On Spitzer

On a purely political level, I think the Spitzer scandal is more shocking and sad than intriguing.

Where it's most intriguing is how strangely Shakespearean or Freudian the whole thing is. Meaning, there's something literary or psychologically intriguing about understanding, resenting, and sympathizing with the character (or dare I say person) that is Elliot Spitzer.

As Obama pointed out in his amazing speech on race, the media doesn't dig deep enough...making racial issues either a temporary spectacle or something that doesn't exist. The sheer wish to not delve deeper into an issue's complexity is so common that most of us can get away with thinking the issues actually aren't very complex.

Not that the Spitzer scandal penetrates our society in the same way that race does in the US. I'm not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is that bloggers who I have a lot of respect for have reduced the scandal to questions around the legality of prostitution, around what "Kristen" looked like, and around this idea that Spitzer wasn't being self-destructive so much as he was acting on the urge to get laid and feel a little powerful.

But there is more to it than even that. And here's just one additional level that I haven't seen explored: Spitzer has spent his career fighting "the bad guys." On the Shakespearean/Freudian levels what happens when the knight/king/lawyer starts to envy his opponents? These men who he has fought against so vigorously don't seem to have remorse for their shadowy actions andhe is constantly battle worn and all he has to show for it is a lot of people angry at him (or unrealistically idolizing him...something he probably wanted but didn't like once he got it, ah there's the rub). And he's in pain. He feels alone. He feels trapped. And where are his enemies? They're having fun. No matter how many he puts in prison, the ones who are free are having fun. Out being "men" reducing him to a tattle tale good two shoes girlie man on the playground showing that he has no understanding of the way "real" men play.

Well, I would conjecture that Mr. Spitzer grew a bit tired of this feeling. That he was ready to fight the bad guys while becoming one all at the same time. To show himself, "hey they aren't the only ones who can do high class prostitutes. I can too. And the difference between me and them is that I bring some good in this world...so unlike them, I deserve being a little naughty."

The case with Spitzer is terribly cliche and pathetic and yes he brought it on himself and showed an overt lack of consideration for his office and more profoundly, his family. But for what purpose? Why? Not because he just wanted to get laid. And not simply that he was interested in more power. That's part of it, but I don't think it's all of it.

My guess is that Spitzer's lonely psychological view of himself and the world had him caught in a comic book where he was tired of playing only one of the characters. And he was tired of the one he was playing to feel like he wasn't a real man. There are issues around masculine and sexual identity here that goes far beyond simple questions such as "should prostitution be legal." The Spitzer scandal is not black and white. It's so painfully gray and reveals such a deep complexity amongst the minds and identities of those we extol and those we abhor...on all of those who seek public personas as part of their very definition of themselves and how this rattles the cage of the psyche in a way that can lead to some very destructive choices.