Hello all! I'm Jeremy C. Young, author of The Age of Charisma: Leaders, Followers, and Emotions in American Society, 1870-1940. I'm an assistant professor of history at Dixie State University, where I teach courses in modern U.S. and European history.
The Age of Charisma argues that the modern relationship between American leaders and followers grew out of a unique group of charismatic social movements prominent in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Drawing on hundreds of letters and testimonials, the book illustrates how “personal magnetism” in public speaking shaped society by enabling a shift from emotionally-inaccessible leadership to emotionally-available leadership. This charismatic speaking style caused a rapid transformation in the leader-follower relationship, creating an emotional link between speakers and listeners, and the effects of this social transformation remain with us today. I argue that ultimately, charismatic movements enhanced American democracy by encouraging the personalization of leadership – creating a culture in which today’s leaders appeal directly to Americans through mass media.
If you'd like a taste of the book's argument, I explain how the 2016 election reflects the emotional politics of the historical age of charisma here. I did an interview on the book with John Fea at the Way of Improvement Leads Home here. I wrote about Marcus Garvey, charisma, and protest movements here. I talked about charisma in Herbert Croly's book The Promise of American Life here. I wrote about Dr. James Rush and the invention of the charismatic speaking style here. And I tweeted some interesting anecdotes from the book here.
I'm a bit of a generalist (as you can see by my teaching fields!), but I have expertise in the social movements, religion, communication, leadership, and politics of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era; the history of emotions, a new and exciting subfield; and a number of well-known figures who were active from 1870-1940, including (but not limited to) Henry Ward Beecher, James G. Blaine, William Jennings Bryan, Eugene V. Debs, Charles Grandison Finney, Marcus Garvey, Hiram Johnson, Aimee Semple McPherson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Billy Sunday, Max Weber, Frances Willard, and Woodrow Wilson. Feel free to ask me questions on any of the above topics (or other related ones).
I've admired this community for years, and I'm grateful to the /r/AskHistorians mods for the opportunity to do an AMA here. I'm actually a bit of a Redditor myself -- I've been a member of /r/fantasybaseball for several years (though under a different username, which I won't share here!) and last year played in a fantasy baseball league made up entirely of Redditors.
I've put this thread up around 7 AM EST; I've got a couple of classes to work around, but I'll be checking in periodically throughout the day, starting around noon EST, to answer your questions. Looking forward to the discussion!
Update, 6 PM EST: I've really enjoyed this conversation -- I can't say I've ever been in a venue before where 100% of the questions were smart, thought-provoking, and on point. I'll check back in tomorrow morning to answer any questions I missed. Thanks very much!
How was the rhetoric of charismatic speakers different (or similar) from the classical rhetoric that a student at university in the 1800's would learn from Cicero? What did classical professors think of this rhetoric?
Hi Mr. Young, thank you for doing this AMA. The advent and spread of telecommunication (mainly telegraph and radio) were a major factor in the increased media coverage during the period you're talking about - how did that change or impact the style of public speaking?
Thanks for participating in this AMA!
(1) Your inclusion of Aimee Semple MacPherson and Frances Willard, to me, brings up the divide between traditional and charismatic/pietistic Christian denominations in terms of worship and politics, with one of those two groups pretty clearly associated more closely with emotionality (or at least, its display) than the other. Is there a counter narrative to your history of public-sphere emotions? A reaction or retrenchment? How does so called muscular Christianity and its secular partner militarism fit into the picture?
(2) How did different norms for men's and women's public displays of emotion or uses of emotion in rhetoric evolve in this period?
Edit Re the second question, you mentioned this below:
Carnegie was trained in the Delsarte system, a style of public speaking usually performed by women...and which disdained charisma and overemotional oratory
and I would definitely like to hear more about that. :)
Would it be accurate to equate the rise of charismatic leaders with a greater understanding of Freudian theory? As a follow-up, how much of this can be attributed to Edward Bernays?
Hi! Thanks for doing the AMA, looking forward to reading your answers!
I'm curious about any relationship between the new US president's spoken rhetoric and the scientific charisma developed in the 19c. His speeches transcribe to something like word salad, but it's said in person, at a rally, he comes across as very personal and engaging. How does -- or can -- this be traced back to the speaking styles of the gilded age? How does this intersect with class and education level? What advice would you offer potential political opponents, right or left, in particular on how they speak?
Thanks for doing this AMA! This is a fascinating topic. I have three unrelated questions: First, how did these charismatic movements use popular music and musical performance? How do you see the relationship between these social movements and the rise of the middle class? And finally, what do you think of Dale Carnegie and his courses and books? They seem like an obvious product of the age of charisma that you've identified. Do you see them that way? If so, do you have any idea about what might explain their continued popularity?
Wait, one more, sorry. Your time frame of focus for charismatic speech (1870s-1920s) lines up just about perfectly with what James Loewen identifies as the nadir of race relations in America (although other scholars shift the boundaries a bit). While surely the exact boundaries are coincidence, is there a general connection between emotionality/charisma as a political lure and the violent racist politics as well?
Were any of the various Methodist denominations that now form the United Methodist Church affected by the trend towards charismatic leadership? What about Baptists?
Good morning and thanks for your time today,
I have spent the better part of my lunch break reading through the articles you have provided. I have not come across any historical work done on the oratory evolution in American politics. Could you recommend a historiography that could help me better understand this specific study?
I would also like to hear more about your chosen periodization. I would have guessed Lincoln would have been one of the more influential and emotional writers and orators. But again, I am coming into this blind as a bat.
Thanks for your time.
The time period you highlight overlaps with Prohibition and the rise of organized crime. Did you think about how your thesis applied to crime and/or political 'bosses' of the time?
Was there a similar development in politics in Europe before WW1? Was the populism in 1930's Europe comparable to politics in the US?
Were there different types of charismatic speaking? Or did they all use the same techniques? Were there early leaders who everyone else copied? Or were they taught at the same places? (Like UofC for Econ)