This speech is why I have had greater hopes for what Michelle can do for women than what Hillary can. But I really hope that she gets to be the career woman she has been in the next four years. I'm so curious to see how her time in the white house will unfold.
(side note--as an intelligent woman who has a side interest in fashion, they don't have to be mutually exclusive. But I wish that while people were talking about what Michelle is wearing they were also talking about what she is thinking. Of course, she is also a private person interested in protecting herself and her family--see her comment made several years ago recently published in the New Yorker about being reluctant at first to enter the political stage. Perhaps we don't know what she is thinking because she wants to keep it to herself.)
A little of topic, but it's these false dichotomies (what Hillary DID and what Michelle will do are NOT mutually exclusive) that allow the spirits of descension and partisanism (yes even within the party) to exist.
I have never understood the need for "intelligent" people to create these ersatz vis-a-vis scenarios when discussing social issues.
It seems like we treat advancement in social issues as a football game, keeping points and stats, that ultimately turn supporters of the same cause into opponents of which we gladly choose sides.
During the campaign, I think Mrs. Obama did what a good wife does for her husband (which is, incidentally, the same thing a good husband does for his wife): she did what she could to ease his walk along the path toward success. That required a shift in her public persona. A lot of white folks just aren't ready for an assertive black woman to represent them; a softer Michelle probably helped change a few minds and a few votes. We can debate the need for that shift, and why it's unfair, and I'm dismayed that it was necessary--but it was, so there.
I also believe that now that the race has been won, she will begin another shift; her first job is Mom-in-Chief, but she plans on keeping herself busy with projects and programs that deal with military families and the people who live in the DC area. Mrs. Obama's appearance at the Ledbetter signing means that she plans to make herself visible for causes that are important to her. By becoming First Mom, she's also becoming First Woman--and that affords her the chance to be outspoken on behalf of women all over the country. I wager we'll be seeing the "old Michelle" sooner than we think.
:-)
k1--thanks for calling me out. I hate dichotomies (I'm trying, in what I write, to get way beyond the accomodationist/activist thing because I think people make choices given their current constraints and live somewhere in the middle). And yet...it is soooo easy to categorize things into two.
I didn't really mean to compare Hillary and Michelle. I guess I was trying to explain why I was immediately attracted to Michelle and less so to Hillary. (I wish I could use their last names out of respect, but those seem to be taken). I wasn't raised with many examples of women successfully mediating work and family. I've also never seen a public woman who seems so committed to their family. I hate to use such an ambiguous term, but the Obamas just seem like "real" folk in a way the other politicians of my lifetime haven't. I can actually imagine them trying to figure out the work-life balance, whereas I have this default setting where other celebrities exist in some other universe without demanding relationships.
Maybe all this says more about me than them. :-)
P.S. I don't normally go around touting my intelligence, but I felt like I should mention it in the fashion thing. In fact, I have never written that sentence before.
k1--you called me out on something else, too--the need to make individuals into blanket shorthand for social situations. That is a persistent problem in our society (and in my brain--for example, I used "Hitler" on one of my exams to mean the whole Nazi system). There's an interesting hour of radio about America's tendency towards individualizing history, particularly through the presidents, here: http://www.backstoryradio.org/2009/01/transfer-your-power/
That was one of my favorite Michelle speeches, but my favorite for me personally is that South Carolina speech that she did.
Look, this country has problems and will continue to have problems with an intelligent, strong BLACK woman that shatters every comfortable stereotype that they have about Black women.
After spending centuries taking care of other people's children, hearing Michelle stand up unapologetically and proclaim that her first priority is taking care of the well-being of HER children...makes me smile everytime I hear it.
If she did nothing more than everything Laura Bush did, it would still be different because it's Michelle Obama doing it. So, if she only did that, and provided The President, with a comfort zone that allows him to keep his sanity over the next 4 years...Michelle Obama would have done enough. Anything else she does, is just gravy.
I hope and really think Michelle will do what every other modern "First Lady" has done: define this job--and it is a job--on her own terms. But she would also do well to remember what Barbara Bush said: "I don't want George to spend one dime of political capital cleaning up my mistakes." She wanted no public daylight between her opinions on policy issues and those of her husband. After getting slammed, for instance, for telling a reporter that she thought assault rifles should be illegal, which was at odds with her husband's stated position, the only public disagreement I can recall was over whether certain green vegetables would be served at the White House. Mrs. Bush believed that because, unlike her husband, she never "had the guts" to run for political office, even as First Lady (a term she never liked and never used) no one was entitled to her opinion but herself.
I just wanted to say that I loved your story about M. Obama in the article about an american girl. I like how you explained her history and how it has shaped her point of view. I also admire your writing style. It's beautiful and fluid and filled with stunning imagery. Thanks.
Here's a piece no one cared about. Meh, whatever, probably the most enjoyable article I did during my stint at TIME. Premiered a month before I got laid-off. The nail in the coffin? Ya think?
Here's me going after Al. I didn't so much have a problem with him, as I had a problem with media acting like this dude was the go-to guy for everything black.
This was my first real story at time. I was writing for the Business section, a real change of direction for me. At any rate, it's about Wal-Mart's attempts to colonize the inner-city. As much as I enjoyed this piece, I mostly enjoyed going out to Chicago, which is a beautiful, beautiful city.
