Leadership

http://lea.sagepub.com The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader: Charisma Reconsidered as Aesthetic Encounter
Donna Ladkin Leadership 2006; 2; 165 DOI: 10.1177/1742715006062933 The online version of this article can be found at: http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/2/2/165

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Leadership can be found at: Email Alerts: http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://lea.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Citations http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/2/2/165

Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader: Charisma Reconsidered as Aesthetic Encounter

Donna Ladkin, University of Exeter, UK

Abstract This article takes a novel approach to understanding the phenomenon of charisma by viewing it through the frame of the aesthetic category of the sublime. It draws similarities between the account of the sublime as theorized by the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant, and the theory of charismatic authority as rendered by Max Weber. The resulting analysis contributes insight into the phenomenon in three ways: it serves to locate the experience of charisma as a relational encounter rather than one situated solely within the leader him or herself, it highlights contextual factors which contribute to the experience of charismatic leadership, and it suggests a new way of distinguishing between generative and degenerative forms of charisma based in its relational quality rather than in outcomes associated it. The article concludes that, interpreted as an expression of the sublime, charismatic leadership functions as a means by which followers are empowered to wake up to their own sense of agency to respond in radical ways during times of crisis. Keywords aesthetics; charisma; charismatic leadership; Kant; the sublime; Weber

Introduction
Throughout the last century charisma has been a perennial refrain within leadership literature. Theorists such as Bass (1985), Bryman (1992), Burns (1978), Carlyle (1847/1907), Conger and Kanungo (1998), Drath (2001), House (1977), Peters and Waterman (1982), Quinn (2000) and Stogdill (1948) have each contributed their particular variation on the theme laid down in the western canon as early as the works of Plato (Takala, 1998). Although much has been written about it, there is no unied view as to how charisma arises or how it should be dened. Furthermore, an implicit unease seems to imbue both the experience of charisma and its theorization. For every instance of charismatic leadership which fosters generative ends, a corresponding illustration can be cited of how it has been implicated in malevolent outcomes. To date, much written about charisma analyses it from either a psychological or a sociological perspective. This article contributes a new variation on the charisma
Copyright 2006 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi) Vol 2(2): 165179 DOI: 10.1177/1742715006062933 www.sagepublications.com
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

theme by considering it as an experience of the aesthetic, particularly as an experience of the aesthetic category of the sublime. The resulting analysis contributes insight into the phenomenon in three ways: it locates the experience of charisma as a relational encounter rather than one situated solely within the leader him or herself; it highlights the contextual factors key to its experience; and it suggests a new way of understanding generative and degenerative forms of charisma based in the quality of relationship between follower and leader, rather than in outcomes associated with it. The argument is formed through comparing and aligning two theoretical ideas: that of the sublime as articulated by the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant and that of charisma as offered by the sociologist Max Weber. By noticing key similarities between the two theories, I hope to offer a new way of conceptualizing charisma which neither eulogizes nor demonizes it but places it within a vital sphere of human sensibility, that of aesthetic appreciation. The article begins with a brief overview of contemporary thinking about charisma. An examination of the aesthetic category of the sublime follows, focusing on Kants theory as presented in his Critique of Judgement. Parallels between Kants theory and charisma as theorized by Max Weber are then identied and illustrated. Charisma is reconsidered in terms of its expression of a particular quality of aesthetic, one particularly capable of bringing us to new thresholds of perception and experience. Finally, the means by which charismatic leaders can encourage followers beliefs in their own capacities are discussed as a key contribution resulting from interpreting charisma as an aesthetic encounter.

Charisma in contemporary literature

This brief account focuses on two themes which emerge from contemporary writings about charismatic leadership: controversy over its denition and genesis, and a general ambivalence about its role and value. Turning to the rst, a recent debate within Leadership Quarterly (Bass, 1999; Beyer, 1999; House, 1999; Shamir, 1999) illustrates well the range of views held about how charisma should be dened and from where it originates. Beyer (1999) argues that Webers (1924/1947) seminal account of charisma has been watered down to cohere with contemporary renderings. Rather than seeing charisma as the truly extraordinary and rare occurrence bestowed as a gift from Divinity, Beyer argues that modern accounts dene charisma in a way which makes it available to anyone. Such redenition, she proposes, supports the largely western preoccupation with the romance of the individual, heroic leader. Beyer also suggests that the emphasis on a psychological paradigm for researching charisma (as opposed to a sociological one) has resulted in an overemphasis on individual traits of the leader without sufciently accounting for the impact of context on this phenomenon. Indeed, representation of charisma as a much prized, individually based attribute to which leaders should aspire is a recurring refrain in the literature. For instance, Kets de Vries (2004) gives the charismatic role (as distinct from the instrumental role) a key place in effective leadership, suggesting that it encompasses how leaders envision, empower and energize their followers. The leadership theory recently in vogue which perhaps most relies on the notion of charisma is transformational

