How Listening Changed History 1

How Listening Changed History

Katie McGann
Gonzaga University
How Listening Changed History 2

Introduction

Listening as a leadership skill – and it is a skill – is often overlooked and misunderstood.

This includes by me. Listening is not to be confused with hearing. Hearing is one of our five

senses, it comes organically. Listening, however, is not a natural byproduct of hearing. On top of

requiring effort, I have come to learn that listening comes in various styles or types, each with its

own distinct advantages and uses.

The 2012 film, Lincoln (Kenney & Spielberg), is ripe with examples of the various styles

of listening. In fact, listening played such a central part in the film, I daresay listening changed the

course of American history. I admit, at first, I did not recognize listening’s level of importance in

the movie. But, a central tenant of Gonzaga’s Organizational Leadership program is the concept

of seeing and seeing again. A second screening of the movie made clearer for me just how pivotal

listening, and its “partner in crime” silence, were to Lincoln’s leadership style. Lincoln is one of

the most iconic America presidents because of his contributions to American history: the end of

both slavery and the Civil War. While he surely possessed many important leadership qualities,

this film reveals why listening was key among them. In the pages that follow, I will examine scenes

from Lincoln (2012, Kenny & Spielberg) that illustrate three of the various styles of listening

Lincoln employed: (1) Listening to Listening, (2) Generative Listening, and (3) Empathetic

Listening. Each of these varietals of listening coupled with Lincoln’s overall capacity to listen

from a servant-leader disposition changed history.

Listening Type #1: Listening to Listening

Lincoln’s use of listening to listening, a form of generative dialogue, was the key to

unlocking the previously impenetrable path to support for the Thirteen Amendment from Thaddeus
How Listening Changed History 3

Stevens. The film depicts Stevens as a lynchpin in gaining support for the passage of the

amendment. Without him, a whole contingent of the House of Representatives would withhold

support for the amendment due to its not going far enough to ensure full equality for blacks.

Without him, the amendment would surely fail.

From various scenes in the movie, we can assume that the relationship between President

Lincoln and Stevens is at best strained. In particular, is the interaction between Mary Lincoln and

Thaddeus Stevens in the receiving line at the White House party (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012).

Mrs. Lincoln effectively rips into Stevens for his past treatment of her husband while the President

looks on smilingly, suggesting he does not much care for Stevens himself (Kennedy & Spielberg,

2012). And yet, moments later President Lincoln and Stevens are downstairs in the kitchen

discussing the upcoming vote on the amendment, clearly at odds with one another (Kennedy &

Spielberg, 2012).

Throughout the conversation, Lincoln is acutely aware of how what he says impacts

Stevens, and he pivots accordingly to gain Steven’s support. The crux of listening to listening is

“constantly tailoring what is being said to the audience’s understanding; this is not about changing

our talk to say what the listeners want to hear; rather, it is about adjusting what we are saying for

the greater clarity of the listener” (Horsman, p. 19). Lincoln does not pander to Stevens or pretend

they want the same thing. Instead, he adjusts his message for Stevens to better understand why

voting for the amendment is the only viable path to what he (Stevens) wants to seek further down

the road. Lincoln picks up on Stevens’ subtle use of the imagery of a compass and turns it on its

head. You can detect a visible change in Steven’s receptivity to Lincoln when he (Lincoln) says:

“A compass, I learnt when I was surveying, it’ll - it’ll point you True North from

where you’re standing, but it’s got no advice about the swamps and deserts and
How Listening Changed History 4

chasms that you’ll encounter along the way. If in pursuit of your destination you

plunge ahead, heedless of obstacles, and achieve nothing more than to sink in a

swamp, what’s the use of knowing True North?” (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012,

58:20).

Listening to listening is about persuasion as opposed to manipulation. The moment

Lincoln spoke those words, they came to “express the truth of what the audience (Stevens)

desires and needs to hear” (Horsman, p. 19). Greenleaf makes an important distinction

between manipulation and coercion. In the former, the speaker guides the listener to an

ending they do not truly desire. It leaves the listener questioning “how did I end up here?!”

In the latter, the speaker provides the listener a logical steppingstone to their perspective,

but in this case, the listener “arrives at a feeling of rightness about a belief or action through

one’s own intuitive sense” (Greenleaf, 1996, p. 129). It was critical and likely would have

been impossible for Lincoln to convince Stevens in any other way other than persuasion.

