Leadership Journal #5


Thursday. February 9, 2017. 940–11 Class. Douglas.

Dr. Sandridge started out today’s class period by suggesting that we do a self assessment, that we ask ourselves where we stand in the class right now. I am confident that I will be getting an A this semester. I’d like to speak that into existence. But also I feel I’ve been doing a good job of keeping on top of things, and it’s not as if this material is new so I don’t want to give myself any excuses.

After our moment of self reflection we went on to reflect on the types of leadership we’ve encountered in the text so far:

  • King: Agamemnon
  • Military Leader : Achilles, Leonidas
  • Philosophical Leader: Socrates
  • Sophist
  • Dictator: Julius Caesar
  • Consul: Julius Caesar
  • Emperor: Augustus
  • Roman Statesman : Marc Antony
  • Queen: Cleopatra
  • Indirect leader: Cleopatra
  • Law Giver: Lycurgus
  • Poet: Tyreis
  • Garisia/ Senate Members (Spartan)

We then went into talking about the Issues of understanding leaders and leadership that we found in the text,

These examples being: the blind acceptance of tradition and history, facts of a leader/leadership being distorted by the passing of time and the telling of stories and poetry.

We started to think of more currently relevant obstacles to understanding our leaders. As a class we spoke about the fact of impression management when it comes to leaders. Examples were given such as : Ben Carson, DC Mayor, Bill Cosby, Martin Luther King Jr.

Some of the issues put forth in the text related to the passing of time and the difficulty of passing information across this time. I think it’s interesting to think of the fact that in our cases we don’t even understand our current leaders, even the leaders that we meet. One of my classmates spoke about meeting and having discussions with the DC Mayor, and how she is seemingly entirely scripted and robotic. The distance now between the followers and the leaders allows for the expectation that the followers will be blind to how the leader really is, often times even what their motives and intentions are even with the leadership position they hold.

One of my classmates asked “can we judge/ criticize leaders for being two people when we are all just as two faced?” This statement made was funny to me being that it spoke to a topic that I think about quite often. The unfair expectations that we hold people in positions in the public eye. Unfair standards of beauty, fitness, lifestyle, talent. We expect them to be perfect and push these standards upon them but then get angry when they are perfect and see them as being hiding something or being robotic.

Friday. February 10, 2017. Home. Towers 5–6pm

Dr. Sandridge closed out the class by asking us the question of what type of leadership we identify with the most and then went on to ask us if those around would agree with our choice. I would consider myself to be a law giver. I say this because I have a lot of ideas and suggestions about how life should be lived. I think that those around me would agree that I am a lawgiver. I think this has to do with the fact that laws are often more like suggestion. Also lawgivers are also not the ones that enforce the laws they give in most cases. So I’d in most cases be a lawgiver.

Sunday February 12, 2017 5–10 Meeting. Douglas. /Home. Towers

As I sit down to write this i realize that last semester in my journals I didn’t include any extracurricular activities. This semester in my journals I’ve written about my attending protests as well as meetings, and today I will talk about my attending my first meeting for Alternative Spring Break Lumberton, NC location. I think it’s important to include certain happenings in my life because I think that they’re helping me to become a better leader and overall a more well rounded leader. I think that my attendance and action in these events specifically relate to some of the traits/ types of people that I believe leaders should have/be advocative, and selfless (volunteer oriented).

During the beginning half of this time, I attended my first group meeting for Alternative Spring Break, a annual volunteer trip planned by Howards Chapel and Howard students overall. I have the pleasure of serving at the Lumberton, NC location. I was hoping that I’d get a location more closely related to my area of study and aligned with my passion, the criminal justice system. Or at least something similar like the school to prison pipeline, or gang and gun violence, etc. But I am extremely excited to be working in the areas that I did get. My locations points of focus are cultural exploration and natural disaster relief efforts. When Hurricane Matthew hit, it hit Lumberton the hardest and we will be helping the people of Lumberton rebuild as well as working with those displaced by the storm. For cultural exploration we will be having a cultural exchange with the Lumi Native American tribe. We will also be protesting with them as they’re having their land treaties violated. Both of these are causes that I think to be extremely worthy of my vacation time and I hope to come back more open minded, and well rounded than I will leave.

Lumberton Floods after Hurricaine Matthew

During the latter section of this time chunk I started the module. The first listening for leadership in the module…

“In your world, where do you see leadership (i.e., power, authority, prestige, particular leadership virtues) represented in material culture? Consider buildings, cities, artworks, and any other examples. Write them down in a notebook or tablet.

