Top: the Obama family, barackobama.com October 3, 2008
Bottom: The First Family, Hyannisport, MA, August 4, 1962
A few days ago I was in full ADD mode, surfing the web and breezing through my usual site-haunts, when I decided to take a detour to Obama's website through a banner ad and came to a full stop at the image at the top of this post.
There was something unsettling about this attractive family portrait, a long-distance deja-vu. I realized of course that it was channeling the black-and-white images I remember from old Life magazines of JFK's Camelot. The starkness of those pictures contrasted with their candid intimacy: the Kennedys were the first First Family to let the nation in on the family scrapbook, and into the White House. And in this intimate portrait, the Obama campaign seems to be explicitly reinforcing what perhaps many have felt but have been hesitant to vocalize: that America is ready to heal the old wound, to return to Camelot and take up the heady optimism that was lost on November 22nd, 1963.
What nags at me is the fear that this desire veers into a kind of American hubris. The Camelot script had it dark side from the beginning. JFK was a mold-breaking (some would say deal-breaking) politician in his day, and the shiny, media-friendly surfaces of his Presidency hid the festering resentment and rage in certain segments of the population, as well as in certain channels of power. In light of the disturbing things being voiced among supporters of the GOP ticket, can we afford to raise the spectre of Camelot? Are we older and wiser enough?
The Obamas are a remarkable counterpart and counterpoint to the Camelot Kennedys. Compare the two photographs: both are pictures of domestic American bliss and youthful potential—wholesome, balanced families of four, as yet untroubled by middle-aged angst, inter-generational strife and domestic scandals. Beautiful couples with beautiful children, formally informal against a dreamy pastoral idyll (with just the hint of a suburban lawn in the Obama portrait).
The differences are just as compelling, and the most poignant is racial. When the Kennedy picture was taken the civil rights era was in full swing, but the iconic March on Washington and Martin Luther King's historic "I Have a Dream" speech were still a year away. Anti-misceganation laws were still in the arduous process of being repealed state by state across the South, and indeed, JFK had only just broken through the ranks of the WASP power elite himself, having been elected the first Irish Roman Catholic President. Still, the brahmin trappings are there: the spare, white-post porch against the unmistakable lawn-and-sea Cape Cod setting; Jackie's casually frumpy yet chicly short gingham, kids in spotless whites, Jack tan and tie-less yet buttoned down and ready for a business call in the study over scotch.
While Barack is dressed identically to JFK, down to the wristwatch (signifier of male diligence during downtime), it is ironically Michelle who seems the more work-ready in the 2008 image. She is much more formal here than Jackie, as befitting a contemporary professional mom, yet it is also possible that the zetgeist is not yet ready for a black First Lady in leisure attire. Certainly this is true in corporate America, where non-white professionals can still feel the need to one-up their white colleagues in formality just to achieve equal parity.
At a time when Sarah Palin's suitability for office is questioned even by liberals in the context of motherhood, it is significant that it is Barack whom the daughters embrace. Here we have a signifier not only of progressive gender politics but of the increasing importance of family values in the political sphere. The Obamas are in that sense a tighter unit here than the Kennedys; in the Kennedy image Jack looks true to the pre-Betty Friedan era, a man in proximity to his family yet not unduly "enmeshed", which implicitly allowed him the freedom to work and "play" outside the domestic realm. Not so Obama, who must project utter wholesomeness in a post-Lewinsky landscape.
The candidness of the Kennedy image is poignant in our hindsight. It captures a moment of domestic dynamism that seems to us a hint of the disharmony we feel privy to as survivors and commentators a generation or two on. We know that someone switched scripts on the unsuspecting actors of Camelot, and we wish we could reach across the divide and toss them a clue.
In this context, the control exerted over the Obama image is somehow comforting to me. It is, of course, a branded and vetted image, much more so than the snapshots of Camelot yellowing in the White House archives. John-John and Caroline seem distracted and ready to bolt from the Hyannisport porch. Jack is standing with, but not enveloped by his family. In contrast, the Obamas are eyes forward, directly engaged with the photographer and the viewer. Even the children seem utterly at home around the camera, as they seemed at ease in the spotlight of a stadium of tens of thousands. Finally, the Obamas are composed in the classic stable form of the triangle or pyramid, but while the senator is at the core of the group, there is no top-down hierarchy. This is a picture of family as a unit of strength, dynamic but immovable.
They seem ready for Camelot, if anyone truly is.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Man Talk Now
jay leffew
Jerry DeNuccio
Somyr Perry
Donna Sandstrom
Redstocking Grandma
Salon.com
Comments
(rated)
I wouldn't have noticed the pyramid part if you hadn't pointed it out... but that's the idea, right? It is just supposed to all seep into our subconscious.
The Obama kids are adorable. And Michelle is a classy, sophisticated, intelligent and beautiful woman. I would vote for her for public office with enthusiasm.
