Saturday, February 28, 2009

"My Lords, do whatever you wish. As for me, I shall do no otherwise than pleases me." (Elizabeth I to Parliament)

Elizabeth I is my absolute favorite historical figure which is why I chose to write about the 1998 film Elizabeth, directed by Shekhar Kapur. “Artistic license” is taken to make the story more, well…more “Hollywood;” nonetheless, the film does a nice job of chronicling Elizabeth’s transformation into one of England’s greatest rulers. Elizabeth I ruled England and Ireland from 1553-1603; her period of reign is referred to as the Elizabethan Era or the Golden Age. She was the daughter of Henry VIII and his second wife, Anne Boleyn. At the age of 3, Elizabeth I was declared illegitimate (upon the execution of her mother) and sent away from London. Elizabeth’s half sister Mary (daughter from Henry VIII’s first wife) ascended the throne while Elizabeth I remained in exile. At age 23, Elizabeth I became Queen of England.

The 1500’s was a terrible time to be a woman and a challenging time to be a female leader. The time period, religious, social and political values, and the obstacles Elizabeth overcame, are important to understanding and appreciating her leadership. Religious upheaval, political loyalty (or disloyalty), and relationships (love, friendship) are the film’s themes and are factors that push Elizabeth to transform from an inexperienced girl to a powerful leader. The movie also hypothesizes that Sir Walsingham was instrumental to the Queen’s education in strategy, politics and “cult of personality” that she develops to gain unwavering loyalty. In essence, there are two leaders portrayed in the film, Sir Walsingham and Queen Elizabeth.

Kouzes and Posners’ five fundamental practices (of transformational) leadership are: model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act and encourage the heart. (Northouse, p. 188-189) The film effectively portrays the five fundamental practices. Historically, the queen had a small privy counsel – or group of advisors. The film portrays Elizabeth initially listening and following the majority of her counsel. After some failures, she decides to trust her conscious and declares that she will lead with her conscious (model the way). Elizabeth’s vision was to have a strong and powerful England that was subordinate to no one or to an entity (the powerful Roman Catholic Church). Her first political move was to separate the Protestant Church and to demand allegiance to England - the crown - versus the Vatican. Her vision was to be independent of the Church and the political allegiances demanded of her. The expectation of the time was for the Queen to find a husband from either Spain or France and to produce a male heir. She refused to marry through her entire reign. She refused to be subject to any man (ergo country), thereby emphasizing her vision and living her belief. Refusing to marry and to produce an heir also illustrates how she challenged the process or values of the day. The film portrayed Elizabeth enabling others to do as they see fit (provided they were in line with her vision); ergo, Sir Walsingham, managed many political scenarios on his own that supported Elizabeth I. Her reign encouraged the heart of her subjects and staff - she granted favor with individual and private audiences, gifts of land and title, and frankly, by sparing lives or remanding prison sentences. Elizabeth’s reign was effective because of her charisma, the time period during which she reigned was ripe for change, and her successful transformation during financially, politically religiously difficult times, inspired her subjects.

Certainly, another interesting essay would be about the leader-member exchange theory (LMX Theory) that existed between Walsingham and Elizabeth – but that will take up too much blog space!!!

1 comment:

Josh Yavelberg said...

Great Analysis of the film! I will agree that the movie however is a dramatized Hollywood adaptation of Elizabeth I's life. Although I agree with your conclusion of transformational leadership on the basis of the film, I found it more difficult to belive that she is a transformational leader so I chose a different film to critique.

She stod appart from many of the leaders that were on the list of films in her role. When talking about people like Malcolm X, Ghandi, William Wallace, etc, her role as Queen gives her certain "God given" leadership points. I believe that she used that aspect of her rule when she was stuck to make a decision. Her conciousness was the drive for her decisions, and was informed by a God-given right to rule the country.

Given her status, I find her to be a very powerful leader who did look out for what was best for the country (like breaking from the political rule of the Vatican) and inspired the Golden Age of the British Empire dispite many odds. The main fork comes from the enabling of others. As Queen, she does not want a bunch of individuals benieth her doing what they think is right, she wants followers that will do what she says. I think you side noted a great point with: "(provided they were in line with her vision)"