166
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

leadership, which suggests that effective leadership relies on personal charisma, comprised of particular skills or traits in the leader including moral vision, coupled with sensitivity to the demands of the context (Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1994; Bass & Steidlmeier 1999). Others, such as Drath (2001) allude to a more relational dynamic operating within the experience of charisma. He writes that dominance and charisma come from this perfect attunement between leader and follower in the shared creation of a kind of leader who is irreplaceable (pp. 656). In fact, Weber himself (1924/1947) recognized that not only did the charismatic leader have to be the recipient of extraordinary gifts, but followers also had to recognize those gifts in order for the leader to be perceived as charismatic. Webers view about this will be explored in greater depth later in the article. Although charisma is largely seen as a desirable and sought-after phenomenon, the disquiet it generates is evidenced by an alternative strand of writing. Just as he legitimizes charisma in the work cited previously, Kets de Vries elaborates on his disquiet about how it arises in other writings. Together with Miller (1986) he explores transference and the pathological aspects of leadership, assigning charisma a key role in the process of regressive projection. In his latest book he links charisma with the phenomenon of leadership by terror as enacted by despots ranging from Shaka Zulu to Hitler (Kets de Vries, 2004). Explanations of such aberrant forms of charismatic leadership focus on the psychological tendencies for followers to regress into powerless identication with charismatic leaders, thus diminishing their own agency in the face of charismatic authority. From a sociological perspective, writers such as Gemmil and Oakley (1997) represent charismatic leadership as an illusory social phenomenon, asserting that [charisma represents] a black hole in social space that serves as a container for the alienating consequences of the social myth resulting from intellectual and emotional deskilling by organisational members (p. 278). Perhaps another aspect of the ambivalence charisma generates is suggested by the term enchantment used in this articles title. Charismatic leaders enchant their followers. How else could the response of a housewife visiting the UK from Des Moines, Iowa, to attend Bill Clintons recent book-signing event in London be explained? I cant stop looking at him. Ive been looking at him for ten years on my refrigerator, said Marilyn Rothstone, a diehard fan from Des Moines. She had woken at 3.30 am to get in for his lunchtime show (The Guardian, 26 October 2004). The word enchantment itself has an interesting connection to the notion of refrain. Both have roots in musical worlds, enchantment deriving from the Latin in cantare, to sing. In common parlance, to chant, like a refrain, is to repeat. Gregorian Chant epitomizes this phenomenon in musical form, and anyone who has listened to more than ten minutes of Hildegard of Bingen can vouch for its mesmerising tendencies. The word enchant however, can also mean to put someone under a spell or to delude (New Oxford Dictionary of English, 1998) to dupe, in other words. And perhaps this denition speaks to our ambivalent response to charismatic leadership: as we are enchanted by it, we are also aware at the back of our minds that we could be on the verge of being duped. Interpreting charisma from the aesthetic perspective of the sublime, however, provides an alternative choice to the follower drawn to the charismatic leader. Before

167
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

exploring how that might be possible, the article considers the aesthetic category of the sublime.

Aesthetics and the sublime

Aesthetic, like charisma is a widely contested term. Csikszentmihalyi and Robinson (1990) suggest that aesthetic experience includes four aspects of felt meaning: perceptual, emotional, intellectual and communicative. The aesthetic sphere of experience speaks to the qualities we perceive in another along with the emotional and sensual response to those qualities. Strati (2000: 16) points out that the root of aesthetic, aisth, from the ancient Greek, means feeling through physical perceptions. In contemporary discourse, we are more familiar perhaps with its opposite anaesthetic something that puts us to sleep. At its most fundamental, the aesthetic wakes us up to the pleasure of sensory response. In this article the aesthetic is dened as the dimension of experience which serves an integrating function between our senses, emotions and intellect. Our aesthetic sensibility alerts us to the qualities of those people, things, and environments we encounter. Both the perceiver and the object of perception have roles to play in that encounter. Those objects, people, or even ideas which pique our aesthetic sense exhibit certain qualities, but perhaps just as importantly, the perceiver must be open and attentive to appreciating those qualities. In this way the experience of the aesthetic could be said to be co-created in that it arises between the perceiver and the object of perception. Beauty is perhaps the most commonly known aesthetic category. In fact, the two words are often used interchangeably we say something appeals to our aesthetic sense, meaning that we judge it to be beautiful. But other aesthetic categories, such as the grotesque, the comic, and even the ugly (Strati, 2000) exist and exert distinctive qualities of their own. This article focuses on the aesthetic category of the sublime because of parallels in the way charisma and the sublime have been theorized, and now turns to a fuller rendering of that theory.

