Make this my home page
More buttons
Best of the Day
Page
Turn off that Wi-Fi network - it's disturbing our chakras.
Video

Hot For Words: Lollipop

Blog
Innocent Spam
Game
EA SPORTS Complex on PlayStation Home
Art
Kinetic sculpture is a cross between art and engineering.
Cool tools
Hot links
Dadaist deconstruction of new media, as a flash game.
Everything you need to know about microscopic water bears
News for nerds
For lovers of the Green Fairy
Stories and art from Australia's Yolgnu people
Australia's best science fiction author
Did the earth just move?
Don't discount journalism
Novelist and comic book legend's homepage
Searchable history of the internet
Exposing systematic torture in Iran
Museum of science fiction, utopia and extraordinary journeys
The real story of christianity
Image bookmarking
Developing tech to get the internet to its full potential
Yes We Can (Allow General Motors To Die The Death It Deserves)

So, a week after the election, with the transition news settling into its Baby Boomer greatest hits groove, President-Elect Obama meets with President Bush. And uses the opportunity to ask Bush to bail out the big Detroit automakers. Is it okay to say, "WTF?"

To which the rejoinder might be, whaddaya want? The unions delivered big time for Obama all over the Rust Belt, as seen last Tuesday night, and probably made him prez. Which is okay, if we want to so quickly give the lie to the idea of a new politics. Because ideologically, it is hard to conceive anything more truly "conservative" one could do than preserve an ossified oligopoly of pre-World War II industrial conglomerates that have done more to damage the planet in the last 100 years than probably any other industry in the industrialized West. Along the way, killing basically all public transportation in America other than buses. You want me to pay my share of the losses of the people who bet their (and our) future on SUVs?

Granted, you are talking about 3 million jobs, $150 billion in personal income, and $60 billion in tax receipts in 2009. But there are plenty of other inefficient and outmoded businesses that won't survive the current credit crunch and consumer austerity. And don't deserve to.

ES-192_Chevy_Malibu

The last American car I owned was a 1974 Chevrolet Caprice convertible that I sold in 1991. Since then, it's been an alternating mix of small cars from the leading Axis powers (that, and living walking distance to work or taking the bus). Driving to the coffee shop this morning, I was reminded why. I saw one of those new Chevy Malibus pulling into traffic. This is the car that is being widely touted as the hope for the future. Naturally, being a General Motors sedan produced after 1975, it is basically a mullet with wheels, as has been every American car I have rented in my adult life. The reason they are failing is because they so completely suck - as products, as businesses, as corporate citizens, as emblems of our American identity. (Unless you want a ranch-ready pickup, in which case they are right on the money.)

0705dp_01_z 2002_chevy_silverado_2500hd

The only things the American automakers have really innovated in the past 30 years are (1) clever cupholders to holster the Big Gulps of saccharine and corn syrup that fuel the clotted vessels oxygenating our fat asses planted against the seat-heaters en route from our climate-controlled homes to our windowless cubes, and (2) televisions installed throughout the vehicle to anesthetize our mini-chubs with the latest sensory Soma from Disney. The Big Three are not our future.

cup_holder

The only hope for the American automotive industry is to allow Detroit to fail. Just as to bring back the healthy diversity within the soil you need to burn the ground cover clean, letting G.M., Chrysler and Ford and their earth-burning mega-cars collapse under their own weight will allow new transportation businesses to sprout, new businesses for a new era - people's versions of outfits like Tesla for those who want to drive, and news ways of moving us around that don't require navigating the on-ramp on insufficient stimulants. The pieces of Detroit that make sense will survive, sliced off through reorganizations that, like the hybrid lines and the utilitarian work vehicles (there will always be pickups and Town Cars).

And we will always have the ruins of Detroit, that American industrial Ozymandias monument whose own death has already been foretold in the urban shell of the city that once was.

 

View the pageGo back to previous pageLeave some feedbackPrint this pageEmail link to friendsBookmark in del.icio.usAdd to Stumble ThisAdd to your favourite bookmarksDigg this article

Tags

 

Related Stories

   
Next

So, I read today that the designer of Mattel's Barbie doll was obsessed with sex. Seriously? We need a book-length study to tell us that?

We in the land of feminist academics have been teaching the pernicious sexual politics of Barbie for years. The breasts that defy gravity, the hair, the long, long legs and of course the cruel, nipped in waist. Oh, don't forget the tiny clothes, the f*ck-me pumps, not to mention the well-equipped kitchens in every Barbie Dream House. The message of Barbie seems unambiguous to me.

Still, many students (and not a few colleagues) consistently resist seeing Barbie as a miniature sex toy, claiming instead that the doll was a good role model for little girls. (One could, after all, purchase a Barbie doll dressed as a doctor.) Or claiming, equally untenably, that toys had no impact on their ideas about gender roles or their own sexuality.

These students, mostly women, want to rescue Barbie, to protect their own childhoods from academic interrogations of pop culture and what those interrogations might reveal. That's understandable. Yet, many of these same students sit in my class pouring out of tank tops, squeezed into low-rise jeans, or tugging on mini-skirts so short they are nearly impossible to sit down in. That is, dressed like Barbie.

It's an experience I regularly have as a feminist critic of popular culture: a media event, book or news story demonstrates that I'm not wrong, my ideology is not based in "over analyzing," "hyper sensitivity," or "reading too much into things" (the three most common criticisms feminists tend to encounter). It's disappointing, frankly, to stumble so often upon evidence of society's sexism and to keep having to explain that it's there. Disappointing that Barbie was so obviously a sexed-up, misogynist, bad idea for little girls and to realize how thoroughly our culture embraced the toy anyway.

So, here we are again. Feminists were right: no one but a sex-obsessed man with a perverse idea of female anatomy would create a female toy like Barbie. And, as is too too often the case for feminists, being right isn't something to celebrate.

Dr. Bean is an Associate Professor of English at Marshall University, specializing in Gender Studies, Film and Drama. She is the author of "Post-Backlash Feminism: Women and the Media Since Reagan/Bush" (McFarland & Co. 2007). She hosts a blog on mid-life and feminism at kelliebean.com.