Inauguration Dress Rehearsal
President-Elect Obama hasn't even given his Inaugural Address and I'm already sick of it.
The media, with seven long days of air time to fill between here and the big day, has started to go all tingly with anticipation about The Speech.
"History Calls On Obama To Uncork a Great Speech," says the Newsweek.
"Will Obama's Inaugural Address Become Memorable?" frets the Associated Press.
"JFK's Speechwriter: Obama's Will Be 'One of the Greatest,'" WBUR Boston reassures us.
Etcetera, etcetera.
Fact is, the odds are really stacked against him.
There have been 55 inaugural addresses since the beginning of the American presidency, and we remember a few lines from, maybe, five of them.
It hasn't really mattered whether the president in question was a good orator or a bad one, whether they wrote the speech themselves or brought in a team of experts, whether he was speaking in times of peace and prosperity, or war and despair. It may well be that inaugural addresses are, by nature, ephemeral -- spoken and forgotten.
And Obama has some additional burdens.
First, he's already beaten themes like "hope" and "change" -- perennials in the inaugural speech garden -- to a bloody plup over more than a year of campaign speechifying.
Second, his speechwriters tend to choke when asked to come up with a speech for the ages. His address at the Democratic convention this summer was little more than a lumpen laundry list of promises wrapped around his usual themes....perhaps well-delivered, but certainly not memorable. Same in Belin: it was a great spectacle, but try to remember a single line without looking it up.
Finally, there's there sheer weight of expectations. Millions of people are going to be expecting a transcendent, historic moment in Washington next week. Most will be satiated, but only in the short term. Truly "historic" moments can't be stage-managed; they're memorable because they surprised us -- because we didn't see them coming, because we had no expectations.
So I have a recommendation.
If only one or two lines are going to be truly "memorable," why not drop the 20 or 30 minutes spiel and just throw everything toward those two lines?
Instead of channeling Lincoln, Kennedy or Roosevelt, why not take a (very small) page from George Washington? After his swearing in for a second term on March 4, 1793, General Washington gave the shortest speech in inaugural history -- just 135 words:
Fellow Citizens: I am again called upon by the voice of my country to execute the functions of its Chief Magistrate. When the occasion proper for it shall arrive, I shall endeavor to express the high sense I entertain of this distinguished honor, and of the confidence which has been reposed in me by the people of united America.
Previous to the execution of any official act of the President the Constitution requires an oath of office. This oath I am now about to take, and in your presence: That if it shall be found during my administration of the Government I have in any instance violated willingly or knowingly the injunctions thereof, I may (besides incurring constitutional punishment) be subject to the upbraidings of all who are now witnesses of the present solemn ceremony.
Really, doesn't that about cover it?
---------------------
More of the flotsam and jetsam rolling thought my brain these days: Sarah Palin's "attack" on the media, why criticism of Israel is a positive thing, whether Sanjay Gupta is a fat-o-phobe.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Max Rivlin-Nadler
Janis Jaquith
Emily Holleman
Dave Cullen
Akopsa
iamsurly
Salon.com
Comments
:-)
We have not the focus nor the interest in detailed explanations of complex concepts facing the country. We want the slogan. If they give us the detail, "reporters" who fail to understand they are not to offer their editorial opinions will simply cherry pick from the elaboration that which supports their pre conceived notion and try to pawn it off to us as objective reporting, be it from the "fair and balanced" right or the "biased left."
A pox on both their houses, goddamnit all!
First of all, can you really be sick of the speech before he has given it? What about the speech are you sick of, given that you have admittedly not heard it yet? Do you hate foods that you have never heard of? Sick of people that you have not met, nor are aware of their existence? Dislike the beaches on planets in distant galaxies that have not been discovered yet? You may be sick of something, but I assure you it is not the speech. You are transferring that feeling from something. If I were to guess, I would say its the conversation about the speech, as you stated. The burger has not been served yet, and you're condemning it based upon the cutlery.
Second, every inauguration cries out for a great speech. Motivating and focusing direction for a democratic republic is a difficult thing. But today, in our 2009, shit on it attitude about anything ambitious, the time has never been better for a great inauguration speech. Baby boomers and their spawn who as a generation(s) have never had much to overcome but their pampered id have cashed a lot of civilization checks, steadily drawing on the account, but have made few contributions. Ugly, dangerous social viruses are growing as they did in the early 20th century, and apathy is allowing the torch to get dangerously close to the gun powder. Civilization needs saving. Bridges, literal and most importantly metaphorical, need building. I have been waiting my whole life, and as heir to my family's dreams, my parents lives, grandparents lives, and great grandparents lives for this speech. I look forward to this speech. I shall marinate my soul in every syllable. I will hang on every concept. And I will be open to every bit of advice to focus on bringing our country together.
I was sick of hearing about Acai juice before I tried it. It was ok, but hardly transformational.
But yes, I am tired of this media leg-humping dressed up as objective journalism. "Wow, it's going to be fabulous!" is not insightful. Let it happen, then tell me what you thought of it. Or better yet, just point your fucking cameras at the podium, and let me make up my own mind about what I see and hear.
As to setting direction, do you recognize this quote:
" But the stakes for America are never small. If our country does not lead the cause of freedom, it will not be led. If we do not turn the hearts of children toward knowledge and character, we will lose their gifts and undermine their idealism. If we permit our economy to drift and decline, the vulnerable will suffer most.
We must live up to the calling we share. Civility is not a tactic or a sentiment. It is the determined choice of trust over cynicism, of community over chaos. And this commitment, if we keep it, is a way to shared accomplishment."
Beautiful passage. Obama could knock that out of the park.
But it's from Bush's first Inaugural.
And I guess that's my point....if you go back through the history of these addresses -- full archive at http://www.bartleby.com/124/index.html -- there's a remarkable continuity of themes, and in the post-Hoover era, a plethora of promises, but when the speech is done and the parades and parties are over, the Ship of State is sill largely driven by the currents, and not by any one man.
But hey, that's the beauty of democracy, right. You can marinate away, and I can be dry as overcooked steak.
thumbs up for the good GW ;)
sentences. Keeps things in balance.
However, I agree with the post. He has been over promoted like a Will Smith movie.
I just want the man to get to work.
While Obama may be different that Bush in what he believes and how he thinks things should be done, in the end he's still a politician.
I say stop talking and just get to work.
Actually, talk all you want at the inauguration. I'm going to read a book that night, anyway. ;-)
NEENER!
(thumbified because I feel guilty for being a smart ass on your blog.)
Don't feel guilty, I love smartasses!