The Anti-Intellectual Presidency: The Decline of Presidential Rhetoric from George Washington to George W. Bush (Hardcover)

~ (Author)
Key Phrases: partisan punch lines, presidential loquaciousness, contemporary speechwriters, White House, State of the Union, Bill Clinton (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

This slim, scathing book does not mince words about the current state of presidential rhetoric, frankly deploring its nosedive from our founding era. Drawing upon interviews with 42 presidential speech writers, Lim investigates what he sees as a particularly American phenomenon whereby most presidents have preferred to appear less, not more intellectually inclined than they actually were. He reveals the long institutional pedigree of anti-intellectualism in presidential addresses, from Harding to Eisenhower, Clinton (an intelligent but anti-intellectual president) to Bush, as presidents have positioned intellectuals as the piñatas of American politics. Lim builds his case systematically, introducing fascinating indices to measure oratorical sophistication or simplicity. A massive campaign of linguistic simplification is afoot, he argues, and he dissects inaugural addresses and presidential public papers, charting average sentence length, Flesch Readability and the preponderance of platitudes to evince a growing reification of style over substance. While his methodology is occasionally esoteric, Lim's presentation of the consequences of the manipulation of language in the political arena is clear and compelling, and will delight grammarians and political aficionados alike. (June)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review

"Sheds fascinating and disturbing light on the torrent of communications that are unleashed by the 'communicator in chief.'... he argues that the real problem is not the increased quantity of words coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. but the sharp decline in content--especially of logical argument."--David S. Broder, Washington Post
"Lim's presentation of the consequences of the manipulation of language in the political arena is clear and compelling, and will delight grammarians and political aficionados alike."--Publishers Weekly
"Recent American presidents have dumbed down democratic discourse, Elvin Lim shows in his disturbing new study of presidential leadership. The chief culprits are presidential speechwriters, who prize style over substance and subvert the reasoned articulation of policy. Timely, well written, and highly recommended."--Jeffrey K. Tulis, author of The Rhetorical Presidency
"That 'Presidents and speechwriters have killed oratory and gone anti-intellectual' will come as no surprise. But why? No scholar has thought more carefully and analyzed more rigorously this historic change in presidential communication with the public. This book will spawn important debates about the meaning and consequences of the 'dumbing down' of presidential rhetoric. It is a tour de force."--Elizabeth Sanders, Department of Government, Cornell University
"Elvin Lim documents a disturbing trend. Presidents are talking more, but their speech is getting less substantive and less informative. Simple declarations have come to substitute for reasoned arguments. Lim's findings ring true, all the more so for their careful empirical grounding and elegant presentation. I know of no book on presidential rhetoric that cuts more directly and effectively to the point."--Stephen Skowronek, Pelatiah Perit Professor of Political and Social Science, Yale University
"Elvin Lim argues convincingly that politics has been dumbed-down but that enlightened civic conversation is possible if politicians will only try. Lim also believes that the American people want to be stretched intellectually and emotionally. The dark trail he traces therefore ends in a sunburst of hope that I find heartening."--Roderick P. Hart, Dean Shivers/Cronkite Chair in Communication, College of Communication, University of Texas at Austin

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 208 pages
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA (June 16, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 019534264X
• ISBN-13: 978-0195342642
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.4 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #93,171 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #6 in	Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Rhetoric
  #66 in	Books > Nonfiction > Government > Constitutions
  #71 in	Books > Nonfiction > Politics > Leadership

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Lim provides the proof, August 12, 2008

By	E. Richard (New York, NY) - See all my reviews

This book offers compelling proof that presidents have dumbed down their public speech in the last two centuries. It is one of the very few political books I've read that is not at all partisan - Lim places equal blame on Clinton as he does on Bush. Lim nevertheless makes it clear that because presidents now tell us what we want to hear rather than what we need to hear, we are headed for trouble.

Lim offers a fascinating account of how the very people who write presidential speeches also call these speeches "rose garden garbage." I especially enjoyed the chapter on speechwriters, all of whom - Republican or Democratic - complain about the fact that, as Peggy Noonan says, America's only "unstimulated organ (is) the brain." If even speechwriters complain of dumbing down, then Houston, we got a problem.

