For the Good of the People
Essay title: For the Good of the People
For The Good of The People
Andrew DuBrin describes socialized charismatic leadership as a leader who restrains the use of power in order to benefit others. He also recognizes that there is another type of leader known as the personalized charismatic. Personalized leaders are those who use their abilities for their own personal gain. In the Dead Poets Society we see many different kinds of leadership. We see Transformational leadership as well, which is a focus of what that leadership accomplishes. Every leader has a goal, every leader has a vision and it’s what they do with these goals and visions that determine what kind of leader they are.
When we think of socialized charismatic leadership the first person that comes to mind from the film is John Keating. From the moment that he is introduced in the film it is obvious that he is not selfish, nor power hungry. He has a deep passion to teach the students all he can and use his power for good. He also shows transformational leadership because his actions have changed the lives of his class and those the school. Lot all leaders in this story, however do the same. Mr. Nolan, for example, is one of the main leaders of the school and a profound influence on all of these boys’ lives. We see in him, however, that he is much less open minded and much less concerned on social well being. We see that he is more fixated on rules and his own personal reputation, making him a more personalized charismatic leader. Along with Mr. Nolan, we also see a personalized leader in Neil’s dad, Mr. Perry. Especially in the beginning of the movie, we see that he does not use his power raise the moral of his son. It seems as though his only concern is his own reputation and future. He does, however, use his power over his son to do what he thinks is best for his son, showing some understanding and transformation.
When we look at transformation in the film we, again, have to look at John Keating. Charismatic leaders have a vision, but transformational leaders have a goal, and Professor Keating definitely had many goals. He had goals of changing the way the boys thought, were taught, and perhaps the way that they looked at themselves. Once could say that without John Keating’s leadership, Neil never would’ve gone through with the play which was such a personal success for him. John Keating knew that he had the ability to make a profound difference in these boys. He did not use these powers to teach discipline, or honor or anything that they had already been taught in the past. He used these