Sunday
Mar152009
New York Hearts Mrs. O
Sunday, March 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM 
With glossy magazine covers featuring Mrs. O at every turn, New York magazine has taken things to the next level. They've not only put Mrs. O on the cover of their March 23 issue, they appear to have devoted the entire magazine to the First Lady's iconic influence. The sixteen articles (!) and gallery of artists' interpretations will keep us busy reading tomorrow morning; click here to get started.
in Outfits
Outfits
Reader Comments (70)
Great cover photo!
yes, i'm waiting for the mag to reach the stands where i am
she's in pink on a lot of the covers ? - vogue, people, now new york - is that a coincidence, or do a lot of style editors agree that that's the colour she looks best in for a magazine cover ?
I've only gotten to the third article, but so far they've all been spot-on and well thought-out. They did a really good job.
Thanks for the heads up Mrs T.
It is wonderful that the articles and artwork is accessible online.
Can't wait to sit down when I have some time and savor all of them.
Thanks for sharing this Mrs T.!
Enjoyed reading the articles...mostly spot on too!
Forgot to share that I read the full "O" magazine interview Mrs Obama did with Oprah...
I laughed, smiled and even cried as I read it-
This woman is the real deal!
She really does get it...
The articles resemble vignettes and as a whole give us a snapshot of the many facets of Michelle, as well as others' perceptions of her.
I am somewhat befuddled about the so-called gift-giving gaffe that Michelle supposedly committed on the Gordon Browns. It's all my father, a right wing sore loser, can talk about. Why is this being blown out of proportion?
Thank you, Mrs. T! This is a very interesting and insightful collection of short thought pieces that give a language to some of the beauty and curiosity that is unfolding before us. I love the cover photo. It really captures her amazing spirit. Wonderful Monday morning treat!
Bevi, I think there is probably a general theme among Obama critics as suggesting that Obama is very unprepared for the job, and the gift-giving "gaffe" with Michelle goes along with that. There'll be other things for critics to focus on soon, I'm sure. But if that's the worst thing a critic is saying about Michelle, that's not so bad!
I thought the "Michelle is so tall" story was amusing. I have a tall friend who can recite all the silly things people have said to her because she's a woman who is tall. Like, "wow! you're so tall!" It must get annoying.
Bevi, I suspect that anything negative that the right-wing can focus on, whether it is a genuine mistake or only exists in their own skewed interpretation of reality, will get a lot of attention in the so-called "liberal media." This will result in people that lean right, or who aren't paying enough attention to other sources of information, believing the President and Mrs. Obama are making many mistakes. This feeds the erroneous and long-standing Republican assertion that our government can not do a good job for us.
I think it is up to us regular folks to counter the biased presentation given on our airwaves and in print media. The corporate media will focus on the negative and we must be educated on what is happening and be able and willing to speak about the positive.
Thank goodness for the Internet or we would be at too great a disadvantage.
BTW, I loved your "pearl of a girl" comment.
Bevi,
Remember that the right wing media in Britain was mainly responsible for fanning those flames, abetted by our own sensationalistic, trivia obsessed media. The Obama era has repeatedly demonstrated that the media oftentimes does not accurately reflect what most people are thinking. Take sleevegate as an example. According to USA Today who actually did a poll about that issue, the majority approved of Michelle's look or said, "who cares. Most people are much smarter than the media. And for some people in the minority, like your relative, they are looking for absolutely anything to bring the Obama family down. Take heart,that will not happen because too many people are wide awake.
I love MO and the rest of her family as much as anyone else . . . but I find this a little creepy. I wonder how she's feeling, being forced out of relative obscurity into superstardom. I'm not saying she isn't doing well at it -- she's doing much better than I ever could. But, it would be difficult, I daresay, not to feel resentful and a trifle freaked out at times . . . .
Regarding the fashion essay in the magazine:
I was somewhat puzzled by the author saying that Michelle should wear shorter skirts because she has great legs. On the contrary, I think that part of the reason that Michelle focuses on arms is because they are one her best features (and legs are not).
