American topoi in Barack Obama's Presidential Oratory

American topoi in Barack Obama’s

Presidential Oratory

Kultura i Polityka : zeszyty naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Europejskiej im. ks. Józefa Tischnera w Krakowie nr 10, 42-54

AM ERICAN TOPOI IN BARACK OBAMA'S

PRESIDENTIAL ORATORY

Abstract

I th e a rtic le I c o n d u c t analysis of B a ra c k O b a m a ’s p o litical sp eech es deliv­ e re d by h im in th e 2008 a n d 2012 electio n cam p aig n s in th e USA. The p rim a ry focus of th e analysis is p u t o n different A m erican c u ltu ra l topoi an d th e w ay th ese serve as m ean s of p ersu asio n . The c o n trastiv e analysis of th e sp eeches fro m th e tw o electio n cam p aig n s allow s m e to p in p o in t th e co m m o n are a s b etw een them , as w ell as p o in ts of co n tra st; also, I c a n observe how O bam a adjusts his rh e to ric to th e ch an g in g expectations of th e audience.

Keywords:

rh eto ric, O bam a, topos, p ersu asio n , election ca m p aig n

+

The study of A m erican p resid en tial rh e to ric co n stitu tes a su b g en re of p o litic al rh e to ric, a su b ject keenly ex p lo red by sch o lars w ho d eal w ith c u ltu ra l stu d ies a n d p o litical scien ce alike. As observed by S onja S ch w arz, p re s id e n tia l “sp eech es d eserv e to b e stu d ie d b eca u se th ey a re a u n iq u e p ro d u c t of h u m a n expression a n d of h u m a n creativ ity ” (S chw arz 2010:8). Also, th e study of rh eto ric helps us to develop skills p e rta in in g to how one can co m m u n ica te o n e ’s ideas in a p ersu asiv e w ay - in ad ditio n , it te a c h e s us how to d isc e rn rh e to ric a l strateg ies th a t oth ers a re using in o rd e r to influence us. These skills a re b eco m ­ ing exceedingly n ecessary in an age of m ass m edia, w h en p o te n t v o t­ ers a re b o m b a rd e d every day w ith m essages fro m rad io , television,

+ M ichał C hoiński - g ra d u a te o f th e In stitu te of E n g lish Philology of Ja g iello n ia n U niversi­

ty, PhD . C o n n e cted w ith W SE fro m 2007. At th e U niv ersity a te a c h e r o f r h e to ric a n aly sis, su ­ a s io n te c h n iq u e s, p re s e n ta tio n skills a n d p u b lic d eb ate. H e h a s b e e n g ra n te d s c h o la rs h ip s a t U n iv ersität z u K öln a n d In stitu te of J o h n F. K ennedy a t F reie U n iv ersität in B erlin. H e h a s re a d p a p e rs a t sev eral a ca d em ic co n feren ces, in te r a lia a t 4 th In te rn a tio n a l A ssociation fo r L ite rary S e m an tics C onference, 10th In te rn a tio n a l Cognitive L inguistics C onference, 1 1th A pril C onfe­ re n ce . H e is in te re s te d in rh e to ric , socio lin g u istics, E n g lish a n d A m e ric an lite ra tu re a n d tr a n s ­ latio n . In h is free tim e h e enjoys listen in g to m u sic a n d rid in g a bike.

n ew sp ap ers, a n d th e In te rn e t, a n d th u s finding th em selv es flooded w ith pu b lic discourse. At th e sam e tim e, th e investigation of p o litical o rato ry helps in discovering c u ltu ral scrip ts th a t govern th e d iscourse of different com m unities.

In this article I in ten d to investigate selected cu ltu ral topoi, motifs, a n d con cep ts c h a ra c te ristic of th e A m erican cu ltu re, w h ich a re em ­ ployed in B arack O b am a’s p re sid e n tia l o rato ry to p ersu asiv e ends. In o rd e r to look into th e co m m u n icativ e fu n ctio n in g of th ese rh eto rical stratag em s, I have co n d u cted a rh eto rical analysis of selected sp eech ­ es fro m B a ra c k O b a m a ’s 2008 c a m p a ig n , a n d of e arly c a m p a ig n speeches fro m

2012

.

The re se a rc h I u n d e rta k e in th e a rticle h as to acc o u n t for n u m e r­ ous ch aracteristics of A m erican p resid en tial rh eto ric w h ich have b een inform ed by A m erican history, by th e A m erican p o litical system , an d by A m e ric a n r h e to r ic a l c u ltu re . W illiam K. M u ir o b se rv e s th a t (1988:261)

O ne of th e presidential pow ers is to speak. It is a un iq u e co nstitutional power, fo r th e p re sid e n t does n o t have to s h a re it w ith any o th e r b ra n c h of g o v ern m en t [...] This in d e p e n d e n t rh e to ric a l p o w e r is c e n tra l to th e p re sid e n c y an d a p rim e resp o n sib ility of every ch ief executive is to it use it w ell and, th ro u g h language, to clarify th e fu n d a m e n ta l a n d a n im a tin g ideas th a t fre e p eo p le c a rry in th e ir h ea d s a n d th a t give p u rp o se to th e ir actio n s. [...] If a p re sid e n t fails to execute th is rh e to ric a l pow er, h e w ill b e a failed p re sid e n t [...]

