Charisma and communities of feeling

Abstract

Theories of nations and nationalism have serious problems when dealing with the concept of charisma. Besides frequent conceptual confusion, the concept of charisma is predominantly observed from either the structuralist position or the perspective of psychological reductionism. Charisma is so often sought in the properties of an office, within an ideology, character of a leader or general socio‐economic circumstances of an epoch. In the example of the commonly examined case—that of Hitler—this article argues that charisma is a property of experience and it is the emotional reaction of the audience that validates it. This article builds on Erika Fischer‐Lichte's theory of performance to argue that successful performances of charisma create a type of community that is not based solely on common beliefs but more importantly on shared emotions and experiences. Studying charisma as a property of experience is a step toward understanding the emotional character of nationalism itself.

Berserk!: Anger and the Charismatic Populism of Donald Trump

“…Sociologists often associate charisma with a love and affection that develops within the ‘cultic milieu’ (Campbell, 2002) around a leader. In such a vision, charisma is seen as a small nuclear force that binds leaders and followers together through a passionate union of affectionate emotions (Uzelac, 2021). While this approach has many strengths, especially in its careful attention to power dynamics at the smallest scales (Finlay, 2002; Joosse, 2017; Wallis, 1982), it is a largely de-politicizing gaze.…”

“…People start to engage in sense-making for an event that, moments before, made no sense at all outside the yearnings of the heart. Agreeing that emotions are the sine qua non of charisma, Uzelac (2021: 145) notes that group processes like ‘ideological attunement’ should therefore be considered a secondary after-effect that appears only later, as raw emotional experience is interpreted, narrated, and imbricated into the nascent cultural structures of an emerging group. In other words, only as they leave the rally, sit in the car, and drive home do charismatic followers begin to ruminate on a series of secondary questions: ‘What was that!…”

“…Since Max Weber introduced charisma into the social sciences over a century ago, it has become ‘impossible to ignore’ (Uzelac, 2021: 130; see also Collins, 2020: 1; Joosse, 2014: 267). It regularly resurfaces at the center stage of social scientific inquiry, often in response to key societal and cultural developments (Alexander, 2011; Derman, 2013; Willner and Willner, 1965; Young, 2017).…”

Charisma and social phenomenology: Gerda Walther, Herman Schmalenbach and Aron Gurwitsch

“…His concept of ‘communities of feeling’ proved inspiring for Wasielewski in her account of charisma’s emotional basis (Wasielewski, 1985). More recently, Uzelac (2021: 132) drew on the idea of communities of feeling to argue that sociologists ought to approach charisma as a special ‘property of experience’ occurring in intense leadership rituals.…”

“…Despite their somewhat archaic language, the analyses of all three authors are surprisingly prescient in terms of later sociological research which, however, did not properly recognise (or was aware of) their contribution. Yet, their focus on experience and emotions as well as the interactional constitution of social identity in charismatic groups, which goes hand in hand with building solidarity and trust with others, predates similar developments in the scholarly inquiry into charisma in both sociology and leadership studies by decades (Uzelac, 2021;Wasielewski, 1985).…”