Reagan at Bergen-Belsen and Bitburg

Chapter 2: Reagan as Ceremonial Speaker

[30฀] chapter฀2 Reagan as Ceremonial Speaker Ronald Reagan was a successful presidential orator in many settings and on many occasions, but he was often particularly effective in ceremonial situations. Because this book focuses on two significant ceremonial speeches, I begin this chapter with a discussion of ceremonial speaking and the expectations of speakers and audiences in ceremonial settings. Ceremonial Oratory Scholars have long attempted to define the essential characteristics of epideictic,or ceremonial,oratory.The traditional definition centers around issues of“praise or blame of an object,event or person.”1 Some researchers view this definition as being too limited, however, because many types of speech deal with issues of praise and blame. Rhetorical critics Waldo W. Braden and Harold Mixon propose that epideictic speeches are “a celebration of communal values and traditional beliefs and feelings of the listeners.”The ceremonial speaker “draws upon those values and concepts that his auditors [listeners] already accept” and builds upon and amplifies them in the speech.2 Reagan often spoke of traditional values and beliefs in ceremonial speeches, but he used similar appeals in other speaking situations as well. [31฀] reagan฀as฀ceremnial฀speaker Braden and Mixon also state that successful ceremonial speakers use myths that are believed and accepted by the audience and therefore appeal to the communal values expressed by those myths.They believe that the content of the speech “is controlled by the occasion, which limits what is appropriate for the speaker to say and do.”3 Rhetorical critic Bonnie Dow agrees when she argues that epideictic speeches “allow the audience to reach a communal understanding of the events which have occurred.” She further proposes that the speech must “be placed in a context that aligns it with past experiences and the beliefs and values that govern [the audience’s] understanding of such experiences .” The speaker should define the audience’s role in response to the situation.4 The speaker must be conscious of the nature of the occasion and the audience expectations of what should be said on that occasion. A speaker who violates those expectations may be rejected by the audience. Braden and Mixon also propose that ceremonial speaking can go beyond its traditional purpose and offer the audience “a course of action . . . for the future.”5 As Mary Stuckey writes, Reagan tried to unite everyone into a “single ‘American’ audience.”6 Once he created the audience, he could call upon that united group to follow his suggestions on future actions or support a policy he proposed. In the most extensive study of ceremonial speaking by a communication scholar, Celeste Condit outlines three paired functions of epideictic speaking: understanding and definition, sharing and creation of community, and entertainment and display. The first term of the pair indicates the speaker’s function and the second the audience’s function in the ceremonial setting. In the definition/understanding function, the speaker“will explain the troubling issue in terms of the audience’s key values and beliefs.”If successful,“the troubling event will be made less confusing and threatening, providing a sense of comfort for the audience.” The speaker will gain the power to define.7 In the shaping/sharing of community function,the speaker develops and maintains a sense of community. Communities“need to have explicit definitions of major shared experiences,”symbols,values,myths, and heritage. If change occurs,“the community renews its conception [32฀] chapter฀2 of itself and what is good by explaining what it has previously held to be good and by working through the relationships of those past values and beliefs to new situations.” If audience members object to values stated in a speech,“the result is likely to be a sense of alienation from the community.”8 Ceremonial speeches often “invite the speaker to display his or her eloquence.” Condit describes eloquence as a “combination of truth, beauty,and power in human speech,and is a uniquecapacity of humanity .” Members of the audience are entertained in a “humane manner” and are “allowed to stretch their daily experiences into meaning more grand,sweet,noble,or delightful.”The audience also“judges the display of the speaker, because the speaker may well present eloquence as a means of self promotion.” The audience may take eloquence to be “a sign of leadership.”9 According to Condit, speakers can mold audiences and define the “public destiny,” but “it is equally true that audiences mold speakers and...