packaging obama

Personally, I’ve always been a fan of the New Yorker cover.  One of the greatest visual forms of satire of American culture, I find it funny and smart, always saying a mouthful.

But the latest cover of the New Yorker is, for many, hard to swallow.  Its depiction of Barak and Michelle Obama, New Yorker defenders say, is meant to satirize how the Obamas are being portrayed, not who they really are.  Take a gander at the cover, and see what YOU think. As for myself . . . I’m still chewin’ on it.

the art of the folksy persuasion

So, I’m troubled…still.  Troubled by the attachment of intellectualism with elitism, and how it plays out in American politics.  Let me be more specific.  It seems that American politicians continue to back away from their privileged educations and shine the spotlight on their “folksy” characteristics (simulated or not) in order to win the American public’s vote.

We’ve all heard/read/talked/laughed about references to Bush and his distance from intellectualism.  The President of Barnard College, Judith Shapiro, just wrote/spoke about this topic, in reference to the Clinton/Obama battle:

“Here we had two candidates vying to run for President who had been educated at institutions that are among the most distinguished in our country: Wellesley, Yale, Columbia and Harvard.  Both candidates were obviously highly intelligent and knowledgeable.  Yet both felt the need to play down their claims to intellectuality–and the winner may still feel that need in the general election.  Hillary Clinton chugalugged beer and sought to attach the dread lable of ‘elitist’ to her rival.  And Barack Obama felt compelled to follow one of the most honest and sophisticated political speeches in recent memory with strenuous displays of folksiness” (“Staying Smart in Dumbed-Down Times”).

I guess I’m concerned by and wondering what others think about the need for political candidates–presidential candidates–to market themselves this way.  I’m all for candidates with balance: an intellectual drive and sophistication alongside a strong sense of humor, silliness…say, folksiness.  But how dangerous is a public association of intellect with elitism, and the consequent backing away from such characteristics?  And, what does it mean when the art of persuasion for political candidates rests on playing down”intellectuality”?

Going Public

A few days have passed since Friday’s presentation.  And, as Katie expressed in her post, the experience has left me reflecting not only on the organization and design of our presentations but also on the design, theory, and practice of Harlot.  Personally, Friday’s discussion with the audience was exactly what I needed.  In many respects, since I first jumped on board, with a genuine personal and intellectual interest and devotion to the project, I have not really stepped outside of it or forced myself to see the project from multiple views.  Some of the issues raised during the question/answer session on Friday forced me to begin that process–an important one, and a timely (kairotic, perhaps) one.

It’s a good time to reflect on what we’ve done so far–what we’ve put into action–and how well it fits with our goals and philosophy.  One of the greatest challenges we face (and we were reminded of this on Friday) is gaining interest from and facilitating engagement with the public…and this is central to Harlot.  How will we capture the attention of the public?  How will we gain their interest and respect?  What will make them want to participate and to continue to participate in Harlot?

Though this week we need to focus our attention on revising our presentations for the Fem(s) Rhet(s) conference on Friday, I think when we return, we need to spend more time working with the public on Harlot.  We need to talk to more non-academics as we move forward with this project.  We need to “go public.”

to educate and/or to entertain?

They say that when you’re working on your dissertation, you can’t help but think of everything in relation to your project.  I’d like to think that doesn’t apply to me, but, in fact, I do find myself thinking about all things as they relate to the issues of intellectualism and anti-intellectualism in American culture (the focus of my project).

Bear with me here.  Recently, I’ve been researching the 19th-Century lyceum in the U.S. and its role in fostering or stifling intellectualism.  In brief, the lyceum consisted of a series of public lectures; town meetings, debates, and discussions; and various newsletters and journals–all with the goal of “disseminating useful knowledge” to the American public.  Though this relates to Harlot in a number of ways (of course), one important issue in the literature about the 19th-C. lyceum pertinent to a discussion of Harlot is the relationship between education and entertainment.

Both the organizers and participants in the various forms of the lyceum in the U.S. emphasized the importance of making the lyceum both educational and entertaining.  The lectures, the discussions and debates, and the publications all had as a part of their mission to provide “useful knowledge” AND entertain.

Isn’t that what Harlot is and will be doing?  We want to have interesting, thoughtful conversations (thanks to 21st Century media) that are also fun and entertaining–in various forms, with a variety of participants.

Wow….everything really does (or can) relate back to your own research.  Whew….

Making Harlot Happen

I second Katie (and Tim’s) shout-out of thanks to all who are making Harlot happen!  As we discuss our plans for our upcoming presentations about Harlot, its origins, its purposes, and the philosophy behind it, I can’t help but acknowledge how important the support of others has been.  Though I wasn’t a part of the original conversation(s) that produced Harlot, I was happy to join the troupe because I agree with the philosophy of Harlot–as do many others.

My personal philosophy–as a scholar, a teacher, and a citizen–is centered on initiating, supporting, and participating in conversations bridging sometimes hidden/sometimes obvious gap between the university and the community.  It is in those conversations that the real intellectual work happens–and blossoms.

Tomorrow is the due date of the submissions for the pilot of Harlot (yeah!), and I look forward to seeing what conversations are initiated…and where they take us!