were upset by the New Yorker's Obama-as-a-Muslim magazine cover, here's one for you..."
      To the right of this you see a National Review cover with McCain and his wife. McCain is sitting slumped over in a hospital gown in a wheelchair while his wife is pouring pills from a bottle saying, "Here, John, take some of my meds to get you through the inaugural parade!" There is a picture of Dick Cheney above the fireplace mantel and the Constitution is burning in the fireplace.
      The cartoonist is David Horsey and the cartoon first appeared in Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • Aimeesue

      Aimeesue 

      You can see it here:

      http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?ID=1792

      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
    • uplandpoet

      uplandpoet 

      exactly, but that is the point, it is a parody of the other cover, the new yorker was a parody or a satire of nothing so much as a protrayle of the rumors that so many americans are prepared to believe, but i bet as much excitement as this has caused, the ny will be happy to do it again!
      posted 3 months ago. ( reply )
  • To reply to this discussion, please sign in or join now.

Return to top
© 2008 Tastemakers, Inc. | Portions of Shelfari.com are Copyright © 1996-2008 Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates. Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy