Alvin SumbulsResponsetoRhetoricalAnalysis
Content
Alvin Nella Rhetorical Analysis 9/18/12 FOUR MORE YEARS
The Democratic National Convention (DNC) is a special time of year for the Democratic Party. It’s a time of excitement and acknowledgment for who is going to represent the Democratic Party for the coming election. As the DNC took place, there were many key speakers for the event. However, there was one key speaker who stood out from the rest, President Bill Clinton. Clinton had an inspirational, yet factual speech about why President Barack Obama should be re-elected for another term of presidency. There were many techniques which President Clinton used to engage the audience in his speech. His styles of persuading were exactly what the Democratic Delegates wanted to hear, and every word was to their interest. First, President Clinton was one of the most successful presidents to have ever represented the people of the United States of America. It was quite an honor for President Obama to have a key note speaker with a great deal of respect by the American people. Although he is already a well-known man, Clinton decides to talk about some things he did as governor before taking office. “I worked with President Reagan in his White House on the first round of welfare reform and with President George H.W. Bush on national education goals” (FOX 2-3). President Clinton establishes his Ethos, or trustworthiness, from the beginning of his speech. He wants the Delegates, as well as the American people watching on television, to know that he has been in President Obama’s situation before.
1
Also, Clinton decided to woo the audience’s emotions by proclaiming what the Republican Party is negatively aiming towards. He says, “They want to cut taxes for highincome Americans even more than President Bush did” (FOX 5). For any American, performing an act worse than what President George W. Bush did is complete foolishness. The audience’s Pathos, or emotion level, boosted from this very statement, causing citizens around the nation to question the Republican Party even more. President Clinton used many versions of propaganda throughout his speech in order to reach out to the Democratic Delegates. To do this, he used some of the devices explained in “How to Detect Propaganda” from Exploring Language (13th Edition). He used devices such as “Glittering Generalities” and “Plain Folks” (Goshgarian 429-30). Clinton used Glittering Generalities to create hope within the Delegates. He spoke with “virtue words” about how Obama would bring back justice to America and Americans would go back to work. He said, “Investments in education and infrastructure and scientific and technological research increase growth” (FOX 2). President Clinton says this to allow the Delegates to think that Obama will be doing this for the next four years. The use of Clinton’s virtue words helped the Delegates to be engaged in his speech, causing an eruption of applause. Next, Plain Folks was another propaganda device that President Clinton used in order to appear as if President Obama were one of the Delegates. The use of Plain Folks allows Obama to be a regular working American, standing up for the rights of his fellow citizens. It was the key device which caused the Delegates to believe that President Obama was being re-elected for each of them. Clinton would state, “Supporting our veterans when they came home”, “lowers the cost of federal student loans”, “millions of seniors are receiving preventive care”, “a lot of that money is spent to help people with disabilities” (FOX 4-9). Within all of these statements, President
2
Clinton reaches out to each member of his audience as if he was talking to them individually. Allowing President Obama to appear as if he was situated in each individual’s shoes, President Clinton did a fine job scoring attention throughout his speech. To follow up, President Clinton used a device which can never be proven wrong, statistics. The Logos, or logic, of Clinton’s speech came with correcting the Republican’s claim that the United States is not better off than we were four years ago. He says, “We were losing 750,000 jobs a month”, “The Recovery Act saved or created millions of jobs and cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people” (FOX 5-6). With this kind of information, President Clinton was able to fight for Obama’s case. He was able to inform the American people how and why the state of our nation is better than it was four years ago. These devices that President Clinton used were clearly effective as all of the Delegates were shouting out the words to Clinton’s speech before he even reached them. Although the Republicans were right about some aspects, President Clinton made sure his speech would disregard all of their statements. He was confident his speech would influence the Delegates and the American people to vote for Obama. There was no better way than to end his speech by saying, “My fellow Americans, if that is what you want, if that is what you believe, you must reelect President Barack Obama” (FOX 13). With the right usage of oratorical devices and rhetorical ideas, President Clinton had constructed the most inspirational speech at the Democratic National Convention. Alvin, this rhetorical analysis has a lot of potential; by that I mean, you can (and should) revise it, because with a little bit more organization and a stronger claim, this paper can be really effective! [ √ ] Some things to consider:
3
You organize your thoughts pretty well, beginning with an intro, then moving into Clinton’s appeal to ethos and pathos, his use of propaganda devices, and his appeal to logos. As you revise this, I’d like for you to think about how your discussion of the various propaganda devices fit into the critical vocabulary we’ve been developing. Does his use of the glittering generalities device appeal to his audience’s emotions? Does it use logic? Once you’ve answered the question “Can this fall under the category of an appeal to ethos, pathos, or logos?” you will immediately recognize how to better link your paragraphs together and transition between them. Also, where do these paragraphs fit within your larger argument? What is your larger argument? Your main argument seems to be that “President Clinton had constructed the most inspirational speech of the convention.” Alright... so what? What I would like for you to think about as you revise this is how you can make an argument by using your analysis of Clinton’s use of devices and rhetorical appeals as support. This can be done by keeping your audience in mind and writing for them. Why should your readers care that Clinton’s speech contains strong logic and tons of statistics? You tell them what you want them to know… now, why do you want them to know it? What do they need to know in order for them to do what you want them to do? (What do you want them to do?) You can try to read this as the reader yourself (instead of the writer/student in college). If you were reading this analysis as an article in the NY Times, what more would you want to know? In any article I read, very early on I’d like to know why the writer is bringing things up. Why are you discussing Clinton’s use of certain propaganda devices? So what if he uses glittering generalities? Why should that matter to the reader? Perhaps you can delve into the reasoning behind Clinton’s choice of topics and words (the economy; “bring back justice”; “stand up for the rights of ordinary citizens” etc.)? Or why he focuses on himself a lot (and what that does rhetorically). View Clinton’s speech in a new light. Pