Monash University Publishing | Contacts Page
Monash University Publishing: Advancing knowledge

Creativity Crisis

Chapter 9

LEADERSHIP

Good learning outcomes make good followers. Fatefully, we set up student success to fulfill the motif of following as opposed to leadership. For a student to succeed, he or she must follow the syllabus and its examples, follow the content and questions, follow the marking rubric and meet the intended learning outcomes: the student follows the teacher and, if not, the endeavour seems likely to end in failure. Speaking cynically, education provides templates, whose satisfaction yields good results. If that were all there is, there would be little scope for intellectual autonomy and especially imagination. The clarity and excellence of learning outcomes could be measured by the ease with which students follow them. Nothing must be obscure or ambiguous but rather everything leads transparently and seamlessly to their fulfilment, through beautifully aligned delivery, learning activities and assessment. All that you need to do is follow the teacher’s leads. It is all about following and not at all about leading, in the same way that alignment predicated on learning outcomes makes little room for genuine student-centredness.

Like student-centredness, leadership cannot easily be accommodated within the learning outcome of any unit, subject or module. Depending on the chosen definition, leadership is about taking the lead. The cornerstone of the concept is initiative, especially in a context that involves other people who may be of a different or half-hearted persuasion. We also speak of leadership in intellectual or cultural endeavours, where a scientist or scholar is a leader in the field: he or she does not just follow others but precedes or, as a Greek might have said, is ahead by leading (ἀντιπροηγέομαι) instead of following; though this has less applicability to coursework degrees, where the chance of students distinguishing themselves with new proofs or a breakthrough is not terribly high. Certainly, we cannot write such expectations into the learning outcomes. It would be unreasonable to expect that the novice should spearhead the discipline, when even the lecturer struggles to make a credible contribution.

My purpose is not in any way to diminish the importance and dignity of following. It is more the reverse, as archaic linguistic structures reveal. The link between leading and following is counterintuitive, because leading with independence is also a kind of following with independence. It means following your own instinct. As the sixteenth-century poet Torquato Tasso said, ‘henceforth I will follow my style’ (or seguirò mio stile)1 and, when it comes to erotic pursuit, the same poet also sees following in determined and predatory terms: ‘he tails you like a hound the woodland doe’.2 Following, unlike waiting, was never seen as passive. As an antithesis to leadership, the word followship or followership has been used in the literature and is itself valuable.3 If I am in the presence of a marvellous and beloved leader, it is possibly the wrong time to seek to exercise my ambitions to assume leadership, especially over her or him. I would be much better off learning by following and making a contribution as a member of a team. Further, there is a philosophical sense in which following is not only acceptable but integral and necessary to all mental process.

If I write something where each part does not follow from the previous parts, the writing will be incoherent—it will be hard to follow: the Greeks were onto it (δυσπαρακολούθητος)—and you will be confused. If I want to make myself understood, it is necessary not only for the parts to be connected as one another’s analogy but for their consecutive placement to make sense in an argument: they must follow. If the one idea follows from the others, you too can follow. The greatest leaders who ever read (unless a psychopathic part of some mystifying cult) anything were all good followers in gleaning meaning from the text: they could see, just like us, the logic by which one idea follows from the last. Every syllogism, every movement from premises to propositions to conclusion depends for its credibility on following; and we, as interpreters and critics, cannot gain any toehold on the products of other intellectuals without being followers of the logic. Among the worst sins of writing is ‘inconsequentiality’, that is, producing lots of details that do not follow. Not only are you likely to be frustrated by the reading—because you will spend much time searching for links that are not there—but you will conclude that the writing is inconsequential, of no consequence, unimportant. These robust critical terms derive from the Latin for following closely (consequi). In both Latin and Greek, however, the motif of following is only metaphorically linked to imaginative ratiocination from late classical times.

