In viewing artist Barry Blitt’s rendition of Barack Obama and the gun toting mama who is actually supposed to be Obama’s wife, on the cover of the June edition of the New Yorker I see almost a discriminatory attitude. Barack is standing there and facing what appears to be a female guerilla fighter who has an assault rifle slung over her shoulder. Barack is wearing the dress and turban that is well known to Middle Eastern ways and is facing the guerilla fighter. The two of them are “punching fists,” the equivalent of a hi-5 among friends, as if they have just completed a deal.
At the same time you see a framed picture hanging on the wall of another Muslim, Bin Laden and the American flag burning in the fireplace and all of this looks to be taking place in the oval room of the White House even though the Oval room really isn’t oval. The entire picture seems to depict that a conversation had taken place and an agreement was reached thus the punching fists. In theory this cover looks like Barack had made plans to get the Presidency and once he did he made deals with the Muslim’s against US Policies and they are congratulating themselves upon a job well done.
Furthermore I see where it may be said that now Barack is in office, he will take over the US and all the claims he made will not happen but that he will convert the USA to a Muslim nation which in turn makes him a terrorist of the worst kind. In reading the CNN commentary of July 14, 2008, this cover is being called tasteless and offensive (Obama spokesman Bill Burton), even John McCain called it “totally inappropriate. ” In America we have laws against discrimination and the New Yorker has started a controversy of sorts with depicting a racist attitude and sympathy towards terrorism (CNN.
com). In another commentary written in the Huffington Post, this cover is being called immature, prejudiced and lacks good insight into our political world (gmr July 14, 2008-http://guanabee. com/2008/07/barack-obama-new-yorker-magazi. php). In yet a third commentary, Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post said “that the cover is arguably incendiary. ” (Mike Allen-CBS News-http://www. cbsnews. com/stories/2008/07/14/politics/politico/main4257077. shtml? source=mostpop_story-July 13, 2008). All three of these comments are similar.
People are agreeing that this was uncalled for, prejudicial, mean, racist, the difference between these commentaries is simply the words used, and the underlying meaning remains the same so in this there isn’t much of a difference in impact unless you compare it to what The New Yorker has to say. This political satire is in poor taste and goes against what we as Americans belief system and constitutional rights are. This magazine looks very racial and more diabolical than our current President. My initial response to this cover has not changed and will not change.
What the New Yorker did was wrong and that is the bottom line. Works Cited Allen, Mike. CBS News. New Yorker Obama Cover Sparks Uproarhttp://www. cbsnews. com/stories/2008/07/14/politics/politico/main4257077. shtml? source=mostpop_story. July 13, 2008, accessed December 8, 2008. Remnick, David. The New Yorker Magazine Obama Cover Proves No One In America Has A Sense Of Humor Huffington Post. http://guanabee. com/2008/07/barack-obama-new-yorker-magazi. php. July 14, 2008. Accessed December 8, 2008
Courtney from Study Moose