Here Lies Arthur

[glenatron]

I'm always happy to pick up an arthurian retelling and among a box of books from my mum ( a mixture of returns to the library at our house and loans from the library at theirs ) I found Here Lies Arthur by Phillip Reeve. It's a very clever low Arthurian story, set in post-roman britain and centred around a young girl who is rescued by Myrddin and

Comments

[ribenademon]

Hmmm Obama is great and all but he has set out on a political career to become president of the world's most powerful country. By definition that is a fairly elitist and self serving path to take. As for cruel and cynical etc we shall have to wait and see. I suspect he will be remembered well, but there might also be a touch of diappointment along the way...

As for how to lead, well when there is a political system and a responding society which lends themselves to giving back more than they each take well that also will be as good a day as any.

Have you read Merlin Dreams by Peter Dickinson? Its only tenuously connected to Arthur as I remember but thats got some interesting ideas about knightly values and such like.

:)

[glenatron]

One thing that I think maybe this book gets right is that it doesn't matter so much what Obama is like, more what people think he is like. Even the greatest presidents the US ever had were politicians and probably had to do some pretty tricksy stuff over the years, but we generally remember them for the idea they represented more than their exact actions.

I haven't read the Peter Dickinson one, I'll add it to the list.

[life_of_tom]

I think people want to believe in leaders, as ideals. We like the idea of someone who will redeem ourselves through their actions, and someone worth following. Arthur's story is almost god-like; he's brought up from seemingly humble beginnings, but eventually his true worth comes to light. At the end of his life, his downfall is brought about by the actions of others around him, including the betrayal by those close to him. He dies, but he will return to save us all. I've heard of some religious wacko cult who believe something like that

Well said

[life_of_tom]

Totally agree. Oh and don't worry, Obama has someone to say that. It just won't be that polite. Rahm Emanuel will say something more along the lines of: "Remember, bitch, you're f*£$ing immortal and I'll kill you if you forget it. Bitch."

[glenatron]

It is an interesting thread isn't it. I guess maybe someone like Mal in Firefly may be a good example of fictional leader in the way I'm thinking about it. I really should watch the rest of that.

Is it even possible to lead fairly a community as huge and diverse as ours? Can the sheer wisdom required exist? I don't know.

I do know that our leaders over the last decade haven't shown anything close to it and I think their belief that the message is more important than it's content, that you can lead simply by telling people what you think they want to hear, has been a contributing factor to that.

[z111]

Fascinating post. Thank you.

[oifonly]

Some very interesting thoughts about the nature of leaders there. I wonder if a horse's ideas about what makes a good leader and our ideas about it vary so much because of the prey/predator difference in perspective? In which case I'd say the prey have it right....

Sword at Sunset is a great book - though I have to admit I still love Mary Stewart's Merlin-centred stories - The Crystal Cave and so on.

[glenatron]

I don't think they do really. I think someone who is a good leader of humans in the way I understand it, will almost certainly be a good leader for a horse as well. I doubt it is co-incidence that so many great historical leaders were regarded as excellent horsemen in their time. I don't think by any means it is just because they belonged to classes that could afford the finest teachers or that they belonged to a horse-powered culture. Those things may have contributed, no question, but I suspect that the qualities that people responded to were the same ones that horses do.

[oifonly]

So can you explain why people are, in general, so monumentally RUBBISH at electing good leaders? Or do you think that there have been more leaders who have just grabbed power and thereby messed things up, than there have been leaders who were actually democratically voted in? Maybe it takes lots of experience of bad leadership before people wake up and start looking for a good leader? After all, George W was elected twice (er...sort of) before America woke up and picked a different direction.

I reckon the human race is its own worst enemy.

[glenatron]

Because people don't pay attention to the person they are voting for, they pay attention to what they are told about that person and they tend to look for the simplest and easiest to follow message, which is unfortunately also often a dangerous one.

Also, picking a bad meal when you have a menu containing only two items, neither of them appetizing, is not a huge suprise.

Democracy really isn't a good way of choosing a national leader anyway. It's the best one, but it's not good. I'm not sure it's working at all really.

Come to think of it, maybe part of what this leads me to think is that our prime ministers and public figures are maybe not our leaders at all. Perhaps the people we choose to follow in other respects are our leaders. Perhaps modern nations such as ours are just too big to ever be truly lead in peacetime.