The House of Commons register of members' interests shows that Mr Adams received £5,000 from Pioneer Productions, which has made the documentary - the Bible: A History - with another £5,000 to follow.For Channel 4, a ten thousand well spent in terms of the free publicity generated. Being in the middle of a decent read at the minute ( Henry Patterson's "Ireland since 1939, the Persistence of Conflict") and in the strong belief I wouldn't learn anything new about either GA or JC, I didn't bother watching. I didn't miss that much apparently:
Mr Adams spent little more than two weeks working on the Channel 4 programme. He visited the Holy Land for one week in search of the "real Jesus" and a further 44 hours in Ireland talking to the relatives of people who died during the Troubles.
The gruff Irishman is uncharismatic to say the least and spends most of the documentary in the dark, characterised by evasive answers about his own beliefs and endless contemplative night walks through the countryside.
His search for Jesus begins in Israel as he treks to some famous landmarks. He swiftly goes to where Christ was crucified and his gilded resting place. This evidently wasn’t enough for Adams, who is keen to see a recently excavated tomb.
Trying it out for size a la JC, one wonders if this is a metaphor surrounding the IRA’s sacrifice for a better Ireland. Or maybe he’s just a bit of a fruit loop.
Or maybe both; anyone who’s a regular reader of some of his more otherwordly offerings on The Blog will tend towards the latter opinion.
But "uncharismatic" is a strange one; love or loathe him, you have to admit that Gerry didn't get where he is today through the power of the gun or his cunning alone. "Charisma" is defined in my dictionary as "a special power which some people possess naturally which makes them able to influence other people and attract their attention and admiration" and if Gerry doesn't possess that ability then I'm not sure how we've collectively ended up where we are today. Perhaps Gerry's only works on home ground?
6 comments:
That's the thing about charisma - those who are unmoved by it rarely see what the fuss is about. I'll shut up now before I invoke Godwin.
Andrew,
I wouldn't say I'm "moved" by Adams charisma; he's not likely to ever persuade me of the joys of a 32 county state, for example. But, following the definition, it's obvious to me that he is capable to sway peoples' minds by his personality.
The problem with "charisma" in modern parlance is that it's invariably used in a positive sense but if Obama can be described as having "charisma" then so, as you allude to, can a whole host of populist dictators throughout history.
Dear me Oneil
What a palave about nothing, it was actually a decent show. I even learned a few things, but then again I do not have an inbuilt agenda against GA as perhaps your good self. It has certainly brought out the loonies over on slugger.
>>you have to admit that Gerry didn't get where he is today through the power of the gun or his cunning alone<<
Let's compare this with your description of Wullie Fraser the other month? Apart from the embellishments regarding Adams, one is a sunshine kinda guy hard done by and one is; To quote the Bard, akin tae a wee sleekit cowrin beastie.
Your disengeniousness knows no bounds.
I'm saying Gerry got to where he is today by the gun, his cunning and his charisma. Which part would you disagree with? If there isn't any, then I'm not being disingenuous.
The gun, the cunning. Mibbe even the charisma, but that is subjective whether you think effective leadership and charisma cannot prosper one without the other.
Anyhow Oneil my highlighting your vastly contasting comparisons between fraser and Adams? Care to ponder on that? Talk about subjectivity!
Effective leadership needs cunning and charisma, Gerry has both. But effective leadership need not always used for positive purposes.
Willie Fraser and Adams, yes, I do consider them as different. Fraser, most certainly is not a "sunshine kinda guy", but flawed although he is, I still consider him a victim. Adams, I consider, as one of the main players of the Troubles with consequently the blood of many innocents on his hands, most certainly not a victim. How you interpret Adam's is the key to whether you agree or not.
Post a Comment