Just my take on it, I am wondering if anyone else is hungering for shorter hemlines from FLOTUS?
Overall, what an impressive bunch of articles, and gorgeous cover. Even she must be surprised over all the attention she is getting. It makes great reading for all of us in uncertain economic times, and I love following her activities, but it must get annoying to be analyzed to death all the time (I know I am one of the worst offenders, she is just so darn interesting and beautiful).
miz_glammie, you raise an interesting point. One thing that I find interesting about MO is how gracefully she seems to have adapted to these changes in her life...as if she was born to it. Of course, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes! But she was never a "Washington wife" (she stayed in Chicago while Barack was a senator) and so I'm impressed that she is just out there, doing things and shaking hands and generally just popping up on a regular basis. She could certainly be forgiven if she decided to just take a break, but she's not.
I think that the infinitely long campaign season gave her a good idea of what is expected, and what kind of criticism she'd be going through. Talking about her arms is small potatoes compared to some of the things people were saying about her back then.
Bevi, the gift giving this is easy for people who want criticize the obamas for absolutely anything, to harp on because there are typically very few details released about the more personal interactions between foreign leaders and their families, so people can just make up their own. it's easy to work yourself up into a frenzy about who "snubbed' whom, or who was conspiring to do this or that, when you get to make up the details of what supposedly happened, to fit whatever you want the story to be; especially since you're unlikely to ever hear from any of the parties involved as to what actually did or didn't happen (because unlike anonymous internet posters and pundits, they are almost certainly too busy to care).
nice....i must purchase this.
I appreciate the POVs of my fellow posters! Thanks for bringing me back from the edge.
I have a friend who has seen the new Oprah mag, and says it's just as weird-looking and "Photoshoppy" in real life as it seemed to us when Mrs. T. posted about it earlier. How weird. I'll have to check it out myself.
edwina I must say that I don't think any of our newspapers could be described as particularly right wing. The Telegraph and Times are nominally right wing, but in a floppy fringed, public schoolboy way. The Star and the Sun are also supposedly right wing, but are really black and white comics that talk about football and womens chests. Nothing to get worked up about.
To be accurate, the supposed "gaff" was reported in both US and UK newspapers across the political spectrum. This is just newspapers making a story up where there isn't one, as per usual - overlooking the beautiful and thoughtful gift that Michelle brought for Laura Bush on Inauguration Day.
None of the newspaper/online reports I read referred to the fact that most visiting dignitaries will have agreed gifts beforehand - I would assume that Sarah Brown and Mrs O had already made arrangements for what was appropriate for them both. That's what diplomats are for, they make sure everything's covered in advance.
Anyway, on to this New York publication: It looks fab and I will have a happy day tomorrow ploughing my way through it.
Thanks for the link Mrs T.
(Bevi, your dad's just enjoying having a reason to be right. Don't we ALL love a reason to be right!!! Poor guy - I think there's going to be thin pickings!)
I wish everyone could be more respectful of other views. The Republican philosphy of governing differs from the Democratic one. It's nothing to get condescending about. I will now raise my glass to listening to other points of view and having a civil discussion.
Allison, it may be a while before we see shorter hemlines on anybody--the conventional wisdom is that hemlines go up when the economy is booming (think flappers, 60s miniskirts, etc.) and get longer when the economy slows down. So I hope we'll be seeing shorter skirts soon--maybe that will mean our 401Ks are out of the tank!
She's so beautiful!
Michelle on Tuesday...
From Politico dot com:
Joins service project Tuesday
Michelle Obama will trade in her fashionable duds for construction gear when she pitches in Tuesday to build an affordable energy-efficient home on the National Mall. The event, which marks the 30th anniversary of YouthBuild, coincides with Congress’s attempts to expand national service programs.
Obama will deliver brief remarks at the event. Community service is one of the pet subjects she is taking up in her role as first lady, along with issues related to military families and work-life balance.
