In the spring of 1983, I was Barack Obama's professor at Columbia University. Barack, or Barry as he was known then, was a senior in my class on "The Novel and Ideology." I understand from reliable sources that he liked the class and was intrigued by what I was teaching. What I taught was that while a novelist, which Obama aspired to be at that point, might feel free to improvise and create, the culture and its ideology would ultimately determine the novelist's innovations. A novelist like Herman Melville might create a story about a whale, but the larger social, cultural surround would determine the various meanings of what that whale might mean. In other words, novelists intend, but what they intend depends on how well their story fits into the current ideology.
Now let's fast-forward 27 years. I'm still a professor, but Barack Obama is President of the United States. As we approach his first State of the Union message, I wonder if it would be appropriate for me to remind my former student of the value of considering ideology at large. If we think of Obama as someone who turned his writing into impressive oratory, we have to notice that the problem is that his golden words fall on unreceptive ears. I don't think there is any question that Obama's goals are laudable and high-minded--to bring the country together, to heal old wounds, to make health care universal and affordable, to reign in the big banks' excesses, create renewable sources of energy, and end global warming. But his intentions are now being absorbed and neutralized by the ideology of the moment--and that narrative has been very successfully shaped by Republicans.
Obama's eloquence and his idealism went awry because he failed to judge the depth of the ideological surround. After his inauguration, Obama wanted to create a new era of bi-partisanship. That was his narrative, but the readership of that story came to see it through the growing world-view of the right. So bi-partisanship would be seen as Pollyannaish and ultimately ineffectual. Obama presented a message of universal and affordable health care, and the right created an ideological reception that depicted it as socialism. Cap-and-trade solutions to global warming were received as Chicken Little panicking about a made-up crisis. Each time Obama wrote his narrative, good words fell on bad ideology, and no germination could happen.
In order to regain lost ground, now Obama has to become more than an author, he has to become a counter-ideologist. What we have before us is a battle that takes place in the arena of ideas. To gird for that battle, Obama needs to become a shaper of the concepts and ideas that permeate the social consciousness of America. He has to master the narrative and change the disseminated stories. If the Republicans have written a story about Obama being a weak and dithering leader, he has to rewrite that narrative to show him as a thoughtful and effective executive. Where he is seen as a man who would dismantle the greatness of America, he has to become another hero in our nation's history. Where he is seen as a man aloof from the people, he has to tell the story he told so effectively in his books of being a spokesperson for and protector of the ordinary citizen. This kind of writing shouldn't be hard for Obama--he's a very good writer and an excellent speaker. But as I give him his mid-term grades, I would specify that he does have to apply himself to the task.
So what grade should I give Obama in his first year? Oprah asked him that very same question, and he replied that he would give himself a B+. I'd lower that assessment to a B-. But we all know that unlike George Bush, the perennial C student, Obama is an A+ go-getter. We all want our President to make the grade, and so his as his former professor I'd say--Try harder and learn the lesson of my course--if you don't control ideology, it will control you.
Follow Lennard Davis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/lendavis
Obama goofed on healthcare. He should have avoided the issue. All the GOP has to do is draw this out as long as possible to stay in control of the "narrative" the Prof. is talking about. Obama's advisors should have reminded him that it was Hillary who put the healthcare issue front and center in the public eye and this one issue would be an Achillies heel for him.
Why do you think he has toured the European Union to such an extend? It is easier to attack Mega-Trans National Corporations in the EU, because they did not have Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1 or Bush 11 with successive de-regulation, and the creation of vertical and horizontal monopoloies such as Wal-Mart or Standard Oil getting back together, or Citzen Kane-Hearst-Randolph, perahps it is the Professor who is getting the failed grade here, rather than the student.
How can any progress be made? Genetics or Genology, or Global Cooling/Warming, or Homsexuality/ Skin Color (multiple genes), the fault is societies.
Obama was naive to think that an eloquent attempt to bridge a philosophical disconnect would work when nearly half the country believes great literature can be found in the pages of a graphic novel.
Sometimes foul language and blunt candor are the best tools to breach the walls of denial that dullards put up around themselves.