It is critica l to observe th a t th e A m erican p re sid e n t does n o t only reign, b u t also rules (cf. W indt 1992: 207). He is not reg arded as a p arty leader, b u t ra th e r as a h ead of state a n d chief executive - th e A rticle II of th e A m erican C onstitution g ran ts h im th e rig h t to a p p o in t am b as­ sadors, ju d g es of th e S u p rem e Court, a n d all o th e r officers of th e US, to re q u e st w ritte n acc o u n ts fro m all b ra n c h e s of th e gov ern m en t, to m ake tre a tie s, to veto law s p a sse d by C ongress, a n d to a c t as com - m and er-in -ch ief if necessary. In p ractice, th e p re sid e n t of th e U S also acts as chief leg islato r in sen ding d ra ft bills to th e legislative b ra n c h of g o v e rn m e n t. Finally, he ac ts as th e c o u n try ’s ch ief d ip lo m at. In s h o rt, th e US p r e s id e n t is th e “n a tio n ’s le a d in g p o litic a l fig u re ” (S ch w arz 2010:12).

In th e 20th century, A m erican p resid en ts recognized th a t p resid en ­ tial power is th e “p o w er to p e rsu a d e ” (N eu stad t 1960:11); and, w ith th e bo o m of m ass m edia, sp eeches b ecam e th e “co re of th e m o d e rn p re s ­ idency” (G eld erm an 1997:8-9). O ne can differentiate b etw een v arious su bg enres of p re sid e n tia l oratory; for instance, th e in a u g u ra l speech, th e S tate of th e U nion A ddress, o r th e “crisis sp eech ”; yet all of th e m

a re w ritte n to b eco m e events to w h ich p eo p le re a c t as to no less th a n “re a l” events them selves. Thus th e A m erican p o litical system req u ires p resid en ts to be o u tstand in g speakers, a n d th a t th e ir speeches tak e on so m ew h at of a “p erfo rm a tiv e ” quality, th ey b ecom e “spoken actio n ”.

O ne asp ect of US p re sid e n tia l rh e to ric tu rn s o u t to p ose p a rtic u la r m eth odological p ro blem s, th a t is, ghost-w riting. W hen I refer to B a ­ ra c k O bam a in th e context of his rh eto ric, I em ploy n oth in g sh o rt of a m etonym y; B a ra c k O b am a m ay b e a crafty p o litic ian , a b rillia n t speaker, b u t he is n o t th e w o rd sm ith , h e does n o t devise h is ow n speeches fro m sc ra tc h by him self. L add H am ilto n casts a ra th e r n eg ­ ative light on th e ro le of g h o stw riters by suggesting th a t “co m m u n ica­ tio n th ro u g h h ired h an d s m ay b e ch eatin g no t only th e v o ters b u t th e c a n d id a te s th em selves. An en d of th is p la g u e of g h o stw rite rs w o u ld serv e n o t only to en lig h ten th e voters; it w o u ld also force th e p o liti­ cian s to exam ine th e ir ow n thin k in g ab o u t th e issues, a n d in th e p r o ­ cess, e n lig h te n th e m ” (1992:215). R o b e rt T urner, w h o w o rk e d as a sp eec h w riter for p re sid e n t T rum an a n d Kennedy, offers a different p ersp ectiv e on th is topic: “A lthough th e w ritin g in g h o stw ritin g w as do ne by staff people, you n eed to rem e m b er tw o things: first, th e staff p eo p le w e re try in g to say w h a t th ey th o u g h t th e P re sid e n t h im self w o uld say if he h ad th e tim e to do th e w riting; secondly, th e P resid en t does go th ro u g h it v ery carefully, a n d frequently, h e d oes su g g est c h a n g e s ” (E in h o rn 1988:99). N o n eth eless, th e m a tte r of “a u th o ria l questio n” needs to b e ta k en into co n sid era tio n in any investigation of th e US p re sid en tial rh eto ric.

Jo n Favreau, B arac k O b am a ’s speech w riter, is a p o litic al scien ce g ra d u a te a n d a p ro d ig y of rh e to ric a l ta len t. At th e age of 31, he h ad b ee n listed by Time m ag azin e as one of th e

“100

m o st influential p e o ­ ple in th e w o rld ” (P ilkington 2009). F av erau b eg an w o rk in g fo r B a ­ ra c k O b am a in 2004, h aving left his v o lu n te e r jo b on s e n a to r Jo h n K erry ’s cam paign. H e w as quickly no ticed by s e n a to r O b am a’s ad v i­ sors a n d d istin gu ish ed him self w ith exceptional rh e to ric a l ta le n t an d in tu itio n . A ccording to O b a m a ’s ow n w o rd s, F av reau is his “m in d r e a d e r ” (Pilkington 2009).

B a ra c k O b am a’s rh e to ric a l p ro w ess w as w idely ce le b ra te d e sp e­ cially afte r th e successful election cam paign. F or th e 2008 p re s id e n ­ tial election, Jon Favreau crafted a rh eto rical im age of B arack O bam a stro n g ly im m ersed in A m erican h isto ry a n d cu ltu re, creatively em u ­ la tin g g re a t A m erican sp e a k e rs of th e p ast. A ccording to M a rr B ei (2009:4) in New York Times, “O b am a is a w alk in g analogy; if he w ere a p u n ctu atio n m ark, h e ’d be a colon”, Bei proves his p o in t by arguing:

F or som e, O bam a arriv e d in W ashington as th e m o d e rn an alo gu e to F ran klin D. Roosevelt, th e soon-to-be arc h ite c t of a ra d ic a l p la n to save th e econom y. F or others, especially th o se of th e ’60s gen eratio n , O bam a b ro u g h t b ack m em ories of th e young Jo h n F. Kennedy. O bam a h im se lf left little d o u b t a b o u t his ow n h is to ric a l p re te n s io n s . H e tra v e le d in triu m p h to th e c a p ita l by rail, as A b rah am L incoln did, a n d rested his h a n d on th e G reat E m a n c ip a to r’s Bible.