If we neglect Greek words that mean follow in the sense of attend (ἀμορβεύω, ἀμορβός)4 there are two main remaining constellations. The first has its roots in following (ἕπομαι), with derivatives to pursue, follow after (μεθέπω), to follow along with, accompany (συνέπομαι) or to follow together (συνεφέπομαι) or follow behind (ὑφέπομαι).5 The other cluster has its roots in another verb for following (ἀκολουθέω), with a very large number of derivatives, embracing most of the prepositions of the Greek language. One spoke of one who follows or attends on (ἀκόλουθος), with abstract forms (ἀκολούθησις, ἀκολουθία), verbal forms with imperative connotations: one must follow (ἀκολουθητέον, ἐπακολουθητέον, παρακολουθητέον), disposed to follow (ἀκολουθητικός), to follow (ἐξακολουθέω), following close upon (ἐπακόλουθος, ἐπακολουθέω), capable of following (ἐπακολουθητικός), easy to follow (εὐεπακολούθητος), to follow after (κατακολουθέω), readily following (φιλακόλουθος), that which follows (παρακολούθημα), following closely, interrelation (παρακολούθησις, παρακολουθέω), to follow about (περιακολουθέω), to follow constantly, attend everywhere (συνεξακολουθέω), accompany (συνεπακολουθέω), follow together (συγκατακολουθέω), follow along (συμπαρακολουθέω) or follow along with (συνακολουθέω), and to follow closely (ὑπακολουθέω). Of these, some have a sense of connexion and interrelation (like παρακολούθησις) which is not just a convenience of later grammarians but is alive already with Aristotle.6 From then onward, it could mean following with the mind or understanding, an inference or even awareness, or consciousness. So too with the simplest form of the verb (ἀκολουθέω), which could already mean ‘follow the thread of a discourse’, in Plato,7 to ‘follow upon, to be consequent upon, consistent with’;8 and one also used the verb in the third person to mean it follows in the abstract (ἀκολουθεῖ).9

Greek sets the pattern which is expanded greatly in the renaissance. Most instances are neither positive nor negative but synonymous with ‘next’, as in ‘the following day’. There are numerous texts in verse where the poet regrets following a lover: ‘for more than seven years I have followed your pathway, O beautiful lady, and it has taken me to death’.10 The author of these lines, Giovan Giorgio Trissino, also wrote one of the first regular tragedies, Sofonisba (1524), in which the term following appears in an argumentative sense.11 It is like Shakespeare’s ‘How follows that?’ or ‘It follows not that she will love Sir Thurio’.12 It is unusual, however, for any value to be ascribed to following, even when it is used for logical process. And often, the term following means ‘to happen’, again as in Sofonisba: ‘well after that, what happened then (ma fatto questo, che seguì dapoi)?’13 This meaning of follow as happening arises in other authors, such as Bandello, who speaks of a woman provoking her lover to cut the clothing, hoping that he will not call her bluff or, as he says, ‘not having the intention that the outcome should follow (che l’effetto seguisse)’.14 In another story, he says ‘if you had withdrawn from this enterprise, the scandal that has happened (è successo) would not have followed (non sarebbe seguito)’ or ‘would not have occurred’ or ‘eventuated’.15 The following is identified with the happening, which makes good ontological sense.

In some authors, the word for following hardly appears, whereas in others, like Bandello, there are hundreds of instances, which makes them hard to remember. Because following is such an enormously common word, it is difficult to prove; but my suspicions are that following has only ever taken on a negative connotation since the development of the word ‘leadership’, which took place in the industrial period. There is nothing inherently wrong with following and it is only since the time when the abstract idea of leadership took hold on the European imagination that the idea of following or followship slid in prestige. In very few cases does one feel a contrast with leading: you lead, I follow. In one gorgeous example, Shakespeare implies that following is the opposite of leadership, when he says: ‘The sheep for fodder follow the shepherd; the shepherd for food follows not the sheep’.16 But that is not just because the shepherd is a leader but because the human stomach cannot digest grass, which enhances the counterpoint with a touch of the poetically grotesque.

In European vocabulary, the abstract noun ‘leadership’ arose at the dawn of the industrial revolution at the end of the eighteenth century; but it had the value of ‘governing people’, as when we speak of the US leadership, meaning the people, collectively, who hold office and exercise power. Although this meaning is still current, if a little old-fashioned, the sense in which we use the word today has an adjectival character, proposing qualities of a psychological kind that predispose people to assume control and take initiative, be enterprising and own responsibility. These uses belong to the twentieth-century vocabulary of management psychology whose cultures have struck deep roots in the Euro-American organizational psyche, affecting education across the Anglophone world with astonishing ubiquity. A Google search discovers 90,300,000 pages for leadership qualities—which immediately pops up as a suggested term in the comprehensive engine—and 3,480,000 results for the same words in double inverted commas, that is “leadership qualities”. The term “student leadership qualities” alone yields 2,040,000 hits. Nobody has looked at them all, much less their counterparts with terms such as leadership traits.

