Aesthetics, Gender and the Media

With the new concern about President Clinton's campaign fundraising and with the general fear about the First Lady playing any sort of policy role, the First Daughter, Chelsea, is being heralded as the best of the Clintons: cool, poised and classy, as Newsweek put it a few weeks ago. Cool, poised and classy. I didn't remember hearing these descriptions four years ago. And I was right.

NBC's Saturday Night Live made fun of Chelsea's hair and braces. The numerous late night talk shows couldn't stop joking about her looks. The culmination of this relentless sarcasm was a cartoon in the Los Angeles Times that viciously mocked her appearance. Thankfully, this cartoon provoked protest. In total, 500 people wrote demanding that Chelsea be left alone. Even parodies of Amy Carter hadn't focused on her looks. And the media realized that a thirteen-year-old child, whoever her parents may be, should be left alone.

Remembering how harsh the media was to her four years ago, we are left to wonder what has changed. Has the media turned over a new leaf? Or has Chelsea herself changed? One sentence can answer all our questions. Last year, when Chelsea first reappeared in the public eye on tour with her mother, two Newsweek reporters wrote a commentary praising Chelsea and how she had grown up so well despite the fishbowl phenomenon. Yet, in their surprise at Chelsea's new appearance, they wrote: Is this the same awkward orthodontically-challenged girl who moved into the White House three years ago?

It seems that the media has changed its approach to Chelsea only because she shed her braces and gained poise, not because they decided that physical appearances were lousy indicators of personal worth.

Of course, Chelsea's other redeeming qualities are heralded throughout the Newsweek article as well: her academic abilities, her filial devotion. But she had those qualities three years ago. It's just that no one noticed them then. Is the media so shallow that it judges by appearance first?

Remember the uproar about Hillary Clinton's headbands and changing hair style? This ethos of personal criticism isn't limited to the United States. NATO allies expressed disapproval of Mrs. Clinton's attire on a goodwill tour she gave. She received her harshest criticism in Italy for looking lackluster next to a high-level official's wife, a former super-model.

Some Americans were personally affronted by the Italian media and said the Italians could keep their supermodel first lady; we'll keep our Yale law school graduate. But then we turn around and criticize appearances ourselves.

We all know that people are judged by appearance. But the interesting--and troubling--point is that all the media comments in this article have been directed towards women. I was worried that I had somehow misattributed this fine-tuned criticism to gender issues, so I looked long and hard for men that were picked on about their appearance. However, even the harshest critique of President Clinton or Bob Dole in jogging shorts were nothing compared to the venom spit during the Hillary Clinton headband debate.

We all like to think that we're in a new and better age when gender no longer matters; after all, we have had a women as our Attorney General and now a woman is a Secretary of State.

But then we blindly accept--even expect--the media's comments on the aesthetics of these women's appearances.

This is reminiscent of the controversy over anorexia and models. With anorexia and bulimia spreading, some people are pointing to supermodels and their unusual appearances as the cause. Yet the same media that criticizes the fashion industry for putting too much weight on thinness (pun not intended), went right ahead and described an Olympic ice skater as chunky. What message does this communicate to young girls about their own bodies and the ideal figure they should hope to have? Strive to win an Olympic medal--but your talent doesn't matter unless you're beautiful too.

It reminds me of a fairy tale written by M.M. Kaye for children. In this story, the youngest of seven princesses is blessed at her christening by many good fairies with the gifts of intelligence, faithfulness and a good heart. But the last fairy blesses her to be ordinary-looking. And so when the princess grows up, no one remembers her royal qualities because she looks ordinary and plain.

As children, we laugh at the fool-hardy monarchy that devalues our heroine and praises her lovely but boring sisters. But maybe this story speaks more pointedly to us than we thought.

Tanya Dutta's column appears on alternate Mondays.