My friend Jennie suggested that I continue exploring the concept of the “offered” in reference to the “shirtless in Hawaii” photos.
Here is a stretchy interpretation what constitutes an offering–“tacit approval”– from Frank Griffin who published the photos.
“The paparazzo had tacit approval to shoot Obama since it’s a public beach.” “The guy just walked along there. He had a camera in his hand. He wasn’t hiding behind the bushes. He took some pictures. Everybody saw him. And then he walked off,” Griffin said. “It was as simple as that…”
Yes, very simple. And then he adds, in that way children do, introducing new material in a negated clause, “He wasn’t hiding behind the trees, he wasn’t on a boat…” A boat? Is this where he draws his line? That when a person takes up a post offshore with a long lens, that’s when he feels a bit squeamish about consensuality? Everything before that was fine…just a photographer on an ordinary day at the beach, collecting a few shells, eating some Luau BBQ chips, snapping a few photos of the president-elect.
Right now, I have some 3-D holiday matters to attend to, dipping this and that in chocolate, sewing some tiny books, etc. but I just want to say that the phrase “a slideshow of other shirtless presidents,” is as frightening a sequence of words as I’ve encountered in a while.
It reminds me of how I love those fine lines so exquisitely laid out in Speech Act Theory, as for example the gradations along which a promise or offer becomes a threat, as in “Here, won’t you try a slice of Aunt Angie’s Fruitcake? It just came in the mail.”
**See a slideshow of other shirtless presidents**
I still have not clicked this link.