To give som e exam ples proving B ei’s last p o in t - in his a n n o u n c e ­ m e n t ad d ress O bam a q u o te d L incolns th e “H ouse D ivided” oratio, in his victo ry ad d ress, on th e edge of th e presidency, O b am a tu rn e d to a n o th e r c a n o n speech , L incoln’s fist in a u g u ra l, a n allu sio n h e re in ­ fo rced d u rin g th e in a u g u ra tio n c erem o n y by usin g m o ral o ra to ry of th e „G ettysburg A ddress”.

To O bam a, L incoln’s o ra to ry is of p a rtic u la r significance because, ju s t like L incoln, O b am a co n stan tly n eeds to n eg o tiate his re la tio n ­ ship w ith A m erican history. They b o th rh eto rically establish a rh e to r­ ical p ro p o sitio n th a t h isto ry is a stead y p ro g re ssio n to w a rd s a co m ­ m on goal, a goal th a t fits th e fram ew o rk of A m erican myths: echoing th e F ounding F athers co n q u erin g th e w ild ern ess w ho p u sh th e fro n ­ tie r w e s tw a rd to w a rd s th e P ro m ise d L an d . J o h n M u rp h y (2009) p o in ts o u t th a t O b am a ’s a n d L incoln’s rh e to ric seem to b e stressin g th e fact th a t th e se p ro cesses w o u ld h a p p en ag ain a n d ag ain in th e life of th e country: g e n e ra tio n a fte r g en era tio n , eac h d ed icatin g itself to th e co ven an t w illed by th e founders, each crossing th e w ild ern ess in view of th e p ro p o sitio n th a t all m en a re cre a te d equal, eac h g e n e ra ­ tio n c eleb ra tin g th e u n io n w ith th e A m erican history, „a u n io n th a t could b e a n d sh o uld b e p erfected over tim e .”

The last line, a p a ra p h ra s e of Lincoln, com es fro m O b am a’s speech of M arch 18th 2008, so called, th e „R ace S p eech ”. B u t it is n o t only th e b elief in h u m a n p o te n cy for p erfectio n th a t b in d s th e tw o p re s i­ den ts together: it is th e ir o rato ry w h ich su stain s th e m yth th a t A m er­ ica is a “city u p o n a hill”, a g o d sen d p a ra g o n of v irtu e o th e r n atio n s o ught to em ulate. As p o in ted o u t by N o rm an Davies (1997: 141), „Eve­ ry o n e n eed s m yths. In d iv id u a ls n e e d m yths. N a tio n s n e e d m yths. M yths a re th e sets of sim plified beliefs, w h ich m ay o r m ay n o t ap p ro x ­ im a te reality, b u t w h ich give us a sen se of o u r origins, o u r identity, a n d o u r p u rp o s e s .” O b am a ’s o ra to ry explores th is n eed fo r n atio n al mythology, su stain s it a n d a p p ro p ria te s it in su ch w ay th a t it cem ents th e m e m b ers of th e a u d ie n c e a n d b in d s th e sp e a k e r to his h eare rs. T he n a tio n a l m eth o do log y em ployed in B a ra c k O b a m a ’s o ra to ry in 2008 m a in tain s A m erica’s greatn ess a n d celeb rates A m erican history a n d culture.

The national myths used in O bam a’s oratory serve as topoi - rhetorical categories, ideas, concepts w h ich a re easily recognizable by th e listen­ ers. In rh e to ric a l th e o ry “to p ic s” a re re fe rre d to as “co m m o n p laces” (after A ristotle), th a t is, associative a re a s fam iliar to th e m em b ers of ad d re ssed com m unity. Topoi differ in th e d eg ree of th e ir universality: som e, “com m on to p ics”, could b e em ployed reg ard less of th e affinities of th e au d ien ce, on th e o th e r h an d , “sp ecia l to p ic s ” w o u ld b e m o re suitab le only to special occasions a n d specific audiences.

A survey of O b am a’s o rato ry fro m th e first cam p aig n o u ght to b e ­ gin w ith a d etailed look on th e m o st salien t elem en t of rh e to ric fro m th e y ear 2008: th e slogan Yes, we can. It played a pivotal role in th e p r o ­ m otion of th e - th e n - sen ato r O bam a, a n d served as contextual fram e­ w o rk for a n u m b e r of p ersu asiv e strateg ies of his oratory.

A m odel p o litical slogan h as a few in alien ab le features: it o u g h t to b e brief, pithy, an d m em orable. It sh o u ld also evoke positive asso cia­ tio n s a n d e n c o u ra g e active, r a th e r th a n p assiv e a ttitu d e of th e a d ­ d ressees. Finally, it sh o u ld b e easy to p ro n o u n c e a n d c h a n t d u rin g election rallies. The Yes, we can slogan seem s to exhibit all of th ese fea­ tu res, fu rth e r e n h an c ed w ith versatile rh e to ric a l ap peals. The catch- p h ra s e b eca m e p o p u la r a t th e b eg inn in g of 2008. Initially, it w as not th e m a in slo g an of B a ra c k O b a m a ’s cam p aig n , yet w ith tim e, it b e ­ cam e th e m o st w idely reco g n ized elem en t of his p ro m o tio n agenda. The slogan w as circu lated th ro u g h o u t th e electo rate w ith ham m erlik e repetitio n s. O ne could see it in alm o st every single sp eech o ra te d by B a ra c k O bam a, a c a n d id a te fo r th e p re sid e n c y of th e US. A nd th e stren g th of th e slogan did n o t resign in its o m n ip resen ce b u t in its rh e ­ to ric a l p ersuasiveness.

