This is my rewrite of the blog post “Michelle Obama and the Politics of Shifting” on Womanist Musings. I tried to preserve her opinions (which I do not completely agree with) but wrote it the way I would have. It is a writing exercise on my part.
Michelle Obama will be America’s first black first lady. Think of it: a black woman held up to America as the height of grace, beauty and intelligence! She is already being compared to Jackie O.
And yet even though Michelle Obama will look black on the outside, she will have to act like she is white on the inside. She will have to hide her blackness.
Many whites are comfortable with her as a buppie – a black urban professional. But when she lets her black side show, when she questions the built-in unfairness of American society, it starts to make whites uncomfortable.
Imagine, for example, if she brought up something as simple as serving collard greens in her interview with Barbara Walters. How would that have changed the interview? When you remind white people that you are black, it makes them uncomfortable. Americans are all supposed to be the same but they are not the same.
Barack Obama fed this lie when he said that there is no white America and no black America, just the United States of America. It is a lie because America is still divided by race, The death threats against him show it. But now Michelle is a slave to that lie. To be her natural black self would make too many white people uncomfortable and cost her husband the support he needs.
To make it to the top of American society you need more than just money. You need to act white too – or be cast out. Because the top of American society is that white. Whites set the unwritten rules for that level of society.
Why do Bill Cosby and Shelby Steele put down ghetto behaviour so much? Is it to help poor black people in the ghetto? No: it is to show rich white people that they are not one of “those people”.
Michelle Obama grew up as one of “those people”. She will have to distance herself.
As buppies the Obamas already act white to a degree. But now they will have to go all the way or find themselves shut out.
That New Yorker cover where Michelle has an Afro is a sign and a warning, even if it was meant as a piece of humour. It is a sign that natural blackness – like the Afro – is not acceptable to whites, that it is even a bit threatening. And a warning of the kinds of things that could come if the upper reaches of white America start to see the Obamas as “not one of us”.
So Michelle will have to hide her true black self in public and keep it to her private moments. Most public figures have to watch what they say and do, it is true, but for Michelle it goes beyond that to who she is as a person.
That is the price of success.
See also:
- Michelle Obama and the Politics of Shifting – the post on Womanist Musings that this is a rewrite of.
- colonial intelligentsia – how they have to walk a fine line between their own people and the colonial masters. Think Gandhi, Lenin and even Martin Luther King, Jr.
Why do Bill Cosby and Shelby Steele put down ghetto behaviour so much? Is it to help poor black people in the ghetto? No.
Right, because there\’s no causal link between ghetto behavior and ghetto poverty. None whatsoever.
LikeLike
Also, there can\’t be any legitimate reasons why people, white or black, may object to ghetto culture. No, that must be because the former are \”racist\” and the latter are Uncle Toms.
LikeLike
No Abagond you did not get the point of that post at all.
LikeLike
Thanks. I will reread it.
LikeLike
I’m still pissed The New Yorker showed Michelle in an afro as if showing your hair in its natural state is a bad thing.
LikeLike
I understand the idea of a black person concealing a lot of their natural “blackness” in mixed company. You can say that about any ethnicity. I mean, I doubt a Latin American will start speaking Spanish during a board meeting with non-Spanish speakers. There’s all sorts of cultural cues that we don’t act out in front of people who are not part of the culture.
But to say that you have to play at being white to “make it” and sacrifice your entire being is both noxious and false. There’s many examples of non-whites (and hell, even some unorthodox whites) who made it to the top doing it THEIR WAY.
How is Michelle “acting white”? What do you want her to do? Start talking slang? Tell Barbara Walters about her favorite catfish dish? Who’s to say that’s even part of her character? Isn’t that stereotyping?
And Michelle and her family grew up perfectly middle class in Chicago, IL. Her brother, Craig and she are both Ivy League graduates so …I don’t get the “not one of those people” remark. Huh?
