So...Listening to President Bush's speech on the 5th anniversary of September 11, I was struck by how slightly askew his (or, more aptly, his speechwriter's) sense of voice, audience, and purpose was. [See the Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca quote from our Herrick text: "The important thing...is not knowing what the speaker regards as true or important, but knowing the views of those he is addressing" (9).] In a speech made on this particular anniversary, a speech that should probably be purely commemorative [epideictic is the term for ceremonial, "praise or blame" speeches], he did get political and somewhat off the day's most important topic. But what my ears really picked up on was this, fairly early in the speech:
For many of our citizens, the wounds of that morning are still fresh. I have met firefighters and police officers who choke up at the memory of fallen comrades. I have stood with families gathered on a grassy field in Pennsylvania, who take bittersweet pride in loved ones who refused to be victims - and gave America our first victory in the war on terror. And I have sat beside young mothers with children who are now five-years-old - and still long for the daddies who will never cradle them in their arms. Out of this suffering, we resolve to honor every man and woman lost. And we seek their lasting memorial in a safer and more hopeful world.
Do your eyes catch what my ears did? Look at all those I's: "I have met firefighters...I have stood with families...I have sat beside young mothers." Maybe I'm just being too rhetorically sensitive, but for a speech that was supposed to honor thousands of dead, thousands of survivors, and thousands who helped out firsthand in some way, why should we care about--to be more precise, why should or would we be persuaded by--what President Bush's "I" did? He's managed to shift the focus, subtly or not so subtly, from what the families and firefighters and mothers have experienced and done to himself. Not an accidental rhetorical move.
