An Ode to Kellyanne Conway — and the Many Deaths of Abraham Lincoln
In January of 2017 Kellyanne Conway, senior counselor to President Donald Trump, triggered a controversy on Meet the Press when she told Chuck Todd that “alternative facts” are real facts.
Conway made this claim defending the Trump Administration’s assertion that the crowd size at his Inauguration was larger than at President Obama’s.
Todd disagreed. He pointed out that there were aerial photographs that proved otherwise; he derided Conway’s claim and then issued one of his own, saying that “alternative facts are falsehoods.”
But Chuck Todd was wrong. Alternative facts are true. And we need to understand their nature and function in creating alternative stories.
The Many Deaths of President Lincoln
I used to teach history and I know that President Lincoln’s death is something most everyone, at that time and thereafter has accepted as a “hard fact” — sitting like a boulder in history’s path. But what are
the facts of Lincoln’s death?
The following quiz explores knowledge of the facts — the alternative facts — of Lincoln’s death. You will ace the quiz if you follow the instructions, and you will be awarded a grade of A+ in doing so. Also, you will have gained understanding of how alternativity is the very essence of factual reality.
Quiz on the Alternative Deaths and Doings of Abraham Lincoln
Instructions: After giving some thought to each of these ten true/false questions, you should circle “True” as the correct answer for each one. In-so-doing, you will have earned the grade of A+.
(1) True or False: Abraham Lincoln DIED in April of 1865.
(2) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was MURDERED in April of 1865.
(3) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was shot by an ASSASSIN in his head.
(4) True or False: Abraham Lincoln had a dream that he was shot by an assassin ten days before was shot by an assassin.
(5) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was shot watching a COMEDY at which he laughed heartily. Lincoln once said, “I laugh because I must not cry.”
(6) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by an ACTOR.
(7) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by a RACIST gun-toting white supremacist.
(8) True or False: Abraham Lincoln left this earthly life like JESUS — on Good Friday.
(9) True or False: Abraham Lincoln was murdered and then transported like EMMETT TILL by train, his corpse for all to see.
(10) True or False: It is a fact that I have followed all instructions, reading and thinking about each of these questions and then circling “True” as the correct answer for all ten, including this last one, for which I have now earned an A+.
The Pregnant Nature of Reality
In the realm of human perception, we have an endless number of symbolic choices, factual choices, alternatives — yes, alternative facts.
We have access to facts that others have made before us, and we can create facts from scratch. “Homo symbolicum” is a term for our species suggested by the highly-regarded the 20th century philosopher/historian, Ernst Cassirer. In his “AN ESSAY ON MAN,” Cassirer tells us that while we humans are not always intelligent — “sapiens” — we are always dealing in symbols, choosing different names, dressing ourselves and our world with any number of words and stories.
We perceive the world by re-presenting it, making it present a second time, or a third time, or a fourth time, and so on, as in Lincoln’s many alternative deaths.
Facts are not hard rocks of information scattered or neatly arranged over an endless field of time and space; facts are more like clumps of clay for the molding by human hands — for the making and shaping
of stories.
The world is pregnant with facts waiting to be born, stories waiting to be told — baby-stories, for which we are midwives. And these facts and stories can grow and change. For as Cassirer insists, a “genuine human symbol is characterized not by its uniformity but by its versatility. It is not rigid or inflexible but mobile.” A fact is soft, versatile, mobile. Thus, it can be used or adapted for different purposes.
It’s true, it’s fact, that Lincoln was murdered by a white racist using a handgun. If this is the “death” I am choosing for Lincoln today, then one would likely, rightly discern that I have concerns about racism and
gun-control.
It’s a fact that Lincoln’s corpse traveled the country in a train, just as Emmett Till. The color of his corpse, wrote the New York Times, “is leaden, almost brown. . . the eyes deep sunk and held close upon the sockets. . . the cheeks hollowed and deep pitted; the unnaturally thin lips shut tight and firm as if glued together.” If I choose to tell this about Lincoln it’s because I sense and see connections between his death and that of Emmett Till — and I believe the “moral arc of history” bends, if painfully, slowly, toward justice.
Who’s Your Daddy?
An essential question before homo-symbolicum today as always, is: Who decides? On what basis? Who decides how Lincoln died? Who determines the facts and stories we live by and within? Who or what decides the size of that crowd? Who will decide if the next election is stolen? Who decides if
immigrants threaten us? Who decides who is “us?”
Authority is about the right to give orders, the power to make decisions, the ability to enforce obedience. Digging deeper into some of the roots of the word, “authority,” we find the 14th century middle English “autor,” with the definition to follow including “father,” and then “creator,” the “one who brings about, one who makes or creates.”
Let us examine the two very different kinds of authority that have informed the two different positions on the crowd-size question at Trump’s inauguration.
The authority behind Chuck Todd’s position on the crowd’s size is not a person; it’s the photographic evidence, scientific fact, scientific authority.The authority on which Conway based her theory about “alternative facts” was not mentioned explicitly, but it proved to be as powerful for many Americans as the scientific authority of the photograph.
The source of authority for Kellyanne Conway and the MAGA base was none other than the big boss, President Donald J. Trump. Many may wonder, what kind of authority could a well-known liar like Donald Trump be? The answer is that Trump was, and still is for millions of Americans, and many others around the globe, a strong father figure. Trump embodies that kind of authority without which human beings cannot survive.