Barack and Michelle have always been true to themselves. And in this case, always true to their blackness. Of course, they can’t go overboard with racial rheotric but in no ways do I see how these two people are attempting to play down their ethnicity. Or act like something that they’re not.
LikeLike
To be fair, Renee says I misread her. So I will have to reread her and bring this post into line with hers.
If anyone can point out some of the ways I missed her point, that would be super.
LikeLike
mynameismyname: I do agree that you do not have to act white to make it in America. Those who do are making a serious mistake because of what they are doing to themselves.
I also agree that Michelle and Barack are presenting themselves pretty much as they are, Michelle in particular.They are not hiding who they are.
But I do think that they are watching what they say, particularly Michelle since her “really proud” statement and Barack ever since the beginning.
When he says there is no white America and no black America but only the United States of America – I can understand that as a hope, as the way it should be, but not as a fact and neither can he.
LikeLike
Kat: right, the Afro. Michelle does not wear her hair that way, so they had to add it – at the same time they were adding the machine gun, the burning American flag, Barack’s Muslim clothes and the picture of Osama bin Laden. Wow.
LikeLike
nonserviam, you said,
Right, because there’s no causal link between ghetto behavior and ghetto poverty. None whatsoever.
Right, because their is no causal link between white behaviour and ghettos. None whatsoever.
LikeLike
From earlier threads on this and related topics regulars know that I think the line of thinking “a black person who doesn’t exhibit at least a modicum of ghetto behavior is somehow pathalogically in denial of his blackness” is a crock.
However, I do agree with this statement: “Imagine, for example, if she brought up something as simple as serving collard greens in her interview with Barbara Walters. How would that have changed the interview? When you remind white people that you are black, it makes them uncomfortable.”
We are a nation where white people have failed to distinguish between things that are racial and things that are racist. I blame PC liberal culture, which has shamed whites into denying the existence of race at all as a default because this avoids confronting the uncomofortable issue of whether a statement or an action or a neighbor or family member is or is not racist.
LikeLike
abagond, you asked for other perspectives on where your post and Renee’s differ–I read both posts, and I think Blanc2 is onto something useful in that regard here:
However, I do agree with this statement: “Imagine, for example, if she brought up something as simple as serving collard greens in her interview with Barbara Walters. How would that have changed the interview? When you remind white people that you are black, it makes them uncomfortable.”
Here you’re focusing briefly on what I read Renee’s piece as focusing on centrally–the white-framed perspective on Michelle Obama, and the stereotypes that the general white gaze is watching out for, and looking for confirmation of. Your post, on the other hand, seems focused on what Michelle Obama supposedly has to repress. You seem to claim that she has some essential blackness buried within her that she’s going to have to hide, while Renee seems focused on the white gaze that’s looking for signs of that mythical, essential blackness. Your piece seems focused on what you think is hidden inside her, while Renee’s seems focused on outside expectations of her.
LikeLike
Right, because their is no causal link between white behaviour and ghettos. None whatsoever.
You\’re right, there is. Whites have been subsidizing those pathologies for a long time.
LikeLike
To my point, witness the uproar over the New Yorker cover. The New Yorker was making an important point, one that needed to be made somewhere in the MSM: that this was the portrayal of the Obamas being circulated throughout the right-wing blogosphere in their fear mongering effort to block Obama’s victory.
The fact that the NY’er was lambasted for the cover speaks to the level at which honest racial discourse is repressed in our nation. The New Yorker was a staunch Obama supporter. They were showing this image as an expose: “Look at how vile and dishonest the right is being in its ugly opposition to Obama.” All anybody saw from that was the “vile” part.
LikeLike
The New Yorker was a staunch Obama supporter.
I even thought of cancelling my subscription over that. All the slobber lovingly applied onto Obama and all the shit scornfully poured onto McCain and Palin made for a nauseating experience. Thankfully, now that The One has been anointed, the hysteria seems to be subsiding.
As for the honest racial discourse, I\’m all for it.