The sublime
The notion of the sublime within the eld of aesthetics dates back most notably to Loginus (1965) who wrote On Sublimity in the rst century AD. He suggests: the sublime denotes the moment when the individuals affective and cognitive dispositions towards the world are subjected to a sense of displacement . . . amazement and wonder exact invincible power and force and get the better of the hearer . . . Sublimity . . . produced at the right moment, tears everything up like a whirlwind. (p. 2) Loginus thus portrays the sublime as a quality of powerful and out of the ordinary proportions. The quote highlights the sublimes ability to disrupt both affective and cognitive capacities. It has the capacity to up-end and disorient the perceiver, to get the better of him or her. Having been lost, Loginuss work was rediscovered by Immanuel Kant in Germany and Edmund Burke in England during the 18th century. Burkes work

168
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

predates that of Kant by about 50 years, but Kant provides a fuller treatment of the notion within his Critique of Judgement published in 1790. This article draws primarily from Kants account.

Kants theory of the sublime

Kant considered the sublime a distinct category of aesthetic value. In The Critique of Judgement (1952), he cites the sublime as a comparative category to that of the beautiful. According to Kant, the sublime distinguishes itself from the beautiful in three key ways:
I

the ground of the sublime resides within the perceiver rather than in the object of perception as happens in the experience of the beautiful; the object which evokes the experience of the sublime cannot be adequately held by the imagination, it is other-worldly, or in some way magical, whereas the beautiful can be held in the perceivers imagination; the experience of the sublime involves negative pleasure and disturbance, whereas the experience of the beautiful evokes happiness and peacefulness on the part of the perceiver.

Each of these is explored in greater detail below.

The sublime: its in the eye of the beholder

Although colloquially we often refer to beauty as being in the eye of the beholder, according to Kant describing the sublime in that way would be far more accurate. In The Critique of Judgement (1952), Kant argues that beauty resides within an objects form, specically within its symmetry and regularity. In contrast, he describes those things which evoke the experience of the sublime as formless, irregular, and larger than life. But the key distinction he draws between the beautiful and the sublime is in terms of where he argues they originate as experiences. The beautiful, he asserts, rests within that which is regarded as beautiful. In contrast, the experience of the sublime resides within the observer. For instance, when contrasting the beautiful and the sublime as they are manifested in nature, Kant suggests, for the beautiful in nature we must seek a ground external to ourselves, but for the sublime one merely in ourselves and the attitude of mind that introduces sublimity (p. 23). Further along, he elaborates on this, writing: we express ourselves on the whole inaccurately if we term any object of nature sublime . . . the object lends itself to the presentation of a sublimity discernable in the mind. For the sublime, in the strict sense of the word, cannot be contained in any sensuous form, but rather concerns ideas of reason . . . [It is] the disposition of soul evoked by a particular representation engaging the attention of the reective judgement, and not the object, that is to be called sublime. (p. 25) How are we to make sense of this formulation? First, the role reason plays in Kants system of aesthetics (and overall philosophy) must be appreciated. Fundamentally located within the Enlightenment tradition, Kant extols reason above any other

