When UK Prime Minister Andrew Burnham met US President Donald Trump recently, the contrast between the two men was stark.
Burham comes across as a professional politician with little to mark him out as a distinct individual behind the obscuring veils of ambition, party politics and his place as the government machine’s regimental mascot. A shadowy shell of a man compared to Trump who certainly is an individual.
Apart from his presentational style, Burnham imitates Keir Starmer. He leads the same party and fronts the same government machine. In private he may project himself as a Fabian sophisticate, but that’s imitation too.
As for his presentation style, Burham could be any bland presenter familiar with public speaking. Perhaps he tries to imitate Tony Blair, yet imitation is one those aspects of life which becomes problematic if we follow it too far.
We all imitate because we have to imitate whatever isn’t inbuilt from birth, including roles such as Mayor of Greater Manchester or UK Prime Minister. We know it too, we see children doing it and we see ourselves doing it throughout our lives - imitating.
We imitate language from a very young age because we have to, but it never stops. Life offers so many advantages if we continue to adopt useful new words, phrases, expressions, arguments, explanations, information and insights. Even facial expressions and hand movements. Via language we imitate thoughts and beliefs too – social, political or professional viewpoints, attitudes, religions, biases. We even imitate emotions.
We imitate styles and trends – in clothing, hairstyles, music, entertainment, food, drink, interior décor, cars, motor cycles, bicycles, holiday destinations, sports, games, literature, arts, cinema, TV, online entertainment, travel, shopping, health, nutrition, clubs, societies, politics. Even careers, ambitions, bucket lists. Even body shape - until we look in the mirror.
The reason why imitation becomes problematic is obvious to all, the problem of locating a unique individual buried in the impossibly complex maze of imitation. Yet a curious aspect of imitation occurs where people over-imitate to become followers, fans, acolytes, believers or merely fashionable. It’s one of life’s oddities where conspicuous or even wildly conspicuous imitation is used to assert individuality.
At a basic level we have the imitation of important criteria such as true and false, good and bad, real and unreal, fact and fantasy. Natural sceptics tend to pull back from conspicuous imitation when it clashes with basic criteria and this seems to be a route to individuality.
People who know how to value their individuality seem to develop and enhance good/bad, true/false criteria throughout their lives, partly by avoiding conspicuous imitation. Andrew Murray Burnham hasn't done that.
We imitate language from a very young age because we have to, but it never stops. Life offers so many advantages if we continue to adopt useful new words, phrases, expressions, arguments, explanations, information and insights. Even facial expressions and hand movements. Via language we imitate thoughts and beliefs too – social, political or professional viewpoints, attitudes, religions, biases. We even imitate emotions.
We imitate styles and trends – in clothing, hairstyles, music, entertainment, food, drink, interior décor, cars, motor cycles, bicycles, holiday destinations, sports, games, literature, arts, cinema, TV, online entertainment, travel, shopping, health, nutrition, clubs, societies, politics. Even careers, ambitions, bucket lists. Even body shape - until we look in the mirror.
The reason why imitation becomes problematic is obvious to all, the problem of locating a unique individual buried in the impossibly complex maze of imitation. Yet a curious aspect of imitation occurs where people over-imitate to become followers, fans, acolytes, believers or merely fashionable. It’s one of life’s oddities where conspicuous or even wildly conspicuous imitation is used to assert individuality.
At a basic level we have the imitation of important criteria such as true and false, good and bad, real and unreal, fact and fantasy. Natural sceptics tend to pull back from conspicuous imitation when it clashes with basic criteria and this seems to be a route to individuality.
People who know how to value their individuality seem to develop and enhance good/bad, true/false criteria throughout their lives, partly by avoiding conspicuous imitation. Andrew Murray Burnham hasn't done that.
5 comments:
If ever there was a characteristic of a Fabian, it is the apparatchik syndrome, which Burnham has in full measure.
"The reason why imitation becomes problematic is obvious to all, the problem of locating a unique individual buried in the impossibly complex maze of imitation."
You could argue that |the Cheerful Chappies main skill is an ability with protective colouration. But live with camouflage long enough and the 'real person' is subordinated to the outer display.
"… his place as the government machine’s regimental mascot. " I like that!
We are all 'stochastic parrots' most of what we say is not the product of any deep reasoning, we just chirp and bleat to signal our companionship with the herd and the flock.
I can't read this beyond the paywall but I must say it starts off in grand form.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-217590369
James - yes, it's part of what he is.
DJ - I once came across an observation that you can't make friends with celebrities. They can be, not always, but can be nothing more than camouflage where friendship as we usually know it is not feasible.
djc - yes we are stochastic parrots and it takes effort to be anything else. It is almost always possible to avoid the effort too.
dearieme - it certainly does start off in grand form. It's all weirdly transparent too, as if feelgood but worthlessly uncheckable proposals will do for the voters Burnham speaks to - the rest of us don't matter.
Post a Comment