Lou Gherig's Farwell Speech
The King's Speech
George Bush's Address to the Nation
Watch ALL THREE SPEECHES, then choose one and do a rhetorical analysis of it. Try and identify the five cannons of rhetoric in each. You can speak to the invention, organization, style, memory and delivery in each. Also, use the language we have learned. How is the rhetor establishing ethos, and appealing to logic and or speaking to the audiences emotions or pathos? What is the kairos of the speech? And in analyzing style, does the rhetor employ any schemes and or tropes? Really analyze the language.
Below are links to the speeches in writing for closer analysis.
https://baseballhall.org/discover/lou-gehrig-luckiest-man
https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/George-VI-King-s-Speech-September-3-1939
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/gwbush911addresstothenation.htm
The speeches must all be done four times, so first come, first served. If you do your blog last, you will have to analyze whichever is left. Although I will say, they are all short and they are all fabulous. You must comment on a speech that you did NOT analyze.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLou Gherig’s Famous Speech
ReplyDeleteEven though this speech was very short, it had such a strong meaning to it. Lou Gherig did an amazing job at establishing the Five Cannons of Rhetoric. For invention, Lou wanted to focus on two main topics for his speech-how he was very thankful for everything he was able to do throughout his career as a baseball player, and he also did not want people to feel sorry for him. His speech was also very well organized. He first has a wonderful introduction by saying how he’s such a lucky person, and he then goes into saying many rhetorical questions. Next, he thanks all the people who have greatly helped him develop into the character he had become. Finally, he restates, in a different way, how he’s still very thankful for all the wonderful opportunities he has had in life. By asking many rhetorical questions, that appeals to his type of writing style. Gherig also uses metaphors in his speech for example, “When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed - that's the finest I know.” Based on how well this speech was delivered, Lou was able to memorize it successfully. Even though it was a very short speech, it was delivered beautifully by applying to logos, ethos, and of course pathos. Ethos is established right in the beginning of the speech when he talks about his past experiences as a baseball player. Pathos seems as if it is established through his voice, he had an extreme amount of emotion when he was delivering his speech. Also, when he was talking about his family some pathos was present. When he answers his own questions in the speech, he is appealing to logos. The kairos of the speech is the time of when it was delivered. People knew he was diagnosed with ALS, so I feel like he needed to address how he was extremely grateful for all the wonderful opportunities he’s had in such a short period of life. He even states in his speech, “Today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth.” Parallelism is used because in the first part of his speech, he talks about something someone has done, and then he mentions their name. Later in the speech, he mentions people’s names and then states how they have helped him with his career. He also used repetition by constantly saying how lucky he was. He did this because he wants people to know he was very grateful. Finally, irony was used when he said "Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got.” Without completely mentioning his disease, this sentence partakes to it. Overall, this was a great speech. Even short speeches can have such an influence on people.
This was a good analysis. You did a good job distinguishing between the five canons of rhetoric, logos, ethos, and pathos, along with Kairos. It was also good that you included a specific example regarding to schemes and tropes.
DeleteI feel you did a great job explaining the many parts of this speech. You captured all the rhetorical appeals as well as explained the kairos very well. Your examples throughout were exceptional
DeleteOn July 4, 1939, the longtime first baseman for the Yankees, Lou Gehrig, did the impossible: in the face of his own impending and painful death, he called himself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. His speech has since gone down as one of the greats of baseball history, and earned the disease that took his life its common name, “Lou Gehrig’s Disease.” His speech was that significant. The disease that plagues Stephen Hawking and killed Mao Zedong was named after a baseball player. His speech was that good.
ReplyDeleteGehrig gave his speech to a waiting audience of millions. These millions of people knew what was affecting Gehrig, but they had not seen him since his last game. His last game, over two months ago, still had him playing strong, but he benched himself due to poor performance, ending an over two thousand game playing streak. The audience expected to see their star run out onto the field, but instead, he walked out, clearly in pain. Despite the pain, Gehrig continued in his belief, that a man with the opportunities he had must be the luckiest man on earth, and he showed it in his speech. The determination that had defined his career to that point was still there, something his fans noticed. Gehrig manages to create enough kairos to firmly cement his speech as a classic in a walk and two sentences.