169
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

human capacity. Much of his project as a philosopher was devoted to arguing for the primacy of reason and creating a philosophical system which proved this case. The Critique of Judgement is largely an account of the way in which reason, rather than subjective feeling, mediates our aesthetic response. This would have the effect of raising the aesthetic to a superior category of human experience, in line with the intellectual rather than relegating it to a merely subjective reaction. For Kant, the experience of the sublime depends wholly on the human capacity to reason. He explains how this experience arises in the following way: the perceiver encounters something which is impossible for her imagination to grasp, such as a wild storm, the vastness of the sea, or a magnicent cathedral such as Chartres. She experiences her sense of self balancing on an on edge of obliteration; the vastness or wildness can be of such an extent as to render her helpless and without ground. At the point when her imagination becomes overwhelmed by the vastness or chaos of that which it perceives, reason steps in. According to Kant, it is the faculty of reason which enables the perceiver to nd some way of engaging with the object of overwhelming qualities. In this way, the experience of the sublime occurs when reason asserts itself and mediates the encounter between the perceiver and that which is uncontainably formless, chaotic, or vast. He elucidates this further by writing: sublimity must be sought only in the mind of the judging subject, and not in the object of nature that occasions this attitude by the estimate formed of it. Who would apply the term sublime even to shapeless mountain masses towering one above the other in wild disorder, with their pyramids of ice, or to the dark tempestuous ocean, or such like things? But in the contemplation of them, without any regard to their form, the mind abandons itself to the imagination and to a reason placed, though quite apart from any denite end, in conjunction therewith, and merely broadening its view, and it feels itself elevated in its own estimate of itself on nding all the might of imagination unequal to its desires. (p. 26) This passage presents the key feature of Kants argument. In the rst instance, we encounter an entity which is somehow greater than our imagination can grasp. This can be on account of its enormity, complete formlessness, or perceived mightiness. At the point of non-comprehension by the imagination, reason asserts itself and nds a way of engaging with the phenomenon. In this way, according to Kant, reason asserts its superiority. This formulation also locates reason as the superior human capacity. This assertion of ones reasoning capacity in the face of the unimaginable produces the experience of the sublime. By way of illustration, Ill refer to a contemporary philosophical system, that created by the cartoonist Bill Waterson in the shape of Calvin and Hobbes. One of my favourite strips presents a series of three frames in which Calvin stares up into the night sky ablaze with a multitude of stars. Who has not done the same, and been transported by the sheer enormity of the universe? In the fourth frame, Calvin yells into the darkness, I am TOO signicant! (Waterson, 1992). Kant might explain Calvins outburst as the rising up of his powers of reason in a moment of sublime aesthetic encounter. (Im not sure what Calvin would make of such an interpretation!) The point here remains, for Kant, that the sublime resides within the perceiver, and signals that reason has negotiated a way of interacting with something beyond the powers of the perceivers imagination. Having said this, the

170
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

sublime arises because of an encounter with something outside of the perceiver. The next section elaborates on the qualities of those objects, people or situations which might evoke the experience of the sublime.

The sublime: that which is absolutely great

Although I have already introduced some of the characteristics of those things which evoke the experience of the sublime, this section elaborates on those descriptions by offering a fuller rendering of Kants position. In the Critique of Judgement Kant (1952) writes: the sublime . . . is ill adapted to our faculty of presentation, and to be, as it were, an outrage to our imagination, and yet it is judged all the more sublime on that account . . . it is rather in chaos, or in the wildest and most irregular disorder and desolation, provided it gives signs of magnitude and power that nature chiey excites the idea of the sublime. (p. 23) In more contemporary accounts of the sublime, the natural world remains a wellspring for experience of sublime aesthetic encounter. Henry David Thoreaus (1972) account of his time hiking up Mount Katahdin, the endpoint of the Appalachian Trail on the East Coast of the United States presents this experience vividly: we have not seen pure Nature, unless we have seen her thus vast and drear and inhuman, though in the midst of cities. Nature was here something savage and awful, though beautiful. I looked with awe at the ground I trod on, to see what the Powers had made there, the form and fashion and material of their work. This was that Earth of which we have heard, made out of Chaos and Old Night. Here was no mans garden, but the unhandelled globe . . . It was Matter, vast, terric, not his Mother Earth that we have heard of, not for him to tread on, or be buried in, no, it were being too familiar even to let his bones lie there, the home, this, of Necessity and Fate. There was there felt the presence of a force not bound to be kind to man . . . (p. 77) Although terrifying, experiences which evoke the sublime are also energizing and invigorating, and consequently draw us to them. As Thoreaus quote intimates, they have the power to connect us with a different plane of reality, one which exceeds the bounds of our normal, day-to-day existence. These natural entities, or man-made ones such as the Pyramids or great cathedrals, astound us, they makes us aware of our smallness. Charismatic leaders can seem to evoke a similar response, perhaps through the astonishing quality of their vision, or their perceived capacity to extend the normal bounds of human capability. Before considering that parallel in more detail, I turn to the third aspect of the sublime which Kant described, its ability to evoke negative pleasure.

