So Animatronic Trump has come to Earth and I'm blaming Ray.
Animatronic Trump is nearly as scary as the real one. I've never been to the Hall of Presidents or the Magic Kingdom at all, though I did visit Disneyland back when I was 9 and Donnie was 13, before Disneyland began banning men with long hair from the park but nearly 20 years after underpaid, undercredited animators went on strike at Disney Studios.
Which is to say that a bloated display of jingoism there is hardly something I have to see to believe, nor do I apologize for rejecting the patriotic equivalent of praying on streetcorners. My parents -- Greatest Generation membership notwithstanding -- used to shake their heads over a similar show at Roadside America, which literally overshadowed the cool little trains and houses we came to see.
But folks eat this stuff up, so wotthehell, and the question really is not whether Walt Disney was the friend of the workingman and a Great American, but rather how such a talented group of artists could come up with such an off-target statue.
Michael Cavna convened a group of political cartoonists to analyze and diagnose Animatronic Trump and explain where it went wrong and how to properly depict Dear Leader.
In fact, it's more than "a group" but rather what I think we can call "a distinguished panel," consisting of Matt Davies, Kal Kallaugher, Mike Luckovich, Scott Stantis and Disney-veteran Ann Telnaes, who contributed the above image.
And I hasten to point out that, if she were ever a disgruntled former employee, she is today one of the most thoroughly gruntled people I know.
So it's fair commentary.
The whole thing is a must-read, not simply for the swipes at the statue but for the genuinely expert insights into how to draw Trump.
A couple of them mention his hair, and I happened to notice yesterday, in the videos of him signing autographs at the airport in Florida (which, by the way, seems oddly unpresidential), that the sun was shining through the front half of his swept-around-comb-over, giving it the look of cotton candy or perhaps fiberglass, which made me in turn think that he's really backed himself into a corner.
That is, I wonder how much more his hair can take and how much longer there were be enough of it to pull off this silly charade. I can't help but think it would have been a lot easier for him if, several years ago, he had simply gotten himself a well-made toup.
After all, people know that Sean Connery and William Shatner wear toupées, but they're well-made and not terribly distracting and who cares?
But once you've taken your hair to a place where anyone talking to you has to keep thinking "Don't stare - Don't stare - Don't stare," it's much more difficult to simply back away from it. It would be like President Grant shaving and then donning a fake beard.
I suppose you could order a toupée replicating your established look, but cotton candy melts and fiberglass would create serious itching problems.
Juxtaposition of the Day
However much two-thirds of us laugh at Animatronic Trump, there is a significant segment of the population that eats it all up, and who are True Believers and unshakable Deplorables.
And not only could Trump shoot someone on Fifth Avenue without losing their support, but Obama was right when he said that the more you take away from them, the more they cling to their religious doctrines and their dogmatic belief in the Second Amendment.
And they are so firmly entrenched in believing what they are told to believe that they got pissed when he said that.
However, between the unreasoning fear Luckovich depicts and the absurd Lotto Nation hopefulness Powell draws upon, they are beyond simply vulnerable as targets for the cynical manipulation that has built them into a political force.
So I laughed at both of these, but it's gallows humor. Between them, these guys have captured the essence of the Republican base.
The cartoons are valuable, but only as a humorous reminder of what thinking people are up against, because, to begin with, most of the Deplorables won't even see these. Many of them don't read papers, while many others only read papers whose editorial slants they accept.
Cartoonists are already getting pushback from editors who don't want them constantly criticizing Trump, because it upsets their readers.
Which reminds me of when, in the Chicago Eight Seven Trial, Judge Julius Hoffman refused to allow former Attorney General Ramsey Clark to testify, "because it might tend to prejudice the jury in favor of the defendants," to which his illegitimate son Abbie commented that he thought that was the point of putting on a defense.
Also, I have noticed that one paper which is home to a moderate progressive cartoonist has begun alternating his work online with cartoons by rabid rightwingers, which addresses the objections of Deplorable readers by declaring that everything is pretty much a matter of opinion, in the best of totally chickenshit on-the-one-hand-but-on-the-other tradition.
For my part, I'd rather have a rightwing paper on my doorstep than some mewling display of moral cowardice.
Anyway, it's important to continue to point out the foolishness and the fear that motivates the Deplorables, not in an attempt to convert them, which won't happen, but to rally moderates to recognize the stakes.
And to provide a few laffs. Lord knows we could use them.
Speaking of Whom
The ironically-named Cardinal Law died, and much as I hate Pearly Gates cartoons, I like Chan Lowe's take.
St. Paul wrote to Titus: "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."
And Titus -- perhaps not the same Titus -- had the response, shorn of niceties because what's nice about it?
Too harsh? Go forward to 5:26.
Comments