Obama is nothing more than a hollywood actor playing the part of president... thats why he needs a teleprompter because he is a psuedo intellectual like all liberals do you think theres 57 states to? Breach the wall of denial that dullards put around themselves.. just classic the problem is people like you think you know better then everyone else. You know better than jefferson, lincoln, madison, washington, franklin... I think not no wonder you come here to be with your fellow pseudo intellectuals pretending you have a clue about how businesses and governmet works.
CLOWNS
You have a problem with the idea of President Obama as much as, if not more than, his job performance. Meanwhile, you, sir, are at the same lower end of the class as Dubbya and Sarah Palin. Ronald Reagan actually was "a Hollywood actor playing the part of President;" you, sir, are no Ronald Reagan.
To put it into simpler terms, let's say that I have been criticized for singing off-key. The professor would have us believe that this criticism stems exclusively from the fact that my critics are schooled in the opposing genre of music, not because I do, in fact, sing off-key. For that reason, I should "rewrite the narrative" to where my singing is merely an expression of artistic soul, or some other benign, flowery excuse. This is an absolutely absurd train of thought.
Unfortunately, this article is ultimately a useless expression of a self-important academic's opinion. I suggest that the professor develop his analysis so that the limp assignment of Obama's B- actually carries some sort of punch with it.
How much managerial experience did he have before he became President? What makes you think he's capable of being an "effective executive"?
It didn't help that he surrounded himself so intimately with the likes of Rahm, Geithner, Summers who seem fairly faaaaaaaar from the populist ideals on which he campaigned.
Obama is given no credit for trying to invoke a new spirit of civil bipartanship into our corroded public life. He tried this in good faith, but underestimated the level of cultural polarization and limits of his own personal popularity, and his more tepid advisors' interests.
From the get-go, progressives and right-wingers alike jumped him. Everywhere he was boxed in by either stonewalling, angry demands or ugly caricature of his efforts to govern.
Now he has a chance to change the narrative, just as we must adjust our expectations of him and pitch in more.
I am hoping he's got the smarts, energy and discipline to correct course, overcome the absurdly superificial day-by-day "grading" and scandal-mongering of the media, and battle the simplistic but effective distortions of the right. All good presidents have been severely tested and tumbled by the forces of history.
"Narratives" are what our impatient, disgruntled, overmediated populace lives by -- maybe what all humans do. They want a story, and the most vivid story wins even if iit's a lie. I think we should give a chastened Obama a real chance to change the narrative, infuse progressive ideology into it, t get back to fighting for people the way he did as a community organizer. Giving up on him is giving up on the society we and our children share, and that is unthinkable.
I believe Obama genuinely wants to do the right things but has not accepted the fact that change doesn't come without a fight and a commitment to his beliefs. Until he figures that out his presidency will suffer and the country along with him.
i would like him to stand up for us, scream, shake his fist, like all of us are doing, fight dammit! even if he loses, at least he tried!
we HOPED for someone to be our champion, i think he may be too cerebral for that job. there is no reasoning with the powers that be.
Obama's problems are not rhetorical but factual. It's his actions that are wrong and the mistrust he is fomenting is well deserved.
I'd say an incomplete is more likely. I'd love to hear the professors response.
He, and historically the Democrats, HAVE to do a much better job of explaining what they are trying to do to the American public,especially the 'moderates',who actually got him elected. He and his plans are being called 'socialist', 'communist' and even 'fascist' by the right wing w/ Limbaugh leading the pack. EXPLAIN to the partly uninformed how we are not becoming 'socialist'. Don't leave a vaccum in the public arena to be filled by the liars and hatemongers and spinners.
The Dems have for decades been afraid of confrontation on the large issues and just seem to wait until they have the numbers to do something. Once again, EXPLAIN,TEACH,the public why choice matters and what's at stake...why we need separation of church/state...why healthcare reform will benefit the whole society and not just those w/o insurance.... The Dems and now Obama seem to think that the public is smart enough to figure things out when simply shown the way. It doesn't work that way. We are engaged in a war of ideas pushed mostly by the Repubs w/ a masterful use of propoganda and the Dems playing defense and generally HOPING that the public will soon 'get it'. Go on the attack and PUSH your ideology or let the rightwing have the field.