Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
The Poetry Of A Political Speech
Presidential nomination acceptance speeches surely aim to create great quotes, not to repeat them. So I should have figured that when I went digging around in such speeches this past week looking for lines of poetry, I'd come up empty handed. Well, almost. George McGovern quoted William Butler Yeats in '72: "Count where man's glory most begins and ends, and say: My glory was I had such friends," but went on to win just one state and 17 electoral votes. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the political power of verse.
It's not that candidates never quote. Many, including Obama Thursday night, pull from the Bible, and everyone, and I mean everyone, quotes Lincoln. Gerald Ford, oddly, quoted himself in his acceptance speech. Twice. He then--and I'm not making this up--quoted an imaginary voter saying, "Jerry, you have done a good job, keep right on doing it." Eisenhower, in his '56 speech, quoted the great 19th Century Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen: "I hold that man is in the right who is most clearly in league with the future." Because nothing says America like 19th Century Norway!
While poetry may not be referenced often, the best speeches are full of poetry themselves, most notably in their emphasis on rhythm. I'm not thinking of the metrical regularity of formal verse, but rather the cadences of the bible--seized upon by great preachers like Martin Luther King--which Walt Whitman turned into his grand and rolling verse. It's rhythm as Mary Oliver described it in her book A Poetry Handbook:
"When we feel a pleasurable rhythm we hope it will continue. When it does, the sweet grows sweeter. When it becomes reliable, we are in a kind of body-heaven."
What's "body-heaven"? I'm pretty sure that it's what happens when you listen to Barack Obama speak.
Repetition is another commonly used poetic technique. When it's well delivered orally or on the page, repetition ratchets up the intensity of a poem or speech--each reappearance of a familiar phrase becomes a brief moment of pleasure, and repetitions build on each other, heightening the effect. Look at the power of refrain in this famous speech Winston Churchill delivered on June 4, 1940, during the early, dark days of World War II:
"We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France,
we shall fight on the seas and oceans,
we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender..."
Obama, too, is masterful at building momentum through refrain, as he did in this excerpt from his speech Thursday night:
"Now is the time to help families with paid sick days and better family leave, because nobody in America should have to choose between keeping their job and caring for a sick child or an ailing parent.
Now is the time to change our bankruptcy laws, so that your pensions are protected ahead of CEO bonuses, and the time to protect Social Security for future generations.
And now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day's work, because I want my daughters to have the exact same opportunities as your sons."
Of course, when it's poorly presented, repetition can seem stilted and suffocating. Remember McCain's speech before that infamous lime green jello backdrop: "That's not change we can believe in....he he he ..." (shudder).
Finally, one of my favorite poetic and rhetorical tricks is the chiasma. The term is related to the Greek letter Χ and means "crossing". Chiasmas have a symmetrical/mirrored structure, and have the effect of subconsciously signaling a conclusion. Here's a simple example from Romeo and Juliet:
"This love feel I that feel no love in this."
Shakespeare's is an interesting line, but a good chiasma is a literary firework--an "OH!" moment -- and Bill Clinton's delivered a great one Wednesday night:
"People around the world have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power."
It's a simple idea--one that you've surely heard before. Delivered poetically, as it was, it smacked of brilliance.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Some comments:
I thought Pres. Clinton's line that you quoted was the most important sentence in the whole convention. It reminded me of Pres. Kennedy, and the truth of that statement is totally lost on very many people, and almost all Republicans. It really is the power of our example that makes us strong. Five percent of the world's population will not, in the end, be able to hold down the other 95% if they do not respect us for more than our armaments.
Sen. Obama is a very good speaker in comparison to Bush and McCain, but so far it is the beauty of his ideas, not the beauty of his prose, that is most impressive. He may never be as good a speaker as Pres. Clinton, but I believe that he will be an even better president. Mr. Churchill was one of the best speakers in English history, but he made some pretty dumb executive decisions. So far, Sen. Obama has shown himself to be an excellent student of history, and a competent user of English prose.
Ms. Andersen, your comment about Pres. Eisenhower and 19th century Norway may be a tad unfair. If Norway had not looked to the future in the 19th century, would they today be the country that bequeths the Nobel Peace Prize every year, and that today has the highest standard of living of any country on Earth?
