Barack Obama = Grace Kelly

email this story
read comments (18)
post a comment

The situation facing Barack Obama right now is not dissimilar to the one facing Grace Kelly's character, Amy, in High Noon (1952). As everyone knows the Illinois Senator has been a proponent, in a manner of speaking, of non-violent campaigning. But the clock has struck twelve, the train has arrived and the Clinton gang, clearly committed to the low and the dirty, is making its way down Main Street and looking to fill him with hot lead. In such a situation, can a pacifist stay a pacifist?

Just as Amy makes it clear early on to Gary Cooper's Will Kane that she despises violence and won't abide it, even if it means not supporting Kane's decision to stand up to the Frank Miller gang, Obama has said he won't engage in the old political battle language and reflexes of the past. He believes, correctly, he has to be the guy with a new way, a new hymnbook. He can't just be another tit-for-tatter looking to get elected. If he succumbs and plays the same old game, Obama believes, he'll be sacrificing an essential part of his appeal.

Not so. Not at this stage of the game. Obama can't be anyone other than himself -- he's nothing if not comfortable in his own skin -- but he has to find a way to stand up, strap on the leg irons and be the tough guy as well as the good guy. The tough challenges that are sure to confront the next president in the domestic and foreign arenas are in some ways analogous to the tough challenges in a political campaign. Question is, will the big cathartic moment of High Noon, which belongs entirely to Amy, work in a real-life political context?

The big High Noon "turn" happens when Kelly hears shots fired and suddenly becomes combative. She shakes off her philosophical reservations and reacts instinctively. About to leave town on the same train, she jumps off and runs into town to help her husband. A few minutes later she does a shocking and cathartic thing by shooting bad guy Robert Wilke as he's re-loading his six-shooter. In the back even! And it's a great moment!

If you've ever seen High Noon with an audience (as I have), you know people go batshit when this happens. Somebody involved with the film (director Fred Zinneman, screenwriter Carl Foreman, producer Stanley Kramer) is quoted on the DVD as saying they knew High Noon would be a hit when they heard a test audience cheer this moment.

People understand the way things are. We all agree with non-violence and positivism and constructive behavior as long as the Frank Miller gang isn't threatening to do harm. When sociopaths push their way into the situation, things change. Sometimes you have to stand up and tell the bullies to surrender their weapons or else. People understand this. They sure as hell don't respect a man who avoids a fight because he doesn't believe in fighting. That's out.

By the way: yesterday I suggested an analogy between older white women who are standing by Hillary Clinton despite her general monstrousness and the "downtown" jury that found O.J. Simpson not guilty in his 1994 murder trial despite the facts presented by the prosecution. The point was that loyalty is blind. Anyone who knows what loyalty is knows the truth of this.

Burrows' melancholic beauty<< previous | next >>Chait's "Go Already!"

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on March 7, 2008 at 2:52 PM

comment #1

Dave says ...

"The point was that loyalty is blind. Anyone who knows what loyalty is knows the truth of this."

Pot? Kettle. Kettle? Pot.

Posted by Dave at March 7, 2008 4:13 PM

comment #2

OddDuck says ...

[A certain regular has unfortunately broken the rule about personal slagging and name-calling, and is therefore taking a vacation from these parts for an indefinite period.]

Posted by OddDuck at March 7, 2008 4:15 PM

comment #3

Gordie Lachance says ...

For the past eight years, the President has been a semi-literate, functionally retarded moron who chokes on pretzels and tap-dances for the press corps. And I'm supposed to believe that somehow Hillary's a bad idea.

I was kind of behind Obama a few months ago. Now, not only am I going to switch parties and vote for McCain, but I am going to gloat when Obama gets stomped by the GOP this summer.

Hopefully, the end will come for him in one of those idiotic Howard Dean YouTube moments, just to undo this whole "Mr. comfortable in his own skin" crap.

Posted by Gordie Lachance at March 7, 2008 4:20 PM

comment #4

mutinyco says ...

If Obama were as hot as Grace Kelly, I'd vote for him. Just on general principle.

Posted by mutinyco at March 7, 2008 4:31 PM

comment #5

Wrecktum says ...

I may be remembering this wrong, but I recall Wells saying he doesn't like High Noon.

Posted by Wrecktum at March 7, 2008 4:36 PM

comment #6

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Dave: No, I don't consider myself to be blindly loyal. I see myself as thoughtfully loyal. Barack Obama has fought and won a series of tough elections by promising a future based on a moderately liberal and collaborative progressive policy at home and abroad that will give this country a chance to at least try and move beyond the usual combative nothing-gets-done, self-destructive crap in which the corporations run everything and the will of the voters (to the extent that it's been expressed) is ignored. There's no mathematical way Clinton can take the nomination from him except by "bombing Dresden," and that is what she and her despicable henchmen are doing now, and that is why I despise her and the gross dysfunctional behavior and thinking that her campaign represents, not to mention taking everyone back to the right-left loathings of the '90s. Her campaign has been run poorly, terribly -- she had no plan beyond Super Tuesday, she ran out of money, she's a terrible people manager (valuing loyalty above all), etc.

