Opinion

The Great Debate

How Barack Obama killed John Wayne

By Neal Gabler
November 14, 2012

The reason that President Barack Obama won reelection, as most everyone knows by now, is that older white males, on whom the Republican Party has long relied, are declining in numbers, while women and minority voters, key components of Obama’s base, are increasing.  In the electoral post-mortems, Obama’s victory has been considered a kind of valedictory to white male supremacy. But his win did something else: Obama killed John Wayne on Nov. 6 — with the complicity of roughly 61 million Americans.

Now, Wayne has been dead for more than 30 years, of course. And Obama didn’t even slay his heroic image.  Americans still like brawny brawlers, and apply what I call “The Hollywood Test” in electing their presidential protagonist-in-chief, opting for the nominee who is most like a movie hero. What Obama and his supporters slew, however, was the value system Wayne personified – a whole way of thinking about America. It’s unlikely to resurface any time soon.

From the time he reached stardom in the 1940s, Wayne was not just a movie star, though he was one of the biggest. Nor was he just an icon, though he was one of the most compelling — a whole generation of men imitated his bearish growl and lumbering walk. More important, Wayne presented values that many now associate with America itself.

As Garry Wills, who wrote an appreciative book about Wayne, put it, “The way to be an American was to be Wayne.” Rather than Wayne being stamped in the country’s image, the country — at least white America — seemed stamped in his.

Wayne’s on-screen persona was both impregnable and intractable. He stood like a force of nature. Nothing fazed him. He relied on brute strength to win the day, so he never dickered or soothed or capitulated. He didn’t believe much in community either, and in what may be his most famous film, John Ford’s “The Searchers,” in which he devotes years to tracking down a niece who has been kidnapped by the Indians, he is unapologetically racist.

In fact, in most of his pictures, he doesn’t even believe in family. One is hard put to think of a movie where Wayne is married or a father. Wayne stands alone and self-contained, a man against the world.

It is an inspiring image – the man who needs no one. It has fired the imaginations not only of countless male movie fans but of countless politicians, especially on the right. Richard M. Nixon once said that Wayne’s “Chisum” was a model for law and order.

Wayne, who was himself conservative, may have been as responsible for modern conservatism as Barry M. Goldwater, or Ronald Reagan — who often imitated him. So when the GOP summoned

Clint Eastwood to introduce Mitt Romney at the convention, they were no doubt hoping to tap into the Wayne reservoir – to summon the manly values for which he stood and to which not just the Republican base but Americans everywhere subscribed.

It failed miserably. Not only because Eastwood seemed less the lone gunman come to rescue America than a bit loony, but also because Eastwood and Wayne, though often lumped together, don’t represent the same things.

Eastwood’s persona is an outlaw, a gunfighter-for-hire, a renegade. He reviles society and its institutions and exists completely outside them. His ethos is basically the nihilistic Tea Party ethos with, albeit, a dose of introspection and even occasional rue.

Eastwood’s  snarling persona will no doubt survive in pockets of right wing-nuttery and extreme libertarianism, but it was never enough to build a party on, much less a nation. We don’t think of this as Clint Eastwood country, the way we thought of it as John Wayne country.

That’s because Wayne was different. He often played a sheriff or a soldier – people who served the common good without joining in the common good. They didn’t join because his heroes thought salvation was the gift of supermen like him. Wayne’s America looked back to the 19th century frontier values. It was anti-urban, anti-intellectual, self-sufficient, highly individualistic and, perhaps above all, masculine.

“The sonuvabitch looked like a man,” Wills quotes director Raoul Walsh as saying of Wayne. And Wills goes on to say, “When he was called the American, it was a statement of what his fans wanted America to be.”

And for many years, America was. It was the example of his macho bluster, wrote critic Eric Bentley, that got the country into Vietnam, and his fierce individualism slowed the march toward civil rights. Wayne was all the things conservative white America believed in as it resisted the pull of modernity.  He was the man blocking the pass.

But when Obama won reelection, with the ascendancy of women and minorities, he struck a blow not only against the dominance of white voters but against the dominance of Wayne’s white male values. Obama’s America reads like the obverse of Wayne’s:  urban and suburban, educated, communal, compassionate and every bit as feminine as it is masculine.

It embraces not the values of 19th century America but the values of many of the ethnic groups who supported Obama — especially what the polls reveal is their commitment to the larger community. It disdains the kind of swagger that Wayne embodied.

Wayne’s America was hard and unyielding. This emerging America is softer and more sensitive. As opposed to a solitary hero, it embraces the idea of collective heroism.

