On the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the 4th of July, 1826, not one but two fathers of the revolution died: Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Last night I read their eulogy, as spoken by the American statesman Daniel Webster. To my surprise, this two-century-old speech changed my mind about a political question of today. While I’m a devoted fan (albeit not a fanatic) of Barack Obama, the criticism of the day, that he may be all eloquence and no substance, had struck a chord. Of John Adams, however, a famous speech maker himself, Daniel Webster had the following to say:
The eloquence of Mr. Adams resembled his general character, and formed, indeed, a part of it. It was bold, manly, and energetic; and such the crisis required. When public bodies are to be addressed on passions excited, nothing is valuable in speech farther than as it is connected with high intellectual and moral endowments. Clearness, force, and earnestness are the qualities which produce conviction.
True eloquence, indeed, does not consist in speech. It cannot be brought from far. Labor and learning may toil for it, but they will toil in vain. It must exist in the man, in the subject, and in the occasion. Affected passion, intense expression, the pomp of declamation, all may aspire to it; they cannot reach it. It comes, if it comes at all, like the outbreaking of a fountain from the earth, or the bursting forth of volcanic fires, with spontaneous, original, native force.
The graces taught in the schools, the costly ornaments and studied contrivances of speech, shock and disgust men, when their own lives and the fate of their wives, their children, and their country hang on the decision of the hour. Then words have lost their power, rhetoric is vain, and all elaborate oratory contemptible. Even genius itself then feels rebuked and subdued, as in the presence of higher qualities.
Then patriotism is eloquent; then self-devotion is eloquent. The clear conception, outrunning the deductions of logic, the high purpose, the firm resolve, the dauntless spirit, speaking on the tongue, beaming from the eye, informing every feature, and urging the whole man onward, right onward to his object this, this is eloquence; or rather it is something greater and higher than all eloquence, it is action, noble, sublime godlike action.
No mere words, indeed.
2 Responses
Marvelous quote. In any polity the ability to mobilize the public is useful but especially so in a democracy. The question becomes what do we mobilize them for and on what grounds. Edward Everett Horton spoke for ~six hours at Gettysburg and Lincoln for a few minutes. Yet he defined the fundamental and central core of our ethos in those few minutes.
In case you haven’t try Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals”. Aside from outstanding history it’s the best book on executive management and leadership in he most difficult circumstances I’m aware of. Lincoln was unsurpassed in his ability to reduce complexities to essentials and then explain them clearly but accurately. We could use some of that again.
So, other than Iraq, has Obama utilized his oratory skills for any specific policy? The crit on Obama is not that he’s an orator, but that his oration seem to lack any substance other than vague promises of “change” or “leadership”. Jefferson and Adams both dedicated their lives to promoting a vision that was both radical and provided a clear means of achieving their ideals. Obama has spent his time uttering crowd pleasing platitudes largely devoid of any real substance. It was a clear vision, combined with the ability to express it that made people like Jefferson great.