---
HuffingtonPost has a new slideshow and poll up regarding Michelle's hair styles:
The Elegant Updo
The Rock And Rolled
The Michelle
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/16/michelle-obamas-three-fav_n_175229.html
Leah D,
Thanks for the link on Michelle's hairstyles. I think the pics that they are using to represent the elegant updos are two different styles. In the first pic, there is nothing elegant about it. It seems to be that she put her hair in a pony tail or pinned it to avoid a bad hair day. The second pic under Elegant Updo also seem to be a pinned do that she did under the circumstances when her hair wasn't as perfectly coiffed. It is the third one that seems to have been an elegant updo by choice.
I love the Rock and Rolled look when she wore the green dress to honor Stevie WOnder, but that is not exactly the same hairstyle in the pic on the left and they were each making a different statement. I LOVE how she looked at the STevie Wonder event, but I know that is a playful look that she could only wear on certain occasions. But it does make her look the most youthful. I think the other pic of her in Rock and Rolled (in cobalt dress) is very nice too and is a less playful version that could be worn during the daytime. But her harsh lipstick spoils it.
The Michelle is OK too when worn at the right occasion. As a black woman, I know that the circumstances and amount of time that she has sometimes dictate the hairstyle. So I can't pick a favorite but I say rock which ever one is appropriate for the occasion, your interest, how you're feeling, how your hair is working, the time and resources available.
They should have used this photo for An Elegant Updo:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gvaldez68/3128373892/
Also they did not include her Flip Do, which I like, as seen in this old photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsmyre/2441151571/
New event tomorrow evening:
From Politico dot com-
A White House aide tells POLITICO44 that Obama will be hosting a big St. Patty's day bash at the WH tomorrow night. On the guest list: Irish American lawmakers and other Irish Americans.
---
Yippie! Maybe Michelle will be wearing green again!
I read those articles and I thought they were interesting. Terry McMillan's article re: Mrs. O's body being a question mark was cute.
The gift-giving flack is just chatter.
Tomorrow should be interesting - construction boots by day, fun St. Patrick's Day green by night.
About the gift incident, it was definitely bad form for Mr. and Mrs. O to give the gifts that they did (bad economy notwithstanding). It shows that not much thought was put into them. Mr. Brown is blind in one eye and it is doubtful he watches TV much plus American CDs are not compatible with British players; the helicopters for the boys were a bit cheap and meaningless. In a way, I don't entirely blame it on them; their social secretary, Desiree, who seems more intent on promoting herself, should have taken care of that in advance. The incident is magnified in the press because it was the very first state visit by a foreign dignitary and all eyes were fixed on such details. Also, Mrs. O still has a bit more to learn about protocol (And yeah, I know she should be herself and it's from the heart, etc.), but as thoughtful as her gift to Mrs. Bush during inauguration, it should have been handled behind the scenes, out of sight of photographers and the public. It would have made it that much more special; plus it would have avoided the awkwardness of Mrs. Bush trying to take pictures without holding a big package in her hands. So yes, there is still room for improvement when it comes to protocol in the Obama White House. But as many will point out, and rightfully so, it is a learning curve and they will get it right with more practice.
Lilly...wish I was as articulate as you. That was excellent! Thanks!
Let me preface this post with the caveat that this is not a fashion statement. If it is going to bother you that it is not, please do not take offense, or do not read if you feel this is a blog that concerns only fashion.
I feel that Mrs. T left a post today that allows us to comment on many angles of the Obama Administration.
Everyone is entitled to make mistakes. What bothers me is the "Quick Draw McGraw" response that seems to permeate the media and critics of the current administration. It seems with every passing day that more focus is put on the mistakes of the Obamas. I really do not remember this phenomenon during the first Bush term. The media were handcuffed.
I am concerned that the true goodness of the Obamas is eclipsed by some social gaffes that folks just cannot let go of. Desiree is new to the job as well. The learning curve is steep. I love this family and this administration.
POTUS and FLOTUS are smart people but they never said they had all the answers. This 50-day watermark is an unfair benchmark. What happened to the First 100 Days?
