New Yorker, What Were You Thinking?

Ramatuelle, France. Here in my tiny medieval village in the south of France I have to hike up the hill into the center of town to borrow some wifi. This morning, after buying some croissants and a Herald Tribune, I was passing through the town square when I saw something that stopped me in my tracks. A young, North African man was wearing a black T-shirt with an image of George Bush putting a gun to his own head.

"Kill Yourself. Save the Planet," it said in English.

Besides being illegal in the United States, the shirt turned my stomach. I'm no fan of the worst president of the United States ever, but the shirt was not only tasteless it was artless and ugly.

The current cover of my favorite magazine ever is only a little better.

I consider myself a satirist myself, bridle at any and all PC constraints, and of course coming from a venerable, legendary and reliably center-left magazine, I get the intended joke, but dressing up perhaps the next president of the United States as the new millennium equivalent of Adolf Hitler is just gross and dumb.

Imagine instead almost the same cover although in the corner some right-wing icon like Limbaugh, Cheney or O'Reilly, via some thought bubbles, imagining the Obamas like that. At least then the offensive absurdity of the point of view would be inescapable and we would all be allowed to laugh at it.

Or better yet, picture a middle-aged married couple watching the Obama's on TV and the husband imagining them as the terrorists so depicted, while the wife seeing them as the reincarnation of JFK and Jackie O. That would, I think, nicely illustrate the point of the cover, the extreme visions many in this nation have around the probable future first couple.

Anything would have been better than what they did.

www.treyellis.com

Comments

[knighthowl]

Where do you get the idea that the T-shirt you describe would be illegal in the U.S.? I am an attorney in California. I see no reason to think that such a shirt would be illegal here. It is free speech, plain and simple.

[andrewjlederer]

Trey, it is funny.

I am an Obama supporter. But I do not believe satire should be repealed in the service of his campaign.

Relax.

[MyGuyO]

How lucky can you be living in MY south of France!

[JohnTalbutt]

One of the most discouraging things is that people say it is satire and then make disparaging marks about the American people for being "too dumb to get it".

The New Yorker editors knew exactly what they were doing.

Most Americans who saw this cartoon would think that it made Obama, Muslims and black people look ridiculous. They would perceive it as racist.

They would be right.

[XCITIZEN]

Thank you - I agree - it only makes me more sick to hear all these elitists gurgling about how stupid we are because we 'don't get it' when in reality, THEY don't get it - they somehow have a huge moral blind spot where it comes to racism, xenophobia, and this anti-democratic attack.

And I agree too that the editors at The New Yorker knew exactly what they were doing. This smear smells of a certain New Yorker we have all heard way to much from during this contentious campaign.

Who does Hillary Clinton know over at The New Yorker?

[Brillig]

So, the NEW YORKER prints a cover purporting to be "satire" and nobody gets it?

WHY?

Because there were no clues on that cover to indicate this was a joke! And most of us don't live in the snide, cynical, elitist stratosphere of the New Yorker readership.

And because it was NOT a joke! It was a depiction of the OBAMAS as the right wing would like them to be seen, painted by so-called "liberals" But why? And this is the really sad part...because, the Obamas are Black! That is the only conclusion I can draw - could it really be so? That in 2008, black and white are so different that some whites, no matter their leanings, just will NOT lean Black?

Why was this not a picture of Rush Limbaugh, with a think- balloon over his head, imagining the Obamas like that? That would have been satirizing the right wingers!

The New Yorker may be right to protect white elitism - after all, it has often been said
"Once you've gone black, you won't go back" though of course in an entirely different context!

[andrewjlederer]

Brillig -- The "clue" is that it was on the cover of The New Yorker.

[SifSkade]

Right. You are supposed to know that the editorial board is too intellectually-gifted, high-minded, and progressive to believe the tripe in the cover illustration; therefore, the cover must be satirizing anyone who does.

Too self-referential to work. By which I mean to say, this cover went over like a pregnant polevaulter.

[disgusted48]

You live in the south of France? Are you accepting visitors?

[FrictionSoul]

My favorite comes from Bob Cesca's website in which a reader suggested that the cover be the cover of a rag that Karl Rove was "reading" while jerking off. Crude, but gets the point off quicker, pun intended.

