For tomorrow’s op-ed page I chose a Maureen Dowd column because I appreciated her insight that Barack Obama, in terms of his relationship with many American voters (particularly diehard female supporters of Hillary) is very much like Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice.
This is dead-on, and it speaks to a truth that certainly should be universally acknowledged: Despite all the chatter about the deep meaning of Obama as the "first black candidate," there is nothing black about his image or persona. Can you think of a black man in literature or popular culture of whom Obama reminds you? Maybe Sidney Poitier in "To Sir With Love," if you stretch the point.
But when Ms. Dowd invokes the archetypically white, Anglo, rich, Establishment Fitzwilliam Darcy, I think, "Exactly."
Mind you, I like Mr. Darcy. When I saw the series that Bridget Jones went gaga over, I identified with him — with his negative aspects that is: his social awkwardness, his aversion to dancing, his refusal to be pleased, etc. (I am, I assure you, no Mr. Bingley.) My daughters identify me — far more accurately, in terms of the way they see me — with a different character altogether: Mr. Bennet. Perhaps if, like that gentleman, I had a study to retreat to, I would be unaware of both Mr. Darcy and Miss Jones. As it is, with so many daughters (and now, granddaughters) in the house, my life is richer. My DVD shelf includes both the definitive 1995 "Pride" and the inimitable 1968 "Where Eagles Dare," with the entire canon of "Firefly" thrown in to bridge the gap. How more well-rounded can a gentleman be, indeed?
But when Maureen tried to stretch the point and cast John McCain in "Pride" terms, her analogy broke down. She compared him to Mr. Wickham, which is not only a gross insult but has no ring of truth whatsoever. Mr. Wickham was what military men of his day would have called a "scrub." He would have garnered no respect in the gunroom of any ship in the Royal Navy in those days, for instance — yet that is precisely the sort of place where Mr. McCain would be most at home back then.
Basically, I don’t think you can find a McCain analogy in Jane Austen. The closest you could come would be the main male character in "Persuasion." At least he was a naval officer.
For that reason among others, I predict Obama will win the Chick Lit vote, hands-down.
Related Posts
Why don’t you come out of the TV-movie-video fantasy world and just deal with Obama, McCain and everyone else the people they really are?
Having returned from my vacation to the "real world" of Lee, I turn, like Capt. Aubrey on the quarterdeck of the Surprise, back to a better world…
The McCain of 2008 increasingly seems to be Capt. Queeq.
Now you see, as much as I like McCain, there’s SOME validity to that comparison. The Mr. Wickham one is hogwash.
Remember that in the end, Capt. Queeg is the unappreciated hero who had been out there fighting the war while the rest of us were enjoying ourselves in college, or whatever. Remember the scene in which the drunken Jose Ferrer makes all the smart-aleck young officers feel guilty for having brought him down?
Who was the Captain of the Titanic? That might be an appropriate analogy for Senator McCain.
I think the real question here is Mr. Warthen’s and the editorial board’s lack of judgment.
They were snookered twice by Junior Bush. They helped inflict Marshall Sanford on us and expressed surprise that both of these incompetents were true to their readily apparent and rigid beliefs.
This campaign increasingly reveals John McCain to be on the edge of incompentence to be president. His senior moments, the most recent one being this week when confronted re his playing the race card and what has he done for African-Americans, are becoming more frequent. He is reminiscent of Strom Thurmond’s decrepitude over his last several terms which the State helped to cover up.
He forgets statements he made the same day. He denies repeated statements caught on tape. He is caught confused several times a week. He has done 180’s on policies and acts surprised that anyone thinks that.
How about it, Mr. Warthen, will you acknowledge the increasingly blatant evidence your hero is failing?
Doug, you nailed this one. Captain Smith made the decision to go full speed ahead through the ice field, thus dooming the Titanic. Seems like our own Captain McCain is doing much the same thing with his 100 years of war approach to foreign policy.
I’d settle for Brad just admitting that John McCain’s views on energy, healthcare, and school vouchers (three subjects Brad has written on extensively) are in direct conflict with his own.
If The State endorses McCain it will be based on two issues: continuing the war and allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the United States.
Does Brad think I am ever going to click on one of his links to a TV show or movie?
