Strategic or Reactive: The transformation of Lincoln’s rhetoric during his presidency
From an Illinois lawyer, to the 16th president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln is one of the most celebrated historical and political figures of all time. He led the United States through its civil war and paved the way to the abolition of slavery. Not only a proficient politician, but also an amazing rhetorician, Lincoln is the author of some of the most memorable speeches and letters in the American history such as: the Gettysburg Address, Emancipation Proclamation, his first and second Inaugural Addresses and so on. His distinct writing style has a restrained, legalistic, calmed tone and most importantly, passive. David Herbert Donald, an American historian, two times Pulitzer Prize winner and best known for his biography of Abraham Lincoln, argues mainly about this aspect of Lincoln’s rhetoric. In his book “Lincoln Reconsidered: Essays on the Civil War Era,” Donald claims that Lincoln’s success was based on his “talent for passivity.” He explains that Lincoln was faced by a crisis, just when he had arrived in Washington. In 1861, Fort Sumter had to be either reinforced or evacuated. But reinforcement would be interpreted as an “aggressive act of war,” while withdrawal would appear as cowardice, so Lincoln’s final decision was neither. He sat and waited until the Confederates fired first. This passive policy worked, and the Confederates were blamed for starting the war, not the President. He continued to use this strategy and “because any action would offend somebody, he took as few actions as possible.” Despite Donald’s argument for a strategic passivity, historian and Pennsylvania State University professor, Mark E. Neely thinks of it differently. In his book titled “The Last Hope of Earth: Abraham Lincoln and the Promise of America,” Neely argues that Lincoln’s style was not strategic, but reactive. …show more content…
“Lincoln acted to shape public opinion only occasionally. He was more often reacting, answering a crisis or challenging,” writes Neely, by claiming that this passivity didn’t allow the President to have a lot of control over the events of the Civil War. He also adds that Lincoln was very eloquent and used the words cautiously, but he didn’t take any action, just responded to his audience. Donald and Neely’s arguments are contrary to each other, however they can both be proven to be correct at specific times. Both the authors analyze Lincoln’s rhetoric at different time periods, unnoticing the progress of his style caused by the evolution of his political strategies. In this way, by comparing different periods of his governance we can see Lincoln’s transformation from the reactive passivity Neely writes about, to the strategic passivity that Donald discusses. When Abraham Lincoln was sworn to the office of the President of the United States, on the 4th of March 1861, he gave his first Inaugural Address. Since slavery was the prevailing concern at the time, he did mention that in his speech as well. Even though Lincoln had mentioned before that he was opposed to slavery, he stated: “I declare that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so.” His passivity is reflected very clearly in these lines. Lincoln needed the support
From an Illinois lawyer, to the 16th president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln is one of the most celebrated historical and political figures of all time. He led the United States through its civil war and paved the way to the abolition of slavery. Not only a proficient politician, but also an amazing rhetorician, Lincoln is the author of some of the most memorable speeches and letters in the American history such as: the Gettysburg Address, Emancipation Proclamation, his first and second Inaugural Addresses and so on. His distinct writing style has a restrained, legalistic, calmed tone and most importantly, passive. David Herbert Donald, an American historian, two times Pulitzer Prize winner and best known for his biography of Abraham Lincoln, argues mainly about this aspect of Lincoln’s rhetoric. In his book “Lincoln Reconsidered: Essays on the Civil War Era,” Donald claims that Lincoln’s success was based on his “talent for passivity.” He explains that Lincoln was faced by a crisis, just when he had arrived in Washington. In 1861, Fort Sumter had to be either reinforced or evacuated. But reinforcement would be interpreted as an “aggressive act of war,” while withdrawal would appear as cowardice, so Lincoln’s final decision was neither. He sat and waited until the Confederates fired first. This passive policy worked, and the Confederates were blamed for starting the war, not the President. He continued to use this strategy and “because any action would offend somebody, he took as few actions as possible.” Despite Donald’s argument for a strategic passivity, historian and Pennsylvania State University professor, Mark E. Neely thinks of it differently. In his book titled “The Last Hope of Earth: Abraham Lincoln and the Promise of America,” Neely argues that Lincoln’s style was not strategic, but reactive. …show more content…
“Lincoln acted to shape public opinion only occasionally. He was more often reacting, answering a crisis or challenging,” writes Neely, by claiming that this passivity didn’t allow the President to have a lot of control over the events of the Civil War. He also adds that Lincoln was very eloquent and used the words cautiously, but he didn’t take any action, just responded to his audience. Donald and Neely’s arguments are contrary to each other, however they can both be proven to be correct at specific times. Both the authors analyze Lincoln’s rhetoric at different time periods, unnoticing the progress of his style caused by the evolution of his political strategies. In this way, by comparing different periods of his governance we can see Lincoln’s transformation from the reactive passivity Neely writes about, to the strategic passivity that Donald discusses. When Abraham Lincoln was sworn to the office of the President of the United States, on the 4th of March 1861, he gave his first Inaugural Address. Since slavery was the prevailing concern at the time, he did mention that in his speech as well. Even though Lincoln had mentioned before that he was opposed to slavery, he stated: “I declare that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so.” His passivity is reflected very clearly in these lines. Lincoln needed the support