F irst a n d forem ost, one has to co n sid er its form : gram m atically, it is an affirm ative sen ten ce w h ich con stitu tes a p a r t of a conversation; its fo rm p resu p p o ses th e existence of an en q u iry th a t w as asked in th e p rev io u s tu rn a n d w h o se exact c o n te n t th e ad d ressees do n o t know. This qu asi-d ialo g ic fo rm re n d e rs th e slo g an dy n am ic as it provokes th e a d d re ssees to try to re c re a te th e in te rro g a tiv e th a t p re c e d e d it. And in co n sequ en ce, th e m essage it c arries b eco m es m o re easily in ­ c o rp o ra te d into th e h e a re rs ’ m inds.

The w ords w h ich fo rm th e slogan a re sim ilar; th ey are m onosyllab­ ic, sim ple, u n iv ersal in te rm s of register. They also co n stitu te th e rh e ­ to ric a l fig u re of tricolon; in rh e to ric a l th e o ry of figures th e a r r a n g e ­ m e n t of tex tu al elem ents in gro up s of th re e has alw ays b een d eem ed as m o st p o te n t - o n e m ig h t re c a ll o th e r m e m o ra b le tricolons fro m A m erican politics: an exam ple u sed by R om an Jaco b son to illu strate his discussion of th e p o etic fu n ctio n of language: „1 like Ik e”, ad v er­

tisin g th e p o litic a l c a m p a ig n of E ise n h o w e r in 1955, o r slo g an s of m o re rece n t US political figures: „Putting People F irst” fro m Bill Clin­ to n ’s cam p aig n of 1992 o r „Yes, A m erica C an” fro m G eorge W. B u sh ’s cam p aig n of 2004 - th is last exam ple exhibits striking resem b lan ce to B arack O b am a’s 2008 slogan.

O ne sho u ld co n sid e r each w o rd of th e slogan. The w o rd “yes” ac ­ counts for th e optim istic m essage of th e tricolon. S ince th e an sw e r for th e afo rem en tio n ed p resu p p o sed en q uiry is affirm ative, th e m inds of th e ad d re sse s a re p u s h e d in th e d ire c tio n of positives. At th e sam e tim e, “yes” provides a specific positive context in w h ich th e tw o o th e r w o rd s a re to b e considered. Similarly, th e p ro n o u n “w e ” is of u tm o st im p o rta n c e for th e co n stru ctio n of th e p ersu asiv e strateg y b eh in d B a­ rack O b am a’s slogan. The p ro n o u n does n ot indexically p o in t to an in ­ dividual speaker, b u t to a collective addresser: it refers to B arack O ba­ m a to g e th er w ith - p resu m ab ly - his follow ers. Thus, B arac k O bam a m an ag es to c re a te a co m m u n ica tiv e com m unity: th e u se of th e p r o ­ no u n suggests th a t he a n d his au dien ce sh a re one lot, have m u tu al u n ­ d erstan d in g , a n d re p re se n t a unified p o litical entity. The com m u nity he co n stitu te s is n o t p h a tic o r co n v entio nal; it is a g ro u p of p eo p le w ho b eca m e u n ited for one p ro fo u n d p o litical goal.

In a g re a t m any of his speeches one can easily d iscern th e echoes of th e co n cep t b eh in d th e inclusive p ro n o u n “w e ” fro m th e cam p aig n slogan. W h at m ore, in th e slogan, O bam a im plicitly d istan ces him self fro m his o p p o n en ts sin ce it is he w ho, to g e th e r w ith his su p p o rters, is th e catalyst of th e g re a t positive p o te n tial in people, a n d w ith nobody else, th e ad d resses of th e slogan „can” do so m uch. In consequence, th e p re se n c e of O bam a in th is collective “w e ” is very strong: th e re is no “w e ” fro m Yes, we can w ith o u t B arack O bam a.

The collective inclusiveness of th e p ro n o u n “w e ” is neatly in terco n ­ n ected w ith th e m essage b e h in d th e th ird w o rd of th e slogan: “can ”. The m odality of th e w o rd re n d e rs its m ean in g flexible a n d in ten tio n ­ ally am biguous; th e ad d resse e does n o t know w h a t it is th a t th e col­ lective su b ject “c a n ” do, b u t in fers th a t it is so m eth in g p o sitive (be­ cau se of th e echo of th e in itia l “yes”) a n d it is so m eh o w co n n ec ted w ith th e id ea of collectiveness (b eca u se of th e in clu siv e p ro n o u n ). This am biguity rem a in s to b e explored by th e h e a re rs in th e ir m inds - w h en they try to re crea te th e in terrog ativ e th a t p rece d ed th e question. At th e sam e tim e, th ey them selves ascrib e ad d itio n al sense to m o d ali­ ty a n d co m p lete th e p e rsu a siv e s tra te g y w ith an y id eas th ey w an t. Thus, th e slo g a n s u rre p titio u sly en g ag es th e a d d re sse e s to b eco m e m o re th a n its passive receivers - th ey tu rn into active p a rtic ip a n ts in of th e co m m u n icativ e act.

Interestingly, th e inclu siv en ess of th e p ro n o u n “w e ” b eco m es an im p lie d c o n d itio n fo r m o d a lity W ith o u t th e co llectiv e su b ject, th e w o rd “can ” loses its potency: “Yes, I can ” w o uld b e a n e u tra l affirm a­ tive, th e collective Yes, we can im plies d e te rm in a tio n a n d w illingness (suggested by th e assem bly sp e a k e r b eh in d it). Thus, p ersu asiv e m o ­ dality of th e slogan becom es in sep arab ly jo in ed w ith th e notion of col­ lectiveness it carries. The th re e w o rd s co n stitu te a p ersu asiv e w hole a n d th e ir fun ction in g is stro n g ly d e p e n d e n t on one an o th er: th e re is no “can ” w ith o u t “w e ” a n d th e re is no “w e ” w ith o u t “can ”.

