Analysis of Barack Obama Inaugural Address
It was a moment and a speech that people have waited for since election night in November. In a historical sense it was a speech that some people thought they would never hear in their lifetime. President Barack Obama made history being sworn in as our country’s first African-American president and delivered a speech that will be remembered by supporter and foe as ushering in a new era of leadership and communication.
President Barack Obama’s Inaugural speech was well-written and well-read, something that can’t be said of Inaugural addresses since 1996.
Style: Obama gave an average speech. But an “average” speech for Obama has been fantastic, stylistically, at least for the last year. Obama continued to read the teleprompter well (not a skill that should ever be dismissed). Obama pauses brilliantly, changes his pace, speed, tone and volume for maximum dramatic impact. Everything about Obama’s body language and use of his voice conveys confidence, authority, and command.
Minor Nit to Pick: Obama is a much more skillful Teleprompter reader than most politicians, but there is one thing he does incorrectly. He turns his head too quickly back and forth from the left TelePrompTer screen to the right screen. He is doing this every 2-3 seconds. He would appear much steadier and even more confident if he simply read off of the same TelePrompTer for a full thought (about 6-8 seconds) before turning to the other prompter. This would create an even steadier presence and allow for people in the audience to feel as though he were speaking directly to them.
Substance: Obama managed to communicate two very important and, at times, contradictory messages. On the one hand, he laid out the case that the world is in extreme crisis and that tough choices and sacrifice would have to be made by all. On the other hand, he expressed extreme optimism that problems could be solved. He deftly criticized old ideologies that idolized free markets as infallible, and yet expressed his core belief in capitalism. The speech was light on programmatics, as it should be. Instead, Obama focused on painting a broad picture of the human condition at the moment and what his general approaches would be. On the one side, he’s not afraid to suggest that these radical times will require radical solutions, and on the other, he is as mainstream, moderate, and reassuring as they come. He consistently flavored his speech with a wider range of yin and yang than his predecessors. Obama thanked God and mentioned the US is a country of Christians, Jews and Muslims, but he also, courageously, mentioned that we are a nation that includes non-believers.
Packaging of the substance: Obama’s speech lacked noticeable sound bites present from other past great inaugurals, i.e. Kennedy’s “ask not…” The problem for Obama is that today’s media culture fancies itself so sound bite savvy that it is harder for politicians to use them in a major address without sounding gimmicky.
Minor detractions: Obama’s presentation began before the actual “‘speech” started. The presentation is the moment you stand up. And in this case, it began with his swearing in portion with Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. Both men made small blunders. Unfortunately for Obama, he is under such a microscope that his enemies will pounce on every mistake, no matter how microscopic. Because Obama did not actually say the Oath of Office word for word in a correct manner, I fully anticipate that right-wing fringe groups will file a flurry of lawsuits claiming he is not legitimately in office. Of course, this will be dismissed by the courts as frivolous, but only after months and months of costly litigation. (Don’t laugh, conservative opponents tried to have Obama disqualified by claiming he couldn’t prove he was a natural born citizen and fought it all the way to the Supreme Court.) My suspicion is that Obama practiced his inaugural speech numerous times (it showed) but did not rehearse the swearing in portion, and that he did not rehearse it with the chief justice. In retrospect, it would have been well worth it to have spent 10 minutes rehearsing the swearing in portion so that it could have gone of flub-free.
Trackback • Posted by TJ Walker in Uncategorized category
Please leave a reply...
TJ I think you are being too generous toward his speech, and makes me wonder if you have been hanging out with Chris Matthews. The speech was one any politician could have made. It was boring and devoid of any signature lines, like his speech four yrs ago, and the speeches of the Iowa Caucus Maybe he wanted a more somber speech, and maybe they messed it up because they (the speech writer’s and Obama) wanted to “include” all sides in the speech. Either way, way I expected much more and was disappointed. I suspect that is a theme we will gain again and again in the next four years.
Great analysis, TJ–I agree with you on all points. It looks like they took the warning on lawsuits seriously as they already re-did the oath. I agree you need to practice everything, and even more so when OTHERS are involved in “your” speech!
From a Norwegian perspective and I would say from many in Europe as well, the speech Obama gave is rather unique of its kind. As seen from a little distance, Mr. Obama seems to combine what clever brains (his and his ghost writers’) can produce of a well balanced message with numbers of allegories – without being too ‘flowerish’ – with very, very good communication skills. I can tell you that I cannot see any politicians in Norway who could be described this way. So far the marketing has been brilliant. Now we are only waiting for the goods to be delivered, together with the rest of the world…
A very intresting analysis indeed. For me watching on the television, he looked very natural and impressive.I could not tell he was reading of the teleprompter!
T.J.
In less than 20 minutes, President Obama, touched on a myriad of topics and issues most of us share. He addressed absentee parents and agnostics, Muslims and military readiness, careless spending to costly health-care, greed and God, founding fathers and foes or our nation . . . The list exceeds my alliterative capabilities.
It was concise, comprehensive and commanding.
Upon hearing it the first time, I expressed some disappointment in that it lacked an catch phrase, but the state of our society requires more than rhetoric. Upon listening again, I appreciate the skill necessary to craft such an address. I choose to be optimistic that as Mr. Obama’s “fellow citizens” we are up to his challenge
TJ Walker, “Don’t laugh, conservative opponents tried to have Obama disqualified by claiming he couldn’t prove he was a natural born citizen and fought it all the way to the Supreme Court.)” Do you think it is a minor point that the President of the US actually be a US citizen?? Why did he hide or not provide proof of his US citizenship?? If he had done so in a proper manner this would not have been an issue at all!!
