People with mana are leaders, they are looked up to and followed. Often you perceive this phenomenom when someone with mana enters the room, a conversation or a group. People stop and listen and they also often 'obey' or fall into line. Sometimes people do these same things though not becase a person is respected or they have mana, but out of fear. I personally see this as a sign of weakness, or a character flaw within the leader. I believe leadership and mana is something that is earned. It is not an automatic right, and if you have to force it then it isn't genuine. I also think that the act of obeying someone or following them out of fear is so false and kinda makes you want to spew up.
So my question is...Is mana earned or given???
Wikipedia also describes mana as "authority derived from having a wealth of resources to gift to others to bind them into reciprocal obligations". I would intererupt 'wealth of resources' not necessarily as money, but more about talents, gifts and character. By what you have, do you envoke people to believe, to cause them to want to follow, to hold power over them? Could this type of mana also be influcence used in the wrong way?
I am intersted in this topic/situation as I ponder why it is that some poeple's 'voices' are louder than others, whether by force or by more intrinsic means. The pecking order or food chain also seems alive and well within the human sphere and I think especially with men.
Take this children's book as an example...
It seems as though their minds are programmed with the adage 'the biggest man wins.'
What strikes me as character and something worth following, is a man (or woman) who is gracious enough to be a team player. To step forward when he knows he/she has the goods to contribute, but step back when he/she knows someone else does. That for me is mana, Ruth-defined!
