Michelle's Place

Obama - How Can I Resist?

In my last post, I lamented my own lack of color-blindness with regard to this election, and expressed my disappointment that a candidate whose values match my own will be terribly unlikely to win even the nomination, much less the presidency. Of the two main democratic candidates, Barack has my vote (Come on, do we really want to let the Clinton Soap Opera back into our lives again?).

And he's done it again, winning voters and "surprising" the right-wing media. I can't deny how thrilled I am. Am I playing into stereotypes, the black girl voting for the black candidate? Do I really like Obama on his own merits?

I wonder if the fact that I'm so happy for Obama's success betrays my loyalty a little too much. On one hand, he's clearly charismatic & energetic in a way no one else is, and he has good ideas (whether he'll act on them remains to be seen). I endorse him for all kinds of reasons besides racial solidarity (and the millions of non-blacks who'll vote for him confirm that those reasons exist). But there's nothing like being a member of an oppressed group and watching one of "your own" succeed in a mainstream democratic race. None of us know who Barack really is. I've done the research, and in my analysis, I perceive him to be a genuine person who really has good intentions. Maybe he'll turn out to be something completely different; maybe it's all a mirage. But illusion or not, it feels like a realization of Dr. King's dream, and how can I resist that?

Photo © 2008 by Jim Wilson for the New York Times.

Who Should I Vote For?

I found Who Should You Vote For? via some blog I read, and I took the little quiz there. My result? John Edwards!

I'm so embarrassed. Why didn't I know that before? Why is it that I endorsed Obama when my policy views (according to this quiz, anyway) don't even match his? I thought I agreed with almost all of his views, except the border wall, of course. (Tear it down!)

Honestly, I don't think America in its current climate would vote for a candidate who didn't support a border wall. It's true that my reasons for picking either Obama or Clinton were because I believe that they are more viable Democratic candidates. The WSIVF explanation page says as much: "What is the point of voting for a candidate to get the party's nomination because they reflect you views if they have limited chance of winning on the national stage? ...Most people are voting because they want their candidate to win the overall nomination for their party."

But what other reasons were there? Was I, a reasonably intelligent woman, guilty of blindly cheering for the candidate with the smoothest rhetoric and the biggest smile? Or seduced by the symbolism of having a black person or woman in the white house for the first time? Probably. What's wrong with me? And worse, how many other people are doing the same thing?

Don't be blind, America! Vote for John Edwards! (How's that for a campaign slogan!)

P.S. I took the test again as an independent (much more questions to choose from) and my new answer? Mike Gravel. I am really left of center! :S

My Unabashed Endorsement

Good news!

2007 Year in Pictures

Part of my pursuit of photography has to do with a love of capturing significant images, you know, all those cliché things we say about how our lives are shaped by our memories and moments and visual remembrances. The NYT commemorative piece, 2007 Year in Pictures, pays tribute to the pros who capture the moments we all remember.

Accompanying each section of the piece is a voiceover by a photographer, who gives some insight into his or her personal style. My favorite is photojournalist Todd Heisler, whose honesty about the combination of emotions and journalistic impulse make his photographs more personal to me.

As for me and my own photography skills, well of course, they don't compare. In fact, looking at these, nothing makes me feel more like some random hack with a camera. But seeing them and hearing the voices of the photographers reaffirms my love for photography, reminds me of the possibilities, and inspires me to work harder to create something meaningful with my work.

Image © 2007 Michael Kamber for the New York Times.

You Can Be Happy Again

The holidays are tough for those who have recently lost loved ones. Making it especially difficult is that, for Americans at least, we live in a suck-it-up culture that encourages you to move on and quit making other people uncomfortable with your sadness. One of my personal grief outlets was an atrociously designed webpage I built in the summer of 2000. It might not be a super-beautiful webpage, but it was meaningful and therapeutic for me. I can't login to edit it now, so it lives on in cyberspace... I'm not sure about sharing the link yet. Maybe later.

Anyway, all this comes up because of an article I saw this week on msnbc.com. Don't worry, you're not by yourself if you feel the world should stop, or you wish you could wear black for a year. You can be happy again.

Astonishing.

I remember seeing Anna Nicole Smith on her reality show, and it was amazing to me how beautiful she was with no or very little makeup. Even in her "overweight" phase, when she was herself she was her most beautiful. Tragically, she never seemed to believe that.

I think the media's favorite friend is the same way. Who knew she was actually pretty? I'd never even seen her smile before. When she was slathered in makeup with that faux-fashionista expression on her face, she was instantly dismissed (by me, anyway) because it was obvious that not only was she being completely fake, but she felt she had to be that way in order to be liked.

The public backlash she endured only confirms that the American public is sick of celebrities who want to be in the public eye, but must assume an obviously manufactured persona to do so. We are too smart for that act. It's sad that she had to hit rock bottom--that is, have her public image so low that she could no longer afford to care what people thought of her--to be herself in public.

Not only that, but perceiving yourself as "above" the trappings and inconveniences of "regular people" will get you nowhere fast (I'm talking to you, Ms. Stewart). I guess we can add her to the long list of celebrities who need personal tragedy, rehab or prison to shed their insecurity & façades.

