Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
See, the 'issue' (or rather, disconnect) is that, when we say "he's a great speaker/orator/lover/decider/whatever" we're not simply judging based upon some singular set of metrics.
Reagan was a very good speaker, and had great speechwriters - he was also photogenic and relatively attractive, and had a very 'attractive' (sexy?) background. He looked and sounded like a President. All of these things are contextual to the listener - you can't separate them from the speech, and they all come into play when determining whether he is a great orator. The parable of Nixon's first appearance on television, after repeated radio speeches, is a great example of how context operates. I guess the point is that anyone who claims Reagan was 'solely' elected on his speaking style is really saying something more complex than 'he's a great orator' because it is nigh-impossible for anyone to judge something that relies on charisma without their own biases becoming evident.
|
Having lived through Reagan's speeches as a teenager, he was elected because he can "PLAY" the "presidential role" well... His acting skills worked well for him. He practiced modulations with his voice, his speechwriters were no different from before. With proper voice inflections, he relayed a quality message, from a poor speech, until he was toughly questioned on it. Which, that did not happen often. He would not be able to survive the current voirdire today's media puts on people...
President Reagan was a great communicator to the world...
His landslide victory over President Carter was due his great ability to rouse the crowds based on his ability to communicate the "meaningful messages".
ETA: President Obama's oratory skills will improve overtime, with practice. Especially with one of his words lingering on the minds of world powers. Regardless of his ethnicity, his oratory skills in my opinion, will relay that pensiveness that he attempts to use, rather than blurting out what first comes to mind...
Linear Mode
