So much does our culture prize personality over achievement that even lawyers these days have to have an “interesting” one. Take the director general of business tax – at Britain’s Inland Revenue – one Jim Harra. A key figure in negotiating a derisory tax deal with Google, he has also, believe it or not, been voted “Tax Personality of the Year”. Yes, at the Taxation Awards Harra won the prized statuette. (which is interesting, because if you have a tax issue with the British authorities and you phone them,you are told you will have to wait on the line for 45  minutes to speak to someone.  Presumably, they are all awarding one another statuettes for personality).

What is it with this modern stress on personality, anyway? Why does the BBC think being “Sports Personality of the Year” matters more than being, well, “good at sport”. Do our politicians really have to be interesting; can’t they just be competent? Nothing personal, but I always prefer people who just get on with the job. (adapted from an article by Elizabeth Day, The Observer).

I suppose the “importance” of personality must owe something to Facebook, where the public quickly learns the value of self-promotion and one-uppedness. What people talk less about is the sense of humour that ought to go with it, particularly, a sense of humour about themselves. I happen to live most of my life in arguably the most serious city in the world, a capital of a country that thinks of itself as the greatest country in the world. Which is why poking a bit of fun at it, its pomposities and its capital, should be a happy pastime for all educated people; but it isn’t. When did people stop stop realizing that they are faintly preposterous, and why don’t they laugh at themselves?

If you want to be a real “personality” don’t take yourself too seriously.