Local Weather Forecast
Today: Current:78	Saturday: 94/73	Sunday: 96/74
Complete Forecast for  Aug 30 2008

TOP JOBS

Satire is often — even usually — offensive. And for good reason.

But when a piece of satire misses, it just might be that its aim was off.

There’s one point that hasn’t been made in the endless commentary on The New Yorker’s cover portraying Sen. Barack Obama as a Muslim and his wife Michelle as a revolutionary. It’s why the magazine cover’s satire failed: poor aim.

The problem isn’t that the cover is offensive.

Look at the most famous piece of political satire, Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal: For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being A burden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public.”

At the time of its writing in 1729, the mood in Britain was insufferably superior, particularly regarding Ireland (and as we see just a few decades later, its American colonies). Various British thinkers were always coming up with new “solutions” for the poor.

And at first glance, “A Modest Proposal” seems to be another of these.

“It is a melancholy object to those, who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads and cabin doors crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an alms,” Swift writes.

His solution to the problem of all these poor children running about?

“I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout,” Swift asserts.

He acknowledges that children might be a bit expensive, “therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.”

Other benefits would come of his proposal, he adds. It would lessen the pope’s influence in the kingdom, because there would be fewer Catholics. And the skins of these children “will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine gentlemen.”

Could “A Modest Proposal” have been more offensive? And yet it remains one of the best historical examples of effective political satire.

No, the problem with The New Yorker cover wasn’t that it was offensive — though that’s what critics on both the left and the right picked up on.

The problem was that it missed its mark. The intention, according to editor David Remnick, was to “satirize right-wing rumors that have been spread virally about the Democratic candidate.”

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer compared the drawing to the cover of “a neo-Nazi or Ku Klux Klan” publication.

But here’s the thing: the Right isn’t spreading those rumors. The neo-Nazis aren’t out there spreading rumors; in fact, according to an article in Esquire, they’re supporting Obama.

“The corporations are running things now, so it’s not going to make much difference who’s in there, but McCain would be much worse,” says Tom Metzger, director of White Aryan Resistance. “He’s a warmonger. He’s a scary, scary person — more dangerous than Bush. Obama is a racist and I have no problem with black racists.”

How about that other bugaboo of the left, the Neo-Con? The movement’s flagship publication, The Weekly Standard, has derided rumor campaigns — probably starting with supporters of Obama’s former foe, Sen. Hillary Clinton — alleging that Obama is a secret Muslim. The magazine is far more concerned with Obama’s very public lack of foreign policy experience.

The Weekly Standard, has derided rumor campaigns — probably starting with supporters of Obama’s former foe, Sen. Hillary Clinton — alleging that Obama is a secret Muslim. The magazine is far more concerned with Obama’s very public lack of foreign policy experience.

It’s true that polls show a recalcitrant 12 percent of the American population still believes that Obama is a Muslim. But that 12 percent is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, according to the Pew Research Center.

For the most part — and for most of this year — the Right has been surprisingly easy on Obama, in my opinion. Long experience with the Clintons led many conservative commentators to let the well-oiled Clinton attack machine do its work in the Democratic primary.

It’s a lot like the reaction to the movie Dogma in 1999. Remember director Kevin Smith’s inept attack on organized religion? It failed as satire — at least in its intent — because poor Kevin knew next to nothing about the Roman Catholic Church. Smith attempted to mock a Catholic Church and culture that only exist in Hollywood. In other words, it was a hearty swing and a miss.

in 1999. Remember director Kevin Smith’s inept attack on organized religion? It failed as satire — at least in its intent — because poor Kevin knew next to nothing about the Roman Catholic Church. Smith attempted to mock a Catholic Church and culture that only exist in Hollywood. In other words, it was a hearty swing and a miss.

And in the same way, The New Yorker cover is a heavy-handed, clumsy swing and a decided miss.

Early Returns is the political observations column of staff writer Roy Maynard, who can be reached at 903-596-6291 or at roymaynardtmt@gmail.com.