I disagree with Kiara, I do not think this a speech that could have been given by any politician. It may seem that way from some elements of what is on the surface, but a closer inspection of the content of the speech seemed quite different to me. We cannot forget that the man is a politician, bound to certain realities of performing that job successfully, and also leader to all Americans, many of which did not vote for him.
I think he did a masterful job of balancing leading us forward in a new direction breaking from the past and communicating a level of familiarity and “sameness” to help create a feeling of security and comfort to those that may be experiencing fear of change. And of course, he will never be able to please everyone…
Regarding sound bites – I wondered why Obama didn’t use his rally call “yes we can” would it have been a great chance to reinforce optimism once more during this time of change. And would this have been considered a “sound bite”?
I was impressed by Obama’s speech from the beginning to the end. He started off his speech with “My fellow citizens,” instead of more common “My fellow Americans.” This “My fellow citizens” well accords with the line “This is the price and the promise of citizenship.” Then he says, “I stand here today, humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors.” Probably, the word “humbled” has never been used by 43 U.S. presidents. It may carry a negative connotation to many Americans, but I think it is an appropriate choice when I take into consideration the enormous scale of the task he has to handle as a realist.
He stood there not only “humbled”,but also “grateful” and “mindful.” As regards sound bites in his speech, I think his phrasing “we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America” is definitely one of his punch lines. This phrase has reminded me of the musical Swing Time (1936), of which the lyrics goes: “Nothing’s impossible, I have found. For when my chin is on the ground, I pick myself up, dust myself off, start all over again.” 1936 was still amidst the Great Depression. I think it’s a nice choice.
Great point about Obama’s use of the TelePrompter. It’s a skill that politicians and businesspeople have to master when they rise high enough to get the miserable things. TelePrompters make bad speakers average, because they get speakers’ heads up from their notes, and they give the appearance of making eye contact. But when you get to Obama’s level, then you need to do more than just the ‘tennis match’ effect of left-right-left-right eye and head motion. Obama should study President Reagan’s speeches; he was a master at moving his head more naturally, lagging the eye movement, and generally looking like he was conversing with the audience. His conversational content helped, too; Obama’s rhetoric for the inaugural was a little too formal.
Going over the transcript, I noticed even Barak Obama’s cultured, superb Inaugural speech is not immune to grammatical “errors,” which includes:
1. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted ….. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things. (should be “Rather, it has been the path for the risk-takers, ..?.
2. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job…(should be “see a friend lose his/her job” a permissible?)
3. The question we ask today is not whether it works–whether it helps families jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.(What should be the verb for “care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified”? “helps families find care they can afford, find a retirement that is dignified”?)
4. For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the fail and determination of the American people, upon which this nation relies. (Understandable, but the use of “For as much as (Forasmuch as?)does not seem to fit here (or does it?)
Aside from these grammatical “uncomfortables”, the ending part of his speech goes: “At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people: ‘Let it be told to the future world…that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive… that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet it.’”
Contextually, the father of our nation refers to George Washington in Valley Forge, and that “these words” in “these words be read” might naturally be taken by Washington’s words. But in fact, I think it comes from Tomas Pain’s American Crisis. Here I experienced some referential problems.
Referring back to my January 29th blog, I made two typos.
(1)I mistakenly ommitted “find” in “whether it helps families jobs at a decent wage” (Obama’s original version was “whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage.”
(2) The word “fail” in “it is ultimately the fail” should be replaced by “faith.”
It’s true that Mr.OBAMA/PRESIDENT,speech is not flawless, neither is your instructions on how to become a great speaker. the closes you have come to not sounding like you are not a gimmic to promote your product is allowing the person that corrected the President, words that were gramatically incorrect is a true analysis based on the English spoken word. Remember this is a Black president a Black man and words have conotation/denotions meaning as well as slang, to relate to the world.the camera is what made the speech look fake. The President/MR.Obama was perfect in following the rules of public speaking,according to the experts and he is a expert at public speaking.
Hi Richard,
Interesting perspective–I’m usually accused of being too pro-Obama. I hope you can watch some of my new video on how to speak like Obama. I’d love your feedback–tj
I have been critical of Obama’s teleprompting cadence as I am a professor of public communications, he never makes eye contact with the audience from the podium. Once he is off script he proceeds to hang his head looking for an answer. Too long responses with exposition dialogue and too many topics. If the question is stimulus package, how did he end up with healthcare, jobs, commerce, the census, Alaskan pipeline, Stevie Wonder, his children’s school, and more..!!
If you want to see some constructive analysis on the inauguration speech there’s a pretty good piece at: http://psworkbench.blogspot.com/ called “5 reasons why you shouldn’t speak like Barack Obama”
This will surprise all but I have just recently discovered that his inaugural speech was read from a teleprompter. For some reason I thought it was from memory. But then I realized that every other past president had notes so I started wondering. It was a good speech but not anything historic along the lines of JFK or FDR. But it definitely had its strong points. Indeed, Reagan was a msterful speaker too. Great physical gestures.
Barack Obama is a good president. he is perhaps the most tech savvy president in the US.