In the same way that there are courses on management, there are units, subjects and modules on leadership. But because leadership has enjoyed such an exponential rise in popularity, it is close to a graduate attribute in universities (and often a motto in secondary schools) and cannot therefore be confined to students in the Commerce or Business schools. Medical students, architects, humanities students, engineers and every complexion of scientist, must all have access to the wisdom and know what leadership is and how to practice it. So there is a corresponding growth in extra- curricular leadership programs, which in many ways suit everyone, because the choice to engage with such peripheral studies in a committed way is itself taken as a good predictor of leadership in industry. The only problem is that the definition of leadership is sometimes vague and possibly not linked to the academic program in which the student is enrolled. Leadership could mean anything from helping more junior students to doing charity work in the community.

Whom does the leader lead? When we speak of leadership, we unwittingly allow a slide in terms to occur. To lead always carries connotations of inducing other people to follow. So even when no-one follows (and in all honesty, we are not leading anyone) the term leadership is still enjoined to inflate the charity work, for example, with the quality of influence. It is valuable and clearly much to be encouraged; but the extent to which it really constitutes leadership is dubious. Various forms of volunteering, laudable in themselves, are structurally often more an expression of privilege than leadership, because they may be undertaken by people with support and time on their hands, as opposed to struggling people who study while looking after younger siblings or sick unemployed parents. To build leadership around privilege is retrograde, because it excludes from recognition the large group of battlers who cannot afford the distinction.

So when we ask: whom does the leader lead? we must further ask: does it have to be a follower? Or indeed does it have to be some plurality of followers? At what point does the credibility of the term leadership become shaky? If I am an independent soul, I have achieved a kind of leadership of myself, but not necessarily of anyone else. In whose name does the leader lead?17 I might achieve a platform from which I can project my independence or champion a cause; but that privileged position might still only make me an evangelist rather than a leader, because it does not necessarily entail winning people’s trust so that they follow.

To lead and to follow are a curious dichotomy, apparently mutually dependent and necessary to one another. They propose a linear model of human relations where people are implicitly marching in solidarity, with one person in the front who—by dint of charisma or wisdom or power or energy or initiative—determines the direction of the trek. In many circumstances, of course, the selection is not democratic. In employment, for example, there is always a boss whose superior station has been established by power structures that we are unlikely to change. Even when we get to vote or help make the decision as staff representative on a selection panel, the elected end up having power over the electors, as if there were no staff participation at all. The boss is charged with responsibilities and instated with authority over us, for which the term leadership is often invoked as both sweeter and more compelling than power. If the boss has talent and a good nature, we experience her or his authority as leadership, because we view sympathetically the objectives that she or he has asked us to fulfill.

Translated into education, leadership may be artificial by contrast, because all students are to be treated equally and none has authority over any other, even if they help more junior students in a peer mentoring program. As leadership programs of all complexions are voluntary, the prospective leaders self-identify and assume the distinction through a positive view of themselves. They may already nurture an ambition to excel in future employment applications and a fortunate career, where leadership experience will give them a competitive advantage. There is nothing wrong with these strategies, even if they have admixtures of expedience and conceit; and ideally our students would achieve great success beyond the walls thanks to the preparation that we have been able to hatch for them.

Just the same, unless our students can all be leaders, which is perhaps hyperbole, there is something uncomfortable about supporting the dichotomy which divides the world into leaders and followers, which could easily be construed as an indicator and predictor of rank. It is as if the implicit demotion of the non-leaders might never end, as the followers have followers, always a next who follows (ὑστεραῖος, as the Greeks said), until you arrive at the least assertive, the least worthy and the most motivationally abject. However distasteful this implicit ladder of assertion, it is also illogical, because whenever we act productively, we tend to toggle between leading and following. Unless psychopathic, we do not just assume that we are the boss, in possession of the necessary wisdom and therefore viewing our followers instrumentally as the tools by which our designs are fulfilled. Rather, we exercise yet wiser powers of listening and thus encourage richer ideas and more energetic participation. That is to say, we take the lead from our followers and follow them with mutual satisfaction.18