Gehrig’s invention was clear through his speech. He had two clear goals in giving his famous speech: to tell the fans that it will be alright, and to thank all the people who helped him along the way. He did not say that he was lucky because he got to play professional baseball with the Yankees, he said he was the luckiest man on earth because of his coaches, his teammates, and his wife, who all helped and supported him every step of the way. His unique style bleeds into each line of his speech. He constantly discusses his awareness of those who help him and deep gratitude for that help. Well over half the speech is spent talking about all of the people who helped him get where he is. Whether or not he memorized the speech is unclear, but when watching the speech, his eyes were fixated on the microphones or were simply shut, leading most analysts to surmise that his speech was memorized. His delivery was characterized by the deep emotion he pours into each of his lines. This is a man who is about to die, who is about to leave his wife, his team, and his fans all behind. That much is clear from the short sentences followed by long pauses full of emotion.
Lou Gehrig delivered one of the most moving speeches in the history of baseball. Although he used schemes and tropes sparingly, making use of anaphora towards the middle of his speech, his kairos and genuineness in the face of such daunting prospects cemented his speech as one of the greats, and him as a face of baseball.
When faced with some of the worst that life had to give him, Lou Gehrig proudly smiled in the face of the unknown. He did not know precisely what would happen in the following weeks, but he sparked hope in others when he likely had little hope left for himself. Gehrig used invention by taking a horrible situation and using it to inspire a nation. The organization used keeps the speech brief but effective, which is extremely appropriate due to the large audience he is speaking to. “Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy?” shows his use of asyndeton. He proceeds to use anaphora in his style to display how fortunate he considers himself to be. Lou expresses his profound positivity in such a manner that it almost strikes the average person odd that they, too, are not as happy in their superior circumstances. The speech is all the more effective because, having the speech memorized, Lou exudes raw, genuine sincerity in his material. He is able to present the speech in a way so that it does not feel contrived, but rather it seems very natural. The whole situation is all the pathos that Gehrig needs because of the depressing nature of it. “Fans”, his opening line, established ethos; Lou Gehrig is such a well-known man that everyone is sure to know what his speech is addressing. Logos is initially questioned when he claims to be “the luckiest man on the face of the earth.” However, it is later justified as he explains why he feels this way. Gehrig was such a respected baseball player, but this speech helped him to become a respected human. His composure is unbelievable as he explains to the nation how to cope with a situation that affects him alone. The strength that this man possessed is unimaginable, and it is something to look up to.
ReplyDeleteI liked how showed a specific example of a scheme, along with good examples of the canons of rhetoric and logos, pathos, and ethos.
DeleteYour analysis was pretty good. It was concise, but still got the point across. His great skill as a rhetorician really made his farewell speech all the more touching, which you were able to expose through your discussion of the rhetorical elements and the canons of rhetoric. Nice work!
