After reviewing all of the word
clouds produced from the past presidential inaugural speeches given throughout
American history, the most interesting thing I came upon was the differences I
noted when I compared the word clouds created from President George Bush’s 2nd
address in 2005 and President Barack Obama’s first inaugural address given in
2009.
The biggest difference I noted
between the two was the nature of the words presented in the cloud. Words used
by President Bush such as tyranny, fire, and enemy were aggressive and rough in
nature. This was contrasted when I looked at the word cloud created from
President Obama’s 1st inaugural address to the country which
included words such as care, promise, journey, and life. These words are very
different in nature than those of President Bush in that they are more reserved
and positive.
I believe the reason for this
juxtaposition of diction used in these two speeches most likely has to do with
the timing of the speeches given and the fact that one speech was a first inaugural
address while the other was a second and last. President Bush was giving his
second inaugural address and his speech which used the more aggressive wording
was at a time where 9/11 was more recent, and the war on terror was a large
issue at hand. President Obama’s speech with the softer language used was a
first-time address and he was probably playing off of his campaign theme of
hope and change for America as a country. Just by analyzing the words used in
their speeches to the nation, it’s clear that Obama was a change from President
Bush.
ReplyDeleteZoe,
I'm glad you brought up this great contrast in words that these two presidents used in each speech. I also noticed that President Bush sounded like he wanted to go to war in the worst way! The aggressive, rough, almost hostile tone that he projects is disconcerting and most certainly not encouraging.
However, as you stated above, the times are drastically different from one presidency to the other. Both these men brought great leadership to the country, but the word choice and tone in their speeches are shockingly different.
Hi Zoe! Nice topic; I liked your blog post! I was intrigued right away between the comparison of Bush’s and Obama’s speeches. I think your observations are right on. The words used most often obviously differed which represents a different approach for each president. I agree that Bush’s speech would be more aggressive due to the threat of national security and the war on terror. Obama, fresh off his campaign, was just about to start his presidency which makes sense that he would be more positive for his term and for the possibilities of instituting his goals. In four years, it’s amazing how much can change and that was evident in the four year gap between Bush and Obama. What do you think a speech will be like in 2016 compared to Obama’s second inauguration speech?
ReplyDeleteZoe, you bring a great point to the table, or the internet I suppose. President Obama's speech both this year and last year have greatly differed from President Bush's. There has been a great difference in how the United States has been dealing and has dealt with current issues. You did a great job talking about the change, and I like the use of juxtaposition.
ReplyDeleteTiming definitely has something to do with the tone of both of their speeches. It is very fascinating that you picked that out between the two. You are right; Bush’s words are far harsher than Obama’s. I wonder if they were switched around how the reaction would be. I personally think it would not work out well. I wonder if America’s audience likes the harsh tone that could sounded powerful, or the softer tone that maybe sounds more like he knows what he is doing. I don’t think I know without being completely biased. This was a very interesting insight Zoe!
ReplyDeleteZoe,
ReplyDeleteThat is a very interesting comparison. I agree with you on the fact that they are in different positions within their presidential career and Bush had more space to say what he really felt because it was his last term. I also think it is a good point that the timing of 9/11 and other things going on throughout the country would affect what they are saying. I do think that them as people and their presentation have something to do with how they said things as well. I think that Bush is a little more ragged in general and Obama is softer spoken. Overall I think this is a great point and very true.
Very Nice!
Zoe,
ReplyDeleteWow... I loved how instead of comparing words or people you looked at the nature (or tone) of the words in the speech. This was a very unique comparison! I totally agree on your idea for why Bush's speech had such an aggressive nature, and Obama's was more reserved. I do not think Bush was trying to go out with a bang...or trying to offend anybody...I think he was just in a difficult spot. 9/11 is one of the most tragic events in history, and if I were the one dealing with that in my country, I would probably sound aggressive too. I also think you hit the nail on the head when you said Obama was trying to continue his campaign motto, because he was. He was all about hope and peace...so why not make the words of his speech continue in that nature?
Great job with this!
~Eva