That "in the Kennedy image Jack looks true to the pre-Betty Friedan era, a man in proximity to his family yet not unduly "enmeshed", which implicitly allowed him the freedom to work and "play" outside the domestic realm" seems on the money, and that Obama "must project utter wholesomeness in a post-Lewinsky landscape" is keen observation, but also, I think part of what happens in a tradition-challenged environment...
When the rules change, because the old standards hold too many inequities and injustices within their core assumptions, there can be simultaneously a fading away of idealized values and a pleasure to be had in seeing what the new ideal might be. The Obamas' photo is in some ways attuned to this reality, I think.
This is the most engaging, sensitive comparison study I have seen about the two families. Beautiful job, and I really like the Renaissance pictorial device discussion at the end.
rated
The images are lovely. However, I think of history look at those photos . . .
and I worry more for Michelle Obama than for her husband. And I admit to worrying a lot.
How in the world did America become so divided? Right down the middle? And those of us on the Left are reaching out for anything possibly hinting at a 'Camelot' state of mind, where Americans can feel proud again. We are hoping to recapture something that has become too elusive and may never be caught again, the softer side of American pride, where the homeless, the elderly, the frail, the stupid, the remorseless have a voice. This voice is respected along with the other more sensible, sturdy and resourceful voice. It's not to be defined, it's a sum greater than its parts. It's being proud of our country again with leaders who think before they spurt out their thoughts and who consider what other countries have to say. It's going to be a very close race to the finish, I'm afraid. The days of landslides are over. We are in the yin and yang of American politics. God bless us all.
Outstanding post and insight. Thanks so much (rated and appreciated).
I too was born in '61 and the assassination is my first memory. I was born just outside of Boston and living there, so you can imagine that the impact on the people in my small world was greatly magnified.
Many might doubt that such a small child can remember, but I certainly do. Of course I lacked the understanding of exactly what had happened at first, but this date marked a time from which my understanding grew.
John Jr's untimely death was, in a way, like the second part of the first death, and in the full comprehension of my adult understanding it was perhaps even more of a tragedy to me personally.
I welcome a new Camelot. I don't think it is a reflection of hubris, I think it is a desire for a certain magic that when combined with the responsible wielding of power has the potential to break through the darkness. There is no perfection in anyone, or in any leader. There will always be some dark traits, that is human. Camelot is the archetype of hope that our society needs.
Beautifully written, powerful prose.
been a hue and cry from the American public at large to bring
back the Camelot era? Which, by the way, was an illusion. I
thought Obama was all about the future-why do you keep
dredging up the past? I was 13 in 1961 and yes, it all seemed
so wonderful, but it was all superficial. All about style. And
you do know that Camelot was a myth, don't you? I seem
to remember that in the Arthurian tales the whole Camelot
thing didn't end so well.
Will Barack Obama ever stand on his own? He's JFK!
He's RKF! MLK! Mandela! Gandhi! Lincoln! He's
everything a human being wants to be...and more!
Oh, I almost forgot: He's Jesus! And waaaay more than
God!
He is (drumroll) Obama!
Great post. Excellent analysis. Beautiful writing.
I was...let's just say old enough (just barely)... to remember Jack Kennedy's run for office as well as much of what was Camelot in real time...the good and the bad...especially the missile crises...and then the terrible ending.
What I remember most is how Jack Kennedy raised the consciousness of America's youth. I really was too young to benefit...but I remember how those individuals a scant generation older than me were signing up for the Peace Corps and majoring in poly sci and planning careers in public service and wishing to be astronauts.
We will never know how the country would have developed had Kennedy lived, but I've always believed that the darker parts of the 60's would not have occurred...I've always thought America's youth would have been more accepting of the war, or at least the ways of protesting it would not have been so radical under a Kennedy administration. I believe under Kennedy the country would have never become so divided
What I hope for Obama is that he can bring to the young people of this country that same optimism, that same desire to serve that Kennedy brought all those years ago. That he can repair the divides that exist today.
The very idea that the upcoming generations could have a "Kennedy" of their own gives me hope. And hope is what we desperately need it now. But even as I type these words, I am compelled to add a little prayer that Obama outshines Camelot by having the gift of 8 long years to complete all the tasks at hand.
for him? Or shall we just name him King of the World and have
done with it? Who needs democracy? We have Obama!
Marco, kudos on a job well done!! I believe your nagging thoughts are dead on however. For me, it would be better to bury the specter of Camelot. Let Obama stand on his own legs. And for God’s sake, I hope I never see Michelle wearing another pearl necklace. I want her to be herself and not a Jackie Wannabe.
I was living and working in Washington, D.C. during the Kennedy Administration, his assassination, LBJ’s inauguration, MLK’s “Dream” speech, the D.C. riots where I saw the troops and smoke from my office window less than three blocks from the White House. History literally passed before my eyes. With that said, I believe I’m a little older than most of you who have commented on this post and perhaps my perception is of a different hue because of my age and experiences.
Yes, DakiniDancer, JFK’s Camelot was horribly flawed. The Camelot Production JFK so enjoyed was WONDERFUL! I saw it, too, and would have bought a T-shirt, but I don’t remember any being for sale. Guess it wasn’t a sixties thing. After his death, Jackie mentioned to a journalist how much Jack had enjoyed the performance—and, voila, the JFK Camelot Myth was born.