LikeLike
cf. “Let Michelle Obama’s real self shine” by Angela Burt-Murray, editor-in-chief of Essence magazine.
LikeLike
I blame PC liberal culture, which has shamed whites into denying the existence of race at all as a default because this avoids confronting the uncomofortable issue of…
…of sociopolitical realities seemingly (or actually) inextricably linked to race.
LikeLike
Michelle since her “really proud” statement
The reason Mrs. O\’s air of angry entitlement is so jarring is that her claims of exclusion and oppression are not simply untrue. They are a total inversion of the truth.
She and Barry didn\’t get where they are despite being black, but because of it. And not because of their merit, but despite their mediocrity.
LikeLike
NS: “Despite their mediocrity.” I don’t think so. Among other things, the office of president of HLR doesn’t get dolled out based on race. Many incredibly talented people vie fiercely for that berth.
I’ve several friends who attended HL with Obama. He is without question the smartest guy in the room, wherever he goes, no matter what room, and he works harder than everybody else. If anything, Obama is proof of the adage that a black man must be at least twice as good as a white to succeed. Obama is many, many times the superior of the Shrub43 in every respect — intellectual, moral, political — and he is head and shoulders above any of his rivals in the 2008 primary/presidential race in all of these categories. Yet his margin of victory was surprisingly close despite the fact that, given how badly the Repubs have fucked things up, the Dems should have been able to run a crash test dummy and win by an easy landslide.
LikeLike
I agree with that 100% – except that I do not know anyone who went to Harvard Law.
LikeLike
Among other things, the office of president of HLR doesn’t get dolled out based on race.
As a matter of fact, it does. Obama was the first HLR president who wasn\’t the first in his class.
He did display a considerably better ability than either Bush or McCain to read stuff off the teleprompter fluently, however, I\’ll grant you that. And he did staff his campaign much more competently than Hillary did hers — the bell curves being what they are, mostly with whites and particularly Jews. Whereas Hillary, seemingly buying into her own bullshit, entrusted her campaign to some black and Hispanic female affirmative-action picks.
LikeLike
Not that any of this truly matters (unlike some of the hotheads out there, I don\’t think Obama\’s election signifies a South Africa-scale catastrophe).
Whoever you vote for, the government wins, and I\’m enjoying my schadenfreude (also weltschmerz) as Hope-and-Change turn out to be the Clintons\’ 3rd term. With, of all people, a Chicago politician for the front man.
LikeLike
first a disclaimer – cant possily know what its like to be black..cause I am not.
But if michelle mentioned collard greens on b.walters show, I would feel like for once someone on that show has something in common with me. My father is a texan that cooked fried okra, collard greens and grits and many other southern dishes…i would relate – not feel incomfortable.
And – I feel like a black women with an afro looks amazing..i have several coworkers at work – that just look well…wow – when they stop straightrning their hair. I want to touch it and put my fingers in it…It makes a beautiful – powerful statement…its a full glorious sexy mane and i say – if you got it…flaunt it.
sometimes i feel you seriously misjudge people. your blog gives me a viewpoint I could not understand on my own but at the same time makes me sad – if one thought your viewpoint was the absolute truth…i think hope would be lost. I understand yours is a viewpoint built as a defensive mechanisim…but i have to believe if we met on the street – you would not judge me by my skin…but by my smile and the warmth in my eyes.
LikeLike
Davida: Your post raises a point I considered mentioning but didn’t — that segments of what some think of as elements of “black” culture are in reality simply part of larger southern culture. This is particularly the case with food. I too was raised on greens, beans & cornbread, etc., by a mother from the south.
LikeLike
Right: much of what Northerners think of as “black” is, in fact, just Southern.
LikeLike
macon d: I think you are right. I reread the post at Womanist Musings and it seems that the fault in this rewrite is more in what it plays up and how it tries to get its points across than anything else.
