Books

Reading Obama

His prose breaks all the rules with its mature complexity.

By Crawford Kilian, 25 Mar 2008, TheTyee.ca

Barack Obama, book cover

His book, like his speeches, conveys respect.

  • The Audacity of Hope
  • Barack Obama
  • Crown (2006)

I mentioned to a friend that I was reading Barack Obama's book The Audacity of Hope, and that I thought he was a good writer.

"Oh, well, he had a ghostwriter," said the friend.

"No. He writes like a lawyer."

Obama's writing style tells us as much about him as the actual content of his prose. A lawyer who writes far better than most of his colleagues, Obama has a remarkable fondness for 60-word sentences rich in subordinate clauses.

Reading his book, I itched to edit the text. Short, punchy sentences and paragraphs would jolt readers whether they read him on paper or on a website. Tough editing, I thought, could make it comparable to Tom Paine's Common Sense -- a document to detonate a revolution.

On reflection, though, I recalled that Common Sense wasn't written in short, punchy sentences either.

Breaking all the rules

Barack Obama breaks most of the rules I try to teach my students. Clear writing is brief, I tell them: short words, short sentences, short paragraphs. If a Grade 5 student can understand your writing, I tell them, so can everyone else. Obama makes me reconsider my philosophy of writing.

Here's a sentence taken at random from The Audacity of Hope: "By the start of the twentieth century, then, the motives that drove U.S. foreign policy seemed barely distinguishable from those of the other great powers, driven by realpolitik and commercial interests."

That's a 31-word sentence. I tell my students to consider 20 words as the maximum sentence length. On the Flesch-Kincaid readability scale, Obama's sentence requires a Grade 12 education.

On the Flesch Reading Ease scale, it comes in at 21.1 out of 100. That's hard. A high FRE score is easier to read, and Microsoft Word advises us to aim for an FRE of 60 to 70.

When I ran a whole random page through Word's readability test, it was a passage of 366 words -- 9 sentences in three paragraphs. The sentences averaged 40 words, and the passage again required Grade 12. The FRE score was 33.4, still far tougher than the recommended level.

(By comparison, this review has a Reading Ease score of 57.3, and should be understandable to anyone with a Grade 9 education.)

What's going on here? Is he just a Harvard Law grad with a good opinion of himself, writing the only way he knows how to?

Evidently not. On March 18 Obama gave a speech in Philadelphia titled "A More Perfect Union," which struck the U.S. like nothing since JFK's 1960 Houston speech about his Catholicism.

Stunning friends, staggering enemies

It stunned his friends and staggered his enemies, and the text has been one of the most downloaded files on The New York Times's website. The speech, in its first 24 hours online, became the most popular video in the world, with 1.2 million full views.

Obama wrote that speech, 4,886 words, over the preceding weekend. (Speaking as a writer, I regard that speed as stunning in itself.) It averages about 26 words per sentence, and Flesch-Kincaid says anyone halfway through Grade 10 will understand it. Its Flesch Reading Ease score is 57.2, close to the recommended 60-70 range. He took about 40 minutes to deliver it.

I conclude that Obama is not writing with the eruditely polysyllabic contempt for his readers that makes Conrad Black so endearing. He knows what he's doing, and he knows his audience. For a spoken text, he can tighten up and simplify, though he's still far from the tabloid style I admire.

But if he's written The Audacity of Hope for pointy-headed intellectuals who've actually graduated from high school, isn't he limiting his audience? Who's got time to wade through his dense, complicated prose?

Evidently a lot of people. Amazon.com ranks it at number 13 in sales. The royalties must have made him one of the wealthier writers in the USA.

The elements of style

The key to Barack Obama's style is register. Register is the choice of words that define a social relationship. Stephen Harper may address us as "My fellow Canadians," but if I addressed my wife as "My fellow Canadian," she would rightly think I'd gone nuts.

For decades, Canadian and American politicians (and their apologists) have chosen one of two registers: the windbag addressing millions, or the con artist addressing halfwits. For the halfwits, short words in short sentences are essential. For the quarter-wits, make it a 10-second sound bite.

Such registers convey a contempt quite as thorough as Conrad Black's. Yet North American voters have tolerated this contempt, even seemed to demand it, since Ronald Reagan and Brian Mulroney.

Now, after two or three decades of discourse in this moronic register, Barack Obama is talking to American voters as if they didn't have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

And he's writing the same way. Get into one of those 60-word sentences, and you come out knowing more than you expected to learn. The cadences and rhythms carry you along, like those of his New Hampshire concession speech -- which will.i.am turned into a powerful piece of music that's had 6.3 million viewings on YouTube.

Shocking the audience with respect

So the shocking aspect of Obama's prose style is not what it says about him, but what it says about his opinion of his audience: a respect Americans have not experienced since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and that Canadians last heard from Pierre Elliot Trudeau in 1968.

This is the reverse of flattery. Tell your students they're dumb, and they'll act dumb. Tell them they're smart and talented, and you expect great work from them, and they'll gape at you in horror. Then they'll buckle down and do great work.