[Kirby]

Subtle, very pointed, however, are the content and sure motivational intent the "cartoon" harbors for all to ponder. This is a low blow, lower than the snipper, Jesse Jackson' s mean spirited snippet and probable jealous short rant. Hundreds of thousands of the USA's comic book crowd will say all the more so, "I told you so." And the number of votes going to McCain is a real gift to his cause, given in a masterful way by The New Yorker.

The rancoring aspect of this so-called cartoon lies in the outright hatred required to draw the bilge.
Little wonder that FrictionSoul mentions a Bob Cesca Reader visualizing the likes of a Karl Rove manually "getting off."

[ShanniC]

It's safe to say that the New Yorker f'd up! I'll even agree with the anti-Bush shirt. Yes, he is the worst president ever, but no one deserves that level hatred, not even Dubya. As for the New Yorker, perhaps they were trying to garner much needed attention. Whatever the case, it comes as no surprise that the MSM will do anything to portray the Obamas as "other" aka "not like us" aka BLACK.

[karma13612]

Trey!

Your ideas would have been brilliant!

I wonder if it is any coincidence that you came up with these ideas while 'off shore'. Sometimes I think Americans need some perspective. I know that New York (where I lived for years) has such a level of intensity that it effects some people's mindset. Edginess, cynicism, defensiveness, and even to the point of aggression and paranoia.

Most of America isn't going to 'get' this cartoon.
I hope the New Yorker 'gets' that.

[Dunsmuir]

To WriterWriter: Amen. I could not have written it better. WAKE UP AMERICA> The World is watching you as never before. They don't like what they see.

[onedivasinger]

I don't like what I see either. The embarrassment grows day by day. The so called sophisticated press doesn't get it, our so called leaders don't get it. How scary and pitiful we must appear. Can the country who allows gross criminal acts of torture, illegal war, greed and corruption, spying on its citizens, and still the ridiculous stench of racism really be a leader as we move forward at the most critical time of change in centuries ?

[mimsnpips]

Most of the world doesn't like us, some hate us. European rock groups write lyrics such as "how can we win when fools can be king?". And here we go allowing the most inspirational candidate in decades to be made a fool of.

Blogging is fine but we need the youth to rise up in demonstrations against the unjustices done to the innocent. Not just Michael Stype singing a nice song, but also Rage Against the Machine who may reunite just to condemn our evil empire. I am old and bustd up but I'll do my part.

Revolt. It's the American way.

[Jey]

This is the thing Americans and the media do not know how to think anymore. It's quite scary.

[dac253]

Yes, this cover is satire and it's pretty disturbing because as a wise man once said, "There'll always be more dumb people than smart people," so we're afraid Dipsh*t Donnie in Redneckville, U.S.A. wont "get it."

Chris Matthews, in his book, says that in the game of politics it is best to attack from a defensive position because it gets sympathy from the voters, and he's right.

What happened when Wright went after Obama on Moyers and at the Press Club? Obama hits the homerun.

The white priest that went off on Hillary at Trinity allowed him to disown that church,... homerun.

Jesse Jackson 'nuts' comment,... homerun.

New Yorker's libel-flavored satire,... Obama swings and drives the ball deep.

Meanwhile, every point is made and Barack comes up smellin' like a rose.

The New Yorker has done what my black brothers have done with the N word. They used it satirically amongst themselves and it took the sting out of it. My white brothers still can't use the N word and Dipsh*t Donnie still can't call Barack a secret fanatical Muslim that hates America.

It's all good. Lay off the New Yorker folks,... they ain't heavy, they're my brother.

[huzzah]

I agree for the most part. I would bet the majority of the New Yorker's readers got the satire. I did and I don't even read the New Yorker. The danger is in people who know nothing about it seeing the cover and assuming the magazine is affirming all the smears. Had they just run a headline on the cover -- "Why Morons Believe Obama's a Terrorist", or something else that screams, "Hey, this is satire!" -- this to-do would have largely been avoided, I believe.

[chumleypotts]

Much ado about nothing. A person with a modicum of intelligence should be capable of comprehending the nuanced subtlety of wry humor.

[Hatchibakku99]

You must not receive the same e-mails that I do. Too many people are falling for things like the report that Senator Obama wants to substitute, "I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing" for "The Star Spangled Banner" as our national anthem (which also started out as a satirical piece). These are being passed along by intelligent, functional (albeit misinformed) people. Don't assume that everyone has your apparently outstanding powers of discernment.