In human evolution and in the growth and development of every human being, the existence and influence of “parental authority” is much older and deeper and more pervasive than “scientific authority.” And if the populations of the religions of the world are any measure, then parental authority is considerably more intrenched, popular and pervasive than scientific authority.
“Momma… Momma…”
Effective agents for social change recognize that objective, rational, proven, and dependable scientific authority occupies but a thin slice, a sliver of a stratum of our evolutionary identity. And, by evolutionary
design, parental authority is steeped in truth, emotional truth, at times, life-saving truth — a truth that is instinctual, and in the blood.
In the realm of “parental authority” many evolutionary lessons are baked in. Like the parent who will make a child listen; a flashing or solid red light is blood red for a reason.
There is a reason why I still long for my mother’s soft touch. There is a reason that grown men, when they are dying, perhaps being murdered on the street, will call for their mothers.
Parental love is a necessity we can’t deny, a truth we always need, a fact we would be dead without. It is stronger than science.
Don’t get me wrong, if I were signing up for the first flight to Mars, I’d want persons with considerable scientific authority and proven experience at mission controls: I’d want scientists and engineers who see
the inauguration’s crowd-size according to the aerial photographs, like Chuck Todd, rather than making claims from an irrational and emotional vantage point, as was the case with Kellyanne Conway.
On the other hand, if my destination were to reach the Oval Office located in that famous White House, I would want the folks on my staff to be more like Kellyanne Conway than like Chuck Todd. Folks with determination and passion, who may often choose subjectivity over objectivity.
Parental authority is subjective and emotive, predictively impulsive. If people are loyal and enthralled with a leader who feels and acts like a strong, loving, perhaps sometime irrational, parent, then no
matter what that leader does — even shooting someone in the middle of 5th Avenue in New York City, or launching an insurrection — these folks will follow like ducklings behind their mother.
Who Are the Leaders I’m following?
I recently shared this essay with my two oldest sons, asking for any suggestions they might give me for for drafting a meaningful and interesting conclusion herewith.
One idea that we chewed on and thought might work, was for me to suggest the names of American leaders who exemplify a balance of the two kinds of authority mentioned above — the parental and scientific. My oldest son further suggested that I might want to share the names of American leaders whom I follow, or have followed or would follow, who reflect an authoritative balance, parental and scientific.
Good idea, I thought; perhaps a little self-centered, but why not give it a try. So, I tried to come up with the names of current American leaders who fit this bill. But, easier said than done; I found the pickings slim.
Actually, my thoughts kept returning to Kellyanne Conway; she appeals to me as a leader; I know this, because every time she’s on television, I make note and follow her like a duckling. Kellyanne is one of the most attractive and interesting “alternative facts” I know. Yes, she is a near-clone of Donald J. Trump, but I say “near clone” rather than “complete clone,” because she is by no means a carbon copy of the former president. Most importantly, she has refused to eat-swallow-digest-and-excrete “THE BIG LIE.”
I think she has served and continues to serve this nation well. I say this because she is a very savvy person who has had Trump’s ear all these years. I have no proof, and have not read her book, but I believe she has been a rare, good influence on this erratic man. Furthermore, she has consistently spoken and acted and interacted with the public more articulately and with more civility than most others who were or are on Trump’s bandwagon.
Not only that, Kellyanne has been, and is, a warrior for the causes she embraces; she stands her ground and will fight for even more ground to stand on if she can.
Aside from the crowd-size exaggerations in which all Trump acolytes were snared, again, I do not believe Kellyanne Conway was or is to this day, a simple mouthpiece for Trump or anybody else. Many liberal-progressives, of which I’m one, may see her as such, but I do not believe she’s ever been Trump’s parrot; I have a strong hunch that she has disagreed with many things Trump has said or done on various occasions; in my mind’s eye, I can see Kellyanne sitting or (more likely) standing in front of Trump, her boss and friend, politely though firmly taking issue with him, taking him on!
Thus I am naming/storying Kellyanne in flattering ways: I name her courageous; I name her intelligent, clever, quick witted — I would want her as my lawyer, if I were accused of killing someone on the streets of Manhattan. I also name her as a good parent of the four children that she and George Conway have; neither she nor George will take any guff when it comes to the wellbeing of their kids. Lastly, maybe firstly, I see Kellyanne as very attractive, and (forgive me) sexy.
I have considerable experience as an educator and teacher; for some years as an school administrator with responsibilities as a supervisor and evaluator of teachers. I earned my master’s and doctoral degree at the Harvard School of Education, specializing in social studies curriculum development and teacher education and training, and yes, I would hire Kellyanne in a heartbeat, as a teacher at my school.
A final note pertains to my two grandboys living up north in the Green Mountains of Vermont. On occasion I send them something that I’d like them to consider as they are about to pass through that knotty stage of development we story as “adolescence.”
A few months ago, I sent them this short poem which reflects (implicitly at least) what we’ve been discussing here about “alternative facts” and thereby the freedom we all have to name one another, and the world all around; it goes like this:
I’ll name you.
You’ll name me.
We’ll name Everything,
On Earth, in sky and sea.
I have chosen to story Kellyanne Conway as a leader worth our while to follow. It is my faith that one day, Kellyanne will help lead us toward a future with more liberty and justice for all people, along with the sustained health and dignity for Mother Earth and precious things She has birthed.
I welcome Readers’ comments, questions, and suggestions — my email is wardbrook@yahoo.com.
