Searching for an essay?

Browse the database of more than 4500 essays donated by our community members!

Analyse the 2001 First Inaugural Speech by George W. Bush and the 2009 Inaugural Address of Barack Obama

Select any two American presidential inaugural addresses for which a video recording is available. Which do you think is the better address, and why? Throughout more than two hundred years, Americans have witnessed fifty-six presidential inaugural addresses. The inaugural address is the second part of the inauguration ceremony, consisting of the oath of office and a couple of prayers. In my essay, I will analyse the 2001 first inaugural speech by George W. Bush and the 2009 inaugural address of Barack Obama.

I have chosen these particular speeches because Bush and Obama had very different policies. Thus I assume it should be exciting to see whether their addresses were different or maybe quite similar. I will begin by comparing the rhetorical features of the speeches. Both presidents used an antithesis several times. According to Atkinson (1984), an antithesis (also known as a contrastive pair or, simply, contrast) is used to ‘project a completion point’ and to deliver a surprising punch line, which keeps an audience-focused (p. 73).

Writing service

Conditions

Website

essaypro

[Rated 96/100]

Prices start at $12
Min. deadline 6 hours
Writers: ESL
Refund: Yes


Payment methods: VISA, MasterCard, American Express

extraessay

[Rated 94/100]

Prices start at $11
Min. deadline 3 hours
Writers: ESL, ENL
Refund: Yes


Payment methods: VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Discover

extraessay

[Rated 91/100]

Prices start at $12
Min. deadline 3 hours
Writers: ESL, ENL
Refund: Yes


Payment methods: VISA, MasterCard, JCB, Discover

Dlugan (2009) argues that contrast is ‘sometimes the best way to highlight and sharpen concepts.’ In his speech, Bush says: ‘The peaceful transfer of authority is rare in history, yet common in our country.’ He says so to praise democracy in the United States, thank to which a transfer of authority has always or almost always been peaceful, which is, though, rare in the history of the world. Obama says: ‘The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often, the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms.’

By saying that, he reminds us that newly elected American presidents have often taken office during harsh times, and he is one such example (he became the president during a financial crisis). Other examples of an antithesis: ‘The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends … are old’ (Obama); ‘… the stakes of our debates appear small. But the stakes for America are never small’ (Bush).

Both Bush and Obama use word pairs. Bush says: ‘justice and opportunity’, ‘synagogue and mosque’, ‘freedom and democracy’, ‘friend and liberator’; Obama: ‘gathering clouds and raging storms’, ‘generosity and cooperation’, ‘conflict and discord’, ‘prosperity and freedom’. Unsurprisingly, they also use alliteration, i.e. repetition of the same or similar sounds in different words (consonance is the repetition of consonants and assonance – vowels). Bush: ‘flawed and fallible,’ ‘fair dealing and forgiveness,’ ‘honored and humbled,’ ‘church and charity,’ ‘abandonment and abuse’; Obama: ‘mutual interest and mutual respect,’ ‘civil war and segregation’.

The former, however, delivers them more often. He uses both consonance and assonance over 30 times, while Obama does it only a few times. As in many political speeches, we can notice a certain number of tricolons in these. They are a series of three clauses or phrases, which often increase in length. According to Atkinson (1984), listing three similar items can strengthen or underline a message (p. 60). Both presidents use them more than ten times.

See also  The Sickening Truth of the Atomic Bomb

Obama, however, delivers them a couple of times more, which seems to make his message slightly stronger. Some examples of tricolons are following: ‘President Clinton, distinguished guests and my fellow citizens’, ‘ … ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens’ (Bush); ‘all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness’, ‘homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered’ (Obama).

They also identify themselves with the American nation by saying such words as ‘we’, ‘us’, ‘our’, ‘ourselves’, etc., multiple times. Bush uses such words around a hundred times, while Obama slightly more often – around 140 times. Obama’s speech is a bit longer, though, and, therefore, both presidents use these words just over seven times per minute (with a slight advantage for Obama). Some examples of the moments when the presidents identify themselves with fellow Americans are: ‘my fellow citizens’, ‘our nation’, ‘the calling we share’ (Bush); ‘my fellow citizens’, ‘our nation’, ‘the journey we continue’ (Obama). As we can notice, both of them very strongly identify with their nation and while listening to their speeches, we cannot really say which one does it more.

