SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Parsing Obama's Snl Cameo

NOVEMBER 5, 2007

Parsing Obama's Snl Cameo

Just a quick thought about that Obama "Saturday Night Live" appearance you've no doubt seen by now. The obvious punchline is that Obama is comfortable enough in his own skin to show up to a Halloween party as himself, as opposed to Hillary, who is constantly rooting around for a winning persona. "I'm not going to change who I am just because it's Halloween," Obama says. But there's another interpretation of the sketch that's less flattering to Obama: That he's so self-absorbed it didn't occur to him to come as anyone other than himself. There's already a low-grade chatter among journalists about how Obama is a little egotistical, that he's never more engaged than when reflecting on his own identity or his own achievements, that his campaign is one big exercise in navel-gazing. (See, for example, here.) I wonder: Was the SNL sketch intended as a kind of inside joke--Obama's way of making fun of these tendencies? Or is he so oblivious to them he didn't realize the joke could be interpreted that way? Knowing what I know about Obama, I suspect it's the former. But who knows?

--Noam Scheiber

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 5 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

5 comments

"low-grade chatter among journalists" -- who exactly is being self-absorbed here?  

Low-grade, indeed.

- stgla

November 5, 2007 at 1:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

could it possibly be that the SNL writers wrote it the way it was because they thought it was funny? And that putting a real Obama in a costume would have meant there would have been no joke?

- blackton

November 5, 2007 at 1:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

An egotistical presidential candidate?  Ye GODS!

- drdannyu

November 5, 2007 at 2:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yet another piece of evidence to support the idea that political journalism should not be a full time job: it leads to extreme ADD (you can't say anything interesting if you have to cover the same stump speeches each day), which in turn leads to trivial and unimportant gossip about gossip. Well done.

- ralphnelle

November 5, 2007 at 3:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noam, my apologies for the cheap shot here. My post says more about my current frustrations with this race than anything else. For what it is worth (if anything!), I consistently enjoy your sober and insightful analysis. The same goes for Crowley.

- ralphnelle

November 5, 2007 at 4:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close