.png)
 |
| Natalie Smith |
In the first two chapters of Robert Penn Warren’s All the King’s Men, the reader is presented with the dynamic character of Willie Stark: a humble, redneck farmer who discovers that success in politics stems not from principles or ideals, but corruption and manipulation. At first, Willie remains idealistic despite the dishonesty that surrounds him in the political climate, but eventually he learns that in order to gain power, he must master the political game instead of attack it.
Willie’s naïve, idealistic attitude about politics shines through when he decides to run for governor the first time. Despite the nepotism, bribery, and blackmail that surround him in his county and state, he fails to recognize that though crooked, these acts allow his opponents to win. He is honest and unassuming, and he doesn’t even realize that he has been manipulated into running. Later, Willie prepares speeches full of facts and statistics in his run for Governor, and agonizes when the people do not react well to them. He falsely believes that his constituents want to hear the truth, when really they only want to hear something that will stimulate their senses.
When Willie discovers that he has been exploited for Harrison’s advantage, his idealistic attitude suddenly sours. He gives a brutally honest, drunken speech the next day about the betrayal, grabbing the attention of his audience for the first time. This change in attitude is evident later in Willie’s career. In the very beginning of the novel, Willie claims to travel to Mason City for the sole reason of visiting his Pap, but he also wants the voters to be witnesses to his pride in humble beginnings. When prompted, he gives an ironic speech emphasizing that he will not seek votes on his day back to the country—yet he brings with him on the trip several reporters and a photographer.
His driven pursuit of the position of governor brings to mind Plato’s three parts of the human soul: reason, emotion, and appetite. When Willie complains about the reactions to his lackluster speeches, Jack chastises him, telling him he needs to “make them feel” rather than “improve their minds.” Willie must appeal to the appetites of the electorate if he wants to be voted into office. In Plato’s ideal community, Philosopher Kings are the ones with reason; if leaders are forced to act on appetite and appease the electorate’s appetite in order to come into office, the political system is surely not one of which Plato would approve.
His approach also made me think of Machiavelli’s warning that appearances are everything. Willie’s failure in his first attempt at governor could be due to the fact that he was too virtuous, instead of appearing to be virtuous. He allowed his honesty to come in the way of his quest to acquire power. It is much more convenient as a leader that he be able to strip away virtue in order to get what he wants—and I believe that Willie Stark will digress even more from his innate virtue as the novel continues.
Though Willie becomes angry and dissatisfied with the political climate that surrounds him, his appetite for power continues to encourage him to master the political game. In an ideal community, the Philosopher Kings would rule, but it seems that in the political climate of the novel, as well as the political climate today, Machiavelli was the most correct about practical politics. Willie’s change of approach in politics is not unique. His story is a timeless example of what happens to the average citizen when he attempts to satisfy his appetite for power—no matter how worthy his original intentions.
Natalie Smith, of Elizabethtown, Ky., is freshman McConnell Scholar at the University of Louisville. She is studying English and political science.