We can all remember the last U.S. Presidential elections when commentators daily compared Barrack Obama and John McCain in not only their policies, but also their speaking styles. Although George W. Bush was not running in the election, the comparisons were extended to him as well. Remarks were made about Bush’s many grammatical mistakes and his struggle with getting his prepositions right, and McCain’s rather grey image and his inability to make a mark on the imagination of the electorate. Obama, in the meantime, was being hailed as the new Cicero.
McCain’s credibility lay in his military record, and to a lesser extent in his record as a senator. He certainly didn’t create any lasting impression with his communication style. Obama, on the other hand, rested his whole credibility on his exceptional rhetorical style. He lifted young hearts and inspired older ones with his rhetoric, coupled with a rhythmic delivery in the tradition of the black church with his deep baritone voice. This was his way of initially establishing credibility with a vast and varied audience, many of whom were unsure of a black man in the White House.
Obama, like his hero Cicero, was a ‘new man’, (novus homo) with no clear associations or reference points to secure this initial credibility. So, in copying Cicero, who had publically associated himself with such personalities as Licinius Crassus and Cato the elder so effectively, Obama constantly referred to Lincoln, Roosevelt, King and Kennedy. It worked.
Many politicians to gain credibility associate themselves with respected figures from the past who are admired across all political boundaries. Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime-Minister, associated herself with Churchill, Macmillan and Disraeli. Ronald Reagan associated himself with the Founding Fathers. But Obama needed to go further, as John McCain had strong military credentials to rely on, which were so attractive to many American voters. So he purposely portrayed himself as an average American who wanted to revive the American dream. Just look at this short extract from one of his speeches:
“I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived the depression to serve in Patton’s army during World War 11 and a white grandmother who worked on a bomb assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I have gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations”.[1]
By his eloquent speaking voice and attractive message along with his book, Dreams of my Fathers, he was able to build connection with the young and blue collar audiences, and for many he even began to personify the American Dream. Aristotle tells us that character proof in this type of speech comes from good sense, good moral character and good will. This creates respect, and audiences tend to believe people whom they respect. Of course, in the case of Obama, this respect and credibility was greatly influenced by his eloquent voice, which went a long way to make his message attractive. Let us look at some of the intricacies of Cicero’s that Obama successfully used in his speeches.
Our first example is his use of the ‘tricolon’. This rhetorical trick is the use of three words to emphasise his message. The most famous ‘tricolon’ in history is perhaps Julius Caesar’s ‘Veni, Vidi, Vici’ (I came, I saw, I conquered). An example of how Obama used it is in his speech in South Carolina: “Yes, we can. Yes, we can change. Yes, we can.”
Another example is:
“Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation, not because of the height of our skyscrapers or the power of our military, or the size of our economy …” [2]
Another rhetorical trick is the ‘antonomasia’, which concerns using a descriptive phrase in place of a name. Obama, when referring to Martin Luther King in his acceptance speech, described King not by his name but as ‘a young preacher from Georgia’. It is a flattering remark and its great advantage is that it humanizes the character of King.
Obama also used two other Ciceronian tricks well: the ‘anaphora’ and the ‘epiphora’. The ‘anaphora’ is basically the repetition of a phrase at the start of a sentence. From the ‘Yes we can’ speech delivered after he won the primary in South Carolina.
Thank you, South Carolina.
Thank you to the rock of my life, Michelle Obama.
Thank you to Malia and Sasha Obama, who haven’t seen their daddy in a week. [3]
The ‘epiphora’ does the same at the end of the sentence. Of course, the most popular example here is Obama’s use of ‘Yes we can’ at the end of paragraphs (yet another tricolon). In fact, he used the phrase at the end of some five paragraphs, and its effectiveness was widespread. Indeed, there is hardly a person who listens, or watches the media who hasn’t been touched by this call to action. For example, one paragraph ends this way which is a mixture of the ‘epiphora’ and the ‘tricolon’:
“And where we are met with cynicism and doubt and fear and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of the American people in three simple words — yes, we can.”
Aristotle warns us in his Rhetoric that credibility in political type speeches does not come from appearances, but from a person’s use of language. But over time, it can be argued that this credibility can only be matched by action. The final test of any leader lies in what he or she achieves and not on their rhetorical style. The Obama legacy will be judge