[Jezreel]

Anyone with a modicum of intelligence coupled with sensitivity to racial and cultural disparities and an awareness of the deep seated hatred that perpetuated during this campaign cycle by Conservatives and supporters of Hillary Clinton would have enough sense not to publish such an ugly image. They would understand that doing so will only add fodder to arsenal of Senator Obama's political adversaries.Does Senator Obama's rejection of the New Yorker cover image unveil his ignorance and incapacity for comprehending the nuanced subtleties (corrected spelling) of wry humor?

[tecpatl]

You need to get out more. The majority of people are not smart and they lead their lives without a modicum of intelligence. That's the problem.

[ckdogs]

This is true! I can think of so many people that I know (highly educated) who will look at that, and say "I thought so!"
My basic bias against any sort of censorship is so strong that I still defend their right to print it - but as noted by Mr. Trey - they could have done the same thing in a smarter way. But it's a tempest in a teapot. Obama will be fine.

[zuzuzpetals]

As H.L Mencken once said:

"You'll never go broke underestimating the American public"

[lizr]

dont expect so much from the american people and you wont be disappointed.

[XCITIZEN]

A person with a modicum of intelligence would not feel the need to use overwrought phraseology like 'a modicum of intelligence' and 'the nuanced subtlety of wry humor.'

[PJay1]

I don't think for one second that this was intended to be satire.
The people at the New Yorker are too smart to not know that this was over the top.

I believe it was intentional, designed to etch this powerful image into the minds of the masses.

They like themselves the *white* candidate who will keep them profiteering with blood money. Literally.

I agree, Mr. Ellis, this is the equivalent of him as Hitler and his swastika.

[NTO08]

The masses don't read The New Yorker. Not it's readership base at all...but Upper West Side liberals, yes.

[PJay1]

No, but they see the offensive 'thousand words' on every cable and network news channel, as well as all over the blogosphere.

And even if they did read, the article within has nothing to do with the cover picture. Nothing.
It doesn't even say "politics of fear". Not within the pages, not on the cover.

Mission accomplished by NewYorker just like SNL did for Hillary before the primaries.

Hopefully, it will backfire, just as SNL did.

[norkas]

There has been race problems in Israel and here amoung the Jewish communtiy that have gone on for over a 1000 years. I have spoke to many Jews about this and after having a honest discussion they admit it and honestly say they never thought of it. So here is the race issue.

There are sephardic Jews with darker skin and there are Ashkenazic Jews mostly from Europe that are white. The Ashkenazic Jews belive they are superior to the Sephardic Jews and this behavior is the same today as it was in ancient times.

If a Ashkenzic Jew were to marry a Sephardic Jew it could cause a rift in the famlies and Rabbis would frown upon this marriage. This is a fact and it is the same thing almost all religion here and anywhere else in the world.

Moses married women of darker color and this also caused trouble and was suppose to be a lesson on racisim.

When was the last time that a religious teacher or leader demand that were are ALL G-DS CHILDREN regardless of color and it is anti G-D to be a racist. NEVER and these religious teachers and leaders have caused allot of harm regardless if they were black or white.

There are many Modern Jews that are supporting Obama with vigor and i am proud of them

[DaOne]

To those who get it, the cover is satirical.

To the 13% out there who think he's a muslim, it only reinforces the warped views they have. What are the odds of turning any of these 13% if they were so warped as to have their views reinforced?

That's why this cover was ill conceived.

[BrianManning81]

I agree. It only helps to reinforce every gross misgivings ignorance brings forth concerning the Obama's.

[NTO08]

A New Yorker cartoon wouldn't change or unchange their minds in a million years...

[SifSkade]

FOX News and other outlets have done such an excellent smear job that there are many Americans out there who believe, suspect, or fear that the Obamas might actually be, to some degree, the sly, furtive, deceptive, America-hating terrorists depicted in the cartoon. So many Americans, in fact, that those who believe that the depiction of the Obamas in this illustration is blatantly absurd, as Blitt claims to have felt, is nowhere near large enough to make any satire that may be present in this cartoon instantly and widely accessible. Plus, let's face it -- this cartoon wasn't so deep or meta that it was beyond the ken of the masses of posters on here who objected to it -- it was just a very poorly-executed, third-rate satire, and that's what people were objecting to. Blitt both drew too much and didn't draw enough (Mr. Ellis's bubble suggestion or something similar would have solved the issue), and the result was the setup of a joke without the punchline. Mike Luckovich on his worst day wouldn't have put something like this out there.