Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

This observation by writerpo (from 2008-08-27), specifically the paragraph I've highlighted (though I'd like to think, in light of the election results, that 'People' should be prefaced with 'Some' and 'prevailing' should be replaced with 'Republican'), brought to mind something a friend of mine had said a bit earlier:

I've spent most of this election cycle marveling at the prevailing narrative (and how I am both amazed and appalled at that election buzzword) of Obama as the arugula noshing, effete, intellectual elitist. [...] From all that I've seen and heard, the Obamas are, in fact, the embodiment of the American Dream.

[...]

The American dream is what we're told all through childhood. Work hard and you can achieve anything, including wealth, both monetary and familial. [...] Through hard work, he made the American Dream happen.

So what's the problem? Why is the Right able to spin him as the other when he epitomizes everything we all hope for?

John McCain is why. If Barack Obama represents the American Dream, then John McCain represents the American Fantasy.

Barack Obama worked hard and became rich. John McCain won the lottery.

We pay lip service to the idea of working to our riches, but when it comes right down to it, we would much rather have a sack of money fall into our laps. [...]

People can respect Obama, but they don't. Instead they want to believe the prevailing narrative because the reality shames them. It shames them because they haven't done the same. It also shames them because they know, in their heart of hearts that he has earned their respect, but their envy keeps them from giving it. The lie is poultice for a burning shame. They respect McCain because they cannot be envious of luck. Luck is ineffable. It is beyond their control.

We preach the American Dream, but when it comes right down to it, we admire the American Fantasy.

When I read that, it immediately made me think of these paragraphs from an interview with Amelia G ( amelia_g), published 2008-05-15, that I had referred to (in poor paraphrase) in recent conversations:

In DC, it turned out that being able to decorate one leather jacket with paint and rivets and being able to tell one great fantasy of an alternate life to a fuckable chick does not equal wanting an actual platform for success or recognition of any kind. I found that quite a number of my amazing and talented compatriots wanted to be able to fantasize about how cool it would be if they started a band, wrote a novel, opened a dungeon, ran a nightclub, got a short story published, deejayed a big party, designed clothing, became an international sex symbol, etc. Although I will engage in conversations about wouldn't it be cool if, I have a tendency to then go forth into the world to make it so. I think I'm wired that way naturally and my upbringing only hammered that into me more. I was both shocked and deeply hurt when I found that a lot of the DC scenesters I counted as friends were angry at someone giving them a chance. They wanted to be able to get credit for their brilliance without having to actually come through with, ya know, work. It had never occurred to me that there were people who did not want opportunity to come knocking.

So I ended up in this odd circumstance where I was getting kind words for my work on Blue Blood from people who were huge heroes of mine. Only parts of my primary support structure were just really kind of pissy. HBO would come to my house to do a special, but I couldn't get some of my supposed closest friends to stop by. William Gibson would tell me I was "courageous" and John Shirley would buy me coffee and DC scenesters who had built whole events based on Gibson and Shirley's writing would make my participation a pain for me. I didn't know the word "hater" then, but it sure would have helped if I had."