This organicity of responsiveness and self-assurance is a social grace that reflects a personal reciprocity between curiosity and telling, reading and writing, learning and teaching. It is the genius of research, where our aspirations to intellectual leadership are intimately cocooned by study, absorption in the work of other scholars or primary sources, all parts of the library from which we gain a certain pregnancy in our own ideas. We lead by following and have to have followed in order to lead. As an intellectual leader, your ability to lead derives from your credibility; and that in turn derives from your ability to follow. As if signalling this relationship of leadership and learning, the more archaic epoch of Greek identifies a leader as also a beginner (ἔξαρχος),19 commencing with the idea of being first. It is a little like English, where ‘prime’ can mean top—as in prime minister—but ‘primer’ or ‘primary’ is associated with early development; or ‘first’, which is both the person ahead and the beginner’s level.20 The two concepts are fatefully linked with the idea of originality, of beginning things, initiating, as we can also check through Greek with the verb to begin, take the lead in, initiate (ἐξάρχω), which could even mean teach in the classical period.21

Leadership is never absolute, as authority may be; and it prospers best when power and influence can be contested. Historically, a king had enormous authority but could be a terrible leader. Meanwhile, when offices are determined by that inscrutable mixture of assertion and merit, the need to show leadership as a worthy trait—neither inherited nor wangled by nepotism—the stakes rise and the claim to be a leader becomes more intense and meaningful. It is the historical dialectical paradigm of ancient Greece, where potentially any male from the voting class could put himself forward in competition with other eligible citizens. Perhaps this socially labile character of Hellenic culture explains the efflorescence of intuitions and words for leading and leadership in the Greek language. As if the bountiful expressions for following were not prolific enough, leadership is like an epidemic. As with following, leading in Greek is mostly conceptualized around two roots, though there are numerous terms beyond them which mean leadership by virtue of rank, like captain or commander or general in English. An example in Greek is commander, ruler, chief (ταγός), leader as general (στρατηγός) or leader of an army, general, commander (στρατηλάτης), a head man, chief, leader (κορυφαῖος) or one who marshals an army, commander, leader (κοσμήτωρ).22

By far the greatest number of conceptions arises through the root of leading itself, the verb to lead (ἄγω) which could also have connotations of carry, fetch and bring. This root has great resonance for us as the basis of ‘pedagogy’, which is technically the leading of children, mirrored by the Latin root in the word ‘education’, which is to lead (ducare). Similarly, our word in English ‘demagogue’ contains the leading root and has a presence in Greek with more positive meaning than in English: the verb to be a leader of the people (δημαγωγέω), the popular who leads (δημαγωγός) and the abstract noun for leadership of the people (δημαγωγία). We can also recognize our word hegemony, again with largely positive associations from the verb, to go before, lead the way (ἡγέομαι, ἡγεμονεύω), leader (ἡγέτης, ἡγεμών, ἡγήτωρ), and the more abstract leading (ἡγεμόνευμα) or leading the way, going first (ἡγεμονία). There is no sense of dictatorship in this conception, for which there were other words, like tyrant. In general, Greek language has a positive view of leadership and contained a term to express it: good leadership (εὐηγεσία). Even leading dogs or goats has a noble air in the very large collection of words on leadership with the ἄγω root.23

It is also no accident that we first see in Greek a link between leadership and interpretation and even explanation. The verb ‘to be leader’ of something or govern (ἐξηγέομαι), designates the exercise of a position but the same verb in the classical period could mean to expound or interpret.24 The noun for one who leads on or is an adviser (ἐξηγητής) is also the root of the word now in common use in the creative arts—adapted via biblical usage—namely ‘exegesis’, that is an explanatory body of writing which elaborates the creative work in whatever genre. As well as meaning one who leads on, or an adviser, an exegete (ἐξηγητής) means an ‘expounder, interpreter, especially of oracles, dreams, or omens’.25 The development of such intellectual and clairvoyant meanings around the simple stem ‘to lead’ makes a lot of sense. First the interpreter is led to the meaning by virtue of special insight but second, the interpreter leads us to the meaning thanks to a process which could be likened to teaching: a text, a discussion or a pronouncement which leads us to the imagined truth. Without being led there, we would not gain the insight. We are led by the exegete so that we understand.

