Political Speech in Nowadays - Coursework Example

Political Speech Writing in the 21st Century Speech is a form of expression. In the political context, speech serves the purpose of exhibiting leadership, inspiring people and winning the hearts and minds of people through effective communication. Wilcox (2004, p. 21) stated that the skills and expertise of speechwriters are known to have been utilized since the era of George Washington, when Judson Welliver became the first official speechwriter to the President of the United States. Since then, the role of a speechwriter has elevated to occupy an important place in the portfolio of eminent political figures, helping them establish important relationships with the people and political systems within their respective domains. However, in the case of the 21st century political speech-writer, the question remains as to the level of influence that they really exert through their works. It is also interesting to examine the relationship between the modern speechwriter and their political benefactor. Many famous speechwriters such as Michael Waldman, who wrote for former US President Bill Clinton, acknowledge that a successful and effective speechwriter needs to know the actual user of their speech in great detail. Political speechwriters have been found to spend considerable times in getting to know the person, their tastes, likes and dislikes, and most importantly their individual styles of delivery and communication. Despite this intimate knowledge of their speech-maker, writers such as Michael Gerson (who wrote for President George W. Bush) have exclaimed that they were never able to develop a formal relationship let alone become close associates despite the long hours spent together on a constant basis (Moreno, 1997). Criticism of modern speechwriting is often centred on the argument that the speeches cannot reflect a speaker’s inherent and distinctive personality if it has been prepared and written by someone else. While this may sound true and justified from an initial perspective, there exists a different side to the range of efforts and the amount of groundwork that speechwriters have to undertake in order to prepare effective and personalized speeches. The process comprises extensive efforts on the part of the speechwriter in establishing a thorough overview of the speaker’s personality. However, this is not a relatively good technique as it distorts and dilutes the writer’s own character and flavour in preparing some good content (Friedenberg, 1997). Many speechwriters assert that they try to immerse and blend into the character of the speaker, while ensuring that they retain their own personality and style. More than the writing, a speechwriter’s efforts are often more concentrated on being aware of the speaker’s position, the issue or range of issues being discussed and the role of the speaker in this scenario. Despite these sinister practices, Robins (2007, p. 52) believes that a speechwriter’s influence has somewhat been limited as many draw up sentences based on the extent to which they know their target speaker. In the absence of any personal working relationship especially among high-profile politicians, this knowledge is highly limited and often distorted from the real facts. In simpler words, writers are resorting to say things which they would had they been in the position of the speaker. In a way, this is more reflective to an expression of the speechwriter’s own personal opinions rather than a true expression of the speaker’s own understanding, belief and commitment. Several professional associations across the world conduct frequent studies in order to assess the influence of speeches. Groups such as the German Speechwriters association emphasize that apart from good and personal content, the degree of success of a speech can be measured directly by the effectiveness with which it is delivered by the speaker. The speaker’s personality thus comes to the fore, not just in the lines of the speech, but also gets displayed based on the manner in which they are conveyed. Trent (2007, p. 102) used examples of eminent speakers such as Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama to demonstrate that they do not like their views being manipulated by a speechwriter. Instead, they insist that the role of a speechwriter is more focused on obtaining new ideas of expression, additional resources for the collation of information and the drafting of a speech. On the other side, speechwriters claim that speakers deliver the speech as if it were prepared by them without any additional assistance. The difference between a speechwriter and speechmaker is founded on the idea a speech ultimately belongs to a speaker, even if it has been written in entirety or in parts by any external entities. The role of a speechwriter with a sense to originality is further emboldened as most speeches are read thoroughly and scrutinized by the speaker prior to delivering the speech. By doing so, a speaker expresses satisfaction with the content as it signifies that it reflects their opinion. Sections where they do not agree or form a collective opinion are always edited to reflect the true opinion of the speaker. This is how a speechmaker plays a crucial role in embedding his personal flow into the speech. The constant interaction with prominent politicians also raises the question over the issue of exerting influence by way of the ideas and work provided by speechwriters. This surprising aspect is evident in almost every case albeit in a limited fashion. For instance, most politicians are either in their middle or old age and often find it hard to communicate with the younger population. In the case of Germany during the 1970s and 1980s, young people had a considerable influence on politics and the society. The senior members in the government found it difficult to deal with the members of this young brigade termed as the ‘Hotheads’ (Helitzer, 1984). The real problems politicians face is a lack of compatibility and common understanding with certain sections of the public. It is during such instances where speechwriters have talked of extensive roles in trying to facilitate a channel of communication between the warring factions, by trying to merge and clarify the intended sensitivities, ideas, problems and their solutions. What is the basic standpoint that determines the quality of a speech? Is its role highlighted when the speechmaker is able to achieve power and goodwill through its use? Bluen (2009, p. 24) answers this by saying that if one were to analyze the speeches made by President Barack Obama during his recent presidential campaign, the role of his speechwriting team is clearly visible at all times. A political speech talks predominantly of leadership. Leadership is a virtue that constantly provides a vision into the future. Politicians in a way are constantly engaged in the war of hearts and minds, trying to gain the upper hand through consolidation of power and public opinion. From a relatively unknown standpoint, President Obama made his way into the White House, as he was able to convince the American public of his aims and vision, and persuade them to allow him to fix the problems plaguing the country. The vision and ideas expressed in his speeches, combined with Obama’s unique and admirable style of delivering them, have worked collectively in ensuring a victorious presidential campaign for the Democrats. Nimmo (1979) has used a quote of Uwe Porksen, a noted linguist, who has expressed that great political speeches change the political climate in a country as they succeed in changing the public perception towards political challenges. From a historical aspect, such change happens quite rarely. The speeches delivered by politicians from across the world over the decades will highlight speeches as effective contributors to political debate, but have mostly remains ineffective in bringing about a fundamental change to a political situation. Examples include the countless speeches delivered by the former president George W. Bush, during the famous ‘War on Terror’, where he used the popular expression, ‘we will smoke them out of their holes; we will get them running; and we will bring them to justice’. Despite having been quoted several times, nothing much has changed on the ground, thereby emphasizing that a speech cannot transform the world or change situations on most occasions. A number of techniques employed in modern political speech writing will be discussed in the subsequent paragraphs. Imagery Similes and metaphors are used for communicating a particular message in an effective manner and are used to lay emphasis on a specific point. More often, these techniques are employed to enhance the level of description of an issue or a phenomenon so as to enhance the desired effect on the reader. Further, imagery has constantly been used to simplify a message to enable followers understand the ideas of the speechmaker in a more lucid manner. Both these versions of imagery share common aspects and work by providing comparisons between two items that are drawn from different contexts. Given the inherent benefits that these techniques stand to provide, the extent to which they are utilized depends ultimately on both the creative thought of the speechwriter and the presentational merit of the speechmaker. Similes are used to compare things through association using works such as ‘like’ etc. Similes have found use in the most flexible situations when the writer chose to leave the ultimate message open to interpretation. This means that using a simile may leave different readers with distinctive connotations of the idea being conveyed, providing listeners with a degree of freedom to make an appropriate interpretation, a technique that is extensively discussed by Powell (2003, p. 82). Imagery techniques have been used quite stereotypically over the past few decades so much so that many phrases such as ‘as stubborn as an ox’ have become part of everyday usage. While not being original, such uses have been used popularly as it allows speakers to convey their ideas easily. Likewise, Similes are also being used to create ironic scenarios where the comparisons made are in contrast to the author’s actual thoughts. There are simply no hard and fast rules when it comes to using imagery techniques in speechwriting due to lack of any restrictions although care should be taken to prevent any overuse which may diminish the interest of the listener. Anaphora According to McConkey (2001), the technique of repeating words at parts of adjacent clauses is known as ‘Anaphora’ and is one of the frequently used rhetorical devices. Such repetition casts a pattern and subsequent repetitions emphasize this pattern, thereby magnifying the desired rhetorical effect. Consider Martin Luther King’s famous speech titled – ‘I have a Dream’. In it, the phrase resembling the title of the speech is found in eight consecutive sentences. In fact, the entire speech comprises many such occurrences such as ‘Now is the time’ and ‘let freedom ring’. These repeated phrases have played a crucial role in some of the most famous speeches due to a very simple reason. Even without the rest of the speech, such phrases contribute immensely in telling much of the speaker’s story. Using such repetition renders such speeches memorable, helping in the easy and popular propagation of the message. Besides using repetitive phrases, Ehrlich (1984) has expressed that important political speeches have also become associated with certain repeated works, which represent a more subtle version of Anaphora. King’s speech has nearly 20 occurrences of the word ‘freedom’, making appropriate sense of the primary