'Toon Tuesday
I am a die-hard Obama supporter (even thiough he has disappointed me a bit the last couple of weeks, but that's OK) as well as a New Yorker magazine subscriber and I think the damned thing is brilliant! The cartoon has coalesced all the inane e-mails we've been getting for the last few months into one monumentally ridiculous image. It is satire at its best and it's doing what satire is supposed to do: make you think.
A bunch of Obama supporters are in a tizzy because they feel too many people "won't get it" - well tough! They're afraid the cartoon will reinforce the nonsense that has been going around like the bubonic plague. I disagree - I think if the media hadn't made such a big, fat, hairy deal over it the only people that woluld have noticed are the regular New Yorker readers, and, we "get it". For the most part, the ones who are likely to misconsture the intent are not New Yorker readers.
This nation has been dumbed-down for the last 8 years to the point where we are the laughingstock of the world. The New Yorker is a "smart" magazine and as such I expect them to produce this calibre of work not appeal to the lowest common denominator. The magazine has a long tradition of topical cover art - there are many who collect and frame the covers!
Frankly I would like to see Obama come out and commend the cover and the magazine and the artist just for being smart.
Labels: 'Toon Tuesday
posted by Hilda @ 8:00 AM
3 Comments:
Exactly, Hilda, I 100% agree.
Pundits have complained that the cover doesn't directly STATE that it is satire, it doesn't have a FRAMING DEVICE (I can only imagine they're referring to something like the whole thing being inside the thought-balloon of a redneck writing an email).
But...duh! Satire is MOST effective when it ISN'T framed...when it expects (and relies upon) the reader being knowledgeable and critical enough to understand the intent of the piece.
New Yorker readers certainly expect this kind of thing. The pundits understand it too but they LOVE manufactured outrage.
I'm sure that Obama's team gets it as well, but it's a difficult position for them: to dismiss the cover could be conceived as being both "all the things the cover says the Obamas are" AND "likely readers of The New Yorker and its type of satire," which are things the team doesn't want to flirt much with. The contest already has an element of "who is more of an elite snob?"
The thing is, braindead people and spin doctors will continue to hammer Obama about these issues, regardless of this particular cover. It ultimately doesn't matter.
Many liberal blogs I read are all up in arms about this. Yours is the first blog that, in my opinion, talks sense! :)
I agree that the less said about it the better but God knows the media can't resist running with a story like this and constantly implying that we should be finding something wrong with it.
Honest to Pete, I'm starting to get fed up with all popular media.
I wish we could just watch "Hilda TV."
Post a Comment
<< Home