In English and romance languages, thanks to a familiar Latin root (ducare), the motif of leading is also intellectual and behavioural. Education is not the only word to draw from the root. We also have induction, deduction, reduction, introduction, production, all of which have a necessary place in the philosophical lexicon, which is why to traduce or mislead or betray is so extremely negative. In addition, the word conduct has a place both in physics or music and morality, method or psychology. A wire conducts electricity in the same way that we conduct an investigation. They both lead, like the person with the baton in front of the orchestra. For a long time, we have spoken of conduct as both noun and verb meaning behaviour. In the seventeenth-century Caractères of La Bruyère, for example, conduct can be purely ‘lead’, as when the beautiful new simplicity in writing style leads imperceptibly (conduit insensiblement) to witty or spirited prose.26 Similarly, excellent artists ennoble their genre and toss out the rules if they do not lead (s’écartent des règles si elles ne les conduisent pas) to the grand and sublime.27 At the same time, La Bruyère uses the noun as behaviour when he talks about women who want to hide their conduct (cacher leur conduite) behind layers of modesty with continual affectation.28 He also says that with virtue, capability and good conduct (bonne conduite) one can still be unbearable.29

In the archaic recesses of Greek language, a whole extra layer of leading perhaps explains this ambiguity. The other impressive collection of Greek words about leading derives from the motif of being first (ἄρχω), with implications of initiating or beginning something but also with the meaning to lead, in the sense of rule, govern or command. It is therefore a slightly more bossy conception, which we can recognize through certain derivatives which are more about the exercise of power than leadership. An example is patriarchy or oligarchy or monarchy. European culture was always more concerned about a lack of leadership or rule, whence the term anarchy, lack of a leader (ἀναρχία), was—and is still seen as—a negative social condition that makes all uncoordinated members of a community vulnerable. One feared this predicament with the same unease as one witnesses the unstable suitors jockeying around Penelope and hoping each to be Odysseus’ successor as King of Ithaca. Of course even established leadership could be challenged through revolt or insurrection which, however, still requires leadership in sedition (στασιαρχία). Though sometimes stern and mixed with harsh command, leading by this root (ἄρχω) is also fundamentally benign and belongs to the world of the goatherd as much as civil council or army. It draws to it a large number of prepositions and other nouns to make up a formidable list.30

In its structure of being first, the prince, the principle or principal thing or person, the Greek conception of leading (ἄρχω) also draws us to an analogous idea in authority. The word authority, about which we might feel a little uncomfortable, has benign roots with the Latin for author or originator (auctor). The power of inaugurating anything is also a claim to lead or have authority (auctoritas). If you are the author or originator, you are the first at something. It might not amount to very much but, insofar as it does mean something, you have the title: you have to be respected or at least acknowledged for having been the author and originator. This motif of being first is implicitly followed by the learning journey of the students who absorb or fathom the material.

Although we first have to have followed in order to lead, to lead is assuredly not to follow. Its distinguishing features of initiative and persuasion concern originality. It is not necessary for the leader’s thought to be original, because it is undoubtedly derived from much following in the past. But the leader is the originator of the suggestion: let us embark upon the project now and all of us get behind it! It is original in the same way that an undergraduate essay may be original. The ideas may have been in circulation long since but the way of drawing them together for the application in point has an integrity that reflects the unique mind of the student, which judiciously matches received wisdom with current needs. So with leadership: the originality does not necessarily have anything to do with the power of invention but rather originating a coordinating and persuasive influence which the singular vision affords.

By a similar logic, one could argue that scholarship is unlikely to yield benefits to leadership because scholarship—unless infused with creativity—is itself structurally more inclined to following. In the scholarship of learning and teaching we become leaders insofar as we are good followers: we follow the trends, good trends, like flipped paradigms, active learning or formative assessment, most of which have become a kind of orthodoxy by the time they are considered fit for leadership. At best, a scholar can lead by giving instances of technique and spirit in how to do something which is known rather than envisaging something which is not yet known.

Leadership and scholarship of learning and teaching therefore risk becoming mutually conflated, especially since, as suggested earlier, both leadership and student-centredness sit unhappily in an educational framework which is structured around competition for high grades. The competitive economy of student success, with its reassuring grid of constructive alignment, struggles to encourage student independence and intellectual initiative. Apart from unusual areas, like art, design, musical composition and architecture, the originality of the student is not greatly accommodated. It is the main reason that leadership is exported to co-curricular programs, which often have an equivocal character and uncertain relations both with study and leadership. If, on the other hand, the field of leadership is returned to the core business of syllabus—where leadership is understood more in terms of intellectual initiative—it will require a new accommodation of creativity and imagination, where the independence of the student is cultivated rather than suffocated by the restrictive closeness of learning outcomes and assessment.