A few times they also use an apostrophe, i.e. an ‘address [to] a specific group or person or personified abstraction absent or present.’ (Scaife 2004.) For instance, Bush addresses President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore but also all Americans: ‘my fellow citizens’, ‘I ask you’, ‘what you do’, etc. Similarly, Obama thanks Bush for his service to the nation, addresses Americans (‘my fellow citizens’, ‘the trust you have bestowed’, ‘God bless you’) but also America itself (‘America … let us remember’) and some people who are absent as well (the Muslim world, the people of poor nations, those leaders who blame the Western world for their countries’ weaknesses).

In the following part of my essay, I am going to analyse, assess and compare how the presidents delivered their addresses. I will take into account the characteristics of their voices, gestures, etc. Camera work in the videos slightly differs. George Bush is shown with a bigger close-up and we can only see his head and shoulders, while Barack Obama is shown from his chest and above. In both videos, the camera occasionally moves away from the presidents, but it happens more often in Obama’s speech. During Bush’s speech, from time to time the camera shows the mob gathered in front of the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C, and some special guests, such as the First Lady Laura Bush or President Bill Clinton.

However, the camera filming Obama during his inaugural address shows not only the whole audience and some distinguished guests but it sometimes also shows some anonymous citizens. The presidents speak very differently during their speeches. Bush speaks more quietly than Obama raising his voice a bit only a couple of times. He speaks slowly and, in my opinion, quite monotonous. He also delivers short pauses regularly. On the other hand, Obama speaks quite loudly, faster and uses many pauses, which are longer than the ones in Bush’s speech. It all makes the audience more focused – it is difficult not to pay attention if someone speaks in such away. Longer pauses make his message even more powerful. Also, Obama delivers his whole speech from his memory, while Bush sometimes looks at his notes.

See also  The Consciousness of Symbolism in "A Rose For Emily" by William Faulkner

To witness the 2001 George W. Bush’s inaugural speech, around three hundred thousand people gathered in front of the Capitol, while the inauguration of Barack Obama had an audience of between eight hundred thousand and 1.8 million (no official measures were made). During Bush’s speech, the most extended applause was nine seconds long (Bush 2001, 4:10), and during Obama’s speech – eighteen seconds (Obama 2009, 12:35). According to Atkinson (1984), there is an unwritten rule saying that a single burst of applause should last for around eight seconds.

If it is shorter and if it appears during a pause after a short delay, it means that it is probably half-hearted. On the other hand, a more extended burst of applause that starts before a speaker pauses is considered more natural and enthusiastic (pp. 28-34). Most bursts of applause during Bush’s speech last only for 6-7 seconds. They are also slightly quiet and usually appear during a pause, sometimes after a delay. Meanwhile, the bursts of applause during Obama’s address are usually longer (sometimes over ten seconds), begin before Obama finishes speaking and are much louder (combined with whistles, screams and shouts ‘yeah!’). What is more, a few times, Obama refuses the invited applause of the audience and carries on speaking despite applause (for example, in Obama 2009, 11:55 and 15:51).

It happened so because the applause was unexpected. Such a situation has three advantages. Firstly, it is probably a spontaneous reaction of an audience. Secondly, if a speaker refuses to accept applause, he seems modest, not devious. And thirdly, he demonstrates that the content of his arguments is more important than the fact whether his audience shows its approval or not (Atkinson 1984, p. 99). Less frequently, but it also happens during Bush’s speech (Bush 2001, 7:35). Anyway, to sum this paragraph up, the audience gathered for Obama’s inauguration seems to be far more enthusiastic than the one that we can hear listening to Bush’s speech, which is a significant advantage for Obama.