There is something to be said about a president with can communicate, and does not embarrass us in the eyes of the world. Some would probably call it elitist, I call it statesmanship.
I have never been more moved by any speaker as I have been by Senator Obama. But, what stands out most in my mind is the substance of his words. He lifts my spirit and gives me hope because he has genuine ideas and plans for making America an even greater nation.
Poetic is the correct identifier: abstract and meant to illicit emotion rather than provide quality information.
Invictus
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of Circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of Chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds, and shall find me, unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invictus
You may be right, poetry offers nothing concrete for a nation of sheep waiting for the orders to jump off the cliff in mass.
I was struck by Obama's very effective use of prepositions near the end, e.g.:
"You have shown what history teaches us " that at defining moments like this one, the change we need doesn't come from Washington. Change comes to Washington."
" If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."
I find it amazing to see 1000's of comments about Mccain and Van Halen and 12 over Obama's speech. You people are so sad. What was that Dem quote "if you don't have something bad to say about someone don't post here at all". sad
Of course, if liberals have something bad to say about conservatives, there is no place to say it except on liberal sites. Comments are removed immediately from conservative sites unless the comments toe the conservative line. Perhaps you could give us a link to a conservative site that does allow liberals to comment. I sure haven't seen one yet.
I wish the trolls who come here to take advantage of this site's freedom of speech would remember that liberals are denied this same right on the trolls' own sites.
I would be happy to post something favorable if the Republicans ever did anything admirable or decent. Perhaps you could let us know if and when that happens. YOu have the freedom to post it here.
No, sir, the saying is, "If you are a repulsive Neo Con, don't bother posting here". Trolling around Progressive sites to spread your vile rhetoric, now that is sad.
Here we stand.
There we look to as the place where we feel we need to be.
What does there consist of?
Somewhere there is an American locked in a life long struggle to survive.
Somewhere there is an American shot in the street and dying.
Somewhere there is an American in a ten million dollar home.
Somewhere, an American feels very much alone, despite their family and friends.
Somewhere, an American struggles to quiet the inner demons within.
All over this land, from little girl and little boy, to full-grown woman and man, there are Americans living life, doing the best they can.
If we could generalize about the public need, if we could sum up what it means to lead, what would we say?
If we could pinpoint the problem that jeopardizes this nation from evolving beyond its inherent flaws, how would we describe our cause to wipe our flaws away?
What is the common good?
What is understood to be the peril we face?
If we are to win then suffering must end.
If we are to prevail then we must gel as a nation and come off a long vacation from the truth, and from the pride.
If America desires to stand strong then America must realize that unification of an entire nation is the coveted prize.
How can we do this with so much division?
How can unity help in a world of competition?
¦
...Continued
If my brother is strong, my family is strong.
If my sister is capable than I find that I am able.
If my neighbor thrives then that serves to keep my community alive.
Am I my sister or brother"s keeper?
Is unity cheaper than divide?
Do we pay for a cold policy of profit with precious lives?
We must pay the bills and we must grow as an economy.
We must have a free market, but not one that cons due to greed, one that misleads the people.
We cannot afford an economy of lust, "just us" feelings of selfishness carrying out evil.
Who amongst us can begrudge another for using their skills and talents to flourish and expand?
Who amongst us can harbor jealousy for any woman or man -- who through personal initiative, and hard, sweat on the brow work, achieves a measure of success and is able to rise above the dirt -- of poverty, of what is stopping many you see -- from realizing other thoughts or ideas. Poverty is the killer of wills. Poverty is insufficient morality and uncaring approaches that speak to banality -- in humankind, not elevated thought of enlightened minds.
The jails are full.
Bellies are full.
Pockets are overflowing.
So what -- it is as it ever was.
It is the same old thing until it is not.
Leadership unrepresentative of what you voted for; the analysis remains the metrics and the characteristic of what you got!
