We’re not in Kansas any more, Dorothy
Posted: February 2, 2009 Filed under: Hillary Clinton: Her Campaign for All of Us, Women's Rights 1 Comment
I’m not sure what made me go read No Quarter first thing this morning. It really isnt’ one of my usual morning haunts but I went there. I was greeted by and fully linked to this article by Scott Horton at Harper’s Magazine. This is one of my favorite magazines although I’ve lost touch with it since Katrina. (Getting fourth class mail delivered here is still an iffy thing.) Of course, SusanUnPC has been all aglow for Hillary as SOS, as have most of us Hillary fans. I’m not trying to ignite any blog wars here because I really don’t take issue with her at all or actually the posting of the article. It is what it is: a nice thread on the difference between Hillary and Condi as SOS and what that will mean to the employees of the State Department. But, it’s the framing of that situation that caught me in my pre-coffee, pre-first class condition. So, here was the eye-catching quote.
“There are great hopes for Hillary at State. I met last week with a number of career State Department employees and was surprised when one said she was looking forward to the “Glinda Party” next week. I asked her: if Hillary was Glinda, the Good Witch of the South from the Wizard of Oz, did that make Condoleezza Rice the Wicked Witch of the West?”
Now, I’m not one to be an apologist for ANY Bush policy, let alone the appalling lack of professional diplomacy, but are we so swimming in the patriarchy that we have to frame two of the most powerful women in the world as the good witch and the bad witch? Just askin if something smells a little fishy to you …
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
dakinikat,
If state employees see their world as the Kingdom of Oz, then, especially given her introductory address and her remarks about the positivity of dissent, I can appreciate why they would see her as Glinda.
Context is almost everything. It is not everything because interpretations vary depending upon horizons of personal experience.
“If your tool of analysis is power, you will see power relations everywhere.” (Edward Said paraphrased) It is legitimate to see the Glinda reference as potentially “patriarchical”(a slippery concept in itself) and the right approach is to ask for commentary from the sensus communis, which is what you’ve done.
I do not know the context, so I do not know.
As to Mather’s, my recollection is that Increase was against witch trials. He saw them for the politcal vehicles they were in Salem. Cotton lacked the wisdom and/or moral integrity of Increase. [I hope I’ve labelled them accordingly (?)]
My brother witnessed, and acted within the turmoil of, a penis theft accusation in Ghana, while doing his research. Given his experience, my sense is that a proper sense of what witch hunts look like, is to imagine a lynch mob in its’ various phases of intensity.
Non sequitur. As to earlier compliments, my parents taught me to praise where appropriate, so as to balance where I offer other than praise.
NS2: Our positions on marijuana decriminalization are similar.
Yours,
SM