As an outgoing Columbia College first-year, I think I can safely say that I have learned a great deal about myself in the last two semesters. I have discovered the glory of Red Bull, become better at pretending to know what I am doing, and learned about the importance of wearing edgy black clothing.
More notably, I’ve gained interest in and knowledge of the political sphere. After watching the 2008 presidential debates with my floormates, researching the candidates, and voting, I gained a deeper appreciation for the political process. I have thus committed myself to zealously keeping up to date with coverage of what is going on in the White House. Recently, I learned a great deal about politics from the coverage of the G20 Summit.
As I understand it, on the eve of the G20 Summit, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama attended an evening reception for world leaders hosted by Queen Elizabeth II. The hard-hitting coverage of the reception at Buckingham Palace was profound and illuminating.
I thought that “London Summit: 2009” was held to provide a forum for world leaders to discuss the status of financial markets and the present world economy. Fooled by the mantra of “stability, growth, jobs,” I assumed that the media would report the dignitaries’ progress in discussing fiscal regulation and future economic trends.
As I watched CNN’s coverage of the apparently groundbreaking meeting between Michelle Obama and the Queen, I realized how very wrong I was. Video footage showed Michelle Obama confidently entering a parlor where Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip were waiting. Barack Obama was there, too. News stations covered Michelle’s movements play-by-play, paying careful attention to what she was wearing and how she hugged the Queen. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, hugged!
Watching this, I realized that the G20 Summit provides the ideal platform not only to demonstrate appropriate protocol for embraces between titled leaders, but to also display fashion do’s and don’ts. It is not merely an instructional meeting on the subtleties and intricacies of bowing, nodding, and breathing near royalty, but also a means of showcasing upcoming spring fashions sported by our very own first lady.
Fantastic!
Or not. This focus on superficialities, mainly Michelle Obama’s dress and mannerisms, is at best excessive. The media’s obsession with covering the First Lady’s every outfit is beyond me, and Web sites like mrs-o.org and Michelle Obama Watch take this interest to an uncomfortably extreme level. Michelle Obama Watch states, “And on to France. Everybody got the much awaited ‘Fashion Showdown’ between Carla Bruni and First Lady Michelle Obama. That’s just a fancy way to say the world has been relishing a ‘CAT FIGHT!’ between a Harvard and Princeton educated attorney and a recording artist.”
Really?
Michelle Obama probably didn’t invest so much time in her education, career, and family life to become competitive in a celebrity fashion smackdown. But I suppose this is good news for all the students who feel uneasy about where their studies will take them. Don’t despair, fellow Columbian. If you put in enough hours at Butler, you, too, may one day take the path of a public administrator who will be judged by the color of his or her shoes.
Granted, some media outlets have (to their credit?) looked deeper. They have reported on Michelle Obama’s philanthropic ventures, mentioning, for example, her visit to an all-girls school in London and the inspiring talk she gave there concerning the importance of education. But the main focus on her achievements is skewed in a different direction, even though the Harvard Law graduate was the former executive director of the Chicago chapter of Public Allies and the past vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. She’s a capable woman who has much more to offer to society than tips on how to pull off that shocking sleeveless dress.
The Columbia students I have spoken with have all agreed that the focus on “Michelle Obama: the fashionista” has missed the bigger picture, and they have expressed at least some dissatisfaction with the media’s one-dimensional representation. These sentiments have not been reflected in the media. If a female public figure can only receive respect and accolades (that aren’t related to her aesthetic appeal) if she wears pants suits, we have a problem. On her Web site, Michelle Obama explains that she is committed to continuing her mission of “supporting military families, helping working women balance career and family, and encouraging national service.” Unfortunately, many people know more about her workout regimen than her means of achieving these goals.
But maybe we shouldn’t ask these probing questions after all. Then we might miss the important details, like how she gets those muscular yet still feminine arms. And how can we call ourselves educated Columbians if we don’t know that?
The author is a Columbia College first-year. She is a staffer for Spectator copy.