Observations on manifestos
When a group of left-leaning journalists and academics launched the "Euston Manifesto" at the Union Chapel in Islington on 25 May 2006, they were, by definition, issuing a statement of intent. They presented themselves as a "new democratic progressive alliance", concerned that the left would rather spend its time bashing Bush than contesting Islamic extremism. Their desire was to realign the left steadfastly behind democratic principles and a new form of socialism - one that doesn't apologise for Hezbollah, forge alliances with anti-Semites, or cuddle up to George Galloway.
But, a year on from publication of the manifesto, the group has made little impact on the wider public imagination, or even on the left itself. Tenets such as "we are committed to democratic norms, procedures and structures" and "we are opposed to all forms of terrorism", while incontestable, have not been reprinted on T-shirts sold in Camden, or been scrawled by attractive poli-sci students in the margins of notebooks, as extracts from a great manifesto should.
I feel inclined to give the Euston signatories the benefit of the doubt and assume it is the form and not the underlying message that has buried their cause. Writing a manifesto is a fine - and some would say fading - art. The document lacked the rhetorical flourishes and inspirational bons mots that have distinguished the writing of great manifestos.
History's most memorable manifestos were all written with literary flair, and none is more quotable than that of the Italian futurists: "We intend to exalt aggressive action, a feverish insomnia, the racer's stride, the mortal leap, the punch and the slap." Now when did you last hear someone promise to "exalt the slap"? If they hadn't been early 20th-century proto-Fascists, I'd sign up right now on the basis of that quotation alone.
The Communist Manifesto, of course, opens with a metaphor that still resonates: the phrase "A spectre is haunting Europe" has become as well-absorbed into the language as the best-known Shakespearean epigram. It was another stroke of semantic genius to close with the incendiary injunction: "Working men of all countries, unite!" It doesn't take a master of rhetoric to divine that strong words can convert the most stubborn minds.
Furthermore, manifestos should be succinct. The infamous film manifesto known as Dogme 95 is less than 300 words long, broken up into bullet points that dictate snappy little rules such as, "Genre movies are not acceptable." A lack of lengthy elaboration also leaves plenty of room for manoeuvre when film-makers apply principles in practice, as Lars von Trier discovered when he broke no fewer than four of the ten rules in his first Dogme film, The Idiots.
I doubt the Euston group would wish to break their own rules in this way - after all, they are not mischievous, enigmatic Danish film-makers, but serious thinkers who wish to see ideological double standards removed from causes they hold dear. But if you really want to bring about an important realignment of the prejudices and prerogatives of the left, there's one thing that's been proven to push their button throughout history, and that is fine language: in slogans, declamations, rallying cries and manifestos.
Might I propose that when the Euston Manifesto group meets in London on 30 May for its "one year on" conference, it rewrites the manifesto that gave it its name?
http://www.eustonmanifesto.org
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
