This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2015/oct/01/if-jeremy-corbyn-lacks-one-thing-its-the-powerful-poetry-of-vision
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| If Jeremy Corbyn lacks one thing, it’s the powerful poetry of his vision | |
| (4 days later) | |
| It began on 12 April 1906 in Azusa Street, Los Angeles. That was where William J Seymour, the one-eyed son of former slaves, first began to speak in tongues, thus kicking off the whole Charismatic movement that was in large part responsible for the extraordinary revival and numerical success of global Christianity throughout the 20th century. John Wesley had done something similar in the 18th century in England, with thousands turning out to hear him speak. Charism, charismatic, charisma are an odd group of words. Originating in the Greek for grace, they suggest that the transformative power of speech and personality has some divine – or at least, mysterious – quality. | It began on 12 April 1906 in Azusa Street, Los Angeles. That was where William J Seymour, the one-eyed son of former slaves, first began to speak in tongues, thus kicking off the whole Charismatic movement that was in large part responsible for the extraordinary revival and numerical success of global Christianity throughout the 20th century. John Wesley had done something similar in the 18th century in England, with thousands turning out to hear him speak. Charism, charismatic, charisma are an odd group of words. Originating in the Greek for grace, they suggest that the transformative power of speech and personality has some divine – or at least, mysterious – quality. |
| Charisma is something that is given as opposed to something that can be learned. Like the ability to make a powerful conference speech or the capacity to persuade others with a sermon: you either have it or you don’t. William J Seymour had it. Wesley had it. And their revivalist style of public speech was so effective that it has been extensively copied by those seeking political office ever since. Martin Luther King’s revivalist-style “I have a dream” speech is still commonly held up as the ultimate in political rhetoric. | Charisma is something that is given as opposed to something that can be learned. Like the ability to make a powerful conference speech or the capacity to persuade others with a sermon: you either have it or you don’t. William J Seymour had it. Wesley had it. And their revivalist style of public speech was so effective that it has been extensively copied by those seeking political office ever since. Martin Luther King’s revivalist-style “I have a dream” speech is still commonly held up as the ultimate in political rhetoric. |
| The political significance of charisma long pre-dated television, though the intimacy of television made it all the more necessary in a leader. Those who issue the call “come follow me” require something of that puzzling, sometimes dangerous, quasi-revivalist quality, in order for people to respond. Like charm, its more modest etymological cousin, charisma is also connected to sexuality on some subconscious level. For sexuality is that elusive umami of motivation through which one person is able to impress themselves and their ideas upon another. When you meet one of those “charming” people, they look you directly in the eye, they grasp your hand firmly, they deliberately establish an emotional connection. It’s a seduction, of course, typically reinforced by all the sartorial accoutrements of power: the dark power suit, the polished black power shoes. And we the voters are total suckers for it. Which is why, time and again, we have woken up the morning after the election to discover that we had been persuaded to get into bed with some charming rotter. | The political significance of charisma long pre-dated television, though the intimacy of television made it all the more necessary in a leader. Those who issue the call “come follow me” require something of that puzzling, sometimes dangerous, quasi-revivalist quality, in order for people to respond. Like charm, its more modest etymological cousin, charisma is also connected to sexuality on some subconscious level. For sexuality is that elusive umami of motivation through which one person is able to impress themselves and their ideas upon another. When you meet one of those “charming” people, they look you directly in the eye, they grasp your hand firmly, they deliberately establish an emotional connection. It’s a seduction, of course, typically reinforced by all the sartorial accoutrements of power: the dark power suit, the polished black power shoes. And we the voters are total suckers for it. Which is why, time and again, we have woken up the morning after the election to discover that we had been persuaded to get into bed with some charming rotter. |
| Yes, I also voted for Blair in 1997. And I still remember the direct cut-through humanity of his smile, his swagger and confidence, his beguiling turn of phrase. It is embarrassing to admit it now, but I was seduced. Only later, as the killing fields of Iraq grew more bloody, as those WMD proved non-existent, did many of us realise that charismatic swagger can be a supremely dangerous quality in politicians. | Yes, I also voted for Blair in 1997. And I still remember the direct cut-through humanity of his smile, his swagger and confidence, his beguiling turn of phrase. It is embarrassing to admit it now, but I was seduced. Only later, as the killing fields of Iraq grew more bloody, as those WMD proved non-existent, did many of us realise that charismatic swagger can be a supremely dangerous quality in politicians. |
| This is probably where anti-politics politics began. And is why many of us now support Jeremy Corbyn, not just in spite of a rhetorically clumsy conference speech, but almost because of it. For this now feels like some sort of hallmark of authenticity. Or, at least, a style of politics that is devoid of sexual manipulation and knowing wink-at-the-camera charisma. Gone is the faux West Wing swagger, thank God. Gone the aping of revivalist preaching. He’s a decent bloke, saying what he thinks in some fundamentally non-flashy way. And three cheers for that. No, two cheers. | This is probably where anti-politics politics began. And is why many of us now support Jeremy Corbyn, not just in spite of a rhetorically clumsy conference speech, but almost because of it. For this now feels like some sort of hallmark of authenticity. Or, at least, a style of politics that is devoid of sexual manipulation and knowing wink-at-the-camera charisma. Gone is the faux West Wing swagger, thank God. Gone the aping of revivalist preaching. He’s a decent bloke, saying what he thinks in some fundamentally non-flashy way. And three cheers for that. No, two cheers. |
| Because there is a but. And the but is that I fear there is something missing with his beige-party-meets-socialism. And it has something to do with the Methodist roots of the Labour party that I feel are so important. For while I agree with pretty much everything Corbyn says, I don’t get to hear the poetry of his vision. And I can’t tell yet whether this is me not yet having fully kicked the need for the intoxicating drug of religious/political charisma, or whether this lack of what I call poetry represents some fundamental lack that Corbyn has to make good. I just don’t know. Yes, I want a new style of politics that refuses to feed us charisma junkies with the cheap promise of some narcotic cocktail of personality and rhetorical prowess. But I also want to be taken to the mountain top and be shown the promised land. I suspect I want the impossible. Probably we all do – so maybe we have to choose. | Because there is a but. And the but is that I fear there is something missing with his beige-party-meets-socialism. And it has something to do with the Methodist roots of the Labour party that I feel are so important. For while I agree with pretty much everything Corbyn says, I don’t get to hear the poetry of his vision. And I can’t tell yet whether this is me not yet having fully kicked the need for the intoxicating drug of religious/political charisma, or whether this lack of what I call poetry represents some fundamental lack that Corbyn has to make good. I just don’t know. Yes, I want a new style of politics that refuses to feed us charisma junkies with the cheap promise of some narcotic cocktail of personality and rhetorical prowess. But I also want to be taken to the mountain top and be shown the promised land. I suspect I want the impossible. Probably we all do – so maybe we have to choose. |
| @giles_fraser | @giles_fraser |