So something happened on Nov. 6 besides a presidential victory. If America is a movie — which in many ways it is — we changed the marquee. This new feature isn’t an old-fashioned Western. It is a new-fashioned Eastern-Midwestern-Far Western.

And there isn’t much of a role for John Wayne in this movie.

PHOTO: Actor Clint Eastwood addresses an empty chair and questions it as if it is President Obama, as he endorses nominee Mitt Romney during Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida, August 30, 2012. REUTERS/Eric Thayer

TOP PHOTO:  John Wayne in “El Dorado” REUTERS/Courtesy Paramount Pictures

MIDDLE PHOTO: Clint Eastwood in “For a Few Dollars More” REUTERS/MGM Home Entertainment

Comments
37 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

Agreed- the emerging America certainly is softer.

Posted by SayHey | Report as abusive
 

I would rather have John Wayne next to me in a foxhole than Mr Obama.

Posted by tiderhawk | Report as abusive
 

But you wouldn’t want John Wayne as president. It is probably a good thing that looks are becoming a less important part of politics.

Posted by pseudonym1 | Report as abusive
 

I can’t help but feel that the Duke’s response to this editorial would consist mostly of words of one syllable.

Posted by Art_In_Seattle | Report as abusive
 

I’ve often used this analogy to try and convince people that the John Wayne mystique, with all its social Darwinian overtones, was what is driving white, red-neck America, and that the country simply couldn’t continue to survive using image it conjures up. Thank you Neil Gabler for saying it much more eloquently than I ever could.

As for the “foxhole” metaphor above, I would rather have a President who can keep us out of them in the first place.

Posted by skimish | Report as abusive
 

Oh really, ‘skimish’, Mr Obama has kept us out of foxholes?!

Both ‘skimish’ and Mr Gabler prefer the socialist, welfare, nanny-state running up massive entitlement deficits to the the John Wayne philosophy of being responsible for both one’s individual welfare and actions.

From ‘Stagecoach’ to ‘The Searchers’ to ‘Red River’ to ‘Who Shot Liberty Valance?’ to ‘The Green Berets’ to ‘True Grit’ to ‘The Shootist’, John Wayne epitomized the archetypal American male: strong, honest, tough, resilient, and competent who did indeed put himself in harm’s way for a greater collective good, be it a country or a family.

In the 1953 ‘The Searchers’, Wayne was ‘racist’ in that he made politically incorrect (by 2012 standards) , but true observations about Comanches. “Ethan” correctly pointed out, for instance, that Comanches often kidnapped and/or raped, tortured, and murdered their victims before setting fire to their property.

The key moment of the film, however, takes place when
“Ethan” tells the abducted Debbie, “We’re going home now” — thereby clearly showing to everyone but liberals such as Mr Gabler that the frontier family he was returning her loved her more than anything and that his “search” was for that family of which he considered himself a member.

As far “racism goes, the liberals such as Mr Obama have their own, much more pernicious kind: from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to comprehensive reverse discrimination.

In sum, Mr Wayne personified the type of male who built America through hard work, courage, and intelligence. Whereas Mr Obama panders his way to election through government handouts — e.g. free contraception, abortions, and de facto citizenship for illegal immigrants.

About 72% of white males voted for Mr Romney. They presumably preferred the John Wayne model to the Barack Obama alternative. And, although they are a minority, they are still a force to be reckoned with.

Posted by ted77 | Report as abusive
 

Thanks to Obama, America’s so weak it resembles of one of those starving Ethiopian children you’d see on TV during the ’80s.

Posted by Xavier.Dutch | Report as abusive
 

Wasn’t John Wayne gay? That revelation has never “come out”, but ever since I saw the John Wayne reference in the movie The Birdcage, it just seems to make sense. He has a somewhat distant relative who was a boxer in the 90′s (Tommy Morris?) and was banned from boxing for testing HIV positive. Just sayin’. “The Duke” might be more at home in today’s gay marriage friendly environment than most people would suspect.

Posted by mcoleman | Report as abusive
 

And what about Reagan? Why focus Whayne tough Reagan has driven his carrier of WASP from movie till the presidency? Isn’t he much more symbolic than Wayne? And is it possible to write than than the Obama victory killed the reaganism? Of course not! the basis of the monetarism of the Chicago school remains indeed deeply established!

Posted by meleze | Report as abusive
 

I could not disagree more. The fact that we are becoming more discriminating in how we evaluate information makes us softer? Our military is softer or less effective? Our president isn’t capable of making hard decisions? BUT unlike a certain Texan, he does so with REAL thought, intelligence AND the input (unbiased, unfiltered, unadulterated) of his vice-president and the rest of his cabinet and staff.

