summary4

Summary
Feb 7, 2010 Inhye Park
According to L. Burns in “The First Ladies as Political Interloper, 1980-2001” in “First Ladies and the Fourth Estate”, 2008, pages 129-153, the first ladies of this era were confronted with criticism owing to their increased political influence. That is, the author pointed out that American society was disputing about the first ladies’ proper position in politics and culture. First, she revealed that “New Traditionalism” (Burns, 2008, p.133) emerged as the resistance to feminism of the previous era, which led to debate about the role of the first ladies in political area. Also, she indicated that the first ladies of this era were compelled to perform more traditional gender role in order to avoid the controversy over their political roles. Furthermore, she scrutinized that the roles of the first ladies as presidential advisor, political activists, and independent advocate were regarded as violating the first lady’s boundary, but on the other hand the first ladies’ influence were restricted to helpmate or protector as an extension of the helpmate. What’s more, she disclosed that the press limited their influence to women’s issues, criticizing the first ladies for their private influence and their political ambition. Finally, she accentuated that the political influence of the first ladies induced the heated debate about their “hidden power” (Burns, 2003, p.130).
Critique
According to L. Burns in “The First Ladies as Political Interloper, 1980-2001”, the first ladies of this era were faced with a question concerning their extended influence as political women. First, the author accounted for the social background of the American society at the end of the twentieth century, which contributes to rationalize the new demand as to the roles of first ladies and ultimately attributes to expand my knowledge as well. Furthermore, she articulated the renewed traditional idea of the first ladies enumerating specific examples, so that I comprehended the context of the American society without disconcerting. In addition, she classified the first ladies of this period into two groups as the level of their political influence, which is helpful to clear the differences between them. However, even though the author didn’t represent their standpoint directly as to the subject matter, she primarily focused on the negative aspects concerning the increased influence of the first ladies. That is, despite the fact that there were sufficient evidences which strengthen the subject matter, the author seldom dealt with their positive achievement. Also, the author still considered the matter from the press’ viewpoint. What’s more, since she largely aimed at disclosing the debate over the first ladies’ hidden power during the last decades of the twentieth century, it was not easy to predict the following generation.