1 Tasso, Rime 31.

2 ‘vi segua, come il can selvaggia damma’, Tasso, Rime 121.11.

3 Google’s self-populating term ‘followership theory’ yields 19,000 results.

4 cf. to follow, accompany, attend (ὀπαδέω), a following after, attending, pursuit (ὀπήδησις), follow, accompany or attend (ὀπηδέω), follow along with, attend on (συνομαρτέω), following along with, accompanying (συνοπαδός).

5 cf. follower, attendant (ἑπέτης) or given to following (ἑπητικός) or the next (ἐπεχές).

6 Aristotle, Posterior analytics 99a30.

7 Plato, Phaedo107b.

8 Plato, Republic.400e, cf. 398d; follow analogy of, Aristotle, History of animals 499a10.

9 GA, Cat.14a31.

10 ‘Seguito ho, bella Donna, il tuo sentiero / più di sett’anni, e me n’andava a morte’, Trissino, Rime 51.9–10; cf. Trissino, Rime 12.9–11, or ‘ma di seguirvi più non m’assicuro’, Trissino, Rime 52.1–3.

11 ‘Però seguendo il ragionar di prima, / vi ripriego ad aver di me pietate’, Trissino, Sofonisba 1.5.

12 ‘It follows then the cat must stay at home’, King Henry V 1.2.

13 Trissino, Sofonisba 2.2.

14 ‘Era in quel punto montata la fantasia a la donna di far una solenne paura a l’amante, e per questo invitava il marito a voler tagliar la veste, non perciò avendo animo che l’effetto seguisse,’ 1.3.

15 ‘averei anteposto la nostra amicizia a l’appetito mio; e forse che tu, udite le mie ragioni, ti saresti da questa impresa ritratto e non sarebbe seguito lo scandalo che è successo,’ 1.21.

16 Two gentlemen of Verona 1.1.

17 ‘though the devil lead the measure, such are to be followed’, Shakespeare, All’s well that ends well 2.1.

18 ‘Rendez service à ceux qui dépendent de vous: vous le serez davantage par cette conduite que par ne vous pas laisser voir.’ La Bruyère, Les caractères 7.12 ; Des Biens de fortune.

19 Iliad 24.721.

20 cf. the word ‘prince’ (principal among nobility) and the German for prince (Fürst), uncannily the first, allied to leader (Führer), as in duke, from duce, ducare, to lead.

21 Plato, Laws 891d, Euripides, Iphigeneia in Taurus 743, like διδάσκω at 111, Aristotle, Poetics 1449a11. See also Iliad 18.51, 18.606, Odyssey 4.19.

22 commander, ruler, chief (ταγός), leader of a countless host (μυριοταγός), join in leading the revels (συνθιασεύω), leader (στρατηγός), leader of an army, general, commander (στρατηλάτης), lead an army into the field (στρατηλατέω), to be on a campaign, in the field (στρατόω), leading forward, advancing (προβίβασις), cause to step forward, lead on (προβιβάζω), leading in procession, solemn procession (πομπεία), conduct a procession (πομποστολέω), head man, chief, leader (κορυφαῖος), one who marshals an army, commander, leader (κοσμήτωρ), lead by the right way (ὁδόω), leader, chief (ὄρχαμος), without a leader (ἀπροστάτευτος), one who gives a signal, leader, commander (σημάντωρ), without leader (ἀσήμαντος), lead in (εἰσπορεύω).