I am a little verklemfpt about the idea that anyone would criticize Michelle for presenting Laura with what I thought was a very thoughtful and lovely gift. Laura simply handed it to an assistant. Is that a problem?
Since we do make comments on protocol as well as fashion, I am putting it out there that the Obamas have been in office for only 50 days - let's cut them some slack, and let's focus on all the good they have accomplished.
I am all for civil dialogue over a drink, so let me put it out there that there is much to revisit after 8 years of a different sort of governance.
@ Bevi. Thank you for putting it so well.
I've just come from the New York Magazine website. The proportion of anti-Michelle comments to those supporting Michelle is overwhelming. When you consider that New York is a red state and New York City is even more so, only an orchestrated campaign would account for such a gross outnumbering of the magazine's normal readership.
And it's the intensity of the anti-Michelle comments that's the most disturbing. . . as in most of the kerfuffle here and in the UK about the so-called gift "gaffe." The incident was clearly a hook to hang far deeper objections on. The hard part is, since the latter don't get expressed, they can't really be countered.
What? Seriously, what is with the criticism of the gifts given by the Obamas to the Brown family?
I have two children and there is no question that both my son and daughter would prefer replica models of Marine One to clothes from retailers that are the equivalent of The Gap. Anyone can buy outfits from the TopShop; not just anyone can get a model of Marine One.
Moreover, even if the DVD set was a misstep, it's on the protocol officer, not on the Obamas.
Ooops. Obviously I should have said New York is a blue state. Got my color-coding wrong. We're Democratic here.
I enjoyed the articles, lovely, down to earth, awe inspiring first couple.
I am a bit confused though about Gordon Brown's visit. Why was the bust of Winston Churchill returned?
As a mom of boys (grown now),I see the model helicopter gifts as just about perfect. I think the gaffe idea is bogus.
So what did Gordon Brown give to Barack Obama as a gift? What did Mrs. Brown give to Michelle? Just curious after all the gift chatter on here.
Gordon Brown's gifts:
Two symbolic gifts - Brown gave a pen holder carved from the timbers of the sister ship of that which gave the wood to create the famous "Resolute Desk," the desk that has been at the Oval office since 1880. He also gave Obama the framed commission for that famous ship, the HMS Resolute. His third gift was a seven-volume biography of one of England's greatest leaders, Winston Churchill
Obama's gifts:
25 American movies on DVD
Sarah Brown's gifts
Two outfits from Top Shop for the Obama girls
Michelle's gifts
Marine One replicas (apparently the kind you can buy at the White House gift shop)
I am not sure where the return of the Winston Churchill bust fits in.
I am oh so disappointed. The person that arranged for these gifts (which I am sure is a White House staffer) needs to be fired - seriously, this sounds like someone was setting up the Obamas.
Thanks for posting this, Suji! I guess that when I heard about gifts being exchanged between the men, I thought the women exchanged gifts for themselves, other than that for the kids. I still think the gifts were appropriate from both ends. The Obamas are casual people, and people may just be reacting to how casual their gifts were. But this is who they really are
Magnolia: Thank you. I try to think through what I write first so I won't offend the majority (I know I am bound to offend at least some sensibilities. And as much as we relate to the Obamas and would like to think they are just like us, there unfortunately are some protocols that have to be followed in such situations, and that is largely the job of Desiree Rogers, to help the Obamas navigate those protocols. The helicopters can even be obtained online, so they are not that special. Mrs Brown made her gifts personal by giving the girls Top Shop dresses (with matching necklaces) [which means she would have had her staff go trhough the trouble of finding the girls' sizes] and a selection of books by British authors. Such gift exchange are usually more symbolic in nature. In this case, both the personal touch and symbolism were lacking. As for the gifts reflecting the Obamas' casualness, we all know Mrs. O has both style and flair and surely can incorporate those elements in the first-hostess part of her FLOTUS role. As mentioned before, they will surely do better next time as they go along.
@ Mrs. A, Unfortunately, "who they really are" doesn't really count in a case like this. When it comes to visiting heads of state, the First Family doesn't act for themselves but for the country and for the office they hold.
