Darkie Jokes

In the stir caused by cover of this week's New Yorker Magazine, my mom sent me a note with a quote from the Herald Tribune. The writer why, in a world where the tone is set by John Stewart, is it hard to find anybody joking about Obama?

There are two issues here: one, John Stewart jokes about Obama all the time. He has not handled him with kid gloves, and if he pokes fun at McCain (with whom he has always had a good relationship: McCain is a frequent guest on his show), it is because Obama is more polished and makes fewer gaffs.

The other issue is why are many people reluctant to laugh at Obama. This is simple as well: he is black, and to laugh at him might be perceived as racist. This is due less to people standing up and saying "you're a racist if you laugh at this joke" (though some people certainly will say that) and more because people will question their own motives.

Let's face it: the essence of all humor is cruelty, and satire is exceptionally cruel. Jokes always demean the subject, and to demean a black man has social implication that most people don't want to deal with. To be cruel toward this particular black man, who is already undergoing racist attacks from some people on the right (not McCain, but certainly some of the people who support McCain), to laugh at a joke that could possibly be seen as racist is troubling. People don't want their motives to be questioned, they don't want to be perceived as racist, comedians and broadcasters included. A similar aura surrounded Senator Clinton for awhile. But, as we can see in the blogsphere, if they are getting a kid-glove treatment it is more than offset by the racist or sexist attacks, cruel jokes, and outright lies being leveled at them from the right.

Personally, I loved the New Yorker cover. I thought it said exactly the right thing: that the way Barak and Michelle Obama are being portrayed by the right are as racist and ridiculous caricatures. I think Obama was wrong to criticize the cover. I *did* employ racist stereotypes in its portrayal of him, and that it was satirical din't help any. Of course the cover was offensive, because it was meant to be. And you can't control how people are going to react to something like that. Authorial intent means nothing next to reader reception.

But it was funny. And I'm not at all embarrassed that I laughed at it.