One of the drawbacks of not working at Christianity Today any longer is that I’m not keeping up with all the new and forthcoming books. One that I totally missed until yesterday is Shelby Steele’s A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win, which came out late last year. Provocative title, for sure. Here’s the book description from Amazon.com:
Steele writes of how Obama is caught between the two classic postures that blacks have always used to make their way in the white American mainstream: bargaining and challenging. Bargainers strike a “bargain” with white America in which they say, I will not rub America’s ugly history of racism in your face if you will not hold my race against me. Challengers do the opposite of bargainers. They charge whites with inherent racism and then demand that they prove themselves innocent by supporting black-friendly policies like affirmative action and diversity.
Steele maintains that Senator Obama is too constrained by these elaborate politics to find his own true political voice. Obama has the temperament, intelligence, and background — an interracial family, a sterling education — to guide America beyond the exhausted racial politics that now prevail. And yet he is a Promethean figure, a bound man.
The book weighs in at a whopping 160 pages. Sounds a little thin, but I’m sure Steele makes every page count. Has anyone had the chance to read it yet? If so, I’d love to hear your take.
I have not read Steele’s book, but I’ve heard him discuss at length with two of my favorite radio hosts — Dennis Prager (transcript) and Milt Rosenberg (90-minute audio). The Rosenberg show is especially valuable because it includes a second guest — Lee Walker, president of the Chicago-based New Coalition for Economic and Social Change — who offers helpful perspective on where Steele is on target and where his thesis does not hold up as well.
From what I’ve heard on these two shows, I think Steele assumes too much of an ability to know Obama’s interior life. So, for instance, he describes Obama’s longtime membership at Trinity United Church of Christ as an act of self-betrayal. He argues that Obama’s white mother would not have felt at home at Trinity. From what Obama has written and said about his late mother, I could imagine her being at home there. Further, Steele wonders how Obama, as a bargainer, can feel at home with Trinity’s mission statement, which is far closer to the challenger end of the spectrum.
What’s missing here is the recognition that Christians do not always want their churches to mirror everything about their lives. Obama has clearly described Trinity as the church where he became a Christian. That would form a powerful emotional bond for anyone.
All told, Steele’s argument seems to amount to this: Obama cannot succeed because, unlike Steele, he has not transcended the categories of bargainer and challenger. If Obama does not win the Democratic nomination, I think it will have far more to do with brass-knuckle politics than with Steele’s categories.
Doug,
I agree with you about Steele assuming too much about Obama’s interior life. I think that is an understatement. From the Prager interview I think his whole thesis is screwy. It seems to stem from his own weird prejudice against the “tragic mulatto” and perhaps his own insecurities about being biracial. It almost sounds like he has to prove himself better than Obama. He’s okay because he grew up with a black father … He assigns Obama a classic pathology, when in fact, it might just be that if a biracial person has not grown up with that role model and community, they might try a little harder to find a place in the community.
I happen to know that a white family can support a biracial person in their struggle with identity. We did it by moving to a racially diverse community when our children were in early elementary school, attending a diverse church, and intentionally seeking out black role models for our children.
A final word: the way Steele frames his statements about Obama benefiting from growing up in a white family sounds offsensive to me … as if black culture is fundamentally viral. I don’t know. What do you think Ed?
Doug, I also like what you said about Christians not necessarily wanting their churches to mirror everything about their lives.
Wow, this is a fascinating conversation. Doug, thanks for the links to the radio programs, and for posting a comment–it’s great to see you here, my dear friend. And Christine, I appreciate your personal perspective on the realities of growing up biracial. I’m always wary of those who would attempt to interpret the complexities of another’s life experience for the sake of their own argument or agenda. Still, the bargainer/challenger metaphor intrigues me. I feel some shades of the “Reconciliation Blues” there, though perhaps not to the extremes that Steele seems to suggest. When it comes to race in America, I think on some level we’re all dashing back and forth between some form of those two categories just to get along.
Ed,
I realize I ignored that part of the conversation. Probably because I was so irritated with the rest of what Steele said. I’ll have to carve out 90 minutes to listen to the other interview … and, I confess, I still need to read Reconciliation Blues. It’s on my list : )
Thanks for the compliment, Christine, and the good elaboration on the creepier aspects of Steele’s argument.
The interview with Milt Rosenberg is especially good because the additional guest, Lee Walker, affirms some aspects of Steele’s points about bargainers and challengers. They discuss, for instance, the difference in how a black man may talk about O.J. Simpson with his white friends and how he may talk about Simpson at the barber shop.
Rosenberg also is good about taking calls, and a few people challenge Steele rather directly. But I doubt that you’ll find Steele any easier to take, especially at the extended length!
Thanks also for the warm welcome, Ed. For too long I didn’t know your blog existed, but once I found it, I added it to my list of subscriptions.
That is helpful Doug. I was pondering the idea of bargainers/challengers after Ed’s response. Makes a lot of sense.
Add to it, the embarrasser. This character unintentially educates through embarrassment.
Here’s what I mean. More frequently than I care to mention, someone will make a racist comment or joke to me, assuming it will be okay because I am white. I tell them I have a black child. Deadening silence follows. Then, protestatiions that they are not racist, didn’t mean anything by it, etc. In one instance a debate actually ensued about whether of not I actually gave birth to a bi-racial child, an “eggplant” to use this guy’s lingo. The debate happened on the way to dinner. It was an akward meal.
I saw part of Steele’s presentation on The Bound Man on c-span’s BookTV, and just found you can watch it on their internet site (at the moment, anyway).
I found his ideas thought-provoking, even I didn’t wholly agree with them. They can still stimulate some useful thought/dialogue and maybe even increase self-awareness.
[...] seems to be continuing in the vein of Shelby Steele’s current book about Barack Obama, A Bound Man. Loury observes that Obama can only win enough white voters by [...]