The sublime: an ambivalent pleasure

Unlike our experience of the beautiful, argued Kant (1952), the sublime evokes in perceivers a kind of alternating experience of pleasure and unease; either fear, distaste, or even repulsion, as described in the following quote:

171
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

the feeling of the sublime is a pleasure that arises only indirectly, being brought about by the feeling of a momentary check to the vital forces followed at once by a discharge all the more powerful . . . since the mind is not simply attracted by the object, but is also alternately repelled thereby. The delight in the sublime does not so much involve positive pleasure as admiration or respect, i.e. merits the name of a negative pleasure. (p. 23) In other words, in the rst instance, an encounter with the sublime threatens our vital forces, our life itself. Only through the power of reason do we experience the phenomenon as something with which we can cope and survive. Through engaging our reason we nd a way of relating to the overwhelming entity. In so doing, we feel a concurrent surge of pleasure. Through reason, the perceiving subject focuses on an aspect of the phenomenon which can be comprehended. For example, faced with overwhelming limitlessness or chaos, we tell ourselves we can sort it out, the mountain can be climbed one step at a time, or we shout into the night sky that we, too, are signicant. This brings us a sense of mastery, along with a corresponding feeling of pleasure. Kant expands on this: the feeling of the sublime, is therefore, at once a feeling of displeasure, arising from the inadequacy of imagination in the aesthetic estimation of magnitude to attain to its estimation by reason, and a simultaneously awakened pleasure, arising from this very judgement of the inadequacy of the greatest faculty of sense being in accord with ideas of reason, so far as the effort to attain to these is for us a law. (p. 27) The ambivalent pleasure which Kant describes echoes what has been written about the experience of charisma. In fact, all three of these aspects of the sublime
I

its genesis within the perceiver, and being evoked as a result of a co-created engagement between the perceiver and the object of perception; the nature of the object which evokes the experience of the sublime, a being larger than life and or in some way overwhelming; and the experience of the sublime as a negative pleasure

have parallels with the way in which charisma has been theorized, most particularly by Max Weber. The article now turns to explore his thinking about charisma and the way in which it resembles Kants analysis of the sublime.1

Webers theory of charismatic authority

The German sociologist Max Weber is often cited as the rst modern thinker to theorize extensively about charisma. In his books, The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation (1924/1947) and Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (1968) Weber sets out a total system for understanding the interrelationships between economic activity, organizations, and authority. He introduces three pure types of authority that is, the force someone has to ensure others will do as they want and their grounds: the rational, the traditional, and the charismatic. He denes the charismatic grounds for authority as:

172
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him . . . In the case of the charismatic authority, it is the charismatically qualied leader as such who is obeyed by virtue of personal trust in his revelation, his heroism or his exemplary qualities so far as they fall within the scope of the individuals belief in his charisma. (Weber, 1924/1947: 21516) This quote highlights some of the key traits commonly associated with charismatic leadership, such as exceptional heroism and exemplary character. But where does charisma comes from in the rst instance? Weber notes (in a footnote) that the word charisma originates from the vocabulary of early Christianity and means the gift of grace, and as such informs the notion of the Divine Right of Kings. He elaborates on this idea, suggesting: The term charisma will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader. (p. 241) This passage suggests that Weber considered the person endowed with charisma as demonstrating truly extraordinary and rare gifts. Webers description resembles the extraordinary qualities typied of entities which evoke the sublime aesthetic experience; they are both characterized as being beyond everyday experience, larger than life and able to exhibit a force beyond normal human bounds. However, just as with the sublime, Weber proposes that the experience of charisma is not solely dependent on an individuals demonstration of extraordinary qualities. In both cases, these qualities must be experienced by the other: the perceiver in the case of the sublime, or the follower in the case of charisma, as being so. Weber makes this point by writing, it is recognition on the part of those subject to authority which is decisive for the validity of charisma (p. 330). The follower must believe in the leaders charisma. When writing of the Divine Right of Kings and its connection to charismatic leadership, Weber notes that if the Kings power is seen to diminish, and those benets which could be expected to be bestowed upon him are not forthcoming, followers will cease to perceive the leader as being charismatic, and withdraw their allegiance. This suggests that as in the experience of the sublime, the experience of charisma arises from the interaction between certain qualities perceived in the leader and the perception of the followers. Jones (2001) elaborates on Webers view of charisma and explains the external nature of charisma thus: A leader becomes (a charismatic) symbol on the basis of two things. First there are specic gifts of body and spirit (Weber, 1946: 245) that mark a person as unique . . . The critical thing is not the specic gift, but whether potential followers see it as somehow blessing them. This is the second factor in the recognition of the charismatic leader. (p. 762)

173
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

In other words, although certain gifts need to be present, it is the perception of these gifts by the followers which actually gives rise to the experience of the charismatic leader. Jones then goes on to identify a number of studies (Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Hater & Bass, 1988; House et al., 1991) which indicate the role situational variables play in the emergence of a leader. He concludes: Leadership is a process that cannot take place apart from the response of followers, and the ndings of both the trait and the behaviour research indicate that follower response depends upon the leaders provision of an answer to a situational need. This agrees with what Weber (1946) said about charismatic leadership: it occurs only when followers believe they have found in some individual a solution to the problems that confront them. (Jones, 2001: 763) Joness reference to a situational need signals a second area of concern for this article: the role context plays in experiences of both charismatic leadership and of the sublime. This link is considered in the following section.