What I like about Obama's speeches is the courage to speak out. He talks about things that the average pol would avoid for fear of turning one segment of voters, with the end result of blandness--it doesn't offend anyone, but it doesn't appeal to anyone either. Obama instead takes risks. He tells the truth in a way that everyone can understand:
"We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country. The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals. I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination."
Most pols won't touch these topics with a ten-foot pole. Obama instead chose to grab them by the horns and ride them and take the expose the truth: that it's not black and white, that there are nuances, that there's more than meets the eye. That if you really look deeper into it, there's more that unites us than divides us as human beings.
Hey John,
Obama did indeed reference a great American poet in his speech.
Langston Hughes' "A Dream Deferred"
Just looking out for a fellow Clevelander.
Great poat!!!!
I enjoyed reading it.
Great speeches are written by professional writers and not by the person giving the speech.Just because a political leader can speak well and cause emotions to rise doesn't mean that the politician knows what he is talking about.It only means that he can read a speech and cause the dense minded general public to believe that he actually has a brain.
A great speech also does not mean that the politician does NOT know what s/he's talking about. They're mutually exclusive ideas.
You should know your facts before you open your mouth. Obama did the same thing for this speech that he did for his 2004 convention speech and his speech on race which was to lock himself inside a hotel room alone and write the speeches. If you have any doubt that this is possible you should read either one of his two books. Just because the majority of people who are brilliant politicians tend not to be brilliant writers does not make it so in every case. It is possible to be a great writer, orator and politician, AND know what you're talking about. You can feel free to disagree with me when I say Obama fits that description, but to suggest it is impossible would mean you're ignoring history.
That's why it's all the more impressive that Obama has the intelligence and wisdom to be able to write most of his speeches, including the beautiful and inspiring nomination acceptance speech HE WROTE, the speech on race he delivered in Philadelphia that HE WROTE, the 2004 convention speech HE WROTE, etc., etc., etc.! I can't wait to have an intelligent president in the White House. One who can not only bring ideas to the forefront, but can beautifully articulate them as well.
I bet you and others like you never had a problem with good speech givers before Senator Obama. Senator Obama supporters can't help it because the Republicans picked a nominee who can barely see the speech let alone present it in an emotional way where people go away feeling uplifted and looking forward to a brighter day in America after 8 years of Bush.
I have known several speech writers and have done some ghost writing myself. The final edit and word choice are always the speaker's in my experience. In fact, I would hazard that a very large percentage of the verbiage in a speech is actually that of the speaker. A good speechwriter simply puts things in order and works on rythym and redundancy. At least that is what I have found in the circles I travel. I'm sure there are exceptions but c'mon - the guy was president of the Harvard Law Review right? I'd be willing to bet he can write a pretty good speech.
I am such a fan of people who are able to give great speeches. Abraham Lincoln gave great speeches. Pinckney Benton Stewart Pinchback (the first African-American Govenor) gave great speeches. So did Teddy Roosevelt and John Kennedy.
Who can forget the 1984 Democratic Convention in San Francisco when Jesse Jackson Jr. gave an A+ speech, only to be outdone by Mario Cuomo who delivered his speech from memory, and without a teleprompter. I was 14 years old then, transfixed and amazed by what I was witnessing.
This is why I know Barack Obama has mastered the "poetry of political speech." His speeches have that pulsating rhythm, metophorical brilliance, and an omnipresent feel about them that inspire and speak to the differences and commonalities of the the multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-cultural, multi-generational coalition he has harvested over the past 18 months.
His speeches also have that "charisma" that you write about. The most charismatic lines of his speech were:
- "John McCain likes to say that he'll follow bin Laden to the Gates of Hell - but he won't even go to the cave where he lives."
- "The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."
Obama rocks.
He is at the top of his game right now.
His speeches are just simple poetry: so immaculate, so well crafted, so full of the goodness of humanity.
I love this man and I love his speeches even more.
I am hoping with Obama's rise that politicians begin to think about doing more in the area of giving speeches and public address. I hope Obama's rise will also help to fade away the sound bite style and force the politicians to think deeper to what they are saying and public discourse.