Stevens would go on to support the amendment to its fullest. Not because Lincoln talked

him into it, but because Lincoln provided him with a logical understanding of why the

amendment did in fact mesh with his own values. Without utilizing listening to listening in

this moment, Lincoln may well not have found the key to connecting with Stevens and

earning his support.

Also of note in this scene, is the role values play in one’s receptivity to listening. It

is not revealed until the end of the movie why Thaddeus Stevens so vehemently fought for

full equality for blacks – he was secretly married to a black woman. We know heightened

emotions interfere with our ability to listen clearly (Burley-Allen, 1995, p. 59). In the early

stages of the movie, Stevens shows himself to be an emotional character. In fact, Woods
How Listening Changed History 5

wanted to bait Stevens into an emotional response on the House floor (Kennedy &

Spielberg, 2012). His marriage could have presented a major emotional barrier to listening

to Lincoln in their kitchen meeting. Like he did on the House flood, Stevens tempered his

emotions. What allowed Stevens to be receptive to Lincoln in this scene was his underlying

values. A major filter for how we listen is our values. Unless our values are piqued by what

the speaker has to say, our attentiveness and receptivity to their message will likely be lost

(Burley-Allen, 1995, p. 51). Though Lincoln did not know it (nor did the viewer), Stevens

was primed to be attentive to Lincoln because of the very personal value he placed on

equality.

Listening Type #2: Generative Listening

One of the most noticeable elements of Lincoln’s communication style in the film was his

comfort level with silence. In numerous scenes, Lincoln leaves intentional space in conversations.

It was within one of those pockets of silence that his most critical decision emerged. Through

generative listening, Lincoln discerned what needed to be done to ensure the 13th Amendment went

to a vote without compromising an opportunity to negotiate for peace.

The scene opens with Lincoln seated with two telegraph operators, his head down,

emotionally conflicted about the right course of action (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012). He initially

tells the young operator to send a message requesting the commissioners meet him in Washington,

knowing this would eliminate the possibility for a vote on the amendment. Then silence. In that

moment, Lincoln was in Mode Two of Ignatius’ three modes of discernment (Horsman, p. 23).

Clearly, not feeling comfortable with the decision, he takes more time to search when the operator

asks if he can transmit the message (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012). Lincoln changes the subject.
How Listening Changed History 6

What follows is a question and answer exchange with Lincoln asking the young men several

profound philosophical questions and then sitting patiently in the silence of the unknown.

Horsman describes generative listening as “attending to the deep silence within as we

creatively listen to hear and comprehend the meaning of what we hear, feel, and see being spoken

around us” (p. 18). During this exchange, Lincoln is fully present to the young men. The generative

spark ignites when one of the young men mentions he is an engineer. Lincoln grabs on to this and

proceeds to ask him about Euclid’s first common notion: “things which are equal to the same thing

are equal to each other” (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012, 1:17:13). Without even intending it

“something wholly new is stimulated…Strategic questions and solutions that we hadn’t considered

before may simply emerge, in part, because our judgments and biases are in check” (Horsman, p.

18). At that moment, Lincoln discerned the solution; no longer conflicted and with ultimate

certainty, he was in Ignatius’ Mode One (Horsman, p. 23).

Lincoln did not initiate the conversation with the telegraph operators knowing a creative

idea would emerge. He only knew that he wanted more time, more information to ensure he was

making the right decision. Without being fully present and listening with his whole self to the

young men, he would have been unable to engage in the creative process. I imagine that absent the

heavy silence involved in this generative listening conversation, Lincoln would not have changed

the telegraph to request the commissioners wait for him in Virginia. Sardello (2008) writes that

“when pauses ease into and over the words, the character of the words change. They become filled

with soul because a word that is open to Silence resonates with our own soul being” (p. 49-50).

