Comments on: Michelle At Arlington

By: Kitt

Kitt — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:38:43 +0000

Paul – I SO totally understand the nitpicking. I am not what I would consider a grammar constable, but apparently my skills at recognizing possessive vs plural is a rare commodity, as is differentiating between certain homophones (there/their, bear/bare, your/you’re are (are/our) the few that come to mind instantly). Although our/are doesn’t really fit the category, some folks use them interchangeably.
As for Michelle Obama. This woman is someone I want to be friends with because of what I’ve observed about her. She’s no freakin’ pushover. She is contemplative coupled with all her other characteristics. Personally – of the two, I think she’s the THINKER in that family, as in heavy-duty. I do not think Barack Obama is a lightweight thinker, but I do think lighter than his wife.
See – she would do exactly what I would do if in her place. I’d be myself as much as I could be in public without giving away too much intimacy, and I sure as hell would be connected to what’s and who is around me. She’s there for a reason, she knows it, and she reading the exhibit because that’s what one does when they want to connect and honor people for who they are and what they’ve accomplished.

By: paul wilczynski

paul wilczynski — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:21:22 +0000

Sorry for this seeming nit-picking here. I’m an avid reader of your analyses, and find a lot of truth in your observations of the “subliminable” (sic).
I must, however, strike a (minor?) negative note here and call your attention to the use of what I call the “hillbilly plural”–the use of an apostrophe in adding the plural “s” onto the singular form of a proper surname: in this case, “Obama’s”, which I’m sure when it’s detached, now reads to you as the possessive!
Apostrophes are used to show contraction or possession, but never to pluralize.

By: Wayne Dickson

Wayne Dickson — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 21:56:50 +0000

Yeah, the closed form of the crossed arms struck me (possibly because we were talking recently about closed vs. open form in my introductory Humanities course). It must always be taken in context, of course. She does indeed seem actually to be reading what’s in front of her. The posture thus seems to me, not a rejection or sign of dismissal, but rather an expression of an empathy that hurts.

By: Serr8d

Serr8d — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 02:40:23 +0000

Did you see the photo taken with M'chelle in beads?

By: www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawkjK9NqwaZ91D7lK18UdVbUQ4i8OXhH7ww

www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawkjK9NqwaZ91D7lK18UdVbUQ4i8OXhH7ww — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:14:57 +0000

Looking at the last picture, note that her head is trailing the line of her body. She is actually reading what is on the wall in front of her. Then the way here arms are crossed, try it yourself and see what emotions it gives rise to. If both hands were covered, it could either be resentment or fear. But the right hand up (and shoulders up) is more relaxed and even contemplative. I think, despite the flashes going off, despite the people around her, this woman is thinking about the loss and sacrifice each name represents.

By: John

John — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:39:24 +0000

I just noticed that Michelle’s smile looks like Reese Witherspoon’s.

By: Progresssive Mom

Progresssive Mom — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:46:51 +0000

In photo #1, the veteran has extended her forearm and elbow to the First Lady, possibly to help her balance her stance (it appears Mrs. Obama is neither using a chair nor bending down to be on par with the two women, but rather is squatting to their level … an outstanding example of what disability advocates call “people first”).
Can anything be more symbolic, more uplifting, or more of an affirmation of what it means to be an American than to see a 100 year old female veteran extend a helping hand to the young First Lady?

By: david

david — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:19:25 +0000

I got to see Michelle in Santa Fe with five military wives and local military officials. Her presence, emotional maturity and connection, and her ability to blend in astute policy discussion was uplifting and wonderful. For over two hours, she was right there with those wives. This was only one of many such meetings she convened across the country during the campaign – we are fortunate to have such a beautiful an engaged first lady.

By: joeradish

joeradish — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:09:36 +0000

All three pictures give new meaning to the “all black and white,” cliche. Michele Obama seems to see us. She is not aloof like the Bush wives, and she is not polarizing like Secretary of State (hee hee)Clinton, who, by the way, in her new role has quickly become a unifier.
First Lady Obama is a good medicine for the nation, and she seems to have enough ease to handle her role.

By: anonpoli

anonpoli — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 12:41:45 +0000

In the last photo, what is striking is that her face is serious, her body language resolute, and she is not looking away. You could place this picture next to the pictures now allowed of the coffins, that we no longer look away and hide reality.
Each name matters. We can see her taking them in, reading, absorbing, she is the “below” neatly and honestly book-ending “Above &”. All the photos are black and white. The dead soldiers are past issues of color. And how neatly her gray jacket embodies that message.