This cover appears on this month's New Yorker magazine. How disappointing for a thinking-man's periodical to stoop to the lowest possible level to explain its position. I am embarrassed to even look at the image.
On so many levels, this is wrong. Just wrong. The image of the militant woman (ostensibly Mrs. Obama) disturbs me more than the parody of Obama in the traditional African garb. The images tell two different stories about how the Obamas are being perceived, even by the most liberal people in American.
Barack Obama's image is almost so literal that it doesn't meet the parody standard. It's simply a cartoon image of something that already came out. Michelle Obama's image is so far off base, so outrageous, it defies explanation. What, just because she has a voice and an opinion, and chooses to use her voice, she all of a sudden becomes a gun-toting Black Panther? It takes a small mind, indeed, to portray her in this way. Parodies are supposed to remind us of some sort of truth, however stereotypical, of the individual portrayed. The recognition of the irony unconsciously makes us laugh, even if it's inappropriate. I don't recognize this image as Michelle Obama. There is nothing in it that even slightly resembles her persona, even though the drawing itself is a remarkable likeness of her face.
I'm glad that most members of the media have come out denouncing the cover. I used to enjoy the New Yorker, but will purposely avoid it now. I don't want to read the prognostications of such juvenille writers and editors. Shame on the editor of the New Yorker for not knowing the difference between satire and racism.