OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Close This Box!

On the triumphalism and the involvement of celebrities, I think there is a difference between gathering to celebrate the peaceful transition of power in the democratic process, and the hope that any and all such transitions represent, and gathering specifically to celebrate the ascendancy of a particular party or person.  Although Obama certainly was the people's choice, too much triumphalism of the latter category can feel like gall in the throats of the many who did not vote for him.  Of course, we could echo Justice Scalia's words about Bush v. Gore, and tell the losers to "get over it."  But we could do with better role models on such issues, couldn't we?  

As worrisome for me is that Washington is a town of star-[redacted]ers, and I would not like an administration that campaigned in the name of the people, and that used but recognized the dangers of personal charisma, to give in too much to the ways of that city, which worships celebrity and loves to bask in personal and reflected glory, and in which "wall of fame" photos are the central decoration.  As I wrote before, we could have seen much about what would be both good and cloying and awful about the Clinton Administration when we watched Michael Stipe and 10,000 Maniacs serenade the new President with "To Sir With Love" in 1992.  I also wrote here that I was not crazy about the kind of it's-who-you-know coziness at the top that placed an advance copy of the final episode of the Sopranos in Al Gore's private plane, lest he have to DVR it like the common folk.  I took some heat for that one, but I'm still uncomfortable about the kind of self-love, sense of privilege, and distance from everyday experience that the lives of the super-elite can entail.  I do think Obama quite rightly uses his charisma as a valuable tool for governing.  But when the New York Times magazine devotes its most recent issue to a portfolio of Obama administration figures, meaning that each one had to show up and agree to a worshipful portrait session rather than modestly say "no thanks," I worry that this famously disciplined group will lose something in the process.

As for U2, I suppose there's just something that nags at me about a foreign band playing at such an event.  Certainly it's a band with a long association with the United States.  And if they were willing to play at any American inauguration, for a figure of any party, I would feel much better about it.  But when the message is that, in effect, celebrities from around the world are coming to tell the United States how glad they are about the election of a particular individual that they favor, I get a little queasier.  This shouldn't be a partisan moment, and yet such performances in some ways heighten that partisan feeling.

Now the caveats.  I think there are ways to engage in this triumphalism, as little as I personally enjoy this kind of pomp, that focus on the event rather than the man.  Transitions should be times of hope or guarded optimism, even when you didn't favor the election of a particular individual.  Although this doesn't always sink all the way down, there is some evidence of this even when the new President does not share "our" views; newspapers in particular, but others too, often take a tone of reserving their judgment and hoping for the best when the changeover occurs, and the stories get softer until there's some evidence on the ground.  When Bruce Springsteen sings "The Rising," it doesn't have to be about the rising of Obama in particular; it can be about the hope that we all will rise together.  I don't know whether the performers yesterday performed in that spirit or not; but it can at least be a far cry from the hero-worship of "To Sir With Love."

Second, there is the simple truth that the United States has elected and will now witness the inauguration of its first black president.  This is still an awesome thing and, as in November, I think the sense of disbelief and joy will crest in the next couple of days.  That is a thing worth celebrating, and it can be seen as an extraordinary moment for the whole American people, of whatever party, rather than as the apotheosis of a man or a party.  In that sense, yesterday's events truly could be a celebration by and for all of us, and not just those who are liberals or Obama supporters.

Finally, and I am somewhat attracted to this, we could view the day's events -- including U2's performance -- as a moment of in-your-face American exceptionalism.  In the popular imagination, that kind of pugnacious "We Are the Champions" nationalism is probably associated more with conservatives and Republicans, but from a Canadian perspective I think liberals and Democrats are hardly any strangers to the belief that theirs is the best country in the world.  Part of the worldwide excitement about Obama's election can be seen not just as a political statement about Bush exhaustion or about Obama's more liberal ideology, but also as a kind of statement of respect and even envy.  Many Western nations, despite their own lack of a recent history of slavery and formal and informal racism, are not even close to electing someone who departs so radically from the traditional backgrounds of their leaders.  The Times the other day had a fascinating story about the career of a Japanese politician whose rise was capped by the fact that he was a member of the buraku class.  There's been a lot of talk in this election about how the United States can, with this election, finally rejoin a community of nations from whom it had become estranged in recent years.  But there is a sense in which I would feel better about the triumphalism of the concert, and the appearance of a foreign band, if the real message here was that the United States was boasting yet again about its exceptionalism and the ways in which it is the envy of other nations.  If U2 wants to come and perform, not as a way of casting a vote they don't have the right to cast, but to pay obeisance to the egalitarian potential of the US of A, I'm okay with that.  Although I still don't think that star-studded concerts and portrait portfolios in magazines scream egalitarianism.