That said, though, it's not clear exactly what level of visit this was. It wasn't an "official" state visit, the kind that involves white tie dinners, etc. And it doesn't seem to have been initiated by the President. The Prime Minister may have invited himself.
From what I gather, politically, Brown is extremely unpopular in the U.K. and on the way out. He desperately needed a "photo op" with our popular President to shore up his standing at home. But in terms of policy, he and Obama don't have much in common. Brown supported the Iraq war and made Britain Bush's strongest ally against strong opposition from U.K. voters.
It's hard to know what went on in the visit and why. There seems to have been a lot of "dancing around each other" on both sides. The British press was most miffed that Brown didn't get a photo op in the Rose Garden (he was given a press conference in the West Wing instead). But they couldn't say that and the criticism got re-directed to the "gifts."
So here is my question. What would those of you have suggested as appropriate gifts for the boys? Could those so conversant with protocol offer up some ideas?
One of the main reasons the Os are being put under a microscope is what makes them so fascinating: the "first" factor. Good or bad, like it or not, they cannot escape the burden of history. While the Obamas are new to this, Ms. Rogers should have the experience necessary to handle such things (or at least do the proper research on how to handle such things); otherwise she is not qualifieed for her position. Also, the gift to Laura Bush should have and could have been handled privately. Remember, not everything that happenned at the white house that day was in full view of the cameras; i.e. the girls were there with their parents, yet they were kept out of public view, so whoever accompanied the girls in could have brought the gift in for Mrs. O to give to Laura privately. It is not the end of the world, but just little things that make the ceremonial functions go smoother.
Les Rodgers and Rodrigo Corral are the only impressions that seemed to showed an appreciation for her beauty as well as her personality and charisma.
I think that all the gifts were appropriate.
It was the Brown's coming to visit the Obama's. I think when the Obama's go to visit the Browns then they will take appropriate gifts TO them. What's up with all of that anyway - we never heard about gifts that the Bush twins received or gave.
As far as the Churchill bust - it was on loan to the White House during the Bush term. It was returned a couple of days BEFORE Obama took office.
I think all of this a bunch ado about nothing.
Loving the Obamas and supporting them does not mean that they can do no wrong. Also, they are president and first lady, what maybe right or appropriate for us is not necessarily the best thing for them. We do not have a social secretary or chief of protocol; they do! We do not have an entire world watching and dissecting our every little move. The gifts cold have been handled better; the Churchill bust, I do not very much care for. Those little things, as insignificant as they seem affect our foreign relaations and the world's view of the competence of the people around the President and first lady.
I think its not really the Obamas themselves, but their staff. They did not do their homework and missed protocol. CD set? Sounds crass.
Ugh, I have a headache rehashing this gift debate.
I also enjoyed the piece about Mr. and Mrs. O's relationship, as well as Mrs. O being a daddy's girl. I bet a lot of her self-confidence comes from having the unconditional love of her father all her life.
Is the cover of the New York magazine an actual pic of Mrs. O or is it an illustration? I don;t recall ever seeing her in such an outfit going by the color of the top.
Mrs. T, any ideas?
As to the gifts, it's the thought that count.
And I think a lot of "parent" thought went into those helicopters, I know any kid I know would love them. How many of us liked getting clothes as presents when we were kids? Zero, I'm thinking.
25 CDs probably representative on U.S. movies (possibly playable in the UK, we don't know what format they were in) is a "nice gift" and well-intentioned. I remember reading years ago that the White House had a room stuffed with things like crystal bowls that whatever Pres that was had been given. Not terribly interesting. While I can see someone actually watching CDs.
You don't expect someone to show up with a gift like Brown's. I kind of think he was trying for headlines because of his poor standing compared to Obama.
I have read the Telegraph online. They seem quite vicious about the U.S. in general. I was surprised when I visited England some years ago. I expected general friendliness, reflecting the bond between our two countries, but most people were pretty close to downright hostile towards Americans. Perhaps that persists, despite Obama's popularity.