I have noticed since Obama came on the scene, and mostly since he began his campaign, that the word Audacity is used. I never really heard it much until then. I've noticed some other things being picked up from obama- still mostly the inept lifting from Obama's material to insert into their own but, at least they are beginning to think about these things.
Senator Obama has taken this election for President Of The United States serious from the very beginning. He and his campaign strategist came prepared to fight for the job of President. They didn't expect it to just be handed to them.
A movie chiasmus I always liked (though hardly share the sentiment) was Fredrick March as William Jenning Bryan testifying against Darwinism and geologicl dating in "Inherit the Wind.":
"I'm more interested in the Rock of Ages, than in the age of rocks!"
I remain surprised how little poetry exists in the speeches of most modern American politicians. Bill Clinton was and is a good speaker and gives some excellent speeches, but the chiasma you cited is rare for him. His thoughts, like Hillary Clinton's, are clear and display a strong intellect but generally are bereft of beauty. McCain's speeches are generally pedestrian and lack any semblence of poetry.
I think there two parts to this piece: one is the poetry of the words themselves, the other is matching the cadence of the words to the natural patterns of the speaker. This is why McCain's famous green jello speech read better than the horrid smirky delivery. His words did not match his natural speaking patterns. If you try to inject poetry without regard to the ability of the speaker, you end up with a McCain disconnect that makes the speaker appear phoney and idiotic.
The best speech writers understand poetry and have an instinctive connection to they way the politician naturally speaks. Obama writes most of his best work, which is unusual for a modern politicians. Reagan had both a fantastic speechwriter in Noonan (though she is on the opposite end of the political world from me) and an underrated ability to infuse these words (that mimicked his natural patterns) with authenticity. Ted Sorenson and JFK had the same relationship. The modern politician who is most similiar to Obama in command of policy and poetry was Winston Churchill.
Great column.
Let's all gush about Obama and his ability to read off a teleprompter not talk about how he wants to violate the constitution even further than the Republicans have.
They all read off a teleprompter, only Obama does it far, far better than almost anybody else on the trail. I understand that many of you are frustrated by that, but your not liking it doesn't make it any less true. And, there is no way that Obama could violate the constitution anymore than it has been in the last 8 years. The constitution has been ripped to shreds, with all the Bush abuses of power beginning with use of torture, suspension of habeous corpus, illegal firing of political opponents,
contempt of congress, the list goes on and on.
Obama knows the constitution. He was an exemplary law student. He studied the constitution, he TAUGHT the constitution. He knows that the constitution has been so violated in these last few years, that the rightwing, even when many of them know better, have convinced citizens like you that they are NOT violating the constitution.
You need to read the constitution "my friend" and find out who really is or is not violating the constitution.
William F. Buckley would have spanked him and sent him home to mommy.
Knowitall-
You surely know enough to put Sensationalist in his/her rightful place! Couldn't agree with you more!
Loading comments…
American International Group is preparing to pay millions of...
I'm pleased to announce the launch today of two new HuffPost...
After a three-night stay in Moscow, the Obamas touched down in Rome on Wednesday so Papa President...
How would you like to live in the White House? Take the HuffPost Poll of World Leaders' Residences...
UPDATE: Paris Jackson also spoke. Watch her moving...
I was sorry to watch, live on CNN, Edward R. Murrow and Emmy Award-winning broadcaster and...
The following post...
It was with interest that I read Dr. Soram Khalsa's post on The Huffington Post...
Below are photos from Michael Jackson's memorial, with Mariah Carey, Lionel Richie, Smokey Robinson,...
Yesterday evening, Greg Sargent reported on The Plum Line that one of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's key reasons...
OH NOES! What happened on Fox and Friends today, people?
It's been a rocky year for Letterman and Palin. He joked...
I'm liveblogging the latest Iran election fallout. Email me with any news or thoughts, or follow me...
MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Oscar G. Mayer, retired chairman of the Wisconsin-based meat processing company that bears his name,...
It's summer, the time for weddings! A few of my friends are getting married this summer and fall, so lately...
SYDNEY — Residents of a rural Australian town hoping to protect the earth and their wallets...
I get many letters like this from readers...
Posted August 31, 2008 | 07:50 AM (EST)