the citizen-viewer

Out of a grim sense of duty I watched Senator Jim Webb deliver the Democratic response to the State of the Union Speech last night.

As his words scrolled by like so many nuts and bolts on a factory conveyor belt, I wondered. Is there a rule somewhere that says the response must be delivered by a person in a blue suit with a red tie (or scarf), sitting alone in a carpeted, book-lined chamber? Is there a rule that the response has to be written before the SOTU and delivered after? Does it say there must be no one present to clap their hands, only a lonely cameraman who predictably zooms in as what are supposed to be the climactic nuts and bolts crawl by, waits for the predictable “God Bless America” and then switches the camera off and shuffles away?

This is not to beat up on Jim Webb, who was slightly more animated than some previous responders (even if part of his animation was a curious gravitational pull that periodically and mysteriously rotated his head to the left). And it’s not an analysis of the substance of the text, such as the substance was perceptible. It’s a criticism of the failure of creativity on the part of the stage managers.

Why not prewrite a modular speech and adjust it as the SOTU is delivered, so it could respond to point in the main speech? Why not take the guy out of that dusty chamber and put him in front of an audience of good old Americans and let them react? Why not have him standing up, gesturing, using emphasis and all the other standard elements of oratory? Why not put him on something closer to an equal footing with the President?

If you’re going to stage the response in a way that is calculated to cause us citizen-viewers to change the channel, why even bother?

It seems there’s no real contest of ideas here. Just an elaborate national ritual playing out again and again.