A correction was added to this article Jan. 21.

Because of an editing error, a graphic accompanying the Jan. 21 article “Memorable inaugural address is sometimes hard to come by” misidentified pictures of President George Washington and President Thomas Jefferson. The two pictures should have been reversed. The Daily regrets this error.

Dry or passionate. Boring or persuasive.

Generally meant to unite or inspire people, lately the inaugural addresses given by a U.S. president — especially the second time around — do not generally stand out enough to be remembered a week later.

The inaugural address, which is the speech given by the president when he or she is sworn into office, originated when George Washington first took his oath into office April 30, 1789. Washington’s second inaugural address, however, was the shortest given by any U.S. president.

“It’s whatever you want to make out of it,” said Steffen Schmidt, university professor of political science. “There’s some that nobody remembers, and then there’s some that everybody quotes all the time.”

President John F. Kennedy’s famous “Ask not …” inaugural address is perhaps the most often quoted and ardently praised. But not everyone can speak as eloquently in public as Kennedy seemed to so effortlessly accomplish.

“Bush is not an elegant presenter,” Schmidt said. “He trips over his words, he’s sort of awkward. Most people cannot speak very well in public and that’s OK, you don’t have to be JFK.”

The speeches used to depend on the talents, skills and ability of the person being sworn in, but now there are professional speechwriters for that, he said.

“We all know somebody else writes it,” said Dirk Deam, lecturer of political science.

Deam said the public expects to hear about new policies and things to come instead of beautiful, artful speeches.

“It’s not stirring oratory,” he said. “And it’s not designed to do that, but touch policy bases that everyone expects.”

Looking back at the speeches given by Winston Churchill, Theodore Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Harry Truman, there’s no comparison — and what is said in the inaugural address now ends up being sort of a joke, Deam said.

“The inaugural is something that should inspire the nation,” said Mary Swander, distinguished professor of English. “It should add some sound byte, some line that has a ring.”

Swander said Bush’s speechwriters are good, although it’s not the content she would prefer. Today, however, fewer people tune in to them than in the past, especially during a second inaugural, she said.

“The speech doesn’t really mean anything to me,” said Valerie Krumm, junior in agricultural education. “We’ve heard what he wants to do from before the election, so now it’s just a matter of pulling through.”

Krumm said she doesn’t watch inaugural addresses because they’re usually long and time consuming.

But even so, these addresses may very well give the public a helpful gauge.

“It might provide us with a standard or a road map by which to judge their progress,” said Chris Motz, senior in political science.

Some general goals may be laid out in these addresses, but probably nothing new or surprising, Motz said.