Tuesday, July 15, 2008

New Yorker cover goes too far

The editors said it's satire and they were making fun of the rumors that Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama is Muslim.

Satire, mocking rumors or not, the New Yorker's cover of Obama and his wife, Michelle, depicted as terrorists, is insensitive and goes too far.

I'm not a subscriber to the New Yorker, but if I were, I could cancel my subscription. Call me sensitive, but I'm highly offended. The editors are feeding into the rumors and someone may look at that cover and truly believe that the Obamas are Muslims, when they are actually Christians.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "The New Yorker may think...that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature of Senator Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree."

The New York explains that the cover "combines a number of fantastical images about the Obamas and shows them for the obvious distortions they are."

In the magazine that hit newsstands Monday, the cover also shows the couple standing in the Oval Office bumping fists, which they made mainstream to white America, and burning the American flag in the fireplace.

The only thing right about the cover is that the Obamas are in the White House.









2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I really think that the envelope continues to bo pushed because of what Bill Maher termed "fake outrage". Sure, some people are really bothered by these things, but free speech comes with a price and I suppose outrage is one of them. True, it is certainly in poor taste, but I think we only fuel the flames when we become so enraged about these things. On the flip side, it seems that making light of racism is acceptable now and that perturbs me. At any rate, whether or not the Obamas are Muslim is inconsequential. They should be free from religious persecution--that should be the outrage especially in the US.

Purpleicious said...

I found the cover of the new yorker to be great. I subscribe to the audio version of the magazine, so I was not immediately aware of what it depicted and the scandal it was causing until I caught the news. Anyway, as an artist I sometimes try to visually create unfounded beliefs that people have. People may believe something without putting much thought into it, but what if they saw what they believe actually being carried out?

Let's say someone believed that women aren't as capable as men. And, I created a film where all of the women in the film were borderline retarded and needed men to help them with any complicated tasks. This satirical film would hopefully demonstrate the absurdity of those beliefs and hopefully change some of sexist viewers or make them consciously aware of what they've believed. Of course, the resolute viewer that strongly believes women are less capable then men would probably love the film and see it as affirming their beliefs (hopefully that wouldn't be many people).

People really believe that Obama's a Muslim? People REALLY believe that Michelle's a crazy militant? To me it makes sense that if you put the ridiculous ideas out in black and white you'll see how ridiculous they really are.

Of course, my interpretation is very different from the average American and irregardless of what I personally believe what I really care about are the actual repercussions of the cover of the magazine. And, I don't really believe that it made any significant changes. I don't believe that the cover caused people to change their minds or open their eyes to a new perspective of what Barak and Michelle are really trying to accomplish.

You've got:
People that are for Obama
People that are against Obama
People that don't care
People that are ignorant and looking for a magazine cover to tell them what to believe

The first group's beliefs won't be changed by the cover- they'll know it isn't a literal depiction of him or simply disagree
The second group will be happy about the cover but won't have changed
The 3rd won't pay attention and won't have changed
and the final group may actually believe what they see but in 2 weeks when something else is big news - they'll believe that.

Maybe my assessment is wrong, but I see the denouncement of the cover as just a maneuver to CYA. We're not sure whether it's offensive or not, but we'll jump on the offended bandwagon so that we're not perceived as racially insensitive.