A snarky Dec 13 Vanity Fair piece chronicles the intolerable transformation of George W. Bush from pop culture pariah to hipster icon.
Every line of Juli Weiner’s backhanded commentary on Bush’s rise in popularity drips with sarcasm, but the attitude can’t cover up the reality of the once-thought impossible turnaround of the left’s favorite political/pop-cultural target.
The piece begins by sketching just how low Bush had fallen in popular perception by his second term—indeed, so far that just holding an iPod threatened the device’s future:
George W. Bush was once very uncool. So uncool, in fact, that in 2005, The New York Times reported that the then-president’s use of an iPod threatened Apple’s status as premier purveyor of “the electronic toys of the anti-establishment set.” The paper then asked a question: “If someone as mainstream as President Bush has caught on to something allegedly so hip, what can Apple do to keep iPod chic and cutting edge?”
By the middle of his second term, the media had successfully op-edited and disapproval-polled Bush into a cultural Untouchable. Embodiments of hip regularly and very publicly took swipes. SNL, Letterman, the Hollywood Elite, and every host on MSNBC made him their go-to punch-line/fall-guy/villain.
But somehow, unthinkably, Bush’s likability is on the rise. And, worse for the left, some people are actually starting to think he’s cool.
A few examples: Bush’s recent letter to a University of Alabama kicker, Cade Foster, earned him hearty praise. And leaked images of his paintings have even fared well—or at least not badly—in critical circles. W the artist? The left’s nightmare.
The paintings were not bad (there was an Alex Katz–influenced cleanliness and flatness to them,as we noted at the time) and the Internet took notice. “More impressive than the painting’s aesthetic quality is the soul-searching introspection evident in the scene,” New York’s Dan Amira wrote. “Bush, slightly hunched, is standing out of the water, staring off into the corner of the shower, as if contemplating past sins that can never be washed away, no matter how much soap you use and how hard you scrub.” What’s important here is not the generosity of the criticism but the assumption that Bush is capable of self-reflection. Bush appreciated art; an appreciation of art implies humanity, according to the enlightened classes; by the transitive property, Bush has humanity. War-mongers: they’re just like us!
How’s it possible? Vanity Fair believes it’s by design, all part of Bush’s deliberate, ingenious scheme at a personal/political makeover—and the naïve American public is buying it:
You might not have pinned “SHRUB” buttons to your tote bag, and might not even remember Bush as a war-lovin’, vowel-droppin’, faux-folksy, ostentatiously religious Connecticut cowboy. This is because Bush has, quietly and wholly, ingeniously refashioned himself into an Internet-friendly, cat-loving, ironic-hat-wearing painter-cum-Instagram savant. Lately, George W. Bush is a hipster icon, and the Internet, unofficial Fourth Estate of the youth of America, is totally buying it.
Of course the snarky Vanity Fair piece has a greater purpose than leftist mockery. The article is a warning of sorts to the rest of the left of a troubling trend. If the popular conception of George W. Bush is ever seriously restored, much of the cultural work the leftist media put in for all those years would be reversed. Such a reversal cannot be allowed, especially with Obama hemorrhaging cool points with every new lie-about-a-lie. No, conservatives must remain distasteful to the younger generation so the left can remain the all-important arbiters of cool.