Charisma and the sublime: the role of context

Context plays a key role in Webers account of charismatic authority. Trice and Beyer (1986: 118) identify a social crisis or situation of desperation as one of the ve elements of charisma germinal to Webers theory. Similarly, the experience of the sublime occurs at moments in which the possibility of ones mortality is apprehended. According to Kant (1952), fear of death operates at the heart of the power of the sublime. Consequently, he writes, there is something of the sublime in the General over the statesman and we therefore owe more respect to the General. Indeed, the list of leaders commonly hailed as charismatic unfailingly includes leaders of military campaigns, from the despotic Hitler to the statesman Churchill. Gandhi made his mark through his radical vision of the non-violent but nevertheless revolutionary overthrow of the British Government in South Africa and again in India. Each of these men literally presided over life-and-death situations. Leaders such as John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, or Nelson Mandela were pivotal in leading their nations through times of huge societal upheaval when signicant cultural meanings were dying and being transformed into new social forms. Such contexts, rife with uncertainty and potentially overwhelmingly chaotic can evoke the experience of the sublime. They also provide the perfect ground for the experience of charismatic leadership.

The sublime: a conduit between realities

A deeper grasp of the signicance of context in the experience of the sublime might be gained through considering something of the etymology of the term itself. The word sublime has its root in the word limen, or threshold that which is at a boundary (Turner, 1976). Rella (1994: 65) describes this more fully, writing, the limen . . . the border understood not as an exclusion but as the potential for transit between subject and object, between subjects and things a subject, in a word, capable of relating to alterity without mythologizing it. In Rellas terms then, the experience of the sublime could alert us to the proximity of a particular threshold.

174
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

The limen as he explains, is a particular kind of border, one which can be negotiated and transformed into a conduit for relating. In other words, through the experience of the sublime, at such a border death does not have to be the nal word. Our imagination brings us to the threshold of knowing the possibility of our mortality, but at the point where we would be overwhelmed by this apprehension, reason steps in and enables us to relate to the overwhelming entity in a new way. The resulting aesthetic experience of the sublime provides a moment of elation in the mastery of being able to delve into unchartered territory. Similarly, charismatic leaders stand amidst the maelstrom of confusion and chaos of crisis situations and conjure up radical visions for engaging with them. Gandhi proposed the British could be defeated through non-violent means. Martin Luther King dreamed of white and black children holding hands and sharing in Americas wealth. Leaders gifted in this way offer stories which enable followers to negotiate previously unimagined inter-relationships and identities. Certainly not all of these new identities are wholesome, however. The knowledge that charismatic leadership can result in atrocities as well as noble acts features highly in the ambivalence surrounding the phenomenon. It is to further examination of that ambivalence, and how it might be interpreted through the frame of the sublime, that the article now turns.

The ambivalence of charisma

In later writings, Weber (1968) notices the alternation between opposing states of pleasure and unease arising from the charismatic encounter. He explains this by hypothesizing that, through engagement with charismatic authority, the individual concedes his or her sense of individual identity to the leader. In doing so, the follower experiences a sense of annihilation. This sense of annihilation is subsequently (and rapidly) countered by a greater sense of identication with the leader. This identication produces an enlarged sense of the self and the concurrent pleasure which arises from that identication.2 Even in more contemporary theories such as transformational leadership, a key component of the exchange is the leaders ability to provide followers with a vision with which they want to identify (Bass, 1985). What transformational leadership theory does not mention is the extent to which the individuality of the follower must be compromised in the transformational process. This loss of a sense of individual agency coupled with overidentication with a larger-than-life vision can leave the follower ungrounded, and in extreme cases result in tragic acts of self- and other destruction. Perhaps the (unconscious?) recognition of the potential loss of ones individuality as well as its consequence accounts for some of the ambivalence followers can feel in the face of charismatic power. Both the experience of the sublime and that of the charismatic then, are imbued with a sense of negative pleasure. In the encounter with the sublime, the perceiver encounters a force with the power to annihilate, or at least make his or her existence meaningless, until rationality negotiates a way of engaging with the phenomenon. In the charismatic dynamic interpreted from a psychological stance offered by Weber, the follower loses his or her sense of self (a similar annihilation to that which occurs in the sublime) but alleviates this by identifying with the leader.

