Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
MICHELLE OBAMA: BUH BYE, CAMELOT?
"Mad Men." "Revolutionary Road." Endless Updike remembrances. It's no secret that we're living in a time of nostalgia for the early sixties. And although many of the celebrated cultural products of that era pick apart gender constructs, there's one place where the media has seemed just fine with uncritically recreating the age of stay-at-home-moms, 9 to 5 dads, and traditional values: inside the White House.
Michelle Obama is lounging sultrily on the cover of Vogue. Her official biography refers to her "first and foremost" as "Malia and Sasha's mom." Her professional mentor, Valerie Jarrett, took to the airways shortly after Election Day to reassure America that "having a seat at .... the table and being co-president is not something [Michelle is] interested in doing." Yesterday, the first lady's main activity was giving culinary students a tour of the White House kitchen. And the New York Times style section is breathlessly conveying that the Obamas are tough love, do-your-chores kind of parents; none of that wishy washy, Me Generation self-esteem stuff.
And yet, in unscripted moments and with small gestures, you can see the old Michelle Obama emerging from behind the Jackie O facade. Most obviously, there is Michelle's tour of federal agencies, where she's been pitching her husband's stimulus package and thanking tens of thousands of bureaucrats for their service. A friend pointed out to me that these events are making Michelle more visible than Joe Biden. That's true. Don't look too closely, or you might see the Obamas' marriage for what it really is: something quite like the infamous "two for the price of one" that so terrified conservatives when it came to Bill and Hillary Clinton.
I'm not one to make too much of hair. But I have to say, I was struck by this swept-back, no-nonsense look that Michelle debuted at the Department of Transportation on Friday. The first lady is lovely with the sweet up-flip 'do she's been sporting since the campaign really got down and dirty. But with this new look, Michelle appears professional. And that's exactly what she is --- even if, as she joked to a second grader earlier this month, the job she's got "doesn't pay much." (How much does it pay to play the full time role of first lady? Exactly nothing.)
--Dana Goldstein
COMMENTS (5)
The Obamas marriage may be "quite like" the Clintons' in some respects, but that's a far cry from suggesting that the Clintons' White House arrangement was some sort of modren ideal. Many of Hillary's critics were sexists and cranks. That doesn't make all criticism of the Clintons invalid. An unelected, unappointed person should not have an office in the West Wing, sit in on Cabinet meetings, and the like. I think in any marriage, particularly a modern marriage in which spouses often are peers in the same or related profession, a spouse is a valuable sounding board, a trusted advisor and confidante, and the like. But no one would suggest, in a law firm, for instance, that the managing partner's husband, also an attorney but not a member of the firm, should be sitting in on partnership meetings or given a office at the firm.
I've said this in comments before, but imagine your comfort with Todd Palin having a West Wing office, sitting in with the Cabinet, calling agency heads on behalf of the president, and the like. Again, I would hope that Michelle Obama is among the president's most important advisors. I think it would be great if she or some future First Spouse followed the Jill Biden example and got a job outside of the White House. If nepotism rules allowed, I would be fine with the First Lady or First Gentleman having an official staff position. But I really disagree with the idea that the Clinton arrangement was some sort of ideal. It was problematic in all sorts of ways.
Also, I think it's unfortunate and patronizing that you continue to suggest that Michelle Obama's emphasis of her role as amother is something being foisted upon her, as if no reasonable, successful, and educated woman could ever say such a thing unless forced to do so by her husband's advisors. I'll admit that this is a sore point because my wife stays home with our kids and probably will until they are in school full-time. Is that a legitimate choice for my wife to make? And if it's okay for her, then why not for Michelle Obama?
Posted by: John M | February 23, 2009 12:39 PM
John,
I don't think that Dana is saying that the particular description of mother is being foisted on her, but that the constant piling on of domestic descriptors without any countervailing descriptors as to her professional ability is clearly a designed marketing ploy. That she is in fact a very successful professional we should expect that she is not going to be a hand bag holding wife and mother only but instead have significant power in the white house.
And of course, none of this is new. The whole idea that the first lady is somehow just a domestic doesn't have any validity in even nineteenth century history. Polk's wife was considered to be very powerful. We always hear about Dolly Madison. Wilson's wife ran the presidency after his stroke.
Posted by: Marshall | February 23, 2009 2:12 PM
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Alanna
http://www.craigslisthelper.info
Posted by: Alanna | February 24, 2009 8:45 AM
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Alanna
http://www.craigslisthelper.info
Posted by: Alanna | February 24, 2009 8:50 AM
It was a very nice idea! Just wanna say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. I will be your loyal reader. Thanks again.
Posted by: links of london Necklace | October 27, 2009 10:44 PM