Shenanigans Can Obama enchant the American soul?

Author: Alex Garlick

Barack Obama is a lot of things to a lot of people, but there is one thing his supporters and detractors both admire - his rhetoric. Which is a good thing. Right? Well, maybe not.

Academics and pundits suggest that Americans are very suspicious of rhetoric, Obama's best weapon. So much so that after eight years of complaining and laughing about President George W. Bush's mishaps at the lectern, Americans may be reluctant to grant his polar opposite the presidential podium.

What is rhetoric? Plato defined it as the "art of enchanting the soul through discourse." Obama's success in the primaries and the warm reception for his "Yes We Can" message and YouTube video suggest that he is in fact a skilled rhetorician. He is not just convincing voters, he seems to be inspiring them. Can this carry him through to the White House, or will it be the start of his demise?

Academia is not so sure. Yale political scientist Bryan Garsten said, "A suspicion of oratory runs deep in the American soul, any politician worth his salt knows that portraying oneself as an orator is not a winning rhetorical strategy."

The media seems to enjoy his message, and the writers at "Saturday Night Live" mock their admiration heavily. Last week, a fictional Tim Russert described Obama as "eloquent, really, really eloquent, amazingly eloquent, astonishingly eloquent." Hillary even referenced these skits in last week's debate.

A glance at the headlines reflects the public's wariness of rhetoric. From USA Today: "Clinton says Obama offers words, not actions." From CBSNews.com: "Does Obama's Record Back His Rhetoric?" From the LA Times: "Obama's rhetoric, American realities." Hillary Clinton's latest campaign angle - after using agent of change in December, front-runner in Iowa, compassion in New Hampshire, toughness in South Carolina, experienced leader on Super Tuesday, underdog in Wisconsin and then front runner again briefly Monday before Ohio and Texas - is that if a phone rang with a National Security emergency at 3 a.m., voters should want her answering it, not some blowhard with a TelePrompter.

While acknowledging the American disdain for rhetoric, Obama is showing he still has a chance at the White House. Obama's message is about transcending partisan politics and his oratory seems to have the ability to transcend American fears of rhetoric as well. "Saturday Night Live's" critique of the media is funny because it is true. The media does fawn over Obama, but if that is the biggest flaw in the Obama persona, John McCain is in for a tough fall. But what of the American suspicion of rhetoric? Daniel Webster suggests a re-evaluation of what we mean by rhetoric. "True eloquence does not consist in speech," he said, "it must exist in the man, in the subject, in the occasion."

Is Barack's much-heralded eloquence true? Will he be able to persuade Congress to fix this country's social problems as he did the people of Vermont to vote for him? Will he inspire the public, as John Kennedy did to win the Space Race? Will he be able to present reason in the most dire of circumstances? Will he act capably in our moment of need? These are important questions, because Hillary is right - whoever resides in the Oval Office will take a call at some point that will stop his or her heart and demand swift action. If Obama's eloquence is genuine and he proves that it exists in himself, he will accomplish these tasks. Then, there will be hope for rhetoric in America. Otherwise, Americans will be even more suspicious of the next "eloquent" politician to come down the line. But first, he has to get elected. The future of rhetoric is on the line.

Alex Garlick '08.5 is a Political Science and Economics major from Needham, Mass.