LikeLike
nonserviam, you said:
The reason Mrs. O’s air of angry entitlement is so jarring is that her claims of exclusion and oppression are not simply untrue. They are a total inversion of the truth.
I talk about this here, which I posted a month before you showed up at this blog:
LikeLike
Blanc2, you said:
We are a nation where white people have failed to distinguish between things that are racial and things that are racist. I blame PC liberal culture, which has shamed whites into denying the existence of race at all as a default because this avoids confronting the uncomofortable issue of whether a statement or an action or a neighbor or family member is or is not racist.
That is interesting. It would explain, for example, why whites are uncomfortable using the word “black” – because they cannot tell when they are using it in a racist way and when not.
LikeLike
Davida, you said:
sometimes i feel you seriously misjudge people. your blog gives me a viewpoint I could not understand on my own but at the same time makes me sad – if one thought your viewpoint was the absolute truth…i think hope would be lost. I understand yours is a viewpoint built as a defensive mechanisim…but i have to believe if we met on the street – you would not judge me by my skin…but by my smile and the warmth in my eyes.
I hope so, I think so.
I get bitter sometimes, especially when I start writing about it, but I am generally hopeful. I never thought I would live to see a black man elected to be the American president or to see apartheid fall. But I have.
LikeLike
here’s a more likely opinion: Americans, including (and perhaps especially?) American women, hate smart career women.
as a BW, I can’t comprehend not being a partner (vs. well-dressed, silent person in the background) to anyone I’d think enough of to marry. my African grandmother was the woman beside the man and just retired from running a school at 77 so I expect nothing less of myself.
Michelle campaigned for husband as hard as Bill did for Hillary. She looked good doing it but not flawless. I’d rather have someone who spends her time thinking about how to improve the lives of military families and raising her daughters than one who spends it contemplating her look. I can also appreciate a J Crew online shopper.
I consider myself a race realist but I think people dislike her because she’s an ambitious, successful woman, not because she’s black.
Michelle – somewhat disliked, equal education, great career success, out-earned her husband until leaving her position to campaign for him
Laura – mostly liked, 50s wife, literacy pet project
Hillary – disliked, equal education, great career success, out-earned her husband until leaving her position to campaign for him, obviously active in husband’s administration
Barbara – somewhat disliked, obviously influential and openly disagreed with husband’s positions on some issues (i.e. reproductive rights)
Nancy – liked, mostly 50s wife except as voice of Just Say No
Rosalind – liked, highly dedicated to social causes
Betty Ford – disliked, especially by GOP for not having the dignity to hide her cancer and addiction (the nerve!), openly disagreed with husband
LikeLike
I like Michelle! Both her and Hillary had high-powered educations, so being on such equal terms with their husbands is to be expected.
LikeLike
Expected but not welcome by many.
LikeLike
I think we will see Michelle’s blackness come out during the presidency. She wears a press n curl, come on you know we will see her with rollers or something. All black women do it and once people get over the shock about something small they will begin to accept it.
What is wrong with collard greens and fried chicken anyway? I was raised in the south and thats what I eat.
LikeLike
What is wrong with collard greens and fried chicken anyway?
Absolutely nothing if you want a future of obesity, diabestes and high blood pressure.
LikeLike
Collard greens are not commonly eaten by white Americans in the North, so bringing it up would have reminded them that she is black, that she is different than they are.
LikeLike
White folks in the South love collard greens, hammocks, yams, sweet potato pie and all of those other soul food delicacies. So, that wouldn’t make her different from them. And who ever said that Michelle likes collard greens? Who made that assumption?
LikeLike
Right, that is why I said Northern whites. Much of what they think of as “black” is just Southern.
This post is a rewrite of one on Womanist Musings, so it would be Renee, the blogger there, who made the point with collard greens.
Even if Michelle hates collard greens, she is not completely mainstream and reminding some white viewers of that fact, like with collard greens or whatever, would have made them uncomfortable. I think that was the point Renee was trying to make.
LikeLike