SPATIAL STRATEGIES SOLUTIONS

When I came upon this picture, it was not the simple message that caught my attention, but the use of spatiality to influence reality through perception.

The first thing that came to my mind was a quote often used in feng shui that says “water governs wealth, mountain governs people”. While by water we are talking in somewhat symbolic manner about the open space in front of a site fit for movement and concentrated action, by mountain we usually refer to physical-geographical features that are able to protect a site on the back, from the side opposite to the front. The back is the point that one physically and visually does not control, the side open to unguarded attacks, therefore the side that needs protection. No mystery in that, we all feel much safer and are able to relax or concentrate better if our back is protected. This picture has shown that the “mountain” can be also interpreted in a much more symbolic-abstract manner, and to me, suggested a corollary to the rule, which I would formulate like “to govern people, one has to have a mountain, or to create it either in actual or in abstract space”. Creating a “mountain” in physical space or in the space of perception can therefore be considered a spatial strategy. In this specific case, a strategy of creating images of leaders perceived as primus inter pares, the first among equals.

Showing a backbone, standing upright, boldly facing challenges, having a clear view of the situations and vision of solutions and the end goal in the times of adversity – these are qualities by which leaders are discerned among other less determined, less self-assured, less focused, less far-reaching people. That is how mankind likes its leaders since the beginning of time, from the first steps of civilization as we know it.

Therefore our leaders – aspiring or realized – were always going to great lengths to present themselves as the ones having that quality. Knowing that words dissolve in the air and are easily forgotten, and that the influence of the written word was limited to the few that were able to read for the most part of history, visual representations were deemed the most efficient to convey the message to the people, to the masses. Throughout history leaders were depicted in postures that emanate the desired qualities: standing upright, usually higher than the surrounding figures, in central positions, head lifted high, eyes fixed somewhere forward.

Representations of Rulers: Ghengis Khan, a Pharaoh of Ancient Egypt, Xerxes of Persia and Caesar Augustus.

The leaders of today are presented in such postures as often as the ancient ones, or rather much more often given the contemporary communication technology. In the newspapers, on television and in all kinds of visual material they stand upright, heads up, boldly facing challenges, displaying confidence in their visions and themselves both in times of plenty and times of need.

Some random pics of contemporary leader representations sine ira et studio: Marine Le Pen, Obama, Sarkozy and Putin

Besides the posture the placing was always an important aspect of leader quality representations. Such impressive figures naturally could not stand at level with the crowd. A true leader, the top dog had to look down to the crowd, assuming the position of authority, of “being closer to higher things”, providing for an unobstructed view for the eyes piercing the horizons of the future.

And that is where democracy makes a difference. Contemporary leaders are depicted as solitary figures elevated above the crowd only if they are deemed “dictators”, in which case we see them often standing alone at some platform or podium, their suite a bit further back, not interfering with the personal space of greatness of the leader.

Random pick of representations of dictators. Still without anger and fondness: Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Saddam, Mussolini and Hitler 

The most striking difference between the autocratic and democratic leaders is probably not the values and goals they stand for (the words they use are the same more often than we are inclined to admit: future, people, nation, freedom, development, etc.), but the visual representations based on which the public opinion is shaped.

These representations show us democratic leaders most often in groups, where each person has a very limited, if any personal space. It is also very important that we see them apparently standing, moving and communicating at (our own) ground level at least as often as we see them standing on platforms.

This should suggest that the leader is one of us, part of the crowd, that they are just ordinary people leading a life very similar to our own, sharing the same values, goals and problems. But if they are indeed just one of us, what happens to the qualities we choose our leaders by? Are they not more self-assured and strong than any of us? Do they not see further, do they not see answers to questions that we haven`t yet come to rise? The representations suggest otherwise, and do so by deploying the spatial strategy of creating image of a strong back, (or strong mountain in terms of Feng Shui) since “mountain governs people”.

In order to assume the primus inter pares position of a democratic leader, the leader has to have a crowd to lead. Therefore our democratic leaders like to be seen leading marches or rallies, or to be present in the first rows of events linked to issues of intense public interest, preferably events with high emotional charge. Being in the first row provides for a position of a strong, protected back, a “mountain” of human energy by the mass behind them. This position also suggests orientation, by which energy of the masses in the back is focused and directed towards the front row, and through it and the actions of the leader(s) into the space of realization that opens ahead of the front row. The leader becomes the one that we expect will make the thing that so many of us want so much to happen.

The image of democracy and the strength of a democratic leader is thus visually better expressed by having a big crowd behind one`s back, than by the crowd one is facing from an elevated podium. And if the mass is not present, the image creates mass by using the appropriate angle. The “mountain” of democracy is not a physical-geographical feature. It is made of people to govern people through representations.