Close Textual Analysis of Barak Obama
Essay Preview: Close Textual Analysis of Barak Obama
Report this essay
In this paper, I am going to first discuss my method of “close textual analysis, backing it up with theories from Michael Leff, Michael Osborn and James Darsey. After this, I am going to walk through Barack Obamas inauguration speech, pointing out the important parts of the speech. After I have presented his speech, I will analyze it, applying my method and theories to critique different strategies Obama incorporated in his speech. Looking at the close reading procedure, I will look at particular patterns of speech, contradictions, metaphors and similarities. I will look for how Obama incorporated his central theme of we and us into his address and explore the hidden meaning of the words, allusions and expressions used. Specifically I will analyze the detail of the language and how stylistic techniques or patterns are used to enunciate the symbol of togetherness in the given rhetoric and how Obama presented his symbol of us and we and the impact it made. I plan on analyzing how Obama used particular nuances through his address that have a calculated effect on the given audience, and his pronoun usage. President Barak Obama used many stylistic elements, including to referring to aspects of historical context, to symbolize his sense of change in his speech. Here, I am going to analyze how he organized his speech and how this organization contributed to the impact of his personal rhetoric.
Close Textual Analysis studies the relationship connecting the inner workings of public discourse and its historical context in order to discover what makes a particular text function in a credible manner (Burgchardt p. 563). In reference to President elect, Barak Obamas Inaugural Address I wish to look into this method “Close Textual Analysis”. Barack Obama used his particular theme of us and we in his Inaugural as a way to unite Americans into a new era of hope for our nation.
As a politician, and in particular as a newly elected president, ones words must exude confidence and intelligence in order to boost the morale of a nation. There were high expectations when it came to Barack Obamas Presidential Inaugural Address and Obama had the duty to deliver a necessary address to the nation as an orator. Barack Obama used a specific style of form and content to enunciate a symbol of us and we in his Inaugural Address to represent the transition to a new era of hope for our nation.
Close textual analysis, often referred to as “close reading, is a literary criticism that aims to reveal the hidden mechanisms found in the discourse (Burgchardt p. 563). As a critic, one must pay attention to the particulars rather than making generalizations about the piece of literature. As a whole, it is an important type of analysis in rhetorical criticism because rather than analyzing the piece in a general perspective, this allows the reader to observe a close connection with the author of the literature. A critic is able to focus on the particular discourses the author created throughout his or her speech. One can explore the authors text and how he or she is using literary devices to have a certain effect on the audience based on the situation. We learn that close reading is more of a particular analysis in that rather than asking questions like, ” What was the author saying?”, the critic will begin to explore, ” Why did they say it, or how did they say it”. The style and choice of language has much more emphasis because orators or authors have a rationale in the words that they choose and how they relay these chosen words. Mastery of close reading enables the critic to explore how the author of a given work crafts their discourse to have an effect that is persuasive.
Michael Leff analyzed Abraham Lincolns Second Inaugural Address. In his critique, “Dimensions of Temporality in Lincolns Second Inaugural”, Leff looks at the theme of time as the center of his analysis. In the critique, he argues that the speech is not only organized chronologically, but time plays a focused role in his speech. Leff relates that Lincoln used a clear pattern of temporal organization in his address. The opening line refered to the past, present, and future and Leff argued about how those three mentioned elements reappear in the body of the speech in their own element. Leff went on to show how Lincolns progressions of time were used more as a literary device for effect, rather than a chronological distinction in the discourse. He then noted how this distinguished Lincolns excellence as a stylist. Leff s hypothesis was that temporal disruptions and subsequent connections were created when Lincoln combined elements from the past , present , and future with elements of the secular and the sacred , and
that these added up to a “creative equivocation Leffs approach on Lincolns Second Inaugural parallels to that of Obamas Inaugural due to the specific themes presented within the speech (Leff).”
Michael Osborn used his essay on “Archetypal Metaphor in Rhetoric: The Light-Dark Family” to look deeper into the usage of metaphor within rhetoric. To begin with, he stated that “archetypal metaphors are especially popular in rhetorical discourse/ limitless range of possibilities” Osborn went on to say that, “when speakers wish to place figurative value judgments on subjects, they will more often prefer a light or darkness association.” A key point that is made in Osborns essay is when he stated that archetypal metaphors are characterized by their prominence in rhetoric. He is saying that their tendency to occupy important positions within speeches creates a particular mood and perspective that reinforces a critical argument and synthesizes the meaning and force of the given speech. The focus of Michael Osborns article was to focus particularly on the four sources of archetypal metaphor–light and darkness, the sun, heat and cold, and the cycle of the seasons. Osborn declared that “The reason for placing light and darkness at the center is that its motivational basis is shared in varying degrees by the other archetypes.” Light relates to the fundamental struggle for survival and with light, a person is informed of their environment and can escape the dangers that coincide with it. With his analysis of light-dark, Osborn then began to question what happens when a speaker uses these metaphors, “Because of their strong positive and negative associations with survival and developmental motives, such metaphors express intense value judgments and may this be expected to elicit significant value responses from an audience.” The essay goes on further to say that in moments of crisis and despondency, the speaker