The George Effect, Cont'd.
The Crimson reports on yesterday's panel at Harvard's Kennedy School, at which speakers discussed
the influence of George on politics and the media. It's still remarkable to me that organizers, including Caroline Kennedy, didn't see fit to include anyone from George on the panel. Wasn't the absence at least a little bit conspicuous?
Nonetheless, I feel like I was there in spirit. As the Crimson points out, "Beginning with its first cover, George courted controversy. One issue included Buffy the Vampire Slayer in a list of influential political women because of her 'girl power.'"
Well...I blush. Because it was yours truly who argued that BTVS was, in fact, an important influence for girls, presenting a radically different conception of female strength than, say, Kate Moss, or any of the forthcoming Desperate Housewives. I assigned the piece to Debbie Stoller, the editor-in-chief of the 'zine
Bust, which is wildly political. Debbie knew right away what I was talking about. It's no surprise that, say, Roger Ailes wouldn't.
Why is it that cultural critics never have any problem pointing out the ways in which television and other popular media can be a bad influence on young people, but if you actually suggest that some parts of it are positive—and that either way, popular culture is inherently political—they grow skeptical?
Moreover, the political strength of non-white males in western society is almost always manifested through artistic occupations. When politics is dominated by white men, those who don't fit the bill express themselves through the arts...
