The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Rudd thuds' or 'A not so impassioned speech' > Comments

'Rudd thuds' or 'A not so impassioned speech' : Comments

By James Rose, published 28/11/2007

'OK guys!' Kevin Rudd's acceptance speech was ... well ... not exactly Shakespeare!

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
I, too, was left feeling deflated by Rudd's uninspiring oratory on election night. I was in a roomful of people elated that an era marked by meanness and mendacity had finally come to an end and willing the PM elect to express our new sense of hope.

My feeling is that the minders kept in on a leash, fearing a "this one is for the true believers" piece of hubris that would come back to haunt him. But surely he could have rallied the nation behind him without sounding overly triumphal?
Posted by Mr Denmore, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 10:09:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Was he elected because he's a great public speaker? Or because he seemed like a decent, capable person who'll turn things around in this country? Perhaps he wasn't elected at all - it was the party he leads that was given government, with their agenda of workplace relations, climate change etc. I didn't vote for Rudd either, simply because his name wasn't on my ballot paper.

In the end, it'll be the actions of his government that count. In few weeks, no, days, his speech will be totally forgotten. If he continues giving boring speeches it really won't matter - who likes to listen to pollies droning on anyway?
Posted by commuter, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 10:12:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rudd's speech, like the vast majority of political speeches, will be forgotten because it was forgettable.
Keating's "sweetest victory of all"/"true believers" speech is far from forgotten (at least, the goods bits - even much of that speech wasn't all that inspiring). I'm skeptical whether Rudd has it in him to pull of anything similarly memorable, but very few leaders/speechwriters do, when it comes down to it. Howard certainly didn't. Even among American Presidents, most of their inaugural speeches are pretty forgettable - Kennedy's being an obvious exception.
Posted by dnicholson, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 10:50:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So Rudd didn't give such an impassioned speech - big deal.

All that happens when you have ultra-passionate people is that they are invariably followed by their polar opposites. Just look at Whitlam being followed by Fraser and Keating by Howard.

Rudd's approach shows that he is studiously looking to cement Labor into the political firmament with a minimum of fuss. This is a smoother arrangement for the average Australian than the roller-coaster of the (scary) ultra-passionate types being followed by the predictable and dead boring opposites.
Posted by RobP, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 11:52:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And this was a 'not so impressive' piece of commentary, rather a nit-picking bit of nothing by someone who isn't that observant. The "Okay guys," was not intended as part of a speech but rather was a typical quietening down gesture of someone faced by an exultant and noisy crowd. As for the over-long list of acknowledgements this is one of the few times that the range of helping groups, individuals and backroom boys and girls get public mention. I agree it was not a great speech but I did feel it was a typically thorough effort by Rudd to leave no one person or sector out of the credit listing. The inclusion of the unions, the Labor party, the candidates etc. will not go unappreciated. Imagine had he seemed to claim credit for himself alone? The party hacks and office employees will cherish that brief mention into a future where their loyalty will be much needed. Bernie Banton would have died a little happier. The acknowledgement of his personal staff and family was not that different from Howard's or of any other triumphant or conceding candidate.

As for your own suggested speech, perhaps it would go down well after a business conference to inspire the shareholders, but it certainly doesn't acknowledge the blood, sweat and tears of those at the coal face.
Posted by Patricia WA, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 12:54:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In political speaking the rules really are different from the Shakespeare that Rose apparently prefers.

Cliché is everything; anything else is but a shadow of the cliché that should have been spoken.

Viewed from that perspective, Rudd's speech was perfect rhetoric.
Posted by Tom Clark, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 1:23:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy