I've revised my blog from yesterday to reflect President Obama's remarks today at the Fort Hood memorial service:

President Obama addressed the mourners at Ford Hood today at the memorial service for the fallen (http://tinyurl.com/y8l4uyj).  The President’s comments demonstrate both the opportunities and the pitfalls of this sort of leadership speech, and bear comparison to President Reagan’s much-quoted remarks on the Challenger disaster of January 28, 1986 (http://tinyurl.com/yzsv4dl), not to mention Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and Pericles’ funeral oration on the death of Greek soldiers during the first year of the Peloponnesian War. 

We expect leaders to speak on tragic occasions like this one.  Their comments should comfort us and let us know that the deaths of the fallen have not gone unnoticed.  There are certain demands of the genre and the occasion; it is the job of the leader to say something about the larger significance of the cause upon which the fallen were engaged.  The leader should further address some specific audiences: the relatives of the dead, who have special reason to mourn, and perhaps other groups who are particularly affected. 

Primarily, we look to the leader to give us some sense of continuity, reassuring us that the cause, and life, will go on.  In the presence of death, then, we look to our leaders to help us find resilience and endurance – to re-orient us toward life, even as we grieve for the dead. 

How do President Obama’s comments compare to the great examples of the genre provided by presidents Reagan and Lincoln, as well as the Ancient Greeks?

Not well, unfortunately, though his remarks of today were more thoughtful and better suited to the occasion than his earlier remarks on the day of the tragedy itself (http://tinyurl.com/ybjjqpf). 

Reagan’s eulogy is a brief masterpiece; Lincoln’s an even briefer, even more magnificent piece of prose.  Both earlier presidents’ speeches – but especially Reagan’s – commiserate with the mourners.  Both speeches acknowledge the role of the fallen in the larger cause.  Both speeches point the way forward, making the argument that the dead have not died in vain because the cause goes on.  And both speeches help their audiences rededicate themselves to the larger purpose involved, whether it is the exploration of space, or the creation of a more perfect union.  In this re-dedication, the two speeches echo Pericles’ oration, which argues passionately for his listeners’ continued allegiance to the city-state Athens and its role in the world as a beacon of freedom. 

In short, the earlier presidents’ speeches speak from both the head and the heart. 

Obama’s speech makes similar arguments, but nonetheless there is something lacking.  His delivery is precise and cool; he seems to instinctively avoid the emotional.  But that is exactly what we need from a leader at a time of tragedy:  a sense that the leader suffers along with us even as he points the way forward. 

Reagan, on the other hand, evinces sympathy, compassion, and comfort in equal measure, his eyebrows drawn together, his head tipped slightly to one side, and his voice full of concern. 

Reagan’s speech mentions the fallen astronauts by name.  He addresses the families of the dead directly, and takes time further to speak to the schoolchildren who were watching the Challenger flight because a teacher was on board.  And he makes an eloquent case that space exploration will go on.  Similarly, Lincoln makes the case that Gettysburg’s fallen have not died in vain because the living will take up their cause and soldier on. 

Obama does link the deaths of the soldiers at Fort Hood to the larger cause of keeping America safe.  His text borrows from Reagan’s by mentioning the fallen by name, and indeed goes one step further, giving brief details of each person’s biography.  It’s a nice touch.  But almost immediately, he goes on to make the political argument for deployment of additional troops in Afghanistan, tying it to 9/11.  We sense that he’s got more on his mind that simply those fallen heroes, and it’s the wrong time to be reminded of this:

These are trying times for our country. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America, our allies, and innocent Afghans and Pakistanis. In Iraq, we are working to bring a war to a successful end, as there are still those who would deny the Iraqi people the future that Americans and Iraqis have sacrificed so much for.

In times of great mourning, we look to our leaders to find the meaning that allows us to go on.  But we also need our leaders to grieve with us, simply, for the lives that have been lost.  Leaders must lead both with head and heart if we are to follow them into an uncertain future.