Next, consider this question: what kind of leadership do your examples display? Individual leadership? Community leadership? If your examples communicate power, what kind of power? How is power legitimized? How do you think the display of leadership — i.e., the construction of the physical objects — and power are related?”

The first thing that came to my mind answering this question was about money american coinage. The presidents faces on bills, nickels, pennies, dimes and quarters. The next thing I think of is Statues and buildings named after a leadership figure. The people depicted are definitely community leaders. They had to have touched lots of lives to be recognized in such a way. Not only touched lives but also in most cases, be seen, even to this day in a mostly positive light. I think my examples communicate power in the same way power is legitimized, through numbers and loyalty of followers. I think that the display of leadership via the construction of physical objects is related to power because it creates a legacy and an increased pool of people to be reached as statues and buildings often stand for generations.

In older times rulers would have their battles and themselves made into statues. I guess the same goes for today. We see statues and monuments built to memorialize times in our history or great leaders throughout history. We also see streets and buildings and holidays named after influential figures. Later in the module it asked what kinds of leadership our examples display. I feel that the leaders that receive statues and monuments and such are legitimized by the community in which the monument stands. For example in some southern states they have memorials that are meant to “honor” the confederacy, so they have some statues of slave owners and people that stood for inequality and racism. But because that area was (is) more accepting of the beliefs and practices, they accept this type of leadership.

In the next step we are shown the battle of Issus and asked to analyze it for messages. It’s easy to tell who Alexander is in this Looking at the picture it was easy to tell for me. Being that in the battle Alexander was victorious, it was easy to tell that the figure that was upright and looking ahead voraciously and with confidence was meant to Alexander. While if you look at a lower level (vertically) you see a person that is different from most on that side being that he looks more “leaderly.” But his army is crumbled, his horses are dead, and he has a look of fear shown in his face.

I then went on to read the section about Alexander the great and his relationship with Lysippos, which was the only artist that was given permission to create visual representations or replications of Alexander. This reminds me of artists, rappers for example, who will hire specific photographers to follow them around and take pictures of them because they like the way that specific photographer captures their “essence” in some cases and for other reasons in other cases. I remember thinking about this last semester as well and relating it to the presidential race. Pointing out Hillary being known for her many pantsuits, and Donald for his hair. So as Alexander’s had someone create an image of him and chose that as his “official” image, in modern times the public in some ways picks and chooses what to focus on and tells the leader what their image is. People hire image consultants to try and control what the public sees and how they perceive it but even that is a guessing game mostly.

Monday February 13, 2017. Home. Towers 5–7

During this time I read more of the module, moving onto Augustus. One of the first things that we were asked to do was look at the depiction of Augustus. I was confused by the images. The first image of Augustus, the one with his battle armor attached and his hand stretched make him look like he’s ready to conquer lands and plan the future of his empire. The second image however was confusing to me. I didn’t think this image to look very leaderly at all. In fact I found that his garb was similar to that of the women in one of the following depictions. The clothing that he was wearing looked like something that someone would wear to hide or blend in, in. And most of the time when we think of leaders we don’t think of or want them to be someone that would hide. We then go on to look at Trajan. First of all they said that his haircut was said to look leaderly for the time but in modern day it would be seen as very silly. I think I have thought because in my opinion, those who receive bowl haircuts usually do so on accident or are under the age of 6. And so it is hard for me to take this haircut seriously. We then watched the video about the building of his monument. So this spoke to the differences in what we a lot of people in modern times think a leader should/ does look like.

I found this video to be a bit creepy but after I got over that I thought about how amazingly inventive and hard working these architects and builders were. In this case and in the case of the pyramids for example. And then going on to look at the column in detail and the many stories told on it. The job of the artist during these times was not only to create visual materials and representations but they also were historians and preservers of their people’s history. I think this relates to todays world as our culture will be looked at by the future generations in many cases by the art that we leave behind.

Tuesday. February 14, 2017. Class. Douglas 940–11

I was super late to this class period. I was just getting back to campus around 10 because I had been asked by my sleepy best friend to drive to Virginia Beach with her as her temporary plates were expiring and she needed to pick up her new plates from her mother. So by the time I got to class I had unfortunately missed Dr.S’s performance. But I came in on the discussion of Dr. Fredrick meeting with Betsy DeVos. Overall I thought that many of the students that were suggesting that Dr. Fredrick send a big F You to DeVos is missing the angle on the longevity of our University. I think that to dismiss DeVos would be to put Howard in an even worse position. There are so many issues on campus that could potentially be fixed by the gaining of and proper allocation of more money. I would have definitely met with her. I would have been okay with doing it on her terms as long as she agreed to come before my students at some point before the end of the school year.