Posted by gruver1 at March 7, 2008 4:38 PM

comment #7

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Wrecktum: No, what I said is that I much prefer "High Noon" to the somewhat similar "Rio Bravo."

Posted by gruver1 at March 7, 2008 4:39 PM

comment #8

Wrecktum says ...

Well I agree with that!

Posted by Wrecktum at March 7, 2008 4:52 PM

comment #9

Hash says ...

"Wells to Dave: No, I don't consider myself to be blindly loyal. I see myself as thoughtfully loyal. Barack Obama has fought and won a series of tough elections by promising a future based on a moderately liberal and collaborative progressive policy at home and abroad that will give this country a chance to at least try and move beyond the usual combative nothing-gets-done, self-destructive crap in which the corporations run everything and the will of the voters (to the extent that it's been expressed) is ignored. There's no mathematical way Clinton can take the nomination from him except by "bombing Dresden," and that is what she and her despicable henchmen are doing now, and that is why I despise her and the gross dysfunctional behavior and thinking that her campaign represents, not to mention taking everyone back to the right-left loathings of the '90s. Her campaign has been run poorly, terribly -- she had no plan beyond Super Tuesday, she ran out of money, she's a terrible people manager (valuing loyalty above all), etc."

Probably the funniest thing you've ever written.

Bravo.

And I cant stand Hillary or McCain.

Posted by Hash at March 7, 2008 5:24 PM

comment #10

Mr. Muckle says ...

I think Obama can fight this a lot more effectively than merely by stooping to Hillary's level. SOMEONE has to elevate the process, it ain't gonna climb out of the gutter by itself. Otherwise, it's same old, same old. I think he has the intellect to make the issues themselves his best weapon. As to his opponents' personalities, we can all see them for ourselves. I don't like movies that sledgehammer their points, I like quiet assassins with nice sharp knives better than ones with big bats and sweaty biceps.

Posted by Mr. Muckle at March 7, 2008 5:43 PM

comment #11

Dave says ...

Jeff, fair point, well said.

One caution, however-- Hillary's campaign HAS been run poorly, and obviously so. Yet, Obama hasn't scored a knockout blow. And the last week really had him staggered-- that press conference was frankly a low moment for him ("I've had 8 questions!" Buddy, you become POTUS, you're getting a lot more than THAT).

I praise your loyalty, Jeff, and best of luck to your guy. I don't agree with hardly a word he says, and his culty supporters really need to listen to what they're saying, but as a man and a candidate, Obama strikes me as one of the "good guys." Personally, while I don't envision any scenario where I vote for the man, his best appeal to Republican voters may just be that he's the first Democrat since 1992 where we won't feel so bad losing to that guy.

Alas, losing to Bill Clinton begat Hillary Clinton sixteen years later, so what goes around comes around.

Anyway, my only caution is that don't let that admirable loyalty blind you to Obama's shortcomings, which he DOES have. Even a "terribly" run campaign has him in the fight for his political life-- and don't underestimate the fact that this is the first serious campaign Obama has ever been in in his life. He *HAS* to get better, and he's learning in the harsh light.

Oh, and as long as your reading, I'll echo what the rest of your loyal readership says, ad nauseum-- more movies, less politics. (Not *NO* politics-- just a bit more balance. All these threads start to run together after a while, I forget who I'm arguing with ;-).

Posted by Dave at March 7, 2008 6:02 PM

comment #12

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Hash: Any chance you could explain why you feel what I wrote is funny? You're not, that's for sure.

Posted by gruver1 at March 7, 2008 6:05 PM

comment #13

K. Bowen says ...

Is this Jeff's way to make his political posting seem more like it fits in with the site? I can't wait to figure out how JOhn McCain's situation compared to Giant.

Posted by K. Bowen at March 7, 2008 6:14 PM

comment #14

Nate West says ...

"In such a situation, can a pacifist stay a pacifist?"

Martin Luther King, Jr. faced precisely this question in rather more dire circumstances. But being a "pacifist" does not mean playing continuously on the defensive. One may be aggressively and defiantly "pacifist." This is what Obama must do. He needs to be defiantly reasonable, aggressively tough, but fair. And if he loses so doing, then he loses.

For instance, issue one:

OBAMA: They are floating a rumor that I'm a Muslim, as if being a Muslim would be a disqualification (which it isn't). As it happens, I am a Christian, and I've attended the same Chicago church for twenty years. But if it bothers you that I may "look like a Muslim," then vote for my opponent, Hillary Clinton. Senator Clinton does not look like the typical Muslim. As far as I know.

Posted by Nate West at March 7, 2008 7:33 PM

comment #15