theme of the speaker. Even simple words such as ‘We’ and ‘You’ can have a profound impact if used repetitively in the appropriate manner. Quotations and Allusions Some speechwriters depend predominantly on evoking references from historic events and literary sources into explicit use through direct quotations or for implicit purposes through allusion. The purpose of using established references is done to provide more credibility to the speech and allow alert listeners to connect with previous events of exceptional importance. For instance, the phrase ‘Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness’ is one of the most common references used in numerous speeches and is invoked from the United States’ Declaration of Independence. Moreover, Martin Luther King Jr. has also used the phrase ‘Five score years ago....’ in many of his speeches, which is derived from the renowned Gettysburg Speech delivered by Abraham Lincoln. Compare and Contrast The technique of comparison and contrast is considered to be a standard oratory procedure and has been implemented by Speeches since the era of Cicero. Used by speechwriters to this day, ‘Compare and Contrast’ has been described elaborately by Levinson (1996, p. 96), who substantiated his observations by placing two individual viewpoints together to render a particular effect through comparison from different angles. The best example of this technique from recent times can be cited in the case of John F Kennedy, who wanted to motivate American people into working for the benefit of their county. Instead of simply using phrases like ‘We need your help’, Kennedy chose the very famous contrast by saying – ‘Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country’. The effects of this sentence and its constant use the world over in a bid to inspire patriotism are there for everyone to see. Alliteration Alliteration represents an approach that also utilizes repetitiveness, whereby the use of the same first-consonant sounds in more than one neighbouring words is used in close succession. An example of Alliteration can be taken from President Obama’s Victory Speech. Phrases like ‘Hatched in Halls’ or ‘Partisanship and Pettiness’ are examples of Alliterative usage. It must be noted that Alliteration has the capability to provide colour as well as tonality to a presentation. However, as told by Safire (2009, p. 56), some speechwriters also recent to extensive usage of this practice leading to a cheesy singsong effect on the entire context of the speech. In some cases, the use of rhyme has proved effective as it helps substantiate a standpoint. Alliteration finds the most usage when the intention is to create an emphasis for a point. Common examples from daily language included phrases like ‘through thick and thin’, ‘bed and board’, and ‘look before you leap’. A few literary critics in fact consider any repetition as a form of Alliteration. One must take care to use alliteration only if it does not add crescendo to a given position in the speech. Conclusion The preceding sections have discussed a number of techniques that are employed by modern speechwriters and speechmakers in conveying a set of ideas in a way that they believe will create maximum impact. In the midst of all these available methods, writers must understand that preparing speeches is a relaxed exercise. The various techniques can be used in almost any possible combination to generate thousands of ways that can devise an interesting and effective speech. In simple words, the primary objective of a prepared speech is to avoid the ‘ahs’ and ‘umms’ that dilute the quality of the discussion. Further, speechmakers must understand that it is fine to trip over with the sentences once in a while until it is known that nothing in contrast to the intended idea has been conveyed to the audience. Delivering a good speech is a matter of style, confidence and persona and can be done in a number of ways. Speechwriters must learn to improve their skills by listening to speeches as a member of the audience and not by acting as a professional. This approach enables them to develop new ways of expressing thoughts and convincing the public in a conclusive manner. In short, becoming a successful speechwriter or speechmaker depends on doing away with vanity and working towards the overall success of the speech. References 1. Bluen, W. (2009). Television in the public interest. University of California. 2. Ehrlich, E. (1984). Speak for success. Berlin: Bantam Books. 3. Friedenberg, R. (1997). Communication consultants in political campaigns: ballot box warriors. London: Greenwood Publishing Group. 4. Helitzer, M. (1984). Comedy techniques for writers and performers: the hearts theory of humour writing. University of Michigan. 5. Levinson, J. (1996). The pleasures of aesthetics: philosophical essays. Cornell University Press. 6. McConkey, D. (2001). Social structures, social capital, and personal freedom. London: Greenwood Publishing Group. 7. Moreno, M. (1997). The writers guide to corporate communications. New York: Allworth Communications. 8. Nimmo, D. (1979). Communication Yearbook 3. London: Transaction Publishers. 9. Powell, L. (2003). Political campaign communication: inside and out. University of Michigan. 10. Ritter, K. (2004). Presidential Speechwriting: From the New Deal to the Reagan Revolution and Beyond. Texas A&M University Press. 11. Robins, R. (2007). Handbook of research methods in personality psychology. Boston: Guilford Press. 12. Safire, W. (2009). The new language of politics: an anecdotal dictionary of catchwords, slogans, and political usage. University of Michigan. 13. Trent, J. (2007). Political Campaign Communication: principles and Practices. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. 1. Wilcox, D. (2004). Public relations: strategies and tactics. Indiana University. Read More