O ne last asp ect of th e slogan n eeds to be considered: linguistically, w h en re g a rd e d in its rh e to ric a l context, th e slogan m ay b e view ed as a in d irect hybrid-speech ac t com prising a representative, an act w hich com m its th e sp eak er to th e tru th of th e p ro p o sitio n expressed, as w ell as a commisive, an act w hich com m its th e speaker to a certain course of action. In Yes, we can, th e actu al political p rom ises a re no t stated overt­ ly, b u t b eco m e in ferred by th e h e a re r fro m im plicatures: th e sp eak er p ro m ise s a lot a n d th e h e a re rs h av e a sen se th a t h e w ill fulfill his p ro m ises - a t least u n til th e m ag ical influence of rh eto ric w ears off.

The rela tio n sh ip b etw een th e slogan a n d O b am a’s use of A m erican topoi b e co m es a p p a re n t w h e n o n e looks a t of th e m o st im p o rta n t speeches of th e 2008 cam paign: th e N ew H am p sh ire p rim a ry election o ration . In th e sp eech th e afo rem en tio n ed slogan Yes, we can is u sed in su c h a co n tex t th a t it p o in ts to th e fo u n d in g co n ce p ts of A m erican con sciousness a n d th e tu rn in g -p o in t events in A m erican history. The use of th e topoi helps to define th e collective „we” fro m th e slogan - it is th e A m erican n a tio n to g e th e r w ith its im p lied n ew est leader, B a ­ ra c k O bam a.

The w h o le N ew H a m p sh ire p rim a ry electio n sp eech is en d o w ed w ith versatile rh e to ric a l figures of rep etitio n a n d rein fo rcem en t. O ba­ m a op en s th e sp e e c h w ith a co n v en tio n al, rh y th m ic ex p ressio n of gratefu ln ess to his voters a n d a reu n io n ad d ress to his opponent, H i­ lary Clinton. The tw o speech-acts rein fo rce his rh eto rical im age, ethos, of a b e n ev o len t a n d m o d est m an. T h ro u g h o u t th e w h ole sp eech , he stresses th a t it is n o t his p e rs o n a l victory, b u t th e v icto ry of his s u p ­ p o rters.

R ight a fte r th e opening, exordium, th e s p e a k e r beg in s to co n stru c t th e “w e ” th a t is b o th th e rh e to ric a l su b ject a n d object of his o rato ry - a t th is p o in t th e “w e ” he uses denotes th e p eo p le w ho h elp ed his ca m ­ p aign, soon to tak e up th e m ean in g of th e A m erican p eo p le (the w o rd “A m erica” is th e m ost com m on co n ten t w o rd of th e speech). Three an- a p h o ric a l co n stru ctio n s “th e re is som eth in g h a p p e n in g ” c h a ra cterize his s u p p o rte rs as u n ited , d ed icated , id ealistic, a n d n o t en tan g led in

politics (presum ably, w ith high m orals) - th u s th e ethos of th e co m m u ­ nity, of th e “w e ”, is c o n stru cte d alongside a h id d en com plim ent.

The vagueness b eh in d th e w o rd “so m eth in g ” is soon disp ersed w ith O bam a statin g th a t A m erica u n d erg o es a “c h a n g e ” acco m panying his election. In th e fu rth e r inclusive co n stru ctio n of th e “w e ” (in co rp o ra t­ ing an enumeratio of p a ra lle l a n tith e tica l labels “black a n d w h ite”, “gay a n d stra ig h t”, “D em o crats a n d R ep u b lican s”) he also delineates g en ­ e ra l goals of th e “w e ”: h e a n d his s u p p o rte rs b eco m e unified in yet one w ay - by com m on political, so cial aim s.

It is also h ere th a t O bam a em ploys th e first topos of th e speech: “w e w ill re s to re o u r m o ra l s ta n d in g in th e w o rld ” - th e s p e a k e r im plies th a t th e m o ral stan d in g u sed to b e th e re (it is n o t th e re an ym o re im ­ plicitly due to th e failures of th e p revious ad m in istratio n ) a n d its ex­ istence is im p o rta n t for A m erica - th e topos of th e US as a “le a d e r”, “g o d sen d ” nation: sim ilarly th e sta te m e n t he u tters later: “B u t in th e un lik ely sto ry th a t is A m erica, th e re h as n ev er b e e n an y th in g false ab o u t h o p e ”, he b u ilds u p a n im age of A m erica as a u n iq u e country, a co u n try w h o se fate is gov erned by a “sto ry ”, th u s suggesting a mis- sion-like narrativ e, im plicitly recalling th e topos of a “city u p o n a h ill”, A m erica as a co u n try th a t is looked u p to a n d looked upon.

At th e sam e tim e, O bam a rein fo rces th e positive ethos of th e co m ­ m u n ity by ascrib ing it a n o th e r positive feature: p atrio tism . H e u tiliz­ es th e topos of an A m erican p a trio t a n d em ploys enumeratio of th e m ost im p o rta n t positive, alm ost idealistic, m otifs of A m erican cu ltu re an d history - th e A m erican scriptures, th e abolitionist m ovem ent, as well as th e drive to conquest th e w ilderness an d to pu sh th e fro n tier w estw ard. E ach of these motifs b ears significance for th e shaping of th e A m erican identity an d as such has u ndeniable ran k of a cu ltu ral topos. At th e sam e tim e, th e listing of th e se m otifs exerts p o w erfu l unifying im pact, by linking th e p a s t w ith th e p resen t, a n d th e p re se n t w ith th e past, O ba­ m a sum m ons th e national spirit an d transform s th e “w e” of his su p p o rt­ ers into th e “w e ” of A m erica, m ak in g all A m erican citizens his s u p ­ p o rte rs a n d m aking him self im plicitly th e only le ad er of th e nation.

