I wouldn't comment on his character as a person or his performance as the PM but I have been reading his journalism and other writing for years and he is a brilliant writer. I taught English language and style at A level for many years and am well able to analyse literary style.
Boris is clever, witty and well informed and he has a grasp of the language and of how to write in a clear and entertaining manner, such as few others possess. This sometimes comes out in his off the cuff remarks albeit disguised by his blustering and stuttering delivery. His speeches are well crafted and he, unlike most leaders, writes his own material.
His bon mots are memorable and are characterised by an ability to create original and contemporary metaphors and similes and, of course, his classical training is evident in his use of rhetorical devices where he unites the demotic and the elevated to pithy and amusing effect.
I realise these observations will infuriate many who focus on his actions as a man and as PM but they cannot be gainsaid and most people will not have read anything he's actually written.
Boris Johnson used to make £800,000 a year by his writing and now has to 'manage' on £160,00 as Prime Minister.
I would suggest that many people respond to those who can wield language effectively without realising how they are being beguiled. I have no doubt that Boris' language skills are a large part of his popularity and other politicians who possessed a linguistic gift also succeeded in politics: Churchill, Blair, Kinnock to name a few. Starmer, in comparison, speaks and writes like a lawyer and is nowhere near as engaging.
As I say, I refer not to the man but the writer.