175
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

Although a similar experience of uctuation between negative and positive states occurs in both, the source of the positive pole of tension differs between them. This is a crucial distinction in the ways these two phenomena are theorized. In Webers account of charisma, the positive feeling can be attributed to identication with an enlarged sense of the self through merging with the leaders vision. This inevitably leaves the follower ungrounded and vulnerable to that vision. However, in the experience of the sublime, the perceiver feels pleasure through apprehension of his own agency. He recognizes a way in which he himself can re-establish a sense of self in the face of an overwhelming force. I am suggesting that through this interpretation the charismatic leader can be seen to act as a catalyst for followers to apprehend their own agency and power. Through the charismatic leaders radical vision, followers can nd within themselves a way of dealing with desperate situations. The resulting experience is sublime. This key difference between the ways charisma and the sublime have been theorized offers important implications for rethinking the difference between what constitutes generative and degenerative forms of charismatic leadership. I am suggesting that if charismatic leadership has a sublime aesthetic quality about it, followers will recognize their own strengths and capabilities in responding to the situation, and have the possibility of responding in a generative and self-afrming manner. If, alternatively, followers merely lose their sense of self in the leaders amboyance, the charismatic encounter is not sublime but perhaps evokes an aesthetic experience more akin to the ugly, tragic, or grotesque in the worst scenarios. In this way, the determining factor of whether or not charismatic leadership is generative or degenerative rests in whether or not followers are empowered through the encounter, or diminished by it. This analysis differs from other current interpretations of the shadow side of charisma such as that presented by Howell and Avolio (1992). They distinguish between personalized and socialized charisma, proposing that personalized charisma is used for the self-aggrandizement of the leader, whereas socialized charisma leads to benecial community outcomes. Their argument suggests that the choice as to which form is embodied rests with the leader and his or her motives. The analysis presented here provides a different way of making sense of whether charisma is experienced as generative or degenerative. I am proposing that, as a primarily relational dynamic, the quality of that experience must also be a result of the dynamics of that relationship. Both parties are implicated. Furthermore, I am arguing that if the engagement between leader and follower creates a space within which the follower awakens to his or her own capabilities and potential mastery of a situation, that experience could be indicative of a sublime aesthetic encounter.

Conclusion: charisma as a sublime aesthetic encounter

The sublime is one of the most powerful of aesthetic encounters. Experiencing it means the journey has been travelled between apprehending ones own mortality and discovering within the self a means for relating to that knowledge. Furthermore, by alerting us to the proximity of death it asserts our own alive presence, here and now. I would argue that the experience of the sublime keeps mountain climbers climbing, parachutists jumping out of planes, as well as white water rafters shooting through

176
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin

rapids. Repeatedly I hear people who engage in extreme sports say the same thing, Ive never felt as alive as when I knew I could die any minute. Similarly, charisma of the variety about which Weber wrote, which veers towards magic speaks of the other-worldly capability to negotiate untravelled boundaries and to engage anew with chaos and confusion. The clarity and surety charisma can bring to desperate situations can be breathtaking and inspiring. I am thinking here of Nelson Mandela, for instance, who after spending 28 years a prisoner, was able to envision more equitable relations between all of the citizens of South Africa and, moreover was pivotal in the relatively peaceable realization of that vision. I wonder if the relative success of South Africas post-Apartheid transition can be attributed to Mandelas ability to let go of his own need for revenge and retaliation, and in doing so alert other South Africans that they too, had this capacity. Such a leader wakes us up to our own potentialities. I am reminded of this further when recalling Mandelas inaugural speech in which he quoted Marianne Williamsons (1985) text about each persons responsibility to be the best, most beautiful and most powerful person they can be. The use of charismatic power on Mandelas part has been highly generative. Despite all of the social and political difculties which South Africa still faces, the nation moves forward in a way few could have predicted possible during the Apartheid era. This article has argued that such generative charismatic power could be viewed as embodiment of a sublime aesthetic encounter, one which has brought, in this case, South Africans, to the realization of their own capabilities in transitioning to a more equitable social and economic state. Although charisma has been a recurring theme within the leadership canon, many of the variations on its theme have focused on either psychological or sociological interpretations of this phenomenon. This article has offered an interpretation of charisma as an aesthetic encounter. Just as we are creatures imbued with our own psychologies, living in social and socially constructed worlds, we are also creatures sensitive to aesthetic qualities. We appreciate beauty, we recoil from the grotesque, we are cheered by the comic. We are also drawn to the tantalizing dance between life and death resting at the heart of the sublime. Charismatic leaders, I have argued, tap into that fascination. Perhaps charismas mesmerising call enticing us with the possibility of engagement with the other-worldly, the limitless, the unknown is one of the reasons it will undoubtedly remain a key refrain within the leadership canon.