Lim does a good job of defending his case against the accusation of elitism, reminding us that when presidents dumb down, they are the ones who are being cynical. The American people deserve, and can handle better, he argues. Lim offers a particularly poignant account of President Bush's speeches on Iraq in the early months of the war, and argues that the country would have been better served if the president had been pushed to specify and demonstrate the evidence that Saddam Hussein had indeed possessed weapons of mass destruction. Instead, we allowed the president to talk us into war with such rousing, but meaningless catch-phrases as the "axis of evil." Thinking back on those years, Lim's explanation for how we were persuaded to go to war rings more true than any account I have read.

A short book that packs a lot of punch, this is a no-holds barred book on the dangers of a White House perpetually concerned with public relations. While the statistical analysis can be dry at times, Lim's wry, engaging prose (which reminds me of Christopher Hitchen's style) more than makes up for it.

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Very informative and worth your time!, December 18, 2008

By	Danni Powell (Tulsa, OK USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I actually had the honor of being in Professor Lim's class at the University of Tulsa while he was still writing this book. He does an amazing job of pulling every argument together in a way that thoroughly explains what is going on in the political world today. Where before I read this book I knew little to nothing about politics, I was able to watch the elections in November and identify certain characteristics of each candidate that Lim explains in his book. It is a slightly difficult read to those who are not politically minded, but definitely worth your time. This book is an excellent investment.

3 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A self-proclaimed intellectual demands Presidential love, August 9, 2008

By	Jerry Saperstein (Evanston, IL USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)

So many academics consider themselves to be "intellectuals" - and most express bafflement at why they are so rejected by the public at large as well as national leaderships. The answer, of course, is that most intellectuals have nothing of value to offer. Lim quotes Lyndon Johnson, unarguably one of the great political manipulators to ever prowl the Senate halls, as saying of intellectuals: " They are "more concerned with style than they are with mortar, brick and concrete. They are more concerned with the trivia and the superficial than they are with the things that have really built America." It should be remembered that Johnson was not only college educated, but a former teacher as well. Golly, a different turn or two and he could have been a genuine intellectual!

As you can probably tell, I have little sympathy for Lim's argument. Contrary to Lim, Presidential rhetoric has never been "intellectual", but rather practical and political. Intellectual influence in Washington resulted in disasters like Wilson's Presidency, Kennedy's involving us in Vietnam and the Cuban missile fiasco. Needless to say, Wilson is one of Lim's paragons of presidential rhetoric along with FDR, whose intellectual advisors argues Amity Shales delayed recovery from the Great Depression by years. Obviously I am not in agreement with Lim's models.

Lim's self-professed "aim" is to "provide a measure of [the] decline of [Presidential discourse] beyond the anecdotal accounts already offered by demonstrating the relentless simplification of presidential rhetoric in the last two centuries and the increasing substitution ocf arguments and applause-rendering platitudes, partisan punch lines, and emotional and human interest appeals. I characterize these rhetoricval trends as manifestations of the anti-intellectual presidency."

Central to Lim's argument is the claimed exceptionalism of intellectuals. If you don't agree with Lim's strawman, you are, de facto, anti-intellectual. In other words, if you don't intrinsically believe that an intellectual knows more about living your life than you do, you are anti-intellectual. The hollowness of the argument is both apparent and revealing: this is a book for unappreciated intellectuals written by an aspiring intellectual. (Lim is an assistant professor.)

Of course, in Lim's view, "presidential anti-intellectualism is a threat to our democracy." Again, intellectuals are smarter than you and if you don't listen to them, democracy is in danger, a hypothesis I do not agree with.

Lim dates presidential anti-intellectualism as beginning in 1969, heaping yet another burden on the much maligned Nixon.

Among the many rhetorical outrages in this book is Lim's attempt to cast an obvious jocular portion of a speech delivered by George W. Bush to a Yale graduating class as "one of the best remembered episodes of anti-intellectualism in recent history". We normal folks thought it was a good joke, but "intellectuals" were obviously offended. Or perhaps they simply have no sense of humor? In this same section, Lim makes it clear that common people with their "simple locution" just don't get it. They're anti-intellectuals too.

Presidential rhetoric was never as good as Lim pretends it was. The Presidency, like every other elective office, is above all first a battle to get elected. To get elected, it takes the votes of the common people, not the self-proclaimed intellectuals - and our democracy is better for that in many ways.

Few in politics listen seriously to the intellectuals because they really don't have much of practical value to say. This book is proof of that. That said, Lim's research and his "linguistical analysis" are interesting.

Jerry