DeletePresident Bush’s Address
ReplyDeletePart I
In the wake of the worst terror attacks in American history, President George W. Bush was tasked with the restoration of order, which he began to accomplish with his address to the American people on the night of September 11, 2001. This address exhibits the five canons of rhetoric, invention, organization, style, memory, and delivery, in all their glory. Even though invention is not blatantly obvious in any piece of writing, considering that it largely encompasses the pre-writing process, it is easy to infer what it might have been like for President Bush. Upon the realization that the nation was under attack, one could imagine that the president would begin pondering how he should address the nation in a manner that would answer to some of the concerns of the people of the nation and would serve as a reminder that the United States is a resilient nation that cannot and would not be snuffed out by people who seek to rid the country of everything that made it what it is. In organizing the address, Bush puts it in an order that first summarizes the events of the day, then proceeds to remind the American citizens that, as strong as we are, we will not be stopped by these occurrences. Bush then goes on to state that he will do everything in his power to make sure that our nation does not take too much of a hit as far as our way of life and economy goes, as such occurrences as stock market crashes and an overall downturn of the economy would definitely be detrimental to the American people. The last minute or so of the speech then reassures the American people of our military’s strength, and that our military is on standby, an effort on the part of Bush to eliminate further concerns for the safety of the American people. As far as style goes, Bush’s speech is pretty light on schemes and tropes, though he does liken the American Resolve to steel that cannot be dented, which is a metaphor of sorts. There isn’t much room for fancy-pantsy language in an address like this one, and Bush doesn’t waste time with gimmicky lingo. For the reason why, we need to stop and take a look at the kairos for a second. Bush was relatively new to office, having only taken to the post eight months prior. Having won the election by an EXTREMELY narrow margin, he needed to convince the American populace that he was a worthy leader. If he was too heavy on juicy language, he likely would not be taken as seriously as he needed to be. This decision to be relatively light on interesting language served as a boost to his ethos, which will be discussed later. Returning to the canons, memory was definitely included here. Bush delivered this address in real-time, without a piece of paper or note card in front of him. Now, he could have been using a teleprompter, but his eyes were fixed directly at the camera. This also serves as a boost to his ethos, here. Now, the delivery was, in my opinion, pretty good. Sure, he stumbled here and there and got a little bit tongue-tied every once in a while, but Bush delivered the address with authority and relative stability. This was a rough day, and a firm response was key to keeping the American people calm, reassured, and hopeful.
Part II
ReplyDeleteAs far as ethos, logos, and pathos are concerned, they are all there and firing on all cylinders. Bush establishes his ethos throughout the delivery of his speech. His firm, grounded response to the events of the day gave him a chance to further sell himself as a good leader to the American people, who were split equally as to whether or not he was good for America on election day, having VERY narrowly won the presidency over Al Gore. This gave him some footing and undoubtedly affected the voters in 2004 who reelected him. Logos is also appealed to throughout the address. At the beginning, Bush recaps what occurred that day. Unless someone was under a rock that day, just about everybody knew what happened. Logos is also appealed to when he talks about how strong our country and military are. Even though some people were undoubtedly feeling concerned for their safety and the future of America after a brief exposure of its vulnerability, surely people knew that our strength as a nation would make for a speedy recovery and that our strong military would be ready to attack and defend us if need be. Finally, pathos is appealed to when President Bush makes an effort to console those who are suffering with the losses of loved ones and fear for their safety. Bush tries to get Americans to feel relief and acknowledgement. Bush basically states that he, the one who is responsible for cleaning up this mess, feels their pain. Overall, all elements of rhetoric, the appeals and canons, make an appearance in this address, which make this address very effective.
Jarret, this rhetorical analysis was well thought-out and incorporated the various strategies that President Bush used to reassure the American people during this time in an organized manner. I similarly felt that the khairos surrounding his speech was incredibly important, as he was, to a large extent, seen as someone lacking credibility, especially with the details surrounding the Florida recount. Great job!
DeleteI enjoyed your incorporation of President Bush’s struggles. It’s hard to imagine the circumstances he faced: he’s a new president, the people don’t necessarily trust him completely yet, and the worst terror attack in our history hits him. It was a really great piece, Jarret.
DeleteI really like how you did not just examine the surface of the speech, you drove down and found the context. President Bush was not just delivering a speech to the nation, he was delivering this speech to a nation that had very recently, very narrowly, put him in office. Not only that, but you pointed at how successful this speech was for him with the reminder of who won the very next election, this time without the narrow margin, winning by just over thirty points.
DeleteI really love how you took the time to rally dive into this speech and truly analyze it. I didn't even realize some of the points you brought up when I watched this speech. Your examples on logos, pathos, and ethos were great. This was a great rhetorical analysis.
DeleteI think this blog is a true delve into the greatness of this speech. You truly encapsulated the essence of what President Bush was trying to say. Your analysis of the rhetorical appeals, schemes, and tropes. I enjoyed your overall analysis of this speech
DeletePart 1
ReplyDeleteFollowing Britain’s declaration of war against Nazi Germany, King George VI, on September 3, 1939, not only delivered a message in support of the Second World War, but he also sent an implied, yet rather clear message in opposition to the apathetic nature of nations who were “remaining neutral.” This speech, which was highly effective, placed Great Britain at the forefront of the war and, ultimately, led to the entrance of these apathetic nations into the war. By conducting a detailed analysis of King George’s speech, it becomes evident that the five canons of rhetoric, as well as the utilization of a variety of rhetorical strategies, permitted for the development and delivery of a well thought-out, persuasive speech.
