|
Llewellyn
King
Read Llewellyn's bio and previous columns
March 24, 2008
Barack Obama and the
Return of the Great Political Speech
In
this extraordinary political season, last week introduced a new
dimension a minute examination of one candidate's rhetorical skills.
Barack Obama was put under the microscope to see whether he could
produce a transcendental speech that would nullify the excesses of his
pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
That this should be is extraordinary in itself. We have heretofore
judged politicians on their religious affiliation, but not on the
utterances of a particular clergyman.
More as a people we have shied away from lofty rhetoric, favoring
meat-and-potatoes speech. Our best orators have not played well with the
electorate, although sometimes they have handed down memorable thoughts.
William Jennings Bryan comes to mind as the preeminent orator of his
day. We still remember his mesmerizing Cross of Gold speech, but we
also remember him as being baited and brought down by Clarence Darrow in
the Scopes Monkey Trial. Today, we adore the cascading cadences of
Martin Luther King Jr. But his was a voice of protest, a cry of pain,
not a solicitation for votes.
One of our best orators was Sen. Everett Dirksen of Illinois, who filled
the Senate chamber with speech but changed no minds. In that, he was
like Winston Churchill before World War II. According to Roy Jenkins's
detailed book on Churchill's parliamentary life, members of the House of
Commons revered Churchill's eloquence but resisted his logic. Jenkins
reports that when it was known that Churchill was to speak, the House
would fill up with enthusiastic members who came for the show. But that
was all they came for.
Rhetoric had its birth, and maybe its finest hours, in the ancient Greek
democracy. The ability to argue brilliantly in public was revered as
established as an art form. It continued, but was modified, in the Roman
Forum. As the Roman state became more important than the individual, the
nature of public oration changed: Disputation surrendered to the
triumphalism of Julius Caesar.
Through history there were great speakers from the thrones and the
pulpits. But the growth of parliamentary democracy in England brought
the art of public persuasion back to life, as it had been in Greece and
Rome.
Initially, when British parliaments reflected only a small part of the
population, debate was erudite with many references to the classics. As
the franchise expanded in the 19th Century, the language was
modified to be more comprehensible to the public.
The House of Commons provided an arena, and rhetorical success there
meant success in politics, witness H. H. Asquith, David Lloyd George,
F.E. Smith, Charles Parnell and Daniel O'Connell. The Liberal William
Gladstone and the Conservative Benjamin Disraeli, the great rivals, went
about it with scholarship and wit, enhanced by their personal antipathy
to each other. Gladstone was the greatest orator (he could speak without
notes for four hours), but Disraeli excelled at repartee the quick
thrust and the lethal turn-of-phrase were his weapons. So popular were
Gladstone's speeches that he had to employ shouters men who stood just
in earshot and repeated the great man's words so that people could hear
them.
Broadcasting has banished the thundering speech in favor of a more
intimate conversation between politician and voter. Franklin D.
Roosevelt understood this and changed political speech from big, bold
oratory to a crowd to intimate communication to individuals. He also
understood the value of scarcity, and addressed the nation infrequently,
compared to today's presidents who broadcast once a week to an
inattentive nation. Ronald Reagan, always referred to as a great
communicator not a great orator, followed the FDR example of delivering
big ideas in soft, informal language.
Whether or not Obama becomes the Democratic nominee and president, he
has raised the rhetorical stakes. He has melded something of the
eloquence of the 19th Century with the collegiate delivery of
today. He has also raised expectations for his future speeches. People
will expect them to be as well-crafted and as nuanced as his
Philadelphia speech. As a speaker, Obama will always be compared to
himself and that is a high standard.
© 2008 North Star
Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.
Click here to talk to our writers and
editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.
To e-mail feedback
about this column,
click here. If you enjoy this writer's
work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry
it.
This
is Column # LK037.
Request permission to publish here. |