The sense of co m m un ity is also rein fo rced by th e puzzle-like com ­ m u n icativ e q u ality of antonomasia, th e su b stitu tio n of a p ro p e r n am e by a longer descriptive ph rase, e.g. m aking a referen ce to Jo h n F. K en­ n ed y ’s p resid en c y a n d th e m ission of Apollo 11, O bam a says a „Pres­ id en t w ho chose th e m oon as o u r new fro n tie r”, also m aking a refer­ ence to M artin L u th er King a n d a w ell k now n p assag e of his sp eech „1 see th e P ro m ised L a n d ”, O b am a says „King w ho to o k us to th e m o u n tain to p a n d p o in ted th e w ay to th e P rom ised L an d ”. By doing so th e sp eak er rein fo rces th e existing sense of co m m u n ity th ro u g h co m ­

m on c u ltu ra l roots: if his h e a re rs a re able to d ecip h er th e referen ces to th e founding con cepts of th e A m erican m en tality a n d US h isto rical figures, th e ir cu ltu ral a n d n atio n a l affinity w ith th e sp eak er becom es confirm ed. They b eco m e th e „we” fro m Yes, we can in one m o re way.

W ith all th e above referen c es, th e collective m o d ality b e h in d th e w o rd „can” b ecom es a t least p artly specified - th e w o rd s B arack O ba­ m a em ploys b e a r stro n g p o sitive co n n o ta tio n s, th ey a re also set in p a ra lle l stru ctu re s, w h ich rein fo rces th e ir sem an tic strength: „justice a n d e q u a lity ”, „ o p p o rtu n ity a n d p ro s p e rity ” (th e la tte r ech oin g th e “A m erican D ream ” topos). As th e g re a t A m ericans in th e p ast, th e col­ lective „we” is capable of th e m o st im pressive national, social, a n d p a ­ trio tic feats, an d w ill erec t new im m o rtal m o n u m en ts of th e A m erican id e n tity - by th e im p lied p a ra lle l b etw ee n th e n a tio n a l a c c o m p lish ­ m en ts fro m th e p a s t a n d th e m o m en t of th e u tte ra n c e of th e slogan, th e p ro fu n d ity of th e m o m e n t is s tre s s e d - it gives th e a d d re sse s a sen se th a t th e y ta k e p a r t in a m ilesto n e m o m en t in th e h isto ry of th e ir nation . Finally, to rein fo rce th e su g g estio n th a t O b am a’s p re s i­ dency w o uld b e different fro m G eorge W. B u sh ’s, th e ideas of „chang­ e s” an d „healing th e n atio n ” a re rep ea ted - a n ap p ea l th a t m u st have b een p a rtic u la rly effective in th e ad d ress to voters, w ho, to a larg e ex­ ten t, w e re strongly critica l of th e previous p re s id e n t’s policies.

W hen o ne m oves to 2012 a n d ta k es a b rie f look a t th e rh e to ric a l m ech an ism s u sed by O bam a, one can n o tice sim u ltan eo u s co n tin u ity a n d d isco n tin u ity in co m p a riso n to th e la n g u a g e of th e 2008 c a m ­ p aig n. A n u m b e r of p o litical events in fo rm ed th e A m erican po litical la n d scap e in th e fo u r years of th e p resid en cy - to n am e ju s t a few, p r i­ m arily th e fin an cial crisis, p la n s of US h ealth reform , ongoing A m er­ ic an en g ag e m en t in Ira q a n d A fghanistan, a n d th e killing of O sam a B in Laden. Also, B arac k O b am a’s p resid en cy b ecam e a self-influenc- ing facto r as, in th e co u rse of his te rm of presidency, he ceased to be a novelty a n d th e sole con d itio n for th e A m erican sp len d o r of a „city u p o n th e hill”. In consequence, th e US p re sid e n t need ed new v o cab ­ u lary to tack le th e changing political a n d econom ic situation, he n eed ­ ed to rein v e n t his rh e to ric a l appeal; p u ttin g p rim a ry co m m u n icativ e em p h asis on th e topos of th e A m erican D ream allow ed h im to do it.

W hen one tak es a look at th e S tate of th e U nion A ddress of 2012, o n e sees th is tu r n in O b am a’s rh eto ric. The p re s id e n t em p h atic ally (em ploying an a n a p h o ra ) stresses th e fact th a t „For th e first tim e in n ine years, th e re a re no A m ericans fighting in Ira q ”; a n d “F or th e first tim e in tw o decades, O sam a b in L aden is n o t a th re a t to th is co u n try ”. T hus su g g estin g th a t an im p o rta n t elem en t of th e g ra n d m ission of „policing th e w o rld ” c an b e te m p o ra rily p u t aside. O b am a em ploys