Notes
1. I do note the irony of nding similarities between Kant and Webers accounts due to the very different philosophical positions each took in regard to the sublime and the charismatic. Kant was in many ways the ultimate Enlightenment philosopher, with his heralding of the power of reason, whereas Weber championed the view that charisma was a mysterious and Divinely bestowed phenomenon. However, I hope to show that they way in they analysed each of these phenomena has important similarities. 2. This process could be described psychodynamically as a process of projection and introjection (Klein, 1946).

177
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

2(2) Articles

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Steve Taylor and Peter Case who, along with anonymous reviewers provided insightful and helpful comments which have contributed greatly to the rewriting of this article.

References
Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1999) On the Taming of Charisma: A Reply to Janice Beyer, Leadership Quarterly 10(4): 54153. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994) Improving Organisational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999) Ethics, Character and Authentic Transformational Leadership Behaviour, Leadership Quarterly 10(2): 181217. Beyer, J. M. (1999) Taming and Promoting Charisma to Change Organisations, Leadership Quarterly 10(2): 30731. Burns, J. M. (1978) Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Carlyle, T. (1847/1907) On Heroes and Hero Worship. Cambridge, MA: Houghton Mifin. Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987) Toward a Theory of Charismatic Leadership in Organisational Settings, Academy of Management Review 12: 63747. Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988) Charasmatic Leadership in Organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Robinson, R. (1990) The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic. Malibu, CA: Getty. Drath, W. (2001) The Deep Blue Sea: Rethinking the Source of Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Gemmil, G., & Oakley, J. (1997) Leadership: An Alienating Social Myth, in K. Grint (ed.) Leadership: Classical, Contemporary and Critical Approaches, pp. 27288. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. (1988) Supervisors Evaluations and Subordinates Perceptions of Transformational and Transactional Leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology 73: 695702. House, R. J. (1977) A 1976 Theory of Charismatic Leadership, in J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (eds) Leadership: The Cutting Edge, pp. 189207. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. House R. J. (1999) Weber and the Neo-charismatic Leadership Paradigm: A Response to Beyer, Leadership Quarterly 10(4): 56374. House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991) Personality and Charisma in the US Presidency: A Psychological Theory of Leader Effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly 36: 36496. Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1992) The Ethics of Charismatic Leadership, Academy of Management Executive 6: 4354. Jones, H. B. (2001) Magic, Meaning and Leadership: Webers Model and the Empirical Literature, Human Relations 54(6): 75371. Kant, I. (1952) The Critique of Judgement. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kets de Vries, M. R. F. (2004) Lessons in Leadership by Terror: Shaka Zulu in the Attic. London: Edward Elgar. Loginus (1965) On Sublimity. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Peters, T., & Waterman, R. (1982) In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.

178
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009

Leadership

The Enchantment of the Charismatic Leader Ladkin Quinn, R. E. (2000) Change the World: How Ordinary People Can Accomplish Extraordinary Results. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Rella, F. (1993) The Myth of the Other: Lacan, Foucault, Deleuze and Bataille. Geneva: Maisonneuve Press. Shamir, B. (1999) Taming Charisma for Better Understanding and Greater Usefulness: A Response to Beyer, Leadership Quarterly 10(4): 55562. Stogdill, R. M. (1948) Personal Factors Associated with Leadership, Journal of Psychology 25: 3571. Strati, A. (2000) The Aesthetic Approach to Organization Studies, in S. Linstead & H. Hop (eds) The Aesthetics of Organization, pp. 1334. London: SAGE. Takala, T. (1998) Plato on Leadership, Journal of Business Ethics 17: 78598. Thoreau, H. D. (1972) In the Maine Woods. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1986) Charisma and Its Routinization in Two Social Movement Organisations, Research in Organizational Behaviour 8: 11364. Watterson, B. (1992) The Indispensible Calvin and Hobbes. New York: Demco Media. Weber, M. (1924/1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation. New York: Free Press. Weber, M. (1968) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. New York: Bedminster Press. Williamson, M. (1985) A Course in Miracles. New York: Foundation for Inner Peace Press.

Donna Ladkin is Director of Research at the Centre for Leadership Studies at the University of Exeter, UK, where she also acts as Programme Director for the Centres MA in Leadership Studies. Her current research interests include leadership as an aesthetic form, how leaders and managers take ethical action in complex situations and the key aspects of leading for sustainability. Exploring the interface between theoretical concepts and their application is an important focus of her research approach. [email: donna.ladkin@exeter.ac.uk]

179
Downloaded from http://lea.sagepub.com by Tomislav Bunjevac on May 4, 2009