23 Leader (Ἀγήτωρ), as noted to be a leader of the people (δημαγωγέω), popular leader (δημαγωγός), lead the way (ἁγεμονεύω), leader, lord (ἁγεμών), leading off the dancing (ἁγησίχορος), leader, lord (ἁγητήρ), lead, carry, fetch, bring (ἄγω), leader (ἄκτωρ), lead the way from (ἀφηγέομαι), leading the procession (ἀγαῖος), host-leading (ἀγέστρατος), leader of the people (ἀγησίλαος), leading the chorus (ἀγησίχορος), lead, bring (ἀγινέω), leader, chief (ἀγός), fit for leading by (ἀγωγαῖος), leading, guiding (ἀγωγός), one must lead (ἀκτέον), one must lead (ἀκτέος), lead up (ἀνάγω), leading up (ἀναγωγή), without leader, unguided (ἀνηγεμόνευτος), lead up against (ἀντανάγω), lead against (ἀντεπάγω), shift in order to meet attacks (ἀντιπαράγω), lead on against (ἀντιπαρεξάγω), lead away, carry off (ἀπάγω), lead the way (ἀπάρχω), leading away (ἀπαγωγή), leading away, diverting (ἀπαγωγός), one must lead away (ἀπακτέον), leader of a (βουαγετόν), to be a leader of mercenaries (ξεναγέω), to lead the people (δημαγωγέω), leadership of the people (δημαγωγία), a popular leader (δημαγωγός), lead through (διεξάγω), lead out, lead away (ἐξάγω), lead forth (ἐξαγινέω), one who leads out (ἐξαγωγεύς), a leading out (ἐξαγωγή), to be leader of (ἐξηγέομαι), one who leads on, adviser (ἐξηγητής), to lead the way (ἐξυφηγέομαι), lead to (ἐφηγέομαι), leading the dance (ἐγερσίχορος), lead out round (ἐκπ; ριάγωlead in (ἐνάγω), bring on (ἐπάγω), leading on (ἐπακτικός), leader of Bacchanals (Ληναγέτας), lead out (ἐπεξάγω), lead (ἐπιβάσκω), lead in (εἰσάγω), lead up into (εἰσανάγω), lead in (εἰσηγέομαι), easily led, ductile (εὐάγωγος), easy to lead on (εὐεπάγωγος), good leadership (εὐηγεσία), easy to bring into place (εὐπαράγωγος), go before, lead the way (ἡγέομαι), leader (ἡγέτης), leading (ἡγεμόνευμα), lead the way (ἡγεμονεύω), leading the way, going first (ἡγεμονία ἡγεμονικός), one who leads (ἡγεμών ἡγήτωρ), guide, lead (ἡγηλάζω), leader of the state (ἡγησίπολις), one must lead (ἡγητέον), authoritative, leading (ἡγητικός), act as guide, lead the way (καθηγέομαι), leader, guide (καθηγεμών), lead down (κατάγω), hound-leader (κυναγός), leader of hounds, huntsman (κυναγωγός), huntsman (κυνηγέτης), leader of a (κωμηγέτης), leader of the people (λαγέτας, λαγέτης), lead an armed band (λοχαγέω) or leader thereof (λοχαγός), leader of the Muses (Μουσαγέτας Μουσαγέτης) lead another way (μεθοδηγέω), leader of the Nymphs (νυμφαγέτς), lead the bride to the, bridegroom’s house (νυμφαγωγέω) or the person doing it (νυμφαγωγός), lead (ὁδηγέω), mountebank, charlatan, quack (ὀχλαγωγός), leader of the rearguard (οὐραγός), lead by (παράγω), leading by (παραγωγή), lead past (παρεξάγω), lead in by one’s side, bring forward, introduce (παρεισάγω), lead (περιάγω), leading round and explaining (περιήγησις), lead round (περιηγέομαι), leader, guide (ποδηγέτης), lead, guide (ποδηγέω), leading, guiding (ποδηγία), lead forward (προάγω), leading on, promotion (προαγωγή), leading on (προαγωγός), lead up before (προανάγω), lead (προεξάγω), going before, leading (προήγησις), go first and lead the way (προηγέομαι), one who goes before as a guide (προηγεμών), leader (προηγήτωρ), leader (προκαθηγέτης), leader (προκαθηγητής), lead off to prison (προσαπάγω), lead on (προϋπάγομαι), leader of dogs (σκυλακαγέτις), lead about whelps (σκυμναγωγέω), carry off as booty, lead captive (συλαγωγέω), lead forward together (συμπροάγω), bring together, gather together (συνάγω), lead away with (συναπάγω), lead out together (συνεξάγω), lead an expedition (στολαγωγέω), lead together against (συνεπάγω), leading, guidance (ὑφήγησις), go just before, guide, lead (ὑφηγέομαι), guide, leader (ὑφηγητής), leader of a hymn (ὑμναγωγός), lead or leading on gradually (ὑπάγω, ὑπαγωγή), leading by the hand (χειραγώγημα), lead by the hand (χειραγωγέω), leading, guiding (χειραγωγός), lead a chorus (χορηγέω), chorus-leader (χορηγός), lead departed souls to the nether world (ψυχαγωγέω), or the person doing it (ψυχαγωγός).

