Mediaboss Marketing

I think a big part of it is that Obama does represent something that, in a boring and literal way, is undeniably true: this country had never had a black president. This is the root of the argument about representation: if there is somebody who is powerful and respected in the country, although everyone hates politicians, its the president and Obama looked good in these photos. He and his family looked very cool. They always looked like they were having fun, even when they were serious. The reason I recalled JFK in the piece is that thats who he most looked like. He looks like hes in Camelot. He looks good in a tux. He looks good in a suit.

And youve heard, for a long time, from white liberals and black conservatives and black liberals, that whats necessary is for black people to see themselves in positions of power. Thats what I wrote about in the section about the little kid that everybody finds very moving, where hes rubbing Barack Obamas head because he wants to see if his hair is just like his. This is one method of creating a post-racial utopia: its basically trickle-down liberation. If a black person, so the argument goes, can achieve the highest office in the land and look this good, then the belief is that it will trickle down. Which, to me, as much as people say that this is about uplift for black people and our understanding of ourselves and what we can achieve, has always really been addressed to white people. Because, if white people see that a black person can, in fact, occupy the office and that things dont go to hell when a black person is in charge, then perhaps some of their antipathies will lessen.

I do happen to think things went to hell under Obama, but I think theres a way you can read things otherwise mainly if youre silent about cities being on fire. Theres another potential way to read it, which is that youll gain liberation through seeing these photos and from seeing this image of the black elite projected every day. There was a black elite under Obama in a way that there had never really been before. Jay-Z and Beyonc were elite before Barack Obama, but theres a different game being played when theyre frequently visiting the White House and Jay-Z is rapping about having Obamas cell phone number. At that point, youre making a national argument that the black elite is the elite.

The problem with that is that its very hard to connect it to any real sense of redress for whats happening for most black people. Im quite deeply wary of this when Im in certain rooms, and people expect me to have something to say that represents all black people. I mean, I make movies and went to a private school, and I have nothing to tell them about whats going on other than what I know from talking to people and reading.

Theres two ways you can address whats happening now to black people. One is expressed in the belief that there is something about seeing black people that causes X, Y, or Z to happen and if thats true, then the representation argument is correct. You need to see black people in the White House, you need to see them in tuxes, you need to see them on billboards, and on Wall Street, or whatever. But if what youre actually talking about is capital, land, and premature death, then youre getting at the heart of whether or not black people can be folded into the national project. Im not so certain they can be, and I dont really think they should be.

When it comes to how you get to a post-racial society, there are to be a bit vulgar about it two paths you can walk. One is the Paul Gilroy route, which involves the premise that racism precedes race. That being the case, in order to find liberation, you have to go through a winding struggle, and on the other side, perhaps there isnt race in any way thats recognizable to us now. But between here and there is a revolution. The other route, which I think Obama is perhaps the best proponent of, is that through the achievements of a handful of black elites and some massive shift in everybodys psyche, you wind up in a place where America can reconcile all of these antagonisms.

I think Obama came probably as close as you can come to demonstrating whether that will work, and there probably are lots of people whose minds were changed. I also think the tail end of his presidency was marked by white nationalists marching in the streets and black people setting cities on fire. Part of why I was very interested in the visual representation of his presidency is that I think thats where he was at his best. He was very good in front of the camera. But also because this ultimately shows the failure and limits of this kind of representation, whether it winds up being on-screen or in his books or whatever. It cant really change the fact that were talking about violence. Were not really talking about how certain images make every individual in the country feel.

The implication of that sort of black excellence thing is that, if we see Obama in the White House, then we can rise out of the ghetto something that depends on a belief that people are in the ghetto by choice, as opposed to somebody keeping them there. So, by the end of his presidency (even before it became clear who was succeeding him), nobody had really come to terms with the fact that a black elite couldnt seem to do anything to stop working-class black people from marching and rioting. I think he got what he wanted, and what a lot of people wanted, which was a black elite that became the elite. But that being the case, theres not much they can say back to the people who are in the streets.

See original here:
Barack Obama, the Hollow Icon - Jacobin magazine