John Wayne may have played a certain role and it probably did reflect itself in how the white male population that ONLY saw the role reacted and envisioned their lives and what they expected from their country. But in my opinion John Wayne was way more than a role and his intelligence and ability were reflected in how well he played the role.

I don’t agree with many of the things Mr. Wayne espoused but I respected his intelligence and his love of his country. And again, in my opinion, he would have made it a goal of his to get rid of the right wing reactionary members of the GOP so that the COUNTRY could be governed and we could ALL get ahead. He would do it without the veiled racism and blatant condescension of those like Pat Robertson, Grover Norquist, Rush Limbaugh, et al.

My country has lost none of its strength, none of its resolve, and none of its values. In fact all of those things are stronger when there is real intelligence and effort and consideration attached to the efforts of those that govern. We have serious problems, both short and long term that need to be worked on, and we can’t do it with failed old policies and old thinking and intransigence. And if Romney had won that is what we would have reverted to.

Posted by jswain23 | Report as abusive
 

It wasn’t just Obama who killed John Wayne. It was decades and decades of both Democrat and Republican administrations who supported extremely high rates of immigration, turning Wayne’s “anti-urban,” “19th century frontier values” America into a teeming urban jungle. Republicans have long supported high quotas of H1-B visa immigrants in order to keep downward pressure on labor costs, doing the bidding of their corporate benefactors. The result is a completely different America, demographically. So Republicans now find themselves stewing in their own juice. It’s poetic justice.

Posted by Pete_Murphy | Report as abusive
 

Pete – H1-B visas are hardly a problem – they are for non-immigrants who are highly qualified professional workers (not low-wage) and are limited to 65,000 per year.

Posted by SayHey | Report as abusive
 

Ha, ha, ha. This article is as silly as the ones 8 years ago claiming the total demise of the Democrats. It never fails to amaze me how mavens like Mr. Gabler are so clueless about “middle” America’s culture–and I don’t mean the so-called “middle class.” Romney was too high finance, too much like the old New England WASP establishment, to excite the “John Wayne type” of (low-church, non-union) voters. Let’s see what happens when we get a Republican candidate like Ronald Reagan who excites voters the way Obama excited the black vote this time. No doubt, we’ll be reading obits for the Dems again. Maybe Gabler would benefit from getting out of the liberal shetl more often and learning about American history before 1900s. Yes, Neal. There were Americans here before Hollywood was invented and their culture isn’t going away no matter how many times you wish upon a star.

Posted by anneeoakley | Report as abusive
 

Oh my god – how pitiful. This is a guy who said in an interview that blacks should be isolated until they become educated enough to participate in society. He also shot Indians and Hispanics down in movies with overtly racists themes. The analogy just highlights the Republican mess – you guys think he’s a hero, most of the country thinks hes a POS.

Mr. Neal Gabler – Mr. Wayne is an yesterdays news – please pick another person to create an allegorical piece.

Posted by John2244 | Report as abusive
 

John2244: That’s exactly the point of the article. Sounds like you missed it.

Posted by RobertHoward | Report as abusive
 

I see John Wayne as an insecure individual who hides behind gun and muscle (his movie personas, at least). Didn’t he say something about “apologizing is a sign of weakness?” No, Mr. Wayne, being afraid to be seen as weak is the real sign of weakness.

Posted by ahms | Report as abusive
 

This is what killed America:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/1 3/us-bernardino-bankrupt-idUSBRE8AC0HP20 121113

Read Reuters’ excellent report on San Bernardino and replicate these trends and values nationwide. Obama came along at the right level of societal weakness. The writer gives BHO too much credit. The system has been gasping after the last three bubbles from which it never fully recovered.

Posted by shsp | Report as abusive
 

This ought to bring out every pop psychologist and Dudley Dewright in the country and unleash a torrent of psychobabble. Based on this kind of thinking, we are lying through our teeth when we thank our military (aka, the dogs of war) for their service to our country. We are becoming France!

Maybe, like France’s Foreign Legionnaires, we ought to hire mercenaries. That way we can lead from behind and don’t have to get our hands dirty when those who hate us come to call.

Posted by Pilgrim1620 | Report as abusive
 

The author forgot to add some important facts…. One:) Wayne was married to a Mexican woman – so he couldn’t have been too much of a racist… and Two:) In the movie cited ‘The Searchers’, Wayne in the end accepts his neice – who has been ‘used by every buck in the tribe’ – back into the family….
So he shows his more ‘tolerant’ side….

