Professor Dickinson,

I just got done reading the speech for the first time after hearing it live on the mall. And I think I come away with two different reactions.

I’ve spent the last few days reading a few of the treasures of inaugural addresses in American history so as to adequately place this one – Lincoln’s first, FDR’s first, JFK’s, etc. And so standing on the mall, I kept listening for an “ask not” “fear itself” line, that didn’t come.

And to be fair, I was already in a sour mood. I broke through the crowds at 11:27, in time to sprint my way to the mall just in time to see Obama introduced. I mention this, because most of the fall out about the inauguration in Washington DC has to do with the thousands that didn’t get to see the speech . I would say 75% of the people I know living in DC were stuck at a gate at the time of the speech. And so instead of dwelling on the power of the address, most analysis here has been on the inaiblity of thousands of ticket-holders to actually attend the event. This story has been much underplayed by the press – so far.

But as far as the speech is concerned, I agree with a lot of the blogosphere that the speech has many paragraphs that might one day be memorable. These include the “unclench the fist” and “pick ourselves up” sections among others. And I think this distinction is what separates this speech from FDR and JFK. Both of the famous lines from those inaugural addresses drew immediate acclaim. While listening to Obama’s speech, I heard a few phrases and lifts of momentum that inspired me, but nothing like what I’ve read the past few days. Perhaps because we’ve heard the cliche lines so many times, we have no idea what they would have sounded like in their originality. But FDR’s nothing to fear but fear itself was already being used in popular parlance and he elevated it to the place it now holds. Similarly, Obama’s winter of hardships was a nice allusion to Shakespeare and might one day be memorized by grade school children, but nothing from the speech immediately moved me like what moved those cheering thousands in 1933.

My immediate take away from the live event, though, was disappointment. I was disappointed by the smaller crowd than I had expected. I was disappointed by the lack of immediately memorable sentences from the speech, and I was disappointed by the seeming crowd wide sentiment that the speech was good, but not King or Kennedy. The crowd just didn’t have the energy I’ve felt at other Obama events or even Dean and Edwards events in 04. I also watched Obama at the DNC in 04 and 08. Both of these speeches drew more from the crowd than anything yesterday.

After reading the speech, I think was more pleased than I had been when listening to it live. I think it puts the country in proper perspective and draws on the right chords. I also think it sets itself up to be memorable in the future. Lincoln’s, Roosevelt’s, and Kennedy’s speeches are all remembered because of their prescience. Those speeches wouldn’t be remembered without the fortitude of subsequent events. What made those speeches great wasn’t their summation of the past but their predictions for the future.

Similarly, if Obama brings us through this recession, war, and political divide successfully, this speech might reach greatness. But if Obama fails like Buchanan or Hoover, his speech will similarly be remembered. We’ll have to wait and see.

“I was surprised by the kernel of doctrine for dictators – we’ll extend our hand if you unclench your fist. Not something I got a whiff of in the campaign.”

Really? His foreign policy approach was all about diplomacy, creating lines of communication, and creating mutually-beneficial agreements to build a safer world. McCain relentlessly battered him for being soft on enemies. This was the clearest articulation of the approach he’d been talking about during the campaign.

Second, he managed to convey his message of change while only uttering the word once. Although Obama won the election because of his promise of change, those who are not the most ardent Obama supporters are most likely fatigued by his use of the word. He “proclaim[ed] an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics” and declared that “we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America,” a clear message of change and a break from the Bush administration, done in a skillful and sly manner that did not fall into cliché.

Perhaps the speech’s most important part, and the part that will be most memorable, is its encouragement of an active public and its recognition of the momentous occasion. Although the word “change” was only said once, “our” was said 67 times and “we” was often used to include the nation into his remarks. In that way, the speech was reminiscent of JFK’s call to service in his inauguration speech. His incorporation of the past was also effective, especially when he referenced ” what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.” It showed that despite people’s fears about what is going on now, we have faced worse in the past and we can “brave once more the icy currents and endure what storms may come.”

I thought that Obama’s speech was eloquent and that it accomplished what it needed to accomplish, and for those who say that it wasn’t as great as they expected it to be, I think it was impossible for Obama to exceed the expectations set for him concerning his ability to make a awe-inspiring inauguration speech.

I notice that the presidents you quoted have their own mythology independent of their inaugurals. I’d suggest that each inaugural speech has quotable lines, and then later people decide that the presidents are quote-worthy and go do it.

I was surprised by the kernel of doctrine for dictators – we’ll extend our hand if you unclench your fist. Not something I got a whiff of in the campaign.

Something else has to be considered: it is possible that history and retrospect help shape the interpretation of an impactful, meaningful inauguration. Perhaps Buchanan’s inauguration would have been more memorable if he had preempted the Civil War; maybe Hoover’s inauguration would have been praised more if he had begun policies adopted by FDR. If Obama ends up being credited for resolving America’s credit crisis, repairing America’s image abroad, and introducing a more amenable political process, I think it’s possible that history will judge his speech and inauguration as more historic simply because it was he who stepped up in a perilous time.