Beginning with the first three components of his speech — the exordium, the narratio, and the partitio — King George effectively establishes his ethos, preparing his audience for the coming message. Within his exordium, he appeals to both those at home and those abroad by expressing his “depth of feeling” for his them, putting on display his affection and high moral character. He continues, in the speech’s narratio, to form this character, as he begins to justify his reasoning behind entering the war. Prior to the declaration of war, Great Britain, he stated, had attempted to seek peace, but, because these efforts failed, the only other alternative was to go to war (the partitio). This logic, which was a clear use of the subtopic of relationship, allowed for King George to portray himself as a decisive, effective leader, which was a trait many looked for during this dark time.
By continuing to use the traditional method of organization, King George is similarly successful in utilizing logos. Within the confirmatio portion of his speech, George introduces the primary idea of the Germans — “might is right” (use of assonance for emphasis). He details the dangers that lied behind this theory, and how destructive it could prove itself if not combatted, as it is, simply put, a “selfish pursuit of power” (use of subtopic of invention, definition). This fully substantiates the declaration of war made by Britain, serving the speech itself as a significant part of the logic behind this argument. He then proceeds to carefully counter the arguments many have made, implying that many have not entered the war due to fear. Clearly, the only way to counter such a foe is with force and, of course, strength and fortitude. This piece of logic, which refers back to the fact that attempts at peace have already been made, furthers his argument and sends a clear message that only if allied forces would join together to combat the enemy and turn away from apathy could Nazi Germany be destroyed.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteThe pathos used by King George within his speech ties together each of his rhetorical strategies, specifically ethos and logos, to deliver a rather emotional, solemn message. He uses rather dire language when describing the situation at hand, labeling it as a “grave hour” that “could be fateful in history,” bringing to life with a solemn tone the dangers that lie ahead. In keeping with the organization of the speech, in his peroratio, King George declares the need to “commit our cause to God.” This was a rather emotional plea to all those listening that one must not do what is in one’s best interests, but rather, what is morally correct, to find peace and stability.
As for the style, memory, and delivery of the king’s speech, they could not be more in sync with the situation at hand. His style was formal, his tone solemn. These complementary aspects of his speech allowed for a a natural, persuasive message that expressed emotion and character to be delivered without the audience feeling as if its emotions had been manipulated. And, though King George most likely did not fully memorize his address due to his speech impediment and disdain for public speaking, he fully understood the message he was trying to deliver, which was just as effective, as, soon thereafter, many nations joined a coalition to combat a growing danger facing the international community.
It can never be easy to tell people that their way of life is under threat, but, as you described, King George did an excellent job of convincing people of all nations that the threat of the Axis was more than a European problem. I also enjoyed how you looked into the speech, I had no idea King George had a speech impediment, and I listened to that speech several times before I settled on Gehrig’s. Overall, it is a great analysis of a great speech.
DeleteI'm really glad you chose this speech because it seems like the perfect one for you. You really brought out each canon of rhetoric perfectly, and you also truly took your time in analyzing King George's speech. I like your description of the delivery because I think it was really important to that speech. Overall, this was a great analysis!
DeleteThis analysis was very well done. All of your points were very valid. In this case, it was very important for good rhetorical skill to be in order, as poor skill would undoubtedly have made the address more alarming. You were spot on with the style, which was crucial to maintaining order moving forward. Excellent work!
DeleteI really like how well done and thought out this rhetorical analysis is. It is evident that you took the time to know the topic, and provided clear concise evidence of all the points. Good job!
DeleteOn September 11, 2001, disaster struck the great nation of the United States. A storm of planes was planned to crash into the World Trade Center, The Pentagon, and multiple other planned locations including the White House as some speculate. Of the four original planes planned to be used, three were able to hit their target. The first, flight 11, hitting the north tower of the World Trade Center. The second, flight 175, crashing into the south tower. The third, flight 77, crashing into the pentagon. The fourth plane, flight 93, had an unknown target, due to an act of major American heroism to crash land the plane.
ReplyDeleteNow, just picture how scared, dazed, and confused the country was. How hard do you think the task must have been to restore order? Well President Bush seems to do this with ease. Not only did his speech act to comfort a scared country, but it also served as a call to action to defend what this country stands for.
The most important rhetorical part of this speech is the Kairos. Imagine the situation that just occurred. People were insanely scared. In fact, I am willing to bet that any adult in today's world can tell you exactly where they were on that fateful day. We are taking about a single day that changed the WHOLE WORLD. Remembering this kairos is why this speech is as good as it is.
The next best part of president Bush's speech is his pathos. He speaks with incredible emotion, showing that he is a man that truly cares for his people and his country, not just some blind leader. The president's pathos is established at its greatest in the second paragraph. He says things such as, "Terrorist attacks can shake the foundation of our tallest buildings, but not the foundation of our great country" and, "they can shatter steel, but not the steel of American resolve." This is meant to be a call to action for the American people. And boy did it work.
While not much logos is used, the president also does a decent amount of establishing his ethos. He talks of everything he did to help the situation, and also talks of how strong the military is. Even though not much logos and ethos were there, I think this was actually beneficial because this situation required a whole lot of pathos.
President George W. Bush's speech after 9/11 is truly amazing, and is actually my favorite of all time. It is everything that America stands for. It is looking your enemy in the face, with a black eye from their blows, but not giving up and hitting back. It is the great strength and determination of an always great nation. It is true American heroism, and it is a great example of how strong we will always be in the face of hostility.
This rhetorical analysis is perfectly thought out and presented well. Your explanation of kaidos and how President Bush used this as his guide is great. Also, your presentation of pathos, which is very strong in his speech, is explanied perfectly with examples.
DeleteYour introduction was absolutely amazing. You were also able to point out the different parts to a well said speech. I really enjoyed how you quoted something from his speech and then explained what the quote meant. Keep up the good work!
DeleteYour analysis was extremely well done. Also, your explanations of the cannons of rhetoric and the ethos, pathos, and logos were great. This is an extremely well done analysis. Great job!
DeleteLou Gehrig, a beloved baseball player, presented a speech to the Yankee Stadium in 1939. Recently, he was given less than two years to live, yet his situation, he presented a speech about what he is lucky to have in his life.
ReplyDeleteAfter slowly and carefully approaching the microphones, Lou was given a full Yankee’s stadium to address. He chose his topic perfectly. Lou could have talked about his situation or his career or his future, but he made his speech about the amazing things he has in life that he would not trade the world for anything else. Lou used this opportunity to have all fans listen to him thank them. The topic of his speech, invention, was his explantation to the world that even the greatest baseball player can have a bad break, but he can still live a positive and grateful life. Also, Lou’s constant questions that involved very important men whom he met or was friends with then to respond with, “sure, I’m lucky,” was a great style. This style of questions looked to be parallelism because it was a question that ended with the name of the great person. He also used anaphora in his “when” statements to address the most important things in his life. Lou’s organization of having a small thank you in the beginning, multiple questions about his baseball accomplishments, and then his true feelings of his happiness, and lastly, a closing that catches the hearts of everyone, created the perfect mix of emotions. The crowd most likely felt sad for him after addressing how he has had a bad break, but he changed those feelings when he explained that the things he already has are his real accomplishments; his wife, his father, and his mother. Lou’s memorization was also very well done. I believe that Lou was most likely filled with emotion that memorizing was a simple task. Lastly, he presented the speech in perfect tone. He was calm, yet raised and lowered his voice when asking or answering questions. Overall, his speech was greatly put together and it was clear to see the cannons of rhetoric.
Lou used ethos, logos, pathos, and kairos within his speech. His ethos and kairos go hand in hand. Lou was a known baseball player and had the hearts of many, also, he was speaking at the Yankees stadium full of his supporters. Pathos was used in the beginning about how he had a bad break and that he was grateful for his favorite people, family. Lou’s voice also showed strong emotion that appealed to the listeners. Logos was minimal but it was seen in his statements about the opportunities he had and the great people he met. Ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos were used smartly and effectively. Lou’s speech accomplished its task of showing that he will be okay because he is surrounded by great people and a little bit of luck.
Lou used his bad break as an opportunity to tell everyone to be grateful. His speech which included parallelism, anaphora, and strong pathos, touched the hearts of his fans in Yankee Stadium and those watching on televsion. Lou will forever be remembered as a humble and gracious man who was just “lucky.”
Maddie, your discussion of Lou Gehrig’s use of various tropes and schemes was extremely useful, as it really showed where he emphasized his most important points of his speech (specifically, when he states how grateful and “lucky” he truly is). I also noticed how well he tied together each of the appeals, which was truly essential when delivering such a heartfelt speech. Great job!
DeleteThis is a very well done rhetorical analysis. I really like how you used the five canons as well as logos pathos and ethos. Good job!
DeleteLou Gehrig made such a short speech into one of the most powerful and emotional ones with the use of his language and his delivery. The Yankee's baseball player was given a "bad break", but he decided to turn it into something beautiful and worthwhile. When he gave that speech, one would actually believe that he was the luckiest man in the world.
ReplyDeleteLou Gehrig very apparently approaches each topic of rhetoric with grace and much thought. His invention was very apparent by his choosing of topic. He chose something that would make the audience feel grateful, and rather than talking about himself he chose to talk of others to bring out his thankfulness. Lou Gehrig organized his speech perfectly as well. He knew when to say what, and included all the aspects of organization. I believe his style is what really made this speech work. He used several different schemes and tropes to really bring out his point. He uses anaphora several times to really emphasize the point of being lucky or grateful. Gehrig also uses rhetorical questions to truly make the audience contemplate why they should be grateful. I don't really think that he had to memorize his speech that well because it was something that truly came from the heart, and he also seemed like he was just talking instead of reading. That part leads into delivery, which he does incredibly well. He speaks slowly almost the entire time and pauses in parts so that he audience can really take in what he is trying to say. I think it was right that he chose to speak slowly, because if it was fast the audience wouldn't have fully appreciated his point. Lou Gehrig clearly establishes his ethos, logos, and pathos. He fully establishes his ethos by explaining all the great things that have happened to him as a baseball player. These examples could easily be proven and seem very believable. His logos is apparent when he is giving the examples like, “When your mother and father work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body, it's a blessing.” He gives an example and backs it up with something that is generally logical to just about everyone in this world. While ethos and logos are visible, pathos stands out the most in his speech. He is taking a very bad situation in his life and making good of it. He is taking a look at his whole life and realizing just how lucky he truly is to have lived it. This makes the audience feel respect and gratitude towards this man. They feel sorry for him, but at the same time feel as if he truly is lucky after he gives this speech. The kairos of the speech is quite obvious. He is a baseball player standing in a stadium full of fans explaining how lucky he is although he only has two years to live. What more is there to say about that? Some of the schemes and tropes he uses are anaphora, rhetorical questions, antithesis, and parallelism.
It is truly amazing how Lou Gehrig turns an absolutely horrific stage in his life to one full of passion and gratefulness. After watching this, I feel as if this is one of the greatest speeches of all time despite its length. He uses almost every aspect of rhetoric in a beautiful sense, and really brings home his point of gratefulness, which is what all of us should be.
You presented all of the topics needed very well. You did a great job explaining the ethos, pathos, and logos. I think you also did a great job explaining the style and schemes and tropes of the speech. Overall, this was a great analysis.
DeleteSeptember 3, 1939 was truly a dark time for members of the British Isles and Empire. The Second World War was nigh on starting, and many, remembering the First World War were terrified of the conflict. In a time when some politicians would remain silent and stoic, King George VI delivered a wonderful speech to all citizens of Great Britain.
ReplyDeleteHe began with a dire opening, foretelling a solemn announcement. He follows it up with a solemn announcement indeed - war. He uses pathos, ethos, and logos throughout but especially in his opening. It was quite apparent how he was reluctant to declare war, but given the enemy (Nazi Germany) and their ideologies (“might is right”), there was no other choice. He uses parenthesis in many occasions, improving his overall rhetorical quality. He finishes with a reference to God, which I believe would have instilled a sense of hope into the people of Britain as it would lend itself to a thought that God was guiding and guarding them, and that with Him, they couldn’t lose.
I think you should try and write just a little bit more next time.. Also, instead of just stating that logos, ethos, and pathos was used, try explaining how they were used. You definitely had some main ideas, but you did not provide many details.
DeleteI’m sorry, but I agree with Bethany on this issue. It was not necessarily a very difficult prompt to write on, and it definitely could have been written better. At least you did it though!
DeleteAfter the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, President Bush was faced with the task of addressing the nation after such horrid events. Planes were crashed into the World Trade Center along with the Pentagon, and it is suspected that the White House along with other locations were also targets. The degree of difficulty behind that speech must have been very high. He had to calm down and reassure a nation that just witnessed one of the worst terrorist attacks in history. However, President Bush did an amazing job delivering it, and if you analyze it, you figure out why he did such an amazing job. He used the five canons of rhetoric, along with kairos, ethos, logos, and pathos.
ReplyDeleteWhat stood out to me the most in the whole speech was the kairos. President Bush had to face a nation that was scared out of their mind. No one had any idea what to expect, if more attacks were coming, or where the future was taking them. Bush managed to stay pretty calm and stable, which I’m sure would have been reassuring for the American people. I am almost certain most adults who experienced it could tell you where they were when they heard the news. The five canons of rhetoric were pretty distinguishable as well. Invention, although we cannot really see it, is implied. A lot of time definitely went into writing that address. As for the organization, he sort of went through a progression of topics. He first somewhat recaps what happened that day, then he encourages the people and tells them they must not be moved the wrong way by this and that he will do everything in his power to get the rebuilding process started and prevent further damage. Towards the end, he then talks about how strong and prepared our military is, trying to help reassure and calm everyone down. His style is pretty serious, not really using many schemes or tropes, but he does use some metaphors, like when he talks about not being bent like the steel. As for memory, it didn’t appear he had any note cards or anything on his desk to help him, since he was looking into the camera the whole time. I do not know if there was a teleprompter or not. The delivery was good. I think he remained focused and stable, which is what the people needed to see. If he came off as nervous or worried, that most likely would have frightened a lot of people. Ethos, logos, and pathos were also very much present. I think he calm and serious approach helped establish his ethos. Surely almost everyone is attentive when they are listening to the president talk, but being stable and easy to understand helped him boost his ethos. Logos is revealed when he recaps the day obviously, and then when he talks about how our military is prepared, strong, and ready. Pathos is included throughout thaw whole entire thing, whether he is talking about what just happened or when he is consoling all those who lost family members or are searching for them. All in all, his use of rhetoric is very effective and was surely needed if he wanted this speech to be successful.
Great job on your rhetorical analysis, it truly showed me the five cannons and the ethos, pathos, and logos within President Bush’s speech. Also, I like how you pointed out that his delivery of the speech was calm because that is what he needed to be, even though America was not.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe this speech was presented before WW2 when Britain declared war on Germany. The kairos of this speech was clear when the country was in panic. He had to tell his people, that once again, they were going to war. He knows exactly how they are feeling because he feels the same way. This is his pathos of the speech along with a few rhetorical questions. The ethos of the speech came when he told the people to be careful and prepared for the war. He talks about trying to stay out of trouble with the world, but he said, “We have been forced into a conflict.” Another factor was being tied with allies, so they had no choice into the war. He had a lot of schemes and tropes in the speech. He used a lot of parenthesis and anastrophe. In respect to organization, he clearly presented exordium and partitio. I feel that the speech was more comforting than informative, but I suppose that is what he was trying to bring out to the audience. He was composed the entire speech which I believe help the audience keep calm. His delivery was flawless and King George showed a lot of empathy at the end. He was also supporting the people by saying that we can win this and stay strong.
ReplyDelete