THE RHETORIC OF TRUMP'S INAUGURAL

Wonderful speech! Terrific! Brilliant. Very.”
 
(He is easier to manage when surrounded by non-stop adulation.)
 
Just one tiny point. Not a criticism. No, not at all. Far from it. It’s just that some old fogies were puzzled a bit, ever so slightly, by one feature of that brilliant speech- really brilliant. Very brilliant. Very.
 
It’s just a minor point. In ancient rhetoric the speaker has to decide the type of speech he is going to give. Will it be like the speeches one hears in a law court, a “dicanic” speech.  You remember the term, I am sure, from your Ivy League education.  In that kind of speech you could attack some public enemy, like John Lewis for ”talk, talk, talk, but no action.” Or indict someone for “carnage,” or some similar crime.  You are good at that kind of attack. Terrific really. Really.
Old fashioned orators, not nearly as brilliant as you, had to decide whether to give that kind of speech or another. Each kind with its own set of rules. Another kind of speech could, for example, call on people to vote one way or another on some matter of policy, or for one candidate in an election. You know, a “symbouleutic” speech.  That way you could revive all the lovely slogans from the campaign and see if they still fire people up. You know the good old stuff, “Make America Great Again.”  You’re great at that. Big League great!
 
But here’s the problem. You have to figure out what type of speech you are going to give, and the occasion you find yourself in dictates the choice.  You were in a ceremonial occasion, so you had to use the third type of ancient rhetoric:  which tells you how to give a ceremonial or “epideictic”speech.   
 
You can’t mix and match.
 
But in a ceremonial speech you can still choose whether to praise or to blame. It has to be one or the other, otherwise the speech will fall flat on its face.  
--
Poor Number 45, how do we break it to him? He forgot thee basic rule of rhetoric .She oscillated between two of his favored ingredient, vitriol, and sweet self-praise.  Which would be the recipient of his unrelenting hyperbole?  He never seemed quite sure, and so, as any ancient rhetorician would have warned, his speech fell on its well-coiffured face.