This a piece I did about the cops just outside our nation capitol, in Prince George's County, a few years back. I wanted to offer a counter to the dumb, conventional wisdom that if you paint your police force black, you could eradicate police brutality. In fact, Prince George's--one of the richest, blackest counties in the country--also had one of the most brutal police force's in the country.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
This speech is why I have had greater hopes for what Michelle can do for women than what Hillary can. But I really hope that she gets to be the career woman she has been in the next four years. I'm so curious to see how her time in the white house will unfold.
(side note--as an intelligent woman who has a side interest in fashion, they don't have to be mutually exclusive. But I wish that while people were talking about what Michelle is wearing they were also talking about what she is thinking. Of course, she is also a private person interested in protecting herself and her family--see her comment made several years ago recently published in the New Yorker about being reluctant at first to enter the political stage. Perhaps we don't know what she is thinking because she wants to keep it to herself.)
Lauren-
A little of topic, but it's these false dichotomies (what Hillary DID and what Michelle will do are NOT mutually exclusive) that allow the spirits of descension and partisanism (yes even within the party) to exist.
I have never understood the need for "intelligent" people to create these ersatz vis-a-vis scenarios when discussing social issues.
It seems like we treat advancement in social issues as a football game, keeping points and stats, that ultimately turn supporters of the same cause into opponents of which we gladly choose sides.
k1
ryanculver.blogspot.com
During the campaign, I think Mrs. Obama did what a good wife does for her husband (which is, incidentally, the same thing a good husband does for his wife): she did what she could to ease his walk along the path toward success. That required a shift in her public persona. A lot of white folks just aren't ready for an assertive black woman to represent them; a softer Michelle probably helped change a few minds and a few votes. We can debate the need for that shift, and why it's unfair, and I'm dismayed that it was necessary--but it was, so there.
I also believe that now that the race has been won, she will begin another shift; her first job is Mom-in-Chief, but she plans on keeping herself busy with projects and programs that deal with military families and the people who live in the DC area. Mrs. Obama's appearance at the Ledbetter signing means that she plans to make herself visible for causes that are important to her. By becoming First Mom, she's also becoming First Woman--and that affords her the chance to be outspoken on behalf of women all over the country. I wager we'll be seeing the "old Michelle" sooner than we think.
:-)
k1--thanks for calling me out. I hate dichotomies (I'm trying, in what I write, to get way beyond the accomodationist/activist thing because I think people make choices given their current constraints and live somewhere in the middle). And yet...it is soooo easy to categorize things into two.
I didn't really mean to compare Hillary and Michelle. I guess I was trying to explain why I was immediately attracted to Michelle and less so to Hillary. (I wish I could use their last names out of respect, but those seem to be taken). I wasn't raised with many examples of women successfully mediating work and family. I've also never seen a public woman who seems so committed to their family. I hate to use such an ambiguous term, but the Obamas just seem like "real" folk in a way the other politicians of my lifetime haven't. I can actually imagine them trying to figure out the work-life balance, whereas I have this default setting where other celebrities exist in some other universe without demanding relationships.
Maybe all this says more about me than them. :-)
P.S. I don't normally go around touting my intelligence, but I felt like I should mention it in the fashion thing. In fact, I have never written that sentence before.
k1--you called me out on something else, too--the need to make individuals into blanket shorthand for social situations. That is a persistent problem in our society (and in my brain--for example, I used "Hitler" on one of my exams to mean the whole Nazi system). There's an interesting hour of radio about America's tendency towards individualizing history, particularly through the presidents, here: http://www.backstoryradio.org/2009/01/transfer-your-power/
That was one of my favorite Michelle speeches, but my favorite for me personally is that South Carolina speech that she did.
Look, this country has problems and will continue to have problems with an intelligent, strong BLACK woman that shatters every comfortable stereotype that they have about Black women.
After spending centuries taking care of other people's children, hearing Michelle stand up unapologetically and proclaim that her first priority is taking care of the well-being of HER children...makes me smile everytime I hear it.
If she did nothing more than everything Laura Bush did, it would still be different because it's Michelle Obama doing it. So, if she only did that, and provided The President, with a comfort zone that allows him to keep his sanity over the next 4 years...Michelle Obama would have done enough. Anything else she does, is just gravy.
I hope and really think Michelle will do what every other modern "First Lady" has done: define this job--and it is a job--on her own terms. But she would also do well to remember what Barbara Bush said: "I don't want George to spend one dime of political capital cleaning up my mistakes." She wanted no public daylight between her opinions on policy issues and those of her husband. After getting slammed, for instance, for telling a reporter that she thought assault rifles should be illegal, which was at odds with her husband's stated position, the only public disagreement I can recall was over whether certain green vegetables would be served at the White House. Mrs. Bush believed that because, unlike her husband, she never "had the guts" to run for political office, even as First Lady (a term she never liked and never used) no one was entitled to her opinion but herself.
Shouldn't that be 'when "you're" the first lady'?
Grammar police.
I just wanted to say that I loved your story about M. Obama in the article about an american girl. I like how you explained her history and how it has shaped her point of view. I also admire your writing style. It's beautiful and fluid and filled with stunning imagery. Thanks.