Another voice
The quality of a political speech is a symptom of popularity not a cause
Matthew Parris on this year's conference speeches
Epiphenomenalism is, as 16-letter words go, not an obvious hook with which, dear reader, to draw you to this column; but let me explain; because I think I may be an epiphenomenalist.
My dictionary defines this as the doctrine that consciousness is merely a by-product of physiological processes and has no power to affect them: that we do not weep because we’re sad, but rather that we are sad because we’re weeping.
The idea is not quite as crazy as it sounds. Tony Blair did not sound passionately sincere because he was passionately sincere. He mastered the knack of delivering his lines with such passionate sincerity that he became spellbound by his own performance, and believed in it. And only last week in Blackpool the Times’s political sketchwriter, Ann Treneman, said to me, ‘I think an election may be approaching because I’ve started eating crisps.’ In the same way, one cow might observe to another, ‘I think it’s going to rain because I’m lying down.’
More articles from: Matthew Parris | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Another Voice
Matthew ParrisIt is good that MPs have second jobs — but they should share the proceeds
Ancient & Modern
Peter JonesPeter Jones looks into some classical apophthegms
Status Anxiety
Toby Young
‘Hyper-parenting’ may be bad — but look what happened when I tried the alternative
The Wiki Man
Rory Sutherland
A fortnightly column on technology and the web
Standing Room
Sarah Standing
When I was young, being given ‘options’ was a treat.
Who would have thought a herd could moonwalk?
Mark EarlsThe acclaimed web theorist, Mark Earls, says that the death of Michael Jackson unleashed the extremes of collective action: mass mourning and sick jokes
Gordon pleads for one last chance from the girls
Melissa KiteMelissa Kite says that the PM is ill at ease with female colleagues. No surprise that it was the women — Blears, Flint, Kennedy — who rebelled while the men hid under the table
This is how you should use your reprieve, Gordon
Irwin StelzerIrwin Stelzer says the PM should seize the opportunity presented by this stay of execution: plot a path to fiscal sanity, cut red tape and restore Britain’s stature on the world stage
If anything, this result understates the support for the BNP
Rod LiddleRod Liddle says that the far right party won two seats against the odds. Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons are simply colonising terrain vacated by the Westminster elite
The real sickness is Labour’s, not Brown’s
Fraser NelsonFraser Nelson says that the governing party has lost its hunger for office — and is now unhealthily dominated by the mega-union Unite and its political chieftain, Charlie Whelan
Latest blog posts
sponsored links
BIG SAND STEEL BAND
IF YOU ARE PLANNING A CHAMPAGNE RECEPTION and looking for some light entertainment, you can now hire London's busiest steel
BOSC LEBAT, Tarn et Garonne.
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
ROME CENTRE
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
C.Gatenby
October 12th, 2007 3:12amI would disagree that Cameron’s popularity is the catalyst for his ‘good’ speeches. We rate Cameron because he, unlike Brown, has the capacity to inspire. The line 'Call that Election. We will fight, Britain will win' will forever give the British people a reverend flutter to what is quintessentially the lions heart.Could he be the one to now give it it's roar? Britain is listening - and it likes what it hears.
Michael Gorman
October 15th, 2007 8:01pmAgreed absolutely. I was there in 2005 for the Tory leadership speeches. Cameron, competent but a little nervous since he was without notes; Davies, competent; Fox, good but unlikely to win; Clarke, brilliant, by far the best, but outclassed by the Cameron PR machine. (P) I write as a former President of the Guildford Speaking Club, accustomed to judging speeches.
Purple Scorpion
October 15th, 2007 8:28pmThere are two different phenomena here. Cameron was in trouble before the Tory conference, so his outriders (including your editor) were saying he would have to make the speech of his life ... in preparation for saying afterwards that he had. While the Cameron narrative was sketched out beforehand, the narrative about Brown seems to have been changed after the event. At the time the speech was not bad, but with hindsight it became dull. This is just scribblers desperate for a striking angle.
David Moss
October 15th, 2007 9:50pmI see your "epiphenomenalism" and raise you "the intentionality of perception".