Marco, you are correct again in that the opposition is setting the Internet abuzz --stories of Obama and Vera Baker—romantic interest or money laundering in Martinique. Did Barack cheat on Michelle? Did Ayers actually write “Dreams…” as Ted Sorenson has admitted writing the first draft of “Profiles in Courage” and being compensated for it as well? We really don’t want to bring up JFK’s presidency.
Let Barack and Michelle be themselves. Stop looking backward and look to the future. Remember, it’s Hope and Change! I’m certain I’m not the only one who remembers the dark side of JFK. So, let’s stop making Obama the second coming of JFK. It’s a turnoff for far too many…but I could be wrong.
Again, Marco…I love your work.
Obama is Obama. He's got a good message and good ideas, and has shown a combination of idealism and pragmatism that just might work. The fact that he's so charismatic is an advantage, in that we're going to need someone who can motivate people.
(FYI to commentators: all viewpoints allowed in a dialog. A screed is not dialog. I even appreciate DakiniDancer's mocking, exasperated tone, since there is some content there.)
I have to say I'm overwhelmed at the response to this post. It will take me a little while to digest and respond to all the comments here, since I am at my day job. But apparently the idea of "Camelot" hits a nerve, whether the reaction is a yea or a nay. What I have taken from Barack Obama's candidacy is "refreshing." I do think he is a politician cut from a different cloth, and I don't mean to say he is an outsider, as the GOP paints him. He seems to me idealistic but realistic and basically honest; at least, his speech on race is the most flat out honest and unvarnished statement I've heard an American politician say in my lifetime. Yes, he is young and relatively inexperienced, but the bottom line for me is that during the Bush years Congress had the cumulative experience of decades and generations, yet our Constitution, our sense of ourselves and our standing in the world have been dealt crippling blows ON THEIR WATCH. So right now I'll take a fresh eye and precocious wisdom over experience.
I don't want to return to JFK's Camelot. What's done is done. I just want this fresh optimism and idealism to take root in this blasted ground, this country that's lost its soul, and become something that will deserve its own name, and not that of a cheesy musical. I don't want another JFK. He was a deeply flawed man, but he did have the gift that Obama has in his own way: he could stir up the young ones, give them a sense they can own this country. That is crucial. Obama is a flawed man, too. I was sorely disappointed by his support of FISA, and his performance in the debates has been unimpressive (first debate) to adequate (second). ( I wouldn't go so far as to say "pathetic" but I otherwise agree with Stellaa on the debates). And while he is "inexperienced" he is bright and will draw the brightest to his administration, and will no doubt glean wisdom history, unlike our sitting duck. He has the obligation to learn from where Camelot failed.
That is like the Kennedy Camelot myth, because it calls out the human from in the midst of tension and struggle, and it is useful to see this connection, because it gives us a chance —one that makes many nervous about the energy required or the chances for success— to try once more to do better, as a nation and a people.
Perhaps we should have nominated Ted Sorenson since he penned the words that call forth and evoke the national mood you desire for America. Sorenson is the common thread between JFK and BHO. Alas, he's too old for the job...but, what about that newbee trainee Jon Favreau...his laptop and Blackberry are in hyper-drive even as we discuss this post. When he's a little older, perhaps he's the man we want in Washington. I, and apparently several others, have a huge problem when the words that stir men's souls are penned by someone behind the scenes before they scroll by on a teleprompter and finally roll off a candidate's tongue.
I'm not saying that the photos you listed are of the same ilk as the Dead Beatle urban legend, but it certainly does hit some of the same notes. It makes me wonder if there is something behind the symbolism of similarity between scenes of Camelot old and Camelot new that you posted. Wow - just wow!
If we have a fatal flaw as Americans, it's that we tend to be more vigilant searching for ways to absolve ourselves of responsibility, than we are for acknowledging the details of the job description we agreed to fulfill whe we assumed the reins that came with our 'coup de pays' (reign). It's about rising to the challenge, rather than fulfilling some warped sense of 'destiny'.
It isn't that Obama is the 'messiah', or even that he should be appointed "King of the world." Some are, perhaps deluded by the potential for change. On both sides, Americans are [h] ubre-fanatical in their expectations of what Obama could mean for our country. Content to err on the side of absolute perfection or absolute disaster.
The idea of Camelot cannot exist without King Arthur. Just as King Arthur cannot rule effectively without subjects who are all on board for the mission, nor can America return to a Camelot-like state without a leader that defies or at least exceeds expectations. After the way he has run his campaign in the last couple of weeks, who can truthfully say that they have high hopes for John McCain?
ideals come from WITHIN. I think you loses your integrity
(as in your soul being integrated) if you look to someone else, regardless of how wonderful that person may be. And, with no disrespect, I include Jesus, Mohammed and all religious icons.
Artsfish, you stated that there is nothing more discouraging
than disillusionment. My dear, to me, disillusionment
equals enlightenment.
I salute the Divine within all of you-from the Divine within me!