Really, that's no different from the rest of us--how many of us can say we are stronger or altered our perspectives because we've gone through something awful, or made a mistake? But it seems to be more pointed in celebrities. Here's to the new Paris--may your life as a real person be beneficial and liberating to you.

The ravages, the ravages!

I'm always going around saying that the current immigration nightmare is directly tied to racism, that it's xenophobia at its most casual, that it's Jim Crow all over again (Farmer's Branch, anyone?). I say these things often to friends and sympathetic people, although I do occasionally come across people who like to go around saying, "They're everywhere!" or, "They should just go back!" And I'm thinking, 'Sounds familiar to me!'

People like to argue with me and say that it's just economics, and act as if it's some kind of self-preservation patriotic rite to insist that the "illegals" be "contained." :::sigh::: But the very language they use suggests that their insistence is more than "patriotic." In fact, these angry people seem to think immigrants are less than American, less than human.

Maybe it's both! Steven Landsburg over at Slate has done the math, and it turns out that to buy into the "illegals"="economic nightmare" argument, you'd have to consider an immigrant not only less than American, but...

In other words, to justify keeping the immigrant out, you'd have to say he's worth less than one-fifth of an American citizen. By contrast, there was a time when the U.S. Constitution counted a black slave as three-fifths of a full-fledged citizen. Alabama Gov. Bob Riley has recently apologized for the ravages of slavery. How long till politicians apologize for the ravages of our restrictive immigration policies?

The ravages, the ravages! Click here to read the entire article...

Barack!

I wholeheartedly endorse Barack Obama. Not sure yourself? Just look at this picture. It's almost too good to be true... a Black president, a guy who's intelligent, creative, very cool, refreshingly forthcoming and honest, and loves his wife? Not only would I vote for him for President, I'd marry him, too! oh wait, he already has a lucky wife--named... Michelle! Hehehe :) 

Here's to discovering more guys like this. And to all you "regular guys" out there--when will you get it? Men who honestly and respectfully love women are the hottest.

I'm not the only one

It's good to hear the voices of others disturbed by the unsurprising surge in interest in the "Let's pay attention now that an American has been killed in a 3rd world country" news story. Here's a  quote from Eric at indymedia.org:

This past Friday, October 27, 2006, at least five unarmed people were killed on the streets of Oaxaca City, Oaxaca. One of them happened to be a young, white, male, American anarchist, working for the radical media outlet "indymedia.org" named Brad Will. Now it is no surprise that the Corporate American media would jump on a story where any American is shot dead in the streets of a third world country... Out of the 5 people murdered on the streets last Friday, how many pictures have we seen of them? And compared to how many pictures we have seen of Brad Will? Will we ever know, or pursue, the story of the teacher shot down just a short time later by the paramilitaries... Do we believe 3000 lives on 9/11 are more important than the million and a half killed in Iraq during the sanctions? Are we really going to condemn our government, while at the same time replicating it's own bigoted mentalities? This is dancing on the rough edges of nationalism..."
 

I agree with Eric's indictment of corporate American media as well as his outrage at the biased coverage of the tragedy (and all tragedies). Read the comments below the article for some other interesting viewpoints.

Oaxaca and the Protests

How sad that the protests in Oaxaca, which started out as a voluntary, peaceful teachers' strike, has become an all-out militaristic crisis. Yesterday I read of the death of Brad Will, American photojournalist, in Oaxaca. Now, some American news outlets are finally covering the situation. This is probably a good thing. Still, there are some interesting angles.

Of course all of the deaths in Oaxaca (or anywhere) are tragic, but it's significant (but not surprising) that it takes the death of an American to politicize us, make us "outraged" and demand an end to the crisis. Take the Houston Chronicle's version of the story, which begins: "An American photojournalist and another man were killed in Oaxaca..." Who was that other man? Doesn't matter; clearly, the Chronicle only finds one of these deaths significant.

Putting aside the astonishing bias of American mainstream journalism, I find it surreal to look at the pictures of the places we were, now unrecognizable. But the unrest clearly exposes a reality that already existed.

I remember when hurricane Katrina happened; people started out saying how they'd miss the great food, and the bars, and the craziness of New Orleans. I was irritated. I had once been a tourist in New Orleans, but as an African-American, my perspective was a bit different. I remembered the good things but mostly I saw it as a sad, impoverished place. It wasn't until the hurricanes, when the class and social structure was exposed for what it truly was, that everyone saw the real, impoverished New Orleans. And then, they were "surprised."

It is similar in Oaxaca. I fell in love with the city--I think I'd be remiss if I wasn't enchanted with it. Our group was kept safe and away from it, but underneath the shiny perfection were tragic circumstances that many Americans are just beginning to think about.

It is past time for us to pay attention the urgency of poverty, the impetus behind social unrest; to remember that for every "tourist haven" there are a million impoverished, frustrated souls that keep it running. Brad Will ultimately gave his life so that others, Americans especially, can be made aware of these types of circumstances, to remind us that many beautiful places have another side to them, one that we don't want to see but must confront if we are to improve things in this world.