24 Herodotus 2.49, Plato Cratylus and Ion 531a, Demosthenes 47.69; see also Lysias, Against Andocides 6.10, and Andocides, On the mysteries 1.116. It could also mean ‘tell at length, relate in full’, Herodotus 2.3 (cf. 3.4, 7.6, 3.72), Aeschylus, Prometheus bound 216, 702, Thucydides 5.26 and 1.138; set forth, explain, Plato, Laws 802c, cf. Republic 474c, explain, Sophocles, Ajax 320, Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians 2.1.

25 LSJ, who give the examples of Herodotus 5.31, Demosthenes 35.17, and then for interpreter, Herodotus 1.78, spiritual director, Plato, Euthyphro 4d, 9a, Laws 759c, 759e, 775a, Demosthenes 47.68, Isaeus, Ciron 8.39, Plato, Republic 427c, the pontifices in Rome, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Antiquities of Rome 2.73. In the most modern sense, it could even mean a guide or Cicerone to notable sights, e.g. Pausanius 5.15.10, and an inscription found at Olympia, Collection of Greek inscriptions (SIG)1021.20.

26 ‘L’on écrit régulièrement depuis vingt années; l’on est esclave de la construction; l’on a enrichi la langue de nouveaux mots, secoué le joug du latinisme, et réduit le style à la phrase purement française; l’on a presque retrouvé le nombre que Malherbe et Balzac avaient les premiers rencontré, et que tant d’auteurs depuis eux ont laissé perdre; l’on a mis enfin dans le discours tout l’ordre et toute la netteté dont il est capable: cela conduit insensiblement à y mettre de l’esprit,’ Les caractères 2.60.

27 ‘Il y a des artisans ou des habiles dont l’esprit est aussi vaste que l’art et la science qu’ils professent; ils lui rendent avec avantage, par le génie et par l’invention, ce qu’ils tiennent d’elle et de ses principes; ils sortent de l’art pour l’ennoblir, s’écartent des règles si elles ne les conduisent pas au grand et au sublime; ils marchent seuls et sans compagnie, mais ils vont fort haut et pénètrent fort loin, toujours sûrs et confirmés par le succès des avantages que l’on tire quelquefois de l’irrégularité,’ 2.61.

28 ‘Quelques femmes ont voulu cacher leur conduite sous les dehors de la modestie; et tout ce que chacune a pu gagner par une continuelle affectation, et qui ne s’est jamais démentie, a été de faire dire de soi: On l’aurait prise pour une vestale,’ 4.46.

29 ‘Avec de la vertu, de la capacité, et une bonne conduite, l’on peut être insupportable.’ 6.31 De la Société et de la Conversation.

30 lead a herd (ἀγελαρχέω), without head (ἄναρχος), to be first (ἄρχω), leader of a flock (ἀγελάρχης), lack of a leader (ἀναρχία), lead away (ἀποπαιδαγωγέω), leader of a political party (ἀρχαιρεσιάρχης), leader of revels or Dionysos himself (ἀρχέβακχος), leading the people, chief (ἀρχέλαος), leader, prince (ἀρχέτας), a leader, prince (ἀρχέτης), leading the chorus (ἀρχέχορος), first leader, author (ἀρχηγέτης), to be chief leader (ἀρχηγετεύω), leader of chorus (ἀρχίχορος), leader of Bacchanals (ἀρχιβασσάρα), leader of a Bacchic revel or rout (ἀρχιθιασίτης, θιασάρχης), leader, chief (ἀρχός), leader of a (διφαλαγγάρχης), leader of twelve (δωδεκάδαρχος), leader of a body of six (ἑξάδαρχος), leader of a hundred (ἑκατοντάρχης), leader, beginner (ἔξαρχος), begin, take the lead in, initiate (ἐξάρχω), leader of an (ἐνωμοτάρχης), to be leader of a carousal (θιασαρχέω), leader of a line of horsemen (ζυγάρχης), leader of a revel (κώμαρχος), leader of the Muses (Μούσαρχος), leader of infantry (πέζαρχος), to be leader (προεξάρχω), chief scout, leader of a reconnoitring party (σκοπάρχης), leader of a (σπειράρχης), leadership in sedition (στασιαρχία), join in leading (συνεξάρχω), leader of a (συνταγματάρχης), leader of a (ταγματάρχης), goat-leader (χιμάραρχος).

Creativity Crisis

   by Robert Nelson