Posted by edgyinchina | Report as abusive
 

The author forgot to add some important facts…. One:) Wayne was married to a Mexican woman – so he couldn’t have been too much of a racist… and Two:) In the movie cited ‘The Searchers’, Wayne in the end accepts his neice – who has been ‘used by every buck in the tribe’ – back into the family….
So he shows his more ‘tolerant’ side….

Posted by edgyinchina | Report as abusive
 

How shortsighted. Reaching back to a figure in his hey day in the 1950′s to use as an analogy for today’s politics. It’s even more amusing when people reach back to the past, 200 or 300 years ago to show how evil we were compared to today. Very stupid to judge people from another period of time. Future generations might judge you from their time period. You might be the bigoted ahole you all wail about.

Posted by WintersWar | Report as abusive
 

A worthy interpretation of the 2012 election would involve researching the reasons why some registered Republicans in the white male demographic voted against Mitt Romney. Some voted for Obama, some for Gary Johnson and even some for Virgil Goode.

The Republican loss was not necessarily a Democratic victory. Some Republican voters turned away from the extreme social policies of some of the candidates but that should not be considered an abandonment of more moderate Republican economic ideals. On the other hand, many Republicans with more extreme economic views turned away from Romney for fear that the former governor of Massachusetts was too far to the economic left.

Another indisputable demographic fact worth considering is that voters who were less than twenty in this election were born during the Clinton administration. They did not grow up watching John Wayne or Ronald Reagan. They were born into a different world, but that does not necessarily invalidate the past.

Obama had to have some John Wayne in his gut to run for First Black President of the United States with 2 WARS and a major economic crisis. I could be wrong.

Posted by MICHAELDONELLO | Report as abusive
 

I voted for President Obama, as a descendant of honest hard working white folk, not because he stood up against John Wayne, but because his opponent kept slithering from one position to the next.

If you want to comment about the President’s reelection victory and the underlying demographics which MAY have been the key, fine. To suggest, however, that our President somehow killed an Icon of American values strikes me as inflammatory and the scribblings of a romancer, whom all should ignore.

Posted by krimsonpage | Report as abusive
 

More the point, the title should have been “How Barack Obama feminized America.”

Obama represents the idea that traditional family, honor, and morality have no place in today’s world of decadence, instant gratification, and special interests. Barry may be ‘King’, but he’ll never be more than ‘King Nothing’. I hope the americans that voted for Obama suffer horribly for their ignorance.

Posted by stambo2001 | Report as abusive
 

I spoke with a POW from WWII one time. He told me that after the war he attended a dinner where John Wayne was the guest speaker. He was honored to sit next to John Wayne. This ex-POW told Wayne, “When I got captured I thought about you Mr. Wayne. I though what would John Wayne do? And so when they interrogated me I told them to, ‘Go to H*ll.’ And you know what Mr. Wayne, those Germans beat the heck out of me.” So the moral of the story is John Wayne was an actor. He played tough parts in movies. But real life isn’t a movie. It just isn’t. And if you try to pretend it is, you are likely to get you keester handed to you on a plate. Obama isn’t a movie. I’m a white male and a realist. I think the GOP has wondered off into some sort of pretend world that doesn’t apply. I used to support the GOP, but they’ve gone over the edge. And, I don’t want America’s keester handed to it on a plate.

Posted by Blind_Dawg | Report as abusive
 

80 to 90 % of lawmakers in this country are still, and always will be, white christian males. Even our British counterparts, who I would say are less discriminating than Americans, have an overwhelming majority of Anglo-Saxon males in parliament. Oceania has, and always will be run this way Winston. Though many non-whites like yourself are willfully ignorant of this.

Posted by brianwayne72 | Report as abusive
 

I really enjoyed reading this article (All the World’s a Stage…), but I believe that this election was a lot more about Wall Street and Great Wall of China rather than Hollywood.
When living organisms face new reality(!) they either adapt or die…

