« Here We Go Again - How Can We Protect the Integrity of Our Vote? | Main | It's About Time »
Debate Analysis: Movement
Barack Obama won the Presidental debate last night, but not because he has resolved his own conflicts and challenges. Barack Obama won the debate because John McCain has not escaped the effects from his imprisonment decades ago.
From the beginning of the evening, both men were grappling with new territory, literally. The Town Hall meeting, with the empty space in the middle and actual voters (not the usual vetted supporters) all around is a challenging space in which to deliberate. The setting resembles both a boxing ring and a one-ring circus more than it does a venue for a side-by-side presentation. Add in all of the people in television land and there is a lot to take into account. Neither man seemed comfortable in the forum, but for different reasons:
Barack Obama lives in the universe of possibilities. His sense of space is vast and often without boundaries. If he were a painter, the canvas he describes as he moves around would be massive, and the colors would run off the edges. Over the past year-plus that he has been a candidate, he has learned how to narrow and focus his message and to add determination and clarity to it. But last night, he was often hesitant, slow to narrow in, and he wandered around looking slightly uncomfortable before nailing his points.
John McCain, on the other hand, began well, with his solidity and clarity present. He is a feisty guy who never gives up. But that is also his flaw. As the evening went on, he became increasingly locked in his body, entrenched in a small enclosed space, often illustrating his own internal contradictions rather than demonstrating solutions: pacing, shifting, side-stepping, restless and deeply uncomfortable.
Both men moved close to the audience and spoke directly to the questioners. Neither seemed to connect deeply with those questioners or their own responses, with two exceptions.
Barack Obama elicited a nod of agreement from one man, who had asked about Israel and Iran. But the real moment of authentic relationship came near the end, when Senator Obama tried to answer (and failed to be specific about) the question about what he needed to learn. He deferred to his wife. The bond between the Obamas is powerful and resonant, and Michelle’s piercing and passionate silent exchange with her husband at the moment he referred to her spoke volumes. Make no mistake about it, these two are a duet. It is clear to those watching that, while he may have difficulty, at times, focusing and directing his attention, all he has to do is look at her and he is instantly reminded of who he is and what he is doing.
But John McCain is a solo, solitary guy. When he smiles and relaxes, he can be engaging and present. He did not smile or relax nearly enough last night. What we observed was a man who carries how own prison with him, emerging only occasionally for a wistful foray with the world of possibilities and who, when speaking of decisive leadership, tended to negate his strong words with unsteady side-stepping. When he spoke about carrying a big stick, channeling Teddy Roosevelt, he looked down and then side-to-side rapidly, as if the enemy was coming momentarily. At one point, he literally backed up as he was laying out his readiness to lead. He has been trying to reassure us that he can take care of and protect us from terrible things, but he often looks worried himself, and hardly prepared to unlock his own strength, much less rally the troops.
It can be heart-breaking to watch this epic election struggle unfold. From the Vietnam War to Watergate to Iran Contra to BCCI to Iraq to the current economic crisis, ambition and greed have generated hubris and poor judgment, causing too many to overreach, bypassing their fellow citizens along the way and causing great grief to the country and the world. John McCain clearly knows this, but from his own cell, he is helpless to equip others to do what he cannot and has not done.
Barack Obama also knows the dangers of overreaching, and has perhaps been too cautious and nonspecific in his leadership style. In the past two debates he has landed on clear strong intentions; enough to assure the voters that he knows he cannot be arrogant or vague. He must take strong lucid stands against the real enemies that plague us: our own appetites, ever unsatisfied, and our tendency towards indifference to the world we share. But after all the observations are finished, one piece of evidence stands out in its clarity: it is Michelle who helps him get to the heart of the matter.
Obama is comprehensive and complex; McCain is simple and straightforward. Obama is a mobilizer, McCain is a stabilizer. On these levels, the choices are easy: at this point in time, what does the country need most from its leaders?
Last night, however, revealed far more than the differences between each man’s style. Last night we saw the fullness of the dilemma we are in as a country played out.
The confined man cannot move us ahead. The free man gives us hope. And maybe hope is all we can wish for now.
##
The above is based on observations made using Laban Movement Analysis by three Certified Movement Analysts sharing observation data and coming to censensus at the end of the second Presidential debate, October 7, 2008. Karen Bradley is the Director of Graduate Studies in Dance at the University of Maryland, College Park, Director of Research at the Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement Studies in New York City and a Senior Research Fellow at the James MacGregor Burns Center for Leadership Studies at the University of Maryland. Dr. Martha Eddy is a Senior Research Associate with the Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement Studies and Director of the Center for Kinesthetic Education in New York City. Karen Studd is Associate Professor of Dance at George Mason University and Coordinator of Modular Movement Analysis Training Programs at the Laban/Bartenieff of Movement Studies. The three are available for follow-up questions, further analysis, or future consulting.
