I once met someone who told me she was so liberal she “screamed at The New Yorker because its political stance infuriates me.” That person is probably screaming at The New Yorker today for a whole new reason, mainly their cover “cartoon” which may just cost Obama the presidency.
Like many, I have tried to make sense of numerous New Yorker cartoons over the years and given up. Perhaps in a snooty aren’t-we-clever-because-we-live-in-NY way, tens of people find them funny or satirical. There was even a whole Seinfeld episode devoted to the absurdity of this topic.
Editorial cartoons are supposed to make you laugh, or at least think. So let’s see – we have a man who could be president dressed like a Muslim (which 12% of Americans still think he is), with his wife dressed as a terrorist, with a photo of Osama bin Laden on his wall and an American flag burning in the fireplace. Are you laughing? Are you amazed by the satirical nature of the image? Do you get the joke?
Like many, I have tried to make sense of numerous New Yorker cartoons over the years and given up. Perhaps in a snooty aren’t-we-clever-because-we-live-in-NY way, tens of people find them funny or satirical. There was even a whole Seinfeld episode devoted to the absurdity of this topic.
Editorial cartoons are supposed to make you laugh, or at least think. So let’s see – we have a man who could be president dressed like a Muslim (which 12% of Americans still think he is), with his wife dressed as a terrorist, with a photo of Osama bin Laden on his wall and an American flag burning in the fireplace. Are you laughing? Are you amazed by the satirical nature of the image? Do you get the joke?
Obama certainly doesn’t find it funny. It doesn’t matter if the accompanying article is a critique of American paranoia and how Obama fits into that. And The New Yorker’s excuse that the cover “combines a number of fantastical images about the Obamas and shows them for the obvious distortions they are,” is jaw-dropping. I consider myself relatively intelligent (although obviously too dumb to understand The New Yorker) and the “joke” is totally lost on me and anyone else I’ve spoken to.
Maybe what the New Yorker sees is a witty and satirical poke at the American mindset. That attitude alone won’t win them any new converts or readers. The mistake they made is assuming that everyone else in America would see it their way, and their churlish response means that if you don’t understand it, you’re not as smart as us.
Context is unimportant, especially with art. The most effective political communication works on emotion and gut, and an image must stand together with context to work. With this cover art, The New Yorker has just given ammunition and excuses to the bigots and ignorant who think Obama is a Muslim, dislikes America and will go soft on terrorists. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity now have free reign to make as many racist comments as they want – hey, if The New Yorker can do it and excuse it as “satire” then they can too, right?
Get ready to see this cartoon appear ad nauseam on Fox News, billboards and anti-Obama 527 rhetoric until November. It is red meat for conservative partisans who need no explanation to spin it to uninformed and undecided voters. And if you think I’m wrong, how would you feel if this was the cover of the National Review?
More Info: The New Yorker's Self-Confessed View of the World (now this is satire, I think)
No comments:
Post a Comment