Sunday, March 22, 2009 - Posts
-
sponsorship
This weekend, I sat through a couple of heated discussions about that photo on the front page of Saturday's New York Times, showing Michelle breaking ground for that vegetable garden on the South Lawn. The views divided roughly between: a) annoyed feminists, who said some version of: "enough with the happy shots of kiddies swinging and mom planting vegetables. What will they bring out next? The checkered apron? After all, in Chicago it was Michelle who wore the pants in the family." And then b) enviros, who said some verion of : "Cool! They finally got that vegetable garden on the South Lawn."
As for me, I'm mostly taken by the unspoken irony I read in the photo. Despite what readers of the New York Times think (and the White House, apparently), this urban locavore movement is something that's gospel among a small percentage of people who can afford to shop at the farmer's market (see example of excesses of movement here). Most people, I think, just go to Wal-Mart and plant pansies on the front lawn.
And while Michelle is concerned about childhood obesity, she doesn't strike me as a rip-up-the-front-lawn kind of gal. How do I know this? Look at what she's wearing. Those could be muck boots but I believe they have heels. And she's in a long sweater, fashionably belted, and all black. And her hair looks perfect. Ladybird at least put on some gardening gloves and a sun hat for the photos. Michelle looks like she's impatient to get to dinner. Between this and the sleeveless gowns, I'm beginning to think Michelle rebels against the strictures of first lady life silently, through her outfits, the sartorial equivalents of a middle finger.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?