What is a great man? What makes a person worthy of admiration? Is it their pleasant company, a positive attitude, or leading historical movements? Or is greatness more subtle, only revealed over the course of many years leading towards one main outcome?
In the 19th century, the historian Thomas Carlyle sought to examine history through a lens he called "The Great Man Theory of History." In it, he described that our recorded past is merely a biographical collection of "great men." In this sense, the great men were those leaders -- good or ill -- who championed movements to shape the surface of our world. Expanding upon this theory, Carlyle stated that there are inherent traits borne into their leaders, and that such men arise when the world needs it most.
It sounds much like the prophesied-child theme that can be seen in hundreds of stories. "Harry Potter" is a prime example, and there are even traces in the Holy Bible -- all include a great man arising out of a time of disdain, championing the ideals that would shape the next age in the story. It is not hard to see the application of fiction in this theory from the 1840s. However, in the present day and age, does this theory still apply?
I would argue that the template still has relevance, but it needs revisions. First, greatness is subjective. It can mean one is distinguished from their peers, that the person is high-standing in their own circle, but depending on who looks at the person, their greatness will always be a matter of debate. History of great men can change perceptions just as easily. Where in his time Christopher Columbus was a champion of travelers who "discovered" the new world, we now look at him as one who historians accuse of starting a genocide against the natives in the name of Christianity. And in today's political climate, some view Donald Trump’s campaign as restoring the greatness of America, but women and some cultural groups would view that "greatness" as an ideal reserved for the upper-class white male.
Another problem with the Great Man Theory is that men are no longer the only prominent figure of the day-to-day. There have been influential women throughout history such as Eleanor Roosevelt, Mother Teresa, Rosa Parks, and even today we have examples such as Malala Yousafzai. Each champion a cause, impacting others with their ideals and the actions to match.
Perhaps the third and key component of the Great Man Theory is the principles on which it was founded. At the time, it states that qualities of leadership -- of greatness -- are inborn. If one is not born great, he or she can never become so. If we believed that today, our whole education system would be different. Leadership qualities, respect, compassion, awareness, analysis, and more are aspects that can be taught. Background certainly influences them, but there is a reason why employers and culture appreciate open-mindedness. A famous philosopher and sociologist, named Herbert Spencer, strongly disagreed with the Great Man Theory, stating that any "Great" was a product of the society. In order for the Great to be such, the society must demand it from him, and he must rise to his station.
Is that not the basis of stories? Bright lights emerge out of darkened places. In order for there to be leaders, there has to be a cause. For there to be a cause, the environment or society as a whole must contain some question that people are striving to solve.
There are many questions existing today -- ranging from international to local -- and I would argue that our current issues are priming for leaders that have not yet arrived. It is a time of great disdain, horrors, and conflict both, locally and abroad. So where are our Greats? Where will they arise, and what shall they change?
Perhaps you, dear reader, could be one of the Great People of History.
