Kanye 2024

I think it is safe to say that nobody is a big fan of demagogues. Where does that leave democracy? Can we conclude that in a democratic society, we really don’t want rulers whose first instinct is to maximize their popularity with the crowds? Can we conclude that we want sober-minded leaders, who think about what is best to do and not what ill-informed citizens of the country might impulsively want to have done? Can we conclude we don’t want people who run for office on the basis of personal charisma instead of policy ideas? Can we conclude that a candidate who has handlers managing public appearances in order to orchestrate popularity is not good for the country?

Enter Coriolanus.

Coriolanus was a war hero in Rome. He single handedly defeated the city of Corioli, came back to Rome greeted with great praise, and was slated to be elected to high office. One problem. To do so, he had to go to into the marketplace and get the crowds to accede to his election.

As Shakespeare relates (in the play cleverly entitled Coriolanus), he wasn’t thrilled at the prospect:

CORIOLANUS: What must I say?
‘I Pray, sir’–Plague upon’t! I cannot bring
My tongue to such a pace:–‘Look, sir, my wounds!
I got them in my country’s service, when
Some certain of your brethren roar’d and ran
From the noise of our own drums.’
MENENIUS: O me, the gods!
You must not speak of that: you must desire them
To think upon you.
COR: Think upon me! hang ’em!
I would they would forget me, like the virtues
Which our divines lose by ’em.
MEN: You’ll mar all:
I’ll leave you: pray you, speak to ’em, I pray you,
In wholesome manner.
Exit
COR: Bid them wash their faces
And keep their teeth clean.

It is safe to conclude that Coriolanus did not have a high opinion of the Common Man.

But, if you want power in Rome, you have to play the game. What we can call Coriolanus’ handlers, the others promoting his candidacy (most notably his mother), earnestly try to persuade him to just do what he needs to do to get elected. First step he needs to stop insulting everyone.

             My nobler friends,
I crave their pardons:
For the mutable, rank-scented many, let them
Regard me as I do not flatter, and
Therein behold themselves: I say again,
In soothing them, we nourish ‘gainst our senate
The cockle of rebellion, insolence, sedition,
Which we ourselves have plough’d for, sow’d, and scatter’d,
By mingling them with us, the honour’d number,
Who lack not virtue, no, nor power, but that
Which they have given to beggars.

Not exactly what his handlers have in mind, It doesn’t end well. Coriolanus to the crowd:

You common cry of curs! whose breath I hate
As reek o’ the rotten fens, whose loves I prize
As the dead carcasses of unburied men
That do corrupt my air, I banish you;
And here remain with your uncertainty!
Let every feeble rumour shake your hearts!
Your enemies, with nodding of their plumes,
Fan you into despair!

And so, he joins the enemy and proceeds to march on Rome.

Here is the question: Is Coriolanus doing what we want leaders to do? He stands on principle; he refuses to abase himself before the crowd; he is aghast at the idea of showing off his war wounds to curry popularity with people too cowardly to fight. He wants Rome to be great, but is deeply concerned that in the race for popular opinion, the rulers are doing long-term harm in order to garner short term praise from the rabble.

In other words, if you don’t want a popular demagogue, if you don’t want a leader who constantly checks the poll numbers, then is Coriolanus your type of leader?

In my reading group discussing this play (The Grecian Urn Seminar), the room was surprisingly split almost exactly in half on the matter of evaluating Coriolanus. Even on the simple question of whether he was a good guy or a bad guy in the play, the room was nearly perfectly split. Is he a noble guy who was sadly forced into a bad situation for betraying his country or is he an ignoble guy who despised the people and was willing to sell out his country for a personal vendetta?

Granted: Coriolanus is not exactly the best or worst type of leader imaginable. That isn’t the real question. The real question is whether his impulses with regards to being popular are the right ones. In the midst of being persuaded to play the popularity game, Coriolanus exclaims:

Well, I must do’t:
Away, my disposition, and possess me
Some harlot’s spirit!

Consider that line. Do we want leaders possessed of some harlot’s spirit? All things to all people? Policies promised in order to get a few more votes in crucial places?

Whether you want it or not, of course, doesn’t really matter. That’s what we have.

Imagine someone wanted to be elected leader of the most powerful country in the modern world. What is the best path to power? Become a Rock Star. Have a Reality TV Show. Perfect the art of delivering exactly what people want to hear and see.

I know you are thinking of the current President of the United States right now. But it goes back further than that. Much further. When was the last US Presidential election where the more telegenic, charismatic personality did not win? Go election by election and ask, “Which Candidate is more like a Rock Star? Which candidate is more likely to light up the room by walking into it?” (Note, this is not the same question as which candidate do you personally like better. Imagine a crowd of normal people, the type of people who never read blog posts about Coriolanus.) You have to go all the way back to 1964, when the candidate with more of that Rock Star quality lost. That year, by the way is not only before I was born, it is also when TV was in its infancy.

So, ask yourself again: would you rather have Coriolanus as leader? Would you rather have a leader who despised the people? Would you rather have a leader who asked what was best for the country instead of what is most popular?

Or put it this way: if the election was between Coriolanus and Kanye West, for whom do you vote? Who wins?