Now I am going to analyse hand gestures. Unfortunately, Bush’s speech is filmed with a too big close-up, so we cannot see his hands. Thus, I will only be able to analyze Obama’s hand gestures. A hand gesture used by Obama most often is the so-called ring (for instance, in Obama 2009, 14:08 and 15:19). It is a shape in which the tip of the index finger and thumb touch each other. It is said that such a hand shape shows specificity or precision. However, Streeck (2008) argues that it may mean specificity to a speaker but not to an audience or vice versa (p. 165).

Obama also uses the slice, a rapid downward movement of a flat, open handheld in a vertical orientation, with the palm facing to the side.’ (Streeck 2008, p. 161; examples in Obama 2009, 4:41 and 5:49.). One more kind of hand gesture used by Obama is the power grip, i.e. a shape ‘in which the four digits are curled as in a fist, but the thumb touches the outside of the index finger.’ (an example in Obama 2009, 17:40.However, accordingng to Streeck, there is no evidence that the power grip carries any specific meaning (2008, p. 166).

The presidents also have different head movements. As I have said before, George Bush looks at his notes occasionally, while Obama does not use any notes at all. Bush looks both to the left and right but into the camera, too. Obama, though, never looks into the camera. He only looks to the left and the right at the crowd. Obama’s head movements thus seem to me to be slightly more monotonous. To sum up, the addresses when it comes to rhetorical features, I think they are pretty similar. Both presidents like to use contrast to highlight a message, which is a widespread phenomenon.

See also  Black Hawk Essay

Bush seems to deliver alliteration more often than Obama. Both of them identify themselves with fellow citizens strongly and underline it by using certain words very often, though with a slight advantage for Barack Obama. He also uses tricolons more often than Bush, strengthening his message and making it a bit more robust. Therefore, in my opinion, the rhetoric of Obama’s speech is slightly better than in Bush’s one.

However, other features such as voice, audience reaction, hand gestures and head movements are different stories. Obama speaks louder and faster, so his speech sounds more interesting than Bush’s one, who speaks more quietly, slowly and, therefore, monotonously. Obama’s crowd is also much more enthusiastic and spontaneous in its reaction – people clap and scream and shout, while Bush’s audience is much more calm and does not seem to be too excited about his address. Obama’s audience’s applauses are longer, too.

It would be unfair to give an advantage to Obama for his hand gestures, because we cannot see Bush’s hands because of too much of a close-up. Yet, it is worth mentioning that Obama’s gestures are pretty interesting. What Bush is better at, in my opinion, are head movements. In general, I think Obama’s speech is better. Not only is the address slightly more exciting but it is also delivered in a better way.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

  • Atkinson, M. (1984): Our Masters’ Voices. London: Methuen.
  • Bush, G.W. (2001): Inaugural address. Retrieved from CSPAN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXzgMdj5urs ; transcription retrieved from: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/George_W._Bush’s_First_Inaugural_Address
  • Dlugan, A. (2009): 5 Speechwriting Lessons from Obama’s Inaugural Speech. In Six Minutes: Speaking and Presentation Skills. Retrieved from: http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/inauguration-speech-analysis-barack-obama-inaugural/
  • Obama, B. (2009): Inaugural address. Retrieved from CSPAN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjnygQ02aW4; transcription retrieved from: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama’s_Inaugural_Address
  • Scaife, R. (2004): A Glossary of Rhetorical Terms with Examples. In Division of Classics, Department of Modern & Classical Languages, Literatures, & Cultures, University of Kentucky: Lexington, KY, United States. Retrieved from: http://www.uky.edu/AS/Classics/rhetoric.html
  • Streeck, J. (2008): ‘Gesture in Political Communication: A Case Study of Democratic Presidential Candidates During the 2004 Primary Campaign’, Research on Language & Social Interaction, 41:2, 154 – 186. Retrieved from: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/ftinterface~content=a793249237~fulltext=713240930

Cite this page

Choose cite format:
Analyse the 2001 First Inaugural Speech by George W. Bush and the 2009 Inaugural Address of Barack Obama. (2021, Sep 26). Retrieved June 29, 2022, from https://essayscollector.com/essays/analyse-the-2001-first-inaugural-speech-by-george-w-bush-and-the-2009-inaugural-address-of-barack-obama/