This seems to describe the experience of Lincoln. The pauses in the conversation injected a deeper

sense of meaning to everything all parties said. The silence allowed the depth of what was said to

reach into Lincoln’s soul, allowing him to emerge with newfound clarity.
How Listening Changed History 7

Listening Type #3: Empathetic Listening

A final history-defining listening type deployed by Lincoln in the film is empathetic

listening. An important starting point for this style of listening is that Lincoln entered most every

conversation with the utmost respect. Especially in those conversations with stark differences in

the power dynamic (e.g. the two black soldiers at the beginning of the film, the Jolly’s, with Mrs.

Keckley after the opera), Lincoln is without any physical barriers between him and those he is

speaking with. Physical barriers, regardless of whether it is an object like a desk that physically

separates parties or a physical condition like fatigue, are an obstacle to listening (Burley-Allen,

1995, p. 64). A lack of physical barriers created an atmosphere of respect if not exactly equals in

Lincoln’s interactions. On many occasions, it would likely have been easy for President Lincoln

to engage from the position of “I’m OK-You’re Not OK” (Burley-Allen, 1995, p. 32-33). But,

rarely did that appear to happen. Instead, in most cases, he approached discussions from an “I’m

OK-You’re OK” position (p. 32-33). My observation is that this allowed his conversations to be

deeply relational and for Lincoln to tap into a more empathetic listening style.

One such occasion was Lincoln’s one-on-one with Mrs. Keckley on the White House steps

after he attended an opera. From earlier scenes, I gathered that one of the biggest philosophical

hurdles for several of the potential democratic supporters was the idea of what ending slavery

meant long term – they were leery of what Pandora’s box of other rights full emancipation miht

create: the right to vote, interracial marriage, etc. Lincoln inquires of Ms. Keckley whether she is

afraid of what might happen were the amendment to pass; what will become of “her people” once

slavery is done (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012). Mrs. Keckley responds: “What my people are to be,

I can’t say. Negroes have been fighting and dying for freedom since the first of us was a slave. I
How Listening Changed History 8

never heard any ask what freedom will bring. Freedom’s first” (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012,

1:34:45).

What I witnessed in those several minutes was what Horsman called empathetic listening

(p. 17-18). Lincoln appeared to feel what Mrs. Keckley felt. For a moment, he was in her shoes.

What she said was “freedom’s first,” but what she meant was “yes, there are potentially so many

more troubles down the road, but what does any of it matter if at the end of the day we are still

slaves?” Seeing the issue from Mrs. Keckley’s vantage point gave Lincoln a new sense of purpose.

While in previous scenes Lincoln felt the intellectual weight of the vote, in this scene the weight

became something more deeply personal. At least from a cinematic standpoint, this interaction

sparked a more hands-on intervention with procuring the votes as the next scene has Lincoln

meeting directly with Schell and his colleagues to brainstorm their next steps, something he had

not done to that point. This more hands-on approach would prove to be critical as Lincoln would

go on to meet with George Yeaman in a similarly empathetic conversation (Kennedy & Spielberg,

2012).

Conclusion

Listening is not only a skill, but a highly nuanced experience. On its surface, it appears

easy and natural. But, to be a true servant-leader, one must devote time to the study and practice

of the various types of listening. Lincoln (Kennedy & Spielberg, 2012) provided a wonderful

laboratory for such a study. It was an opportunity to further reflect on my own listening strengths

and weaknesses as a servant-leader in training. Specifically, as someone who tends to listen mostly

from my head, what Burley-Allen (1995) call an “intellectual listener,” I want to channel more of

Lincoln’s relational, empathetic listening skills. I also would like to cultivate the presence that he
How Listening Changed History 9

brings to his interactions. In a world chock full of multi-tasking and that prides itself on production,

this empathetic quality to servant-leadership can be quickly lost. By becoming a more proficient

listener who knows what impact we may have in our sphere of influence. Perhaps, though listening,

we may even change the course of history.

How Listening Changed History 10

References
Burley-Allen, M. (1995). Listening: The forgotten skill—A self-teaching guide. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Greenleaf, R. (1996). On becoming a servant leader. Frick, D. & Spears, L. (Ed.). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Horsman, J. (2017). Foundations of servant leadership: Listening & communication issues.

Horsman, J. Foundations of the philosophy of servant-leadership.

Kennedy, K. (Producer) & Spielberg, S. (Director). (2012). Lincoln [Motion picture]. USA:
Touchstone Pictures.

Sardello, R. (2008). Silence: The mystery of wholeness. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.