Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
On the horizon

On the horizon

Last updated on: January 8, 2018 at 5:48 pm by Fred Clark

On the horizon 2018-01-08T17:48:55-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Back during my magazine years, I sometimes picked up hours at an area chain bookstore where a friend of mine was a manager. It was a good way to make a little money during those stretches in which I wasn’t able to pay both postage and my salary.

So in October of 1996 I was there, at the Encore Books in Exton (where the Men’s Wearhouse is now), at about 4:15 on a weekday. That’s when a nice white suburban housewife type asked me if we had a copy of Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison. “We do,” I said, and I walked her back to the 4-foot “Literature” section tacked on at the end of our Fiction-people-actually-buy aisle where we had one dusty copy. She was very pleased and took the book right to the checkout counter. And I was very pleased, because it was always cool to actually sell something from the Lit section.

Ten minutes later, another nice white suburban lady: “I’m looking for Song of Solomon, by Toni Morrison.”

I walked her back to Lit, apologizing for the strange coincidence of having sold our only copy just a few minutes earlier. “But we have several other books by Toni Morrison,” I suggested hopefully. “Beloved? This won a Pulitzer.” But she wasn’t interested in any of those books. Only Song of Solomon. She was adamant.

So we walked over to the special order counter where I was surprised to find a long line of white Chester County women. And they were all asking for Song of Solomon.

What was going on?

Oprah, it turns out. The reigning queen of afternoon talk shows had started a new book club and all of these women hadn’t even waited for the end of the show before getting into their cars, driving to our store, and special-ordering their copy of a very good, 20-year-old book that no one had been buying from us the week or month or year before. Their favorite celebrity — their mentor, friend, sister — said she loved this book and wanted them to read it and that was all they needed to hear.

Thankfully, for those of us in the book-selling racket, Oprah Winfrey was also a canny businesswoman, so by the following month she’d prepared us for the astonishing book-selling phenomenon that came to be known as the Oprah effect. Before announcing future selections, she’d ensured that stores like ours had already received plenty of advance copies — all sternly sealed and embargoed as a vigilantly kept secret. We sang her praises as we rang up sales, making millionaires of people like Jane Hamilton and Wally Lamb and Alice Hoffman.

During its 20-year run, Oprah’s Book Club selections were scrutinized and often criticized, sometimes sniffed at as “middle-brow.” Whatever. People were reading books — good books, mostly. And those selections and syndicated discussions made millions of book-club members want to read more good books. The publishing world never saw anything like that before or since.

The really remarkable thing about the Book Club’s selections — and the reason for it’s huge success — was that it seemed so personal. There wasn’t any whiff of payola or of any of the ways that such a money-making engine might have been corrupt or corrupted. Selections were, above all, chosen on the basis of one criteria — Oprah herself had read the books and loved them. She was, as a person, someone that millions of others had come to trust as a recommender of books.

I don’t know of a better compliment than that.

Oprah Winfrey is in the news today because she was honored last night with the Cecil B. DeMille Award for lifetime achievement at the Golden Globes. This was newsworthy not just because of that honor, but because of her rousing acceptance speech — a sermon, really, and probably the best one you’ll hear this week. Oprah can puh-reach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss6qQM054B0

You should watch that video if you haven’t seen this speech already. If you have seen it already, you might want to watch it again.

This bit, especially, is not just moving but insightful:

And there’s someone else, Recy Taylor, a name I know and I think you should know, too. In 1944, Recy Taylor was a young wife and mother walking home from a church service she’d attended in Abbeville, Alabama, when she was abducted by six armed white men, raped, and left blindfolded by the side of the road coming home from church. They threatened to kill her if she ever told anyone, but her story was reported to the NAACP where a young worker by the name of Rosa Parks became the lead investigator on her case and together they sought justice. But justice wasn’t an option in the era of Jim Crow. The men who tried to destroy her were never persecuted. Recy Taylor died ten days ago, just shy of her 98th birthday. She lived as we all have lived, too many years in a culture broken by brutally powerful men. For too long, women have not been heard or believed if they dare speak the truth to the power of those men. But their time is up. Their time is up.

