Loury and McWhorter on the Obama/King comparison

Loury is peeved that "image-makers" are juxtaposing King's speech in 1963 with Obama's speech this year at the DNC. The dates, for all who don't know, are exactly 45 years apart. I kind of get Loury's beef--and then not so much. First off, Obama didn't set the date--it would have been the same if Kucinich had won. Second, Loury's critique--of media--posits a time when the MSM were a great asset to black folks, except mostly they've been a hindrance. If you look at the epoch of lynching, for instance, perhaps no institution, short of the government, has more blood on its hands than American newspapers. I mean really, King's own family sold off his image to Alactel, I really can't have a beef with him being associated with Obama. Ultimately I come down with McWhorter--it's stupid to act like this is some sort of equivalent to 1963. But that's because history hadn't played out yet. IN 1963, it would have been stupid to compare "I Have a Dream" to the Gettysburg address. We just don't know what's going to happen yet. Anyway watch the rest of the episode. It's pretty good.

Comments

dan July 26, 2008 10:40 AM

Thoughtful and, in my opinion, accurate insight. The only thing is, you might want to look at, "it would have been the same if Kucinich had one".

Clearly, Kuncinich isn't the tallest man on the Hill, but calling him a 1 seems a little petty.

Reality Man July 26, 2008 11:05 AM

I get Loury's point, but not sure I agree with it. I wonder how much of Loury's anger is generational. Obama has pretty much eclipsed a whole lot of older black leaders and thinkers in importance rather quickly (as Loury noted about Cornell West and Loury also backed Clinton out of generational solidarity). There isn't a direct line from "I have a dream" to the Obama nomination, but there is a strong connection in that King's successes helped lay the foundation and forged the struggle that have made Obama's run possible. While younger Americans of all races see Obama's rise in joy and excitement, Loury seems to see it with a lot more grief and sorrow.

Martin July 26, 2008 3:00 PM

Like TNC, I get the frustration, but it's a shrug. Does Brokaw's book The Greatest Generation have to be the equivalent of WWII in order to honor it? Isn't it the function of lesser entities to honor great events from the past, while it is the lot of great events of the present (9/11, say) to approximate great events from the past (Pearl Harbor) without having anything, properly speaking, to do with them?

In other words, Obama has two tasks before him ... to honor and possibly appropriate MLK in 2008, something that really anyone can do ... HRC, Newt Gingrich could have done so, did do so in various ways. What Lowry is asking has to do with the other part of Obama's job, which is to approximate the world-historical impact of, say, FDR -- that's the yardstick McWhorter is bringing to bear. We know that MLK can be honored, we don't know if FDR or Lincoln can be approximated -- indeed, probably not. But if he's as good a president as Ike or Clinton or Truman, one of many B-tier presidents, then we'll have a lot more to discuss than his not very meaningful appropriation of MLK.

JT (Chicago) July 27, 2008 1:36 AM

I remember waching Rev. MLK's speech in 1963. I was 6 years old and standing in a department store with almost all the tvs tuned to the speech.

I knew it was important becaue so many people stopped shopping and were gathered watching, listening. I was struck by the moment, watching people in the store: some black women crying silently, some black men saying yes quietly, some white men & women shaking their heads in opposition while other white folks nodded in agreement with the words being said.

It was exciting and a bit scary for me to see the effect these words coming from the tv had on people. I wasn't sure what to make of it but I knew it was very important.

I remember my own mom & dad quietly discussing the speech on the drive home and I remember wanting to join in the discussion. So I asked them if the man who gave the speech was now our President. They laughed, but I thought it was a reasonable question given that the speech was made in Washington in front of so many people and how everybody stopped to watch in the store.

I wonder if I'll have the same feeling about the speech in Denver next month. It's probably too much to ask of Senator Obama to reach the lofty heights of "I have a dream" but he has risen to the moment a few times already. We shall see.

Nquest July 27, 2008 12:42 PM

The prevailing narrative on "I Have A Dream" being what it is... if I was a ban person (like people who want to ban the N-word), I think a movement to ban King's speech from history and people's historical memory would be in order.

Indeed, it's that speech or a line or two from that speech to the exclusion of other lines in the Bounced Check speech that has been misappropriated by the likes of HRC and Gingrich.

Don't worry, though, I won't touch the June 23, 1963, older version of the speech made in Detroit, MI and I must admit I'm bit particle to the "we can never be satisfied" portion in the August 28, 1963 version as well as the "insufficient funds" part.

Ren Mahoney July 27, 2008 11:45 PM

I die a little inside each time I remember that the King legacy is 'owned' (what does that even mean??) by a godforsaken telephone company!

Thanks (I think?) for reminding me how many compromises our posterity can make (each in small, unobjectionable increments), to besmirch our good name.

BTW, I hate that I'm such a pedant, but your spell-checker's not working right--please double-check 'hindrance' and 'equivalent'.