The Outlook section of the Washington Post had a fascinating round table on what a First Lady should be. I thought you’d be interested in some of the comments. “Why do First Ladies have to be pigeonholed into a careerist Hillary or traditionalist Laura box?” asked Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the Nation. “Letting a First Lady (or Man) do something other than play political surrogate might actually get points with many people who are just tired’beyond belief really’of the endless spin and hype around presidential personality.”
Wendy Wasserstein, the playwright: “It seems to me that shortly there may be an unmarried man or woman in the White House, or even, in years to come, a president with a same-sex partner. To put a spouse in a traditional role seems a retro Disneyland version of coupling.”
Kati Martin, author of a book on presidential marriages: “Let’s get real here: It takes two people committed 1,000 percent to get elected president. And that’s only the beginning. In office, the Big Guy can’t do it alone. And why should he? Even without the crushing burden of the presidency, most of us need a soulmate to get through the day. Once in the White House, most First Ladies agree it’s worth taking time off from their former lives and occupations.”