a series of p arallel constru ction s to p re se n t a vision of A merica: „Think ab o u t th e A m erica w ith in o u r reach: a co u n try th a t leads th e w o rld in e d u c a tin g its p eople; a n A m erica th a t a ttra c ts a n ew g e n e ra tio n of high-tech m a n u fa ctu rin g a n d high-paying jobs; a fu tu re w h ere w e ’re in c o n tro l of o u r ow n energy; a n d o u r secu rity a n d p ro sp erity a re n ’t so tied to u n stab le p a rts of th e w orld. An econom y b u ilt to last, w h ere h ard w ork pays off an d responsibility is rew ard ed .” This idealistic vision co n notes th e offering of ho pe a n d p ro sp erity fro m th e p revious ca m ­ paign, b u t un lik e in 2008, O bam a does n o t co n d itio n A m erica’s su c­ cess in him self b u t in th e m otivating p o w er of th e A m erican D ream . E choing th e Yes, we can slogan, O bam a em p hatically stresses th a t „We can do this. I know w e can, b eca u se w e ’ve do n e it b efo re.” The p o w ­ erful call to action, a n in sta n ce of figurative en c o u ra g e m e n t a n d pa­ thos, is rein fo rc ed by th e e lab o ra tio n on th e A m erican D ream (as he says, one of “A m erican values”): th e „basic A m erican prom ise th a t if you w o rk h ard , you could do w ell eno u g h to raise a family, ow n a hom e, sen d y o u r kids to college, a n d p u t a little aw ay for re tire m e n t.” O ba­ m a b rak es th e m yth into p articu la rities, ren d erin g it co ncrete, acces­ sible to th e audience: he crafts a sto ry of a „self-m ade m an ”. The fu r­ th e r elab o ratio n on th e p rinciples of th e A m erican D ream is reinforced by an obligation th e sp ea k e r sets u p o n him self a n d his h earers, a p a ­ trio tic m ission: “w e have to reclaim th e m ” [i.e., “A m erican v alu es”] .

O bam a him self g ro u n d s th e reaso n for th e call to actio n in a n ex­ ten siv e narratio\ „In 2008, th e h o u se of c a rd s co llapsed. We le a rn e d th a t m ortg ag es h ad b een sold to p eop le w ho co uldn’t afford o r u n d e r­ sta n d them . B anks h a d m ad e huge b ets a n d b o nu ses w ith o th e r p e o ­ p le ’s money. R egulators h ad looked th e o th e r way, o r didn’t have th e a u th o rity to sto p th e b a d b eh av io r.” O bam a uses s h o rt c o o rd in a te d sentences, briskly elab o ratin g on th e causes a n d th e co u rse of th e c ri­ sis. The referen c e to th e p a s t event allow s h im to en d o w th e id ea of th e A m erican D ream w ith new significance: th ro u g h his rh eto ric, it b eco m es a re m e d y fo r th e fin a n c ia l crisis a n d th e p ro b le m s of th e A m erican economy.

In a n o th e r sp eech fro m Ja n u a ry this year, th e fu n d ra is e r speech, O bam a p ro jects an im age as a sp eak er is p a rticu la rly strong: he states „1 said in 2008, I ’m n o t a p erfec t m an. I ’m n o t a p erfect P resid en t” - such an overt depreciatio helps him in con structin g his im age as a tru th ­ ful, h o n est, easy-going p e rso n . T he s p e a k e r also em ploys a n o th e r A m erican topos to unify his listeners, to com bine th e m u n d e r th e label of „A m erica” - he stresses th a t he to g e th er w ith his v o ters has a m is­ sion, a n „ e rra n d ” to re c o n s titu te A m erica as a g re a t co untry: „[the people] u n d e rsta n d th a t th is co u n try is still th a t last, b est h o p e”. This

u sage of th e topos of a “city u p o n a hill” a p p e a rs in th e context of th e fin an cial crisis a n d th e elab o ratio n on econom ic setbacks. B u t th e u s ­ age of th is rh e to ric a l stra ta g e m is different fro m w h a t it w as in 2008 as, a t th e sam e tim e, o ne also notices a n o th e r c u ltu ra l topos - th a t of a „self m a d e-m a n ” a n d th e „A m erican D re a m ”: „in A m erica, if you w o rk h a rd y o u ’ve g o t a c h a n c e ” a n d O b am a in c o rp o ra te s into th is con cep t a w ide sw eep of th e A m erican people: „It doesn’t m a tte r w h at you look like. It doesn’t m a tte r w h a t y o u r n am e is”. The co n cept of th e A m erican D re am b eco m es inclusive to all his voters, as th e sp e a k e r im plicitly p ro m ises th e m its fulfillm ent a n d p ro sp ero u s future.

B a ra c k O bam a skillfully ad ju sts his sp eech es to th e ch an g in g so ­ cial, fin an c ial a n d p o litic al context. In g en eral, in th e 2008 election speeches, th e A m erican topoi w e re u sed to c o n stru c t th e voting co m ­ m u n ity of O b a m a ’s su p p o rte rs , th e in clu siv e “w e ” fro m Yes, we can fram e d in th e m yth of A m erica as a “city u p o n a hill”, a p a ra g o n for o th e r nations; in th e 2012 cam paign, O bam a seem ed to p ay m o re a t­ te n tio n to th e re-vitalisation of this sense of co m m unity a n d evoking it u n d e r th e label of ho p e of econom ic g ro w th g u a ra n te e d by th e “A m er­ ic an D ream ” as w ell as by th e d eterm in a tio n a n d ability of th e A m er­ ic an p eop le to su rp ass th e fin an cial crisis. Still, th e above c o n sid e ra ­ tio n s a r e b y no m e a n s fin a l - th e c a m p a ig n of

2012

a n d th e p o st-cam p aig n deb ates offer o p u len t m a teria l for extensive rh eto rical in v estig atio n of n o t only topoi em ployed in B a ra c k O b a m a ’s o ra to ry b u t also of figures, an d tro p es, body language, etc. It is a p p a re n t th a t th e sp eech es of th e p re sid e n t of th e US co n stitu te im p o rta n t artifacts of A m erican c u ltu re a n d help in g rasp in g th e n u an ce s of th e A m eri­ c an identity.