Posted by UauS | Report as abusive
 

Having been a neighbor of Marion Michael Morrison’s for many years, I and my sisters were often invited to come to his mini-ranch to play. I never got to know him well, but it was extremely obvious that MMM was nothing like John Wayne and carefully crafted on-screen persona that helped to sell pictures. It was years before I learned why there was a harp in his living room.
I can say that he was fairly down to earth and seemingly shy.
Reagan, the multi-millionaire who campaigned as the “people’s man” used to get my dad mumbling, “I wish I were a ‘people’s man’ with a net worth in the hundreds of millions.”
Public personas may have little or nothing to do with the reality. At least the Magical Myth had not the slightest compunction of hiding his affiliation with the Tenth Percenters, forever babling spoiled rich boy out-of-touch sentiments that weren’t gaffes, but clear signs of a firmly held worldview. “I like to fire people! Don’t you?” “I wouldn’t hire illegals. I’m running for political office for God’s sake!” The 47% statement wasn’t even the slightest surprise except that a few people were actually surprised. “I don’t care about the poor. They have a safety net.” “You stupid students, don’t get money from the government. Borrow from your parents!” Could we possibly have gotten anyone who so deliberately wanted to sound out-of-touch? Who would be impressed by such silly comments? Why, the Members of the Tenth Percenters Club, of course!

Posted by ptiffany | Report as abusive
 

Perhaps Wayne’s patriotism was displayed so eagerly because he did not enlist to fight in WWII like so many other famous actors of that age. Much like the beloved dick cheney, wayne had other priorities.

Posted by fromthecenter | Report as abusive
 

The reason why Romney didn’t get elected was simply because he embraced traditional core values: such as family as the foundation of our society, defense of life rather than abortion rights,straight vs.gay agendas and denouncing the increasing poverty rate in America and correlated middle class demise. The undecided swing voters didn’t subscribe to those values, that’s why they remain “undecided” in the first place. A man of integrity like Romney wouldn’t blur his discourse compromising these core values for the sake to win this “unsettled” voters or to that matter, to cash into the 51.42% Pro-Obama popular vote.

Posted by greatdebate | Report as abusive
 

People, including the author, dislike John Wayne for one primary reason — they dislike white, protestant heritage men. The blatant racism / sexism of that visceral dislike pours from the article and the commentary. The fact is most people in this country now treat white men like they treat fire ants. With poison.

Yes, by the measure of a shrinking population of increasingly poor and disenfranchised white men America is making good progress. Oh, very few white men are like Warren Buffett or Bill Gates — go look under any decent sized urban American bridge. That is the only place where you will find a growing population of white men. Congratulations to us!!

Posted by usagadfly | Report as abusive
 

John Wayne wasn’t killed by President Obama;

he grew old and succumbed to tobacco-related lung cancer which, of course, was self-inflicted.

Posted by breezinthru | Report as abusive
 

Excellent article with a legitimate analogy.

Being in advertising & film production for more than 40 years I can attest to America’s (and now the World’s) insatiable hunger for idols & gimmicks.

John Wayne only acted out masterfully the character & script he was given by his producers, whose only concern was the box office sales & many times political ideology as well.

The ‘Pure WASP Americans’ & the newly immigrant ‘wannabees’ new Americans wholeheartedly consumed the John Wayne image.

This is at the root of our today’s social discontent.

The media, especially motion films, as in Marshall McLuhan’s ‘The Medium is the Message’, has proven to be more powerful than any government or institution.

The media works on your brain in ways you never thought possible.

Even in China the government controlled news agency Xinhua can ‘make or brake any politician’ as I was told by one of its top directors there last year.

Yes, most of us live in a fantasy world most of the time.
It is pleasant to our impaired intelligence and it is even easier pickings for the slimy & greedy profiteers.

Posted by EthicsIntl | Report as abusive
 

@stambo2001: Thanks for embodying the exact sort of attitude that is keeping the GOP out of the White House: “People who disagree with me are ruining America and deserve nothing less than absolute misery!”

@greatdebate: “Mitt Romney” and “integrity” in the same sentence? Comedic gold.

Posted by katzn | Report as abusive
 

@fromthecenter

Wayne was not allowed to enlist in WWII he was deemed too valuable to the war effort in his acting and also he was by then such an icon that the propaganda value of killing or capturing him would have been too damaging to morale

Posted by txguy2112 | Report as abusive
 

@txguy2112 Wayne was the only star at Republic Pictures, a small near bankrupt studio specializing in serials. The OSS needed to have a secretly owned movie (for propaganda) studio. It was cheap and available so they did need The Duke. Not because he was a big Star, but the only one with Republic who had any stature at all. You people need to know what your talking about before posting your own propaganda.

Posted by Rea1American | Report as abusive
 

And so John Wayne sits back on the front porch of his town and watches the bullies invade, intimidate, plunder, and take over his town, while he turns his attention to knitting and promoting the “paint everything purple” club which has a creed to eliminate the ability for anyone to have a prettier color on their house than anyone else.

Posted by SomeCommonSense | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •