Hello
Today I happened to approach the text of the famous 'I Have a Dream' speech by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I have heard the recording of his speech before;however, it was my first time actually reading the script. When I finished reading, I realized that listening to it and reading it were two very different experiences. I was impressed by Dr. King's usage of various types of different rhetorical devices. He makes use of some of the common rhetorical device such as ironies and metaphors but other times he uses more rare form of figurative speech (and I am sure those of you take Latin will know what I'm talking about).
After trying to find out different rhetorical devices in Dr. King's speech, I started to wonder about other famous speeches and their usage of rhetorical device. Does anyone have an example?
Also, what enables these oratorical geniuses to make proper use of rhetorical device? What is its impact on the audience?
Jennifer Park
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Ironically enough, I think that we went over the perfect example today: Patrick Henry's "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!" Some of us were divided on whether or not he was actually "saying" much of anything. I use this term loosely. In class, I meant to say that he wasn't relaying any information, in actuality. (Isn't that one of the ways Hayakawa defined language?) I'm sure the reading in our packet doesn't even begin to do Patrick's Henry's presentation any justice.
But in terms of his rhetorical uses of language, he knew just how to reel his audience in. He set the bait, and they took it. Appealing to all listeners in his first paragraph, he allowed himself the liberty to let loose toward the end of the speech. It didn't matter that he continued on high abstraction levels; he was enticing, and therefore inviting in his ideas and thoughts. Of course, you have people like Johnathan Edwards, however, who operate on opposite sides of the spectrum. He delivered his sermon so stolidly that it sent shivers down the spines of his listeners. I find it so interesting how several tactics seem to work...sometimes on the same audience!
(Sam Maliha)
As we were talking about yesterday in class, the way a speech is given is many times determined by the audience. One thing that interests me is that Patrick Henry chose to give a highly emotional speech to a neutral audience. But, even more than that, it worked! Mr. Laz mentioned in class that generally when attempting to persuade a neutral audience toward your cause you should not use emotion, but, rather, focus on logic. I've got a couple of ideas as to why Henry chose emotion:
-Henry was aware that his audience knew plenty about the revolution at hand. He knew that they were aware of arguments for and against going to war with the British. He also knew their reasons for being incapable of choosing sides: there were political risks involved. Because Henry knew who he was dealing with, he knew that it would take more than logic to convince them that they should side with the colonies. He chose emotion to inspire them.
- Another thing why I think Henry was aware of was the fact that emotion has a stronger short-term impact than logic. Henry wanted votes, so he did his best to make impact the voters on a level that would elicit an emotional response and spur his audience to immediate action.
- Another reason that I think Henry's use of emotion and passion worked on a neutral audience is that he did not use emotion in a way that would have offended those that might side with the British. His focus was not strongly on the wrongdoings of the British, but on the suffering of the colonies and the rights of the colonies.
Even though Patrick Henry's speech was highly emotional, the undertone of logic certainly served as support for his argument. All in all, Henry's speech is a great example of well thought-out propaganda. It seems to reach the audience well on multiple levels.
Emily T.
As we discussed on Friday, reading a speech and hearing it delivered by an orator can be quite different experiences. After all, many on the rhetorical devices and emotional appeals used in oratory are lost when transcribed onto paper. As Hayakawa told us, affective elements, presymbolic meanings, and emotional appeals are all powerfully transmitted through a spoken medium. Reading a speech written by Patrick Henry and hearing a speech delivered by him are different experiences.
As Emily said, Patrick's decision to use emotion in his speech was certainly effective for his audience. Although emotion can be a risky tool when appealing to neutrals, Henry was taking a calculated risk: he saw that in order to bring any waverers out of apathy, he would have to rouse their sense of patriotism and nationalism. In a time when the United States was not formed yet, his passionate emotional rhetoric was needed to create a sense of community and connection with the audience.
In a more modern day context, I often read over the transcripts of Obama's speeches after hearing them deliver them. Interestingly enough, although the written version lacked the same power Obama's oratory had, I was actually able to pick up some things in the transcript that I missed during the spoken version. Perhaps I paid more attention to the actual content of his words in the transcript, often marveling at his wordplay and speech structure.
Of course, a truly good speech often is effective both on paper and out loud. After all, no matter how well you orate, if all you have is to offer empty words, you'll soon lose the attention of your audience.
-Eric Wei
I think that Eric's experience of picking up on additional points from READING Obama's speeches is a significant one because it demonstrates the importance of a speech's balance between emotion (pathos) and content/logic (ethos). The fact that we may not pay as much attention to content when LISTENING to a speech emphasizes the need for emotion and other rhetorical skills to catch and hold on to the audience's attention. You may recall the class' general disappointment at the apparent lack of passion that McCarthy had when giving his speech in the video Mr. Lazarow showed us. At the same time that pathos is utilized, however, ethos must be wielded as well. A certain amount of content or logical argument must be presented, or else people like us who are knowledgeable of semantics begin to criticize where the orator stands on the abstraction ladder.
(Janet Lee)
Post a Comment