8 Comments
Leave a comment
Not registered? Click on 'Sign-in' above and then select 'Sign up' in the lower right corner. Don't forget to click on the link in the confirmation email that will be sent to your email address.
Karen, this is excellent observation. Do you think that we should equate John McCain's self-containment with his sense of imprisonment? Doesn't that just rouse sympathy when we make such an excuse for his lack of inclusion?
I know people who seem imprisoned within themselves who didn't spend any time at all as a prisoner anywhere. I'm very concerned if Barack Obama won the debate because of John McCain's imprisonment decades ago. The media would latch onto this sympathy getter in a flashpoint. And if you and the other analysts did not know of McCain's imprisonment, would your conclusions be the same?
Thanks Karen. Very interesting.
Karen et al said
Oh yes! I love this observation! They are certainly a team. With Barack Obama as a choice there is enormous brainpower, compassionpower and rationalpower. Barack, Michelle and Joe. If ever there was a time that America needed such a trio to be leading them, I've never heard of it.
What is the alternative? It seems so ridiculous that a man who is imprisoned within himself should even be considered, especially when his major support is the ever-so-experienced Sarah Palin. The so-called, self-professed straight-talker and the loose-cannon. Really? This election has been going on for years. Let it be over. Please.
Thanks for your comments, woz. On your questions in the first comment:
Do you think that we should equate John McCain's self-containment with his sense of imprisonment? Doesn't that just rouse sympathy when we make such an excuse for his lack of inclusion?
First of all, I don't think we are EQUATING his self-containment with his sense of imprisonment, but noting the possible (and somewhat obvious) reason for it. When we observe we look for what has changed in this context from patterns we have noted before. Back when we were on HARDBALL, we noted McCain's sense of groundedness and rationality; something everyone else was discounting. Now we see he just does not seem to be able to make a shift of any kind or even TRY to make a shift without losing that sense of groundedness. He literally sidesteps, steps back, and shifts in the wind.
As for rousing sympathy, it does rouse mine. He doesn't seem to understand why his approach is not working for him. And he doesn't listen well enough or trust enough to be able to make the shifts with a sense of conviction. My sympathies will be further roused if the country elects him, but so will my anger.
But then, we get what we wish for, right?
Oh Karen, it doesn't bear thinking about. Thanks for the explanation.
My Uncle Jack spent 5 years as a POW of the Japanese. When the war ended and he and his comrades had built the Burma railway whilst being simultaneously tortured, beaten and starved - some to death - his skeleton, that encased his still beating heart, struggled home.
I don't sympathise with John McCain whose continued wish is to keep sending young people to be damaged by experiences he survived. He will knowingly send them to endure far, far worse. Why isn't it more important for him to wage peace?
I regard John McCain as a survivor of war. Not a hero. War is obscene. He survived it. There are many heroes in war and mostly we don't hear about them. Our own Aboriginal soldiers were some of those and they didn't even get a war pension at the end of it. Many of the heroes were treated as less than nothing after all was over.
If John McCain's incredible ego tells him that his inability to move properly because of his imprisonment is what qualifies him to be president, well ..... universe, help us all. If he'd had any integrity at all, he'd never have begun this race.
I wasn't able to comment too much because I didn't see much of the debate. From what I saw, I can only say that McCain seemed like a rubberband that had been stretched too far and was about to snap.
He reminded me of how my father taught me which dogs or cats were giving out hidden signs of about to let loose. The hair stands on end. The teeth or jowls start curling. And the animal moves both slowly and stalkingly before they snap at their prey.
So let's look at McCain in this respect. From the clip where he's talking about what Obama voted for, and he said, "That one", his eyes are squinted and he's, as you said, squarely planted. He firmly has his feet on the ground as he shifts to the other dirction and with a firm finger and a curl on his lips, said, "That one."
Look.
I recognize the signs of someone about to lose his temper. I've seen it up close and personal (many years ago) and he was exhibiting ever single one of those signs that indicates a violent reaction a violent temper is soon to follow.
I predict that there is not much else anyone will have to do before the guy loses control.
Hey Karen,
Great analysis, as usual. I thought the same - McCain looked old, stiff, stressed and grasping.
Obama looked and sounded loose and relaxed in comparison.
The pundits kept saying this was McCain's best forum. I thought just the opposite. Maybe it's different in person, but on TV, he just looked old and decrepit.
Unbelievable...especially given this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7AET4i6L74
Listen carefully to his words.
Good Matthew - you found it!
Also this ..
http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=056030F3F6468BE5C2DF0E50AC77E483?diaryId=2011
I combined all three at http://www.silencedmajority.blogs.com