I recently read my old colleague Ed Dutton's biography of a "radical Right" political figure called Jonathan Bowden (1962-2012); which has just been published.
I had never heard of Bowden until after he had died, and was not interested by what I discovered. His ideas were seemingly derived from the same kind of (fundamentally deficient) "based", "reactionary", nationalistic, Nietzschian, this-worldly and hedonically-calibrated non-religious sources as are always knocking about on the internet - ideas capable of generating a little bit of light, but no sustained heat.
So it seems that JB was not an original or coherent philosopher - it was not what he said that made him distinctive, but how he said it.
What was of general interest about Bowden, as Dutton presents him, is that he was an orator of genius, a live public speaker who was capable of inspiring and motivating people in a remarkable way - so that those present retained the influence for a long time afterwards.
It seems that the inspirational effect was sufficiently objective that Bowden has developed a posthumous following, based upon videos of his speeches.
Ed describes him as a "shaman" - to emphasize the strong magical spell that JB cast on his listeners.
The other striking aspect of Bowden was that he was a long-term and wide-ranging self-aggrandizing liar about almost everything to do with himself.
This was very extreme; and while his friends and colleagues realized that Bowden was prone to exaggerate and fabricate; apparently none of them realized the sheer scope and depth of his dishonesty.
As well as all kinds of stuff about a constellation of false academic qualifications and intellectual attainments; perhaps the strangest lie was a highly elaborate construction about being a wealthy and successful businessman, with a wife and four (or five) children.
Bowden provided people with all kinds of everyday details and specifics about the family's history and current doings - when the reality was that Bowden was never married, never had a job - and subsisted on a very small income from his father and benefits, probably never had a girlfriend, and lived alone in a rotting caravan.
This strange story makes me think about the role of motivational speaking, and by extension writing - the considerable extent to which we seek, and rely upon this...
And how there are some people who are exceptionally gifted in this direction; and in ways that seem to depend extraordinarily little upon their actual attainments, or the content of what they are saying.
On the one hand, it is striking how highly valued is this ability - how grateful people are, for being stirred-up and given confidence and direction.
And on the other hand, how little substance is needed for this to happen - or even how that substance may be vague, impossible, or incoherent.
It seems a fact about humans that we desire to be inspired by others - no matter or unworthy or flimsy are those chosen - none of which seems to make a difference to the intense loyalty and affection that are directed at those capable of doing such inspiring.
As Dutton analyses it; this is what Max Weber termed "charisma" in a leader - and charisma can, to some extent, be associated with a variety of adverse and undesirable experiences and personality traits.
Nowadays, charisma is mostly artificial and manufactured by the machinery of advertising, public relations, propaganda and saturation mass media coverage; so that someone without any exceptional degree of genuine charisma can be passed off as a "shaman"...
(Just as the public can successfully be manipulated to react to very ordinary-looking actresses and actors, pop stars or other public figures; as if they were truly beautiful, handsome or sexy; or can be induced to regard mildly-competent, socially-conformist and ideologically-mainstream pundits or writers; as if they were towering intellects, path-breaking radicals, or creative powerhouses...)
But there is also such a thing as real interpersonal charisma - that does not depend on anything except human presence and the human voice - and this "real thing" was apparently what Jonathan Bowden had in spades.
1 comment:
Your point about motivational speaking/writing and personal charisma as distinct from any substantive content is intriguing. (Granted he is possessed of an abundance of substance, but is Jesus' charisma what really matters?)
Also, you write: "...someone without any exceptional degree of genuine charisma can be passed off as a 'shaman'." This might lead one to suppose that you are criticizing "The Shaman of the Radical Right"--not only the book's subject, but also its premise. You proceed, however, to aver that Bowden may well have been genuinely charismatic.
I'm curious as to why Edward Dutton chose to write about this subject. Is he a fan of Bowden, or is it just a case of a biographer's morbid curiosity...?
I have only a glancing acquaintance with Bowden--principally through Counter-Currents which faithfully memorializes him year after year. I've seen and listened to just a few of his talks online, the most memorable of which for me had to do with Heidegger and the existentialists. (I gather you don't much care for Heidegger; I happen to find him fascinating.) I recall Bowden insisting that Heidegger was nothing to do with existentialism; his province was rather essentialism, no doubt referencing Heidegger's preoccupation with essences.
But like you, I don't really find Bowden to be very interesting and I would hardly call him an orator of genius--at least, not based upon the snippets I've heard; though I can well imagine he was possessed of a personal charisma, and perhaps his talks were a case of "you had to be there..."
What I feel for him nevertheless is just a vague wistful sense that he was "one of us", broadly speaking: a guy attracted to philosophy and disaffected by modern liberalism. That disaffection caused Bowden to lead a highly unconventional and alienated life, and I'm just really struck by how much I personally can relate.
Post a Comment