When I read Federalism and the French Canadians 40 years ago, I was impressed with the quality of Trudeau's political intellect (and with the cover photo of a bohemian intellectual in a black turtleneck). It was amazing to think that such a highbrow was about to become Canada's prime minister.

Barack Obama is no bohemian highbrow. He's certainly smart, but so was Ronald Reagan, and so is Dick Cheney. But Obama's writing style shows him to be a decent man as well as a smart guy.

For my taste, he is entirely too tolerant of conservatives. But that tolerance, expressed in such graceful and demanding prose, shows him to be not just smart but wise. We have not seen his like in my lifetime.

 [Tyee]

15  Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • elijah

    3 years ago

    Obama totally freaks me out

    I don't know how to respond when a politician doesn't treat me like an idiot.

  • kurt

    3 years ago

    Refreshing

    That's exactly what I like about Obama: he talks at you instead of over your head, and it's that directness that is so endearing. No, we've not seen his like in many years. Still, no matter who's elected as prez, that person will be articulate compared to the current prez.

  • G West

    3 years ago

    And yet, and yet....

    There are still those nagging questions - not about 'his' intellect; but about whether or not he is as 'bought and paid for' as every other politician of the current crop.

    Somehow, the politics of 'hope' does seem appropriate and many Americans need a bit of that today.

    However, with hope comes expectation.

    And there’s the rub, so compromised, indebted, unrealistic and in thrall to power and commerce is the American political system that one wonders exactly how the almost-inevitable dashing of many of those ‘hopes’ will affect the electorate when they come crashing into the hard resistance of reality.

  • deeby

    3 years ago

    And yet (more)....

    ...if he turns out to be the intellectual, capable of great oratory, that he appears to be, the power brokers that buy and pay may gravitate to his cause. The question then becomes whether he can control them, or they him.

    They appear to need him more then he does them, especially if he is able to rise above the muck thrown at him, like he did to some extent with the 'race speech'.

  • James Burns

    3 years ago

    All Obama is likely to be is

    All Obama is likely to be is a step in the right direction. Choosing him is merely a sign that Americans are willing to begin to change from the truly disgusting direction they've habitually taken. Their society is largely a myth built on outright slave and wage slave labor. Very few Americans want to acknowledge that truth about themselves. But they really need to now, given their current economic circumstances.

    Although what has amazed me about the furor over Obama's pastor Rev. Wright is just how profoundly racist the US still is. Sure I've seen it up close and personal on an individual level. But the news coverage is full to the brim with denial and condemnation for Wright's admittedly incendiary articulation of some very simple truths about the United States.

    Obama is right that dialog is best achieved by acknowledging everyone's grievances, even those of racist whites, at least as a starting point. But the colossal level of American denial truly has an awesome quality to it. It seems to sit in the American psyche like some great mountainous leviathan.

    At least with Obama, I think there is a chance of a softer landing for America and the world. But if Americans go in another direction.... well we're all in for a long and potentially terrible ride as the US suffers serious economic and military contraction, and potentially even collapse. As a nation they have so much potential to do real good, is just so sad that they, and particularly their elites, choose not to. What a waste.

  • lynn

    3 years ago

    Breaking the Rules

    I think when it comes to oratory it is Reverend Wright who breaks all the rules....because he dares to speak the truth. Not an easy thing to do these days. And a dangerous truth he dares to tell....a sacrilege to the free market religion which is America.

    For his sins, for the "depth" and "daring"in his oratory, Wright was reduced to "an endearing uncle" by Obama...who says "funny things now and then." Wright is in fact a dedicated and compassionate activist, a scholar who speaks five languages. He knows exactly what he is saying. And good on him for saying it.

    It was more than just race he was talking about. But by trying to make his speech solely about race America has created a distraction ( served up nicely by Obama as well).... a distraction from the larger issue which is oppression - specifically the oppression of the US military-industrial complex. Oppression through free market/"democratic" forces that have enslaved America's and the world's poor. The slavery of the American power system. And no thing of the past. But alive and breeding across the globe.

    But nobody, not even Obama wants to talk about this. He, in fact, condemned Wright's so-called "inflammatory" words in this regard.

    Inflammatory? Or brave and true? Wright is taking the ultimate moral stand. For real change. And America cannot even fathom what he is really saying....it is so blasphemous to their America the Good insular view of itself. A painful shot across the bow of the patriotic conceit of America.

    And that is what bothers me about how Obama condemned the truth of what his pastor was saying...as if it was a view from the past...a sixties revivalist view of a lovable but fading radical. He chose to diminish the words of Reverend Wright. To diminish his pastor's powerfully charged words of change. When clearly the world has never been more endangered by American imperialism than now. And America itself has only to look to New Orleans to see that Wright's message is as timely and as significant as ever. And never more needed to be said as now.

    My vote would go to Wright over Obama any day. He is doing what any responsible moral leader in a country should be doing, questioning the status quo. In this case a very dangerous and threatening status quo.