Bibliography:

Bai, M. 2009. „Don’t Look B ack ,” N ew York Times, 29 January, 4.

Caesar, J. 1981. „The R ise of R h eto rical P residency.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 11, 158-171.

D avies, N. 1994. „Polish N a tio n a l M e th o d o lo g ie s.” In M yth s and Nationhood, G. H osking an d G. S chopflin (eds.). L ondon: H u rst, 141-157.

E in h o rn , L. 1998. „The G host Talk: P erso n al In terv iew w ith T hree F o rm er Spe- e c h w rite rs.” Communication Quarterly 36, 94-108.

G eld erm an , C. W. 1997 .A ll President’s Words: The Bully Pulpit and the Creation of

Virtual Presidency. N ew York: Walker.

G oetsch, P. 1994. „ P resid en tial R hetoric: a n In tro d u c tio n ” In Important Speeches

by American Presidents after 19 4 5 , P G oetsch an d G. H u rm (eds.). H eidelberg:

Goetsch, E 2000. „In th e Bully Pulpit: P residential R hetoric betw een Serm onizing a n d A g e n d a-S ettin g .” [in:] Negotiations o f American Identity, R. H a g en b ü ch le a n d J. R aab (eds.). Tübingen: S tauffenburg, 330-346.

Ham ilton, L. 1992. „Presidential R hetoric and Political D iscourse.” [in:] The Rhetoric

o f M odern Statesm anship, K. T h o m so n (ed.). L a n h a m : U n iv e rsity P re ss of

A m erica, 207-226.

M uir, W. K. 1988. „R onald R egan: The P rim acy of R h e to ric ”[in:] leadership in the

M odem Presidency, F. G reen stein (ed.). C am bridge, M ass: H a rv a rd U niversity

Press, 260-295.

M urphy, J. 2009. A N ew Birth o f Treedom: Barack Obama and the Rhetorical Uses

o f H istoiy. Je a n a n d A lexander H e a rd Library, http://discoverarchive.V ander­

b ilt.ed u /h an d le /1 803/2574. R etrieved 2011-01-16.

N e u s ta d t, R. 1960. Presidential Power and the M odern Presidents: The Politics

o f leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. N ew York: Wiley.

Pilkington, E. 2009. “O bam a In au g u ratio n : W ords of history... crafted by 27-year- -old in S ta rb u c k s ”. The G u a rd ia n , h ttp ://w w w .g u a rd ia n .c o .u k /w o rld /2 0 0 9 / jan /2 0 /b arack -o b am a-in au g u ratio n -u s-sp eec h . R etrieved 2011-01-27.

S ch w arz, S. 2010. The Role o f Religion in American Presidential Rhetoric: a Compara­

tive Analysis o f Speeches by John P. Kennedy and George W Bush, Trier: A tlantische

A kadem ie.

W indt, T.O. 1992. „The P re s id e n c y a n d S p e e c h e s o n I n te r n a tio n a l C rises: R epeating th e R hetorical P ast” In Contemporary American Public Discourse: a Col­

lection of Speeches and Critical Essays, R. H alfo rd (ed.). P ro sp ect H eights: Wave-

la n d Press, 204-217.

+

M ichał C hoiński - ab so lw en t In sty tu tu Filologii Angielskiej UJ, d o k to r n a u k h u m a n isty c z n y c h . Z w iązan y z W SE of 2007 r., p ro w a d z i n a u c z e ln i zaję c ia z analizy retorycznej, tech n ik persw azyjnych, u m iejętności p rezen tacji i debaty p u ­ blicznej. P rzebyw ał n a stypendiach n a U niversität zu K öln o ra z w Instytucie Jo h ­ n a F. K ennedy ego n a F reie U n iv ersität w B erlinie. W ygłosił re feraty n a k ilk u n a­ s tu k o n fe re n c ja c h n a u k o w y c h (m .in . n a 4 th I n te r n a tio n a l A sso c ia tio n fo r L iterary S em an tics C onference, 10th In te rn a tio n a l Cognitive L inguistics Confe­ ren ce, 11th A pril C onference). In teresu je się retoryką, socjolingw istyką, lite ra tu ­ r ą an g ielsk ą i am erykańską, o ra z p rzek ład em . W w olnych ch w ilac h słu c h a m u ­ zyki i jeźd zi n a row erze.

Abstrakt

W artykule p rz e p ro w a d zo n a zo stała an aliza p rzem ó w ień politycznych B arac- k a O bam a, w ygłoszonych w ra m a c h k a m p a n ii p rezy d en ck ich w USA w 2008 r. i 2012 r. A naliza sk u p ia się n a ro zm aity ch am erykańskich to p o sach kulturow ych, k tó re używ ane s ą w re to ry c e Obamy; szczeg ó ln a u w ag a je st p o św ięco n a s tra te ­ g io m p e rsw a z y jn y m , k tó ry c h s ą o n e c z ę ścią. S k o n tra s to w a n ie p rz e m ó w ie ń

z dw óch k a m p a n ii p o zw ala w ykazać p u n k ty k o n tra stu o ra z p u nkty w sp ó ln e m ię ­ dzy re to ry k ą dw óch k am p an ii, w szczególności to w ja k i sposób O bam a d o sto so ­ w uje sw oje p rzem ó w ien ia by sp ro sta ć z m ien iający m się z c z a se m oczek iw an io m publiczności.

Słowa klucze

retoryka, O bam a, topos, p ersw azja, k a m p a n ia w y borcza