Let me join the unlikely duo of Bob Somerby and Ross Douthat in being embarassed that the Washington Post published this Ruth Marcus column on Caroline Kennedy potentially being appointed to Hillary Clinton's Senate seat. After noting that she "recoil[s] from political dynasties" and calling them "fundamentally un-American" (I agree!), Marcus proceeds to describe how the "fairy tale" appeal of Kennedy's appointment has won her heart:
What really draws me to the notion of Caroline as senator, though, is the modern-fairy-tale quality of it all. Like many women my age—I'm a few months younger than she—Caroline has always been part of my consciousness: The lucky little girl with a pony and an impossibly handsome father. The stoic little girl holding her mother's hand at her father's funeral. The sheltered girl, whisked away from a still-grieving country by a mother trying to shield her from prying eyes.
In this fairy tale, Caroline is our tragic national princess. She is not locked away in a tower but chooses, for the most part, to closet herself there. Her mother dies, too young. Her impossibly handsome brother crashes his plane, killing himself, his wife and his sister-in-law. She is the last survivor of her immediate family; she reveals herself only in the measured doses of a person who has always been, will always be, in the public eye.
...I know it's an emotional—dare I say "girly"?—reaction. But what a fitting coda to this modern fairy tale to have the little princess grow up to be a senator.
As Somerby writes, "Endlessly, the world is a novel for these elites—a pleasing story, a fiction, tale." But it's Douthat who nails what's so offensive and anti-democratic about the column:
This is, of course, a pretty good distillation of the case against dynastic politics: Namely, that it transforms the business of republican self-government into a soap opera, in which the public/audience thrills to the "intriguing subplots" involving a President's daughter, a President's wife, and a Governor's son who happens to be the President's daughter's sister's ex-husband ... and sighs, enraptured, at the "fairy tale ending" when the President's daughter grows up to have a Senate seat handed to her as a reward for having endorsed the President-elect. This sort of politics is entertaining to write about, which is one reason why fantasy sagas and Shakespeare are generally more interesting than Washington novels. But after twenty years with the same two families in the White House - which nearly became twenty-four (or twenty-eight) - for a political columnist to endorse a pointless escalation of dynastic politics because it fulfills the fairy-tale mythos her generation spun around a mediocre, tragically-murdered President and his good-looking family isn't "girly"; it's an embarrassment.
You can apply similar logic to the prospect of Chris Matthews using his celebrity and cable news platform to get the Democratic nomination against Arlen Specter in 2010 (or Al Franken, etc.). I should start a bipartisan anti-celebrity/dynasty PAC.
The column wouldn't have been as embarrassing if she'd been arguing that Caroline Kennedy was particularly brilliant or had a long history dealing with issues of any importance. Instead she justifies her support by citing the examples of Sonny Bono and Jesse Ventura (who at least had to put their names on a ballot to get elected).
Posted by: Jinchi | December 10, 2008 at 02:18 PM
I'm tempted to agree, since I don't want to see Caroline Kennedy, Chris Matthews, or Al Franken in the senate. But really I don't see the former as comparable to the latter two.
I don't think celebrities are any more or less offensive than rich businessmen who use their personal net worth as a springboard into office. There's no way someone like Jon Corzine would be where he is if he wasn't super wealthy, just like there's no way we'd take Al Franken or Chris Matthews remotely seriously if they weren't famous. And we all seem pretty fine with rich businessmen/lawyers running for Congress (we have voted for plenty of them).
So it's really just a matter of whether the specific celebrity is actually fit for office. I don't see any larger issues beyond their qualifications. Caroline Kennedy in the senate is disturbing due to the political dynasty issue no matter how qualified she is.
Posted by: Ben Fritz | December 10, 2008 at 06:19 PM
What, no mention of Ahnuld? I gotta say, he hasn't been nearly as awful a governor as i expected, but i suspect that this is only because i expected nothing less than utter embarrassment.
I agree with Ben; we already elect celebrities. The only difference is that politicians pay for their celebrity.
Posted by: rone | December 11, 2008 at 01:16 AM