Doug,
The main reason The State endorsed Obama and McCain is they all favor amnesty of illegal aliens, the more backward the better.
You’re right, Doug. McCain has Mr. Warthen’s big talking points, unlike Mr. Warthen, nailed.
Maureen Dowd is a joke.She’s nothing more than a bad gossip columnist.This sort of “content” is making newspapers irrelevant.
Doug, I don’t see how his views on energy are "in direct conflict" with mine. He’s right on some aspects, wrong on others — just like Obama. As for "admitting" where we disagree — how many times do I have to write about the pandering on the gas tax to suit you?
On health care — that was, as I recall, the occasion for the first of many critical posts I’ve written about Sen. McCain during this campaign. Again, I don’t like where Obama is on that, either. If you’ll recall, I’ve written more than once about the fact that I won’t be able to choose my candidate on the basis of health policy because the only candidates who agree with me on it — such as Dennis Kucinich — are out of the running for my support on other grounds.
As for education, my position is what it has always been: When candidates for federal office talk about schools, I tune them out, because it’s irrelevant to the office they are running for. I only object to such candidates’ views on education when they emphasize those views FAR too much, as in the case of Jane Frederick when she ran against Floyd Spence a few years back. You’d have thought she was running for the school board or something. If a candidate for federal office wants to disband the U.S. Department of Ed., that might get some attention, and some applause, from me. Otherwise their views in this area mean about as much to me as if they were describing their favorite TV shows or sports teams.
Right-on response from Kathy Hilton on McCain’s dumb, isulting ad featuring her daughter:
I’ve been asked again and again for my response to the now infamous McCain celebrity ad. I actually have three responses. It is a complete waste of the money John McCain’s contributors have donated to his campaign. It is a complete waste of the country’s time and attention at the very moment when millions of people are losing their homes and their jobs. And it is a completely frivolous way to choose the next President of the United States.
Seriously Brad, how can you possibly, with a straight, face assert that John McCain is anything like the man he was in 2000. His completely disgusting turnabout, especially on the torture issue of all things, for political gain, simply makes me want to go vomit.
Obama will have you eating vomit.
Bud, McCain is exactly the same man as he was in 2000. He pandered to the left then which cost him the nomination. If he panders to the left too much this time he will lose again.
Yeah, that’s right, Mr. Wolfe.
John McCain was against the Confederacy’s Swastika equivalent back then. John McCain was for a comprehensive immigration law change back then. John McCain was against off-shore drilling back then. John McCain was opposed to the MLK National Holiday back then. John McCain was opposed to the Bush tax cuts back then.
Just like his positions today, right, Richard? Good old John McSame.
Seriously, was your post intended to be humor or do you really believe that nonsense you posted? Just curious.
Thank you, Ms. Hilton and Miss Hilton. Y’all keep talking, and get the Rev. Wright to join in the conversation, too. If voters look at Obama and see Paris Hilton, the old wrinkly guy will win.
And, by the way, RBB, McCain changing positions over eight years isn’t really news like Obama changing positions in eight minutes, or eight hours, or eight days, or eight weeks.
Furthermore, bud, speaking of a “disgusting turnabout … for political gain,” how about Obama and offshore drilling? How about Obama and the oil reserve (that switch in the context of just one day)? How much would a Democrat upchuck if a Democrat upchuck would?
Wouldn’t you say the changeling’s campaign has shown so much change it’s become Ludacris?
The GOP really is a piece of work. How this collection of vile, insulting idiots continues to retain so much power is simply beyond comprehension. Now McCain is ridiculing Obama for suggesting motorists keep their tires properly inflated. Obama correctly claimed that if all American’s would correctly inflate their tires we could reduce our gasoline consumption by 2-3%. Given that we import more than $700 billion in oil each year, a 2% savings could cut that by about $10 billion. Yet all the dispicable greed mongers in the GOP can do is pass out tire gauges in a phony attempt to brand Obama as misguided. Heaven forbid we should have someone suggest a plan to save $10 billion a year that would require absolutely ZERO government expenditures. The GOP really has become a desparate bunch of morons. But what is one to expect from the party of Larry Craig, David Vitter, Ted Stevens and Mark Foley.
The Democrats are proposing to double the budget deficits and raise taxes. Isn’t that even more greedy?