On
March 8, International Women’s day, men and women of conscience
in all parts of the world were reflecting on the call of the Global
women’s strike for societies to’ invest in caring not killing.’
This call represented the maturation of a movement of women who
grasped the depth of the social and economic crisis. In her own
tribute to the day to reflect on the struggles of women, Maureen
Dowd, the columnist for the New York Times, placed
a spin on the raging debate in the United States on whether Michelle
Obama should cover up. Dowd ended up praising the confidence of
Michele Obama. But, was this tongue in cheek, given the record of
Dowd?
Using
her usual mix of cunning wit and sarcasm, Dowd entered the fray
by joining the thousands of words in print and the hundreds of pictures
about Michelle Obama, the first lady of the United States. In brief,
the debate has centered around the appropriateness of the dress
code of Michelle. From fashion magazines such as Vogue to
super market tabloids such as People magazine, from
Essence to bloggers and to the pages of quality news outlets
- the question echoed, should Michelle Obama cover up?
Others
who wanted to place a twist on the second amendment debate on the
right of gun owners to carry guns used the debate on Michelle’s
dress to refer to “the right to bare arms.” When the official portrait
of the first lady was released towards the end of February, the
image ignited even more debate. The official portrait of First Lady
Michelle Obama, taken in the Blue Room of the White House by photographer
Joyce N. Boghosian, shows Michelle
Obama wearing a sleeveless dress. One blogger called this sleeveless
style the signature style of Michelle Obama and then went on to
cite the designer.
Into
this debate waded Maureen Dowd who has represented herself as one
spokesperson of the wounded US ruling elite. A week earlier, before
entering the debate on whether Michelle should ‘cover up’, she had opined
in her column that she did not like the speech of Eric Holder, the
Attorney General. In a speech to Justice Department employees marking
Black History Month, the Attorney General said that while the country
has a lot to be proud of, "in things racial we have always
been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially
a nation of cowards."
Maureen
Dowd reflected the discomfort of the establishment when she had
written in her column,
“In the middle of all the Heimlich maneuvers required now
— for the economy, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, health care, the
environment, and education — we don’t need a Jackson/Sharpton-style
lecture on race. Barack Obama’s election was supposed to get us
past that.”
Joining
with the very conservative commentators, Dowd wanted to squash any
serious discussion on the history of those who had lynched black
people and raped millions of Black women. Dowd is very much at home
with the founding fathers and mothers who preached liberty and equality
but practiced slavery. Her line was telling not only because she
had warned the Obama White House that his election was’ supposed
to get past race,’ but also because, at the end of that week, Barack
Obama himself in an interview with the New York Times distanced
himself from the comments of Holder.
President
Barack Obama said he would not have used the same language that
Eric Holder did last month when the attorney general declared that
the United States is a nation of cowards on matters of race.
Maureen
Dowd had demonstrated to her readers that she had a backchannel
to the communications sector of the Obama White House.
One
week later, Dowd represented herself as the filter for the heir
of William Buckley and Samuel P. Huntington.
Representing
the discussion in a taxi cab between herself and David Brooks, the
self proclaimed intellectual voice of the conservatives, Dowd reported
the following version of the cab ride,
In the taxi, when I asked David Brooks about her (Michelle
Obama’s) amazing arms, he indicated it was time for her to cover
up. “She’s made her point,” he said. “Now she should put away
Thunder and Lightning.”
Thunder and lightning
The
United States is now experiencing one of the most severe thunderstorms
in its history. In thunder storms, lightning is probably the most
dangerous element. So it was curious that David Brooks referred
to the arms of Michelle Obama as Thunder and Lightning, in other
words, the arms of a dangerous woman.
Because
the conversation was filtered, we will probably not know what other
choice metaphors were used by this writer who was one of the principal
cheer leaders for the occupation of Iraq.
The
imagery of Michele Obama as representing Thunder and Lightning is
coming from a section of the US intelligentsia that cannot consider
black women in any other public positions other than that of nannies
or wet nurses. Maureen Dowd used references to a character in Jane
Austen when it may have been more profitable to use Sethe from Beloved
in a context when she was referring to the confidence of black women
while at the same time commenting on the slave ships of the British.
As a successful crafts person, Dowd was able to introduce in one
paragraph the history of British colonialism and repression in Kenya
as well as the horrors of the slave trade. Citing a formulation
from the British newspaper , the Telegraph
on Michelle Obama, Dowd repeated their nervousness,
“Her
broad-brush view of history associates Brits with the wicked white
global hegemony responsible for the slave trade.”
Seven
months year earlier, it was this same nervousness that led the New
Yorker to bring out their Thunder and Lighting in the cover page
of Barack Obama and Michelle Obama as unreconstructed black militants.
The July 21, 2008 cover of The New Yorker Magazine
carried a cartoon of Michelle Obama as an afro-wearing, gun toting
militant and Barack Obama was depicted dressed wearing traditional
Muslim garb. They were greeting each other with a “fist bump”,
with an American flag burning in the fireplace, and a portrait of
Osama Bin Laden on the wall of the Oval Office.
