Today is widely recognized as Shakespeare's birthday, and it occurs to me that his most famous character, Hamlet, could fairly be said to be iconic of the Democratic party these days. We see the situation well, but can't seem to act precisely and effectively. There are flashes of tactical brilliance all over, but no strategic direction. This disillusions me rather a lot.
There's a famous essay from 1860 by Turgenev called "Hamlet and Don Quixote." Basically, the idea is that there are two heroic types.. the man who thinks he is strong, and the man who knows he is weak. Hamlet can read a situation brilliantly, but finds himself paralyzed by his own character. Quixote acts decisively, but cannot read a situation accurately to save his life, which it comes down to from time to time.
In Turgenev's words,
Don Quixote is entirely consumed with devotion to his ideal, for the sake of which he is ready to suffer any possible privation and to sacrifice his life; his life itself he values only to the degree that it can become a means for the realizaton of the ideal, for the establishment of truth and justice on earth. To live for oneself, to care for oneself, Don Quixote would consider shameful. He lives ... outside of himself, entirely for others, for his brethren, in order to abolish evil, to counteract the forces hostile to mankind - wizards, giants, in a word, the oppressors. Don Quixote is an enthusiast, a servant of an idea, and thus is illuminated by its radiance.
On the other hand, Hamlet is very different:
Doubting everything, Hamlet, naturally, spares not himself; his mind is too much developed to be content with what he finds inside himself. He is aware of his weakness, but even this self- consciousness is his power: from it comes his irony, in contrast with the eagerness of Don Quixote. Constantly concerned with himself, always a creature of introspection, he knows in detail all his faults, scorns himself, and at the same time lives, so to speak, nourished by this scorn.
In sillier terms, you could say that in 2000 the Democratic party nominated the Tin Man to run against the Scarecrow, and in 2004 they took a chance with the Cowardly Lion.
The takehome message for me is that we need to nominate someone in 2008 who is neither a Hamlet nor a Don Quixote - I'm not sure what literary archetype to substitute in place - but someone who can serve the idea of progressivism, while not being blinded by it, but who can also be introspective enough to identify his faults without being paralyzed by them.