Blog Post
#3 Political speeches
I have
chosen to analyze Trump's inauguration speech because in my opinion it is the
most important speech he has delivered to date. Below I have attached the
full video of his speech.
When analyzing this speech it is hard to shake
the voice of Dr. Rowland out of my head. As most of you know, Dr. Rowland is a
professor at KU that teaches a class on analyzing the speeches of presidents.
When looking at Dr. Rowland’s criteria of a “good speech” I find a lot of
things missing, one of them being unifying the people. With that being said, I
still believe it is an effective speech. Yes, it is different than presidential
speeches of the past but different is what America voted for.
In Trump’s speech he did a good job inspiring
America. He talks about an ideal America and the goals he has to create a
better nation. He has a hopeful tone that you hope to see in an inaugural
speech. Trump also stands true to his stern stances he ran by during the
election, which is reassuring to his voters. An example of this can be seen in
his mention of God. Trump also does a good job with the focus of the speech. Throughout his speech he is constantly brining the focus of the speech about the people. He talks about how he wants "The people" to be in charge and the "forgotten people" to no longer be left out.
-Donald Trump
Where I thought Trump was lacking was in his
efforts to unite the parties. After this election I think many would agree that
America desperately needs unification. Trump used a tactic of using statements
involving “us V.S. them”. I think Trump’s Idea was that using that language
would help others identify as “us”. However, many America’s were still
emotionally sore after the election and found themselves resistant to
identifying with Trump’s America, leaving them to feel “othered”.
If Trump could redo his inauguration speech I
would suggest two things, add emotion and tread lighter. Something I missed in
Trump’s speech was emotion. Trump won, he achieved a goal he is able to make
America the way he thinks is best fit, so where is his excitement and maybe
even sentiment? Maybe it was just me but I wanted to be so inspired that I shed
a tear but his lack of emotion rubbed off on his viewers and lead to a less
climatic speech. The use of emotion could possibly help in the unification process
as well and help others warm up to the idea of Trump. Secondly, Trumps speech
was bold, using and mentioned specifics of what he was planning on doing. Some
of those things were still pretty controversial. I think Trump should have
spoken a little more broadly and focused on union and less about details of controversial
topics.
Content:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/20/donald-trumps-full-inauguration-speech-transcript-annotated/?utm_term=.fac308770856
Images:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Trump&biw=1271&bih=699&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTmdaw8I3SAhVIqFQKHaXfCdAQ_AUICCgD#tbm=isch&q=funny+trump+protest+signs&imgrc=rG9eeT_puUZ1uM:
Im so angry I made a sign! haha. I analyzed this same speech and agree with everything you said above. I feel like he didn't appeal to emotion as much as he should, like you said. In my post I mentioned the "dumbing down" of language he uses to suit a wide variety of Americans, which some people find insulting. It will take a while for the emotional hangover of the campaign to rid itself, and it will be interesting to see what happens next!
ReplyDeleteAfter taking COMS 235, I came to the same conclusion. It lacked the essential elements of what an inaugural address. It did not re-united the country like it should. I thought it did the opposite and sure enough more protested erupted in the hours following the address. It will be interesting to see how an event, such as the state of the union address occurs and how he reacts to the occasion.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Trump did a great job with inspiring the American people during his inauguration speech through his voice and emotion. Although he used terms like us and we I do not believe is it any intention to divide Americans and only be talking to his supporters. He used terms like us and we, terms that previous presidents and anyone giving a speech to a community of people would use. I believe that during his campaign he used terms that divided his supporters from Hillary, people that were name calling his supporters and other countries and businesses but in his inauguration, I do not think he did this. I think the tendency to take “we” as an “us vs. them” is an approach or feeling that people that strongly oppose Trump have that do not associate themselves with him. It’s a president’s job to unite a country and in many speeches including this one he mentions how it is not a party that won, that it is not an us vs. them but rather coming together as a whole and making decisions together that will better our country.
ReplyDeleteI took that coms class with Dr. Rowland too. I've definitely benefited from the critical analysis skills learned in that class. I agree that Trump should have spent more time trying to unify the country and the two parties. Following the election it was clear to see that America is suffering from serious polarization. In addition, i think most of us we're thrown off by this speech because the public was so used to Trump's charisma and personality when speaking which this speech seriously lacked. Good post!
ReplyDelete