    To question, what a novel thing.

    It is where Reverend Wright is courageously right and where Obama in his compromising Man For All Seasons role, displays a fundamental weakness, I think at least. And yeah, I know I am in a very small minority for daring to question Obama in any regard.

    But isn't that what a real democracy is all about?

    I'll take the way Wright breaks the rules over the way Obama does any day.

  • Canis Latrans

    3 years ago

    Quote:Barack Obama is no

    Quote:
    Barack Obama is no bohemian highbrow. He's certainly smart, but so was Ronald Reagan, and so is Dick Cheney. But Obama's writing style shows him to be a decent man as well as a smart guy.

    And if history has demonstrated anything to humankind, it is that being, "...a decent man as well as a smart guy." is not enough. The real need is to be whole bunches tougher than that, with a whole lot more insightful, courageous, and to the root of the matter "radical" analysis and action than he demonstrates. All of which, from a "fans" perspective from this writer above, we shall find out about soon enough, presuming he is elected.

    I actually think GWest above gets it better and more to the core of this window dressing black man at the front office desk of the US electoral system:

    Quote:
    "There are still those nagging questions - not about 'his' intellect; but about whether or not he is as 'bought and paid for' as every other politician of the current crop."

    Though it is my friend Lynn as usual who really tops out the analysis here, I think, with her observation:

    Quote:
    "I think when it comes to oratory it is Reverend Wright who breaks all the rules....because he dares to speak the truth. Not an easy thing to do these days. And a dangerous truth he dares to tell....a sacrilege to the free market religion which is America."

    Yes, Lynn. You are exactly right. I thunderously applaud your intellect over everyone else here. You had the courage to observe it and say it outright. (Though my friend James Burns did also allude to it as well.)

    It is the Reverend Wright who got it right, and for which had Obama the real cajones, he would have stoutly defended him and helped explain his great insights into the US system and its still very much alive racist history. Simple decency, even being smart, and a simple capacity for flowery prose that titillates [DERISIVE COMMENT AIMED AT WRITER REMOVED. -MODERATOR.] is not enough.

  • Crawford

    3 years ago

    Obama's writing income

    CNN has reported an interesting item about Obama's income (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/obama.tax.returns/index.html):

    According to the 2006 return, Obama and his wife, Michelle, earned over $991,000 in 2006 and paid $277,431 on the income.

    More than half of the couple's income in 2006 -- nearly $507,000 -- came from royalties from his two books, "The Audacity of Hope" and "Dreams From My Father." In 2005, Obama earned over $1,210,000 from royalties, according to the couple's returns that year.

    Thanks, everyone, for your comments here.

  • Canis Latrans

    3 years ago

    :-) Too bad...

    Moderator,

    Too bad folks here won't ever get to see how really innocuous the comment you censored out really is. You folks really are too amusing, in a negative sense, sometimes. :-)

    My suggesting that the author of this article was but a smitten female fan of Obama is censorship worthy?!?! C'mon, even the MSM are more tolerant in their censorship than that. :-D lol.

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    Sounds good but...

    It is one thing to say something clear and concise and quite another thing to just say something that sounds good. Lots of politicians can sound good without saying anything clear or meaningful. The devil is always in the details.

  • frank2

    3 years ago

    Obamania justified

    Obama in office MIGHT fall prey to all the usual pressures. But maybe not. On the other hand, we KNOW that Clinton and McCain would obey the dictates of the military-industrial complex. I hope Obama survives to (and through) the election.

  • Skywalker

    3 years ago

    frank2

    That is a leap of faith that is neither justified nor prudent. I will retain a lot of caution as with any bandwagon effect the proponents are usually headed for a major let down.

    Read two books. Greg Palast's "Armed Madhouse" and Linda McQuaid's "It's The Crude Dude" and you will see that Obama alone not going to be able to do much to change the U.S. system which is totally corrupt. Without a major change in U.S. foreign policy, one that will create major economic pain for the U.S. in the short term, Obama will have the war hanging around his neck during his term. Once pain starts and Yankee hubris must be controlled, Obama will prove to be just another former President like all the others.

    I prefer a dose of cold reality. Nothing is so imprudent as having faith in a politician.

  • Crawford

    3 years ago

    A smitten female fan?

    Canis Latrans evidently suggested that's what I am. Well, I can only ask what parents would name their daughter Crawford?

    And even if I were female (which would come as a shock to my wife--mentioned in the review--and my daughters), what difference would that make in my analysis of Obama's writing style?

  • Canis Latrans

    3 years ago

    Point made..

    :-) A good lesson for me, in the problem of making online gender assumptions.

    Okay, well then, a smitten "male" fan. :-) lol
    (Laughing at myself.)

  • Canis Latrans

    3 years ago

    Besides...

    Crawford sounded, to me, still does, :-)like one of those male names that "some" true middle class, glass ceiling preoccupied women are fond of adopting these days. :-) It being seen as a means of securing the perceived "power" that goes with the name-, presumably.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.