“A culture broken by brutally powerful men” is an eloquent and precise diagnosis of our current context, and of our perennial context.

Oprah’s speech last night brought the star-studded audience to its feet and has been routinely, and accurately, described as “inspirational.” Given the current colossal absence of inspiration in American public life — the narcissistic vortex sucking even the possibility of inspiration out of us all — it’s not surprising talk quickly turned to speculation of Oprah for president in 2020.

I get that — particularly at this moment in American history, when she would be such an obvious, dramatic improvement in competence, temperament, intellect and integrity over the bumbling narcissist currently occupying the Oval Office. I appreciate, too, that Oprah Winfrey is such a unique figure, enjoying such widespread admiration and trust, that she seems in a category unto herself when it comes to thinking of celebrity candidates. As Bill Scher noted more than a year ago in Politico, Oprah for president isn’t an entirely fanciful idea.

Boondocks

For decades, Oprah Winfrey has always been near the top of Gallup’s annual list of “most admired” people, indicating that she enjoys a broad base of respect and trust throughout America. But Oprah has never held the No. 1 spot on that list. For the past quarter century, that spot has belonged to the woman who has been America’s top most-admired person more than twice as often as the nearest runner-up and thus, by any interpretation of Gallup’s data, is the most beloved figure in America: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It’s odd, of course, that the woman whose name has been volunteered by more Americans than any other person as the figure they admire the very most is simultaneously portrayed in the media as “unpopular” or “unlikeable.” That’s not surprising, though, if we keep in mind that the media, and political reporting especially, is part of “a culture broken by brutally powerful men.”

The paradoxical results of that annual Gallup poll are sometimes explained by the theory that Hillary Clinton is a uniquely “polarizing” figure. I don’t think that’s accurate. I wouldn’t say that she is uniquely polarizing so much as that she has been uniquely polarized — that she has been, for the same reasons she tops that Gallup poll year-in and year-out, the particular focus and target of that broken culture and of those brutally powerful men.

Oprah Winfrey has, thus far, not experienced that kind of focus and targeting, but if she became a candidate, that machine would turn toward her. It’s been less than 24 hours since her speech last night and already we’re seeing that kind of focus shift toward her. The broken culture and the brutal men have sniffed out the prospect of another widely admired woman who might challenge their control of that culture, and just that quickly they’re moving to neutralize that threat (just as they have been busily at work pre-emptively “polarizing” any other women they regard as getting uppity, such as Sens. Harris and Gillibrand). Give them another six months of lies and attacks and slanders, fabrications and distortions and exaggerations, and they’ll manage to turn the second-most admired woman in America into the second-most hated woman too. That’s how they do. It’s how they keep their broken culture broken. It’s how they keep their broken culture theirs.

In any case, Oprah’s speech last night wasn’t about electoral politics. It was about politics though — about the political, legal, and cultural effort that dominated last night’s awards show. It was about Time’s Up and the long-awaited, potentially revolutionary response that began to unfold following the revelations about Harvey Weinstein et. al. That was the “new day on the horizon” she spoke of in the crescendo of her sermon-speech.

“When that day finally dawns,” she said, speaking of it in future tense, as something that will — or that may — happen, but that has not happened yet. The effort to bring about that new day is still tenuous and vulnerable and young. It’s still in danger of fizzling out, of losing steam, or of being categorized as last week’s news. (Everybody wore black dresses so now we’re done with that, right?) That effort still requires work. It still requires leadership, attention, funding, and, yes, inspiration.

And Oprah Winfrey, bless her, reminded us last night that she can provide some of that. So I’m not eager today to hear talk about giving her some other project. I want to see her keep working on this one. When this victory is secured, then maybe we can talk about 2020. And then maybe we’ll even be able to do so without automatically considering every woman to be pre-polarized.

class warfare

gender

Previous Post

January 7, 2018

Sunday favorites

Next Post

January 9, 2018 It's up to you in 2018, 2019, 2020 ...

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What natural disaster did God use to destroy the earth in Noah’s time?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Earthquake Fire Famine Flood