The
image was supposed to be seen as a joke but the minds that created
the cartoon reflected the anxiety of those who are afraid of Thunder
and Lightning. Other cartoonists from the same city have gone past
subtlety and have simply revealed what is sometimes discussed at
chic dinner tables. In the same period when Maureen Dowd rebuked
Eric Holder, the New York Post had shown a cartoon
of a dead chimp and two police officers, one with a smoking gun.
The
caption reads, "They'll have to find someone else to write
the next stimulus bill."
This
was the same city where Amadaou Diallo and Sean Bell were gunned
down.
Michelle Obama’s sculpted biceps
: texts and sub texts
Maureen
Dowd was trained in an institution where the Professors taught about
text and sub text. Hence, those committed to openness and transparency
are calling for a deciphering of the text of Maureen Dowd on whether
Michelle Obama should cover up. The reader should carefully analyze
the words of Dowd. She ended her offering in this way:
“Let’s face it: The only bracing symbol of American strength
right now is the image of Michelle Obama’s sculpted biceps. Her
husband urges bold action, but it is Michelle who looks as though
she could easily wind up and punch out Rush Limbaugh, Bernie Madoff
and all the corporate creeps who ripped off America.”
Echoing
other concerns over the biceps of Michelle Obama
“I’d seen the plaint echoed elsewhere. “Someone should tell
Michelle to mix up her wardrobe and cover up from time to time,”
Sandra McElwaine wrote last week on The Daily Beast.”
Apparently,
Maureen Dowd does not know the history of Georgetown, South Carolina
and the crimes against Black women. It is for this reason that her
commentary on Eric Holder was out of step with the historical record
of the atrocities committed against black people which are outlined
in the book, Killing the Black Body. This ignorance
of the sexual and racial terror permitted Dowd to render these sentences.
Washington is a place where people have always been suspect
of style and overt sexuality. Too much
preening signals that you’re not up late studying cap-and-trade
agreements. David was not smitten by the V-neck, sleeveless eggplant
dress Michelle wore at her husband’s address to Congress — the
one that caused one Republican congressman to whisper to another,
“Babe."
Ostentation and sensually avoidant
He said the policy crowd here would consider the dress ostentatious.
“Washington is sensually avoidant. The wonks here like brains.
She should not be known for her physical presence, for one body
part.” David brought up the Obamas’ obsession with their workouts.
“Sometimes I think half the reason Obama ran for president is
so Michelle would have a platform to show off her biceps.”
During the campaign, there was talk in the Obama ranks that
Michelle should stop wearing sleeveless dresses, because her muscles,
combined with her potent personality, made her daunting.
She ignored that talk, thank heavens. I love the designer-to-J.
Crew glamour. Combined with her workaday visits to soup kitchens,
inner-city schools and meetings with military families, Michelle’s
flair is our depression’s answer to Ginger Rogers gliding around
in feathers and lamé.
Her arms, and her complete confidence in her skin, are a
reminder that Americans can do anything if they put their minds
to it. Unlike Hillary, who chafed at the loathed job of first
lady, and Laura, who for long stretches disappeared into the helpmeet
role, Michelle has soared every day, expanding the job to show
us what can be accomplished by a generous spirit, a confident
nature and a well-disciplined body.
I also have no doubt she can talk cap-and-trade with ease
and panache.
Confident
Nature
On
a quick read, it may sound as if there is solidarity between Maureen
Dowd and Michelle Obama when she ended by noting that Michelle has
soared and what can be “accomplished by a generous spirit, a confident
nature and a well-disciplined body.” If this is praise, then the
support for
the confidence was betrayed by the imagery of the nanny in the soup
kitchen. There is an economic depression in the country and the
soup kitchen metaphor must be complimented by a rigorous call for
the redistribution of wealth in the United
States. The progressive forces must organize and intervene
so that Obama does not have to call back the editors of the New
York Times to plead that he is not a socialist.
Two
days after International Women’s day, the New York Times,
as if endorsing the imagery of Michelle as a First Lady
visiting soup kitchens, brought us a picture of Michelle Obama serving
food to homeless people.
It
is clear to this writer that the rulers of the United States would
like to define Michelle Obama. Such a definition will be in keeping
with the historical image of Black Women in the United States. Michelle
Obama is undeniably beautiful. However, this does not undermine
the fact she was trained at two Ivy League schools and is a thinker
as well as an activist for social justice. Those who fear this kind
of thinking as well as those who fear the full rendition of the
history of Georgetown, South Carolina, will call on Michelle Obama
to cover up. This column on whether Michelle Obama should cover
up ended up praising her confidence and we look forward to the same
praise when Michelle Obama raises her voice against the bailout
for the banks and insurance companies.
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator, Dr. Horace Campbell,
PhD, is Professor of African American Studies and Political Science
at Syracuse University in Syracuse New York. His book, Rasta
and Resistance: From Marcus Garvey to Walter Rodney
is going through its fifth edition. He is also the
author of Reclaiming
Zimbabwe: The Exhaustion of the Patriarchal Model of Liberation
and is currently working on a book on Obama and 21st
Century Politics. He has contributed to many other edited books, most
recently, “From Regional Military de-stabilization to Military Cooperation
and Peace in South Africa” in Peace and Security in Southern Africa (State and Democracy Series)
, edited by Ibbo Mandaza. He has published numerous
articles in scholarly journals and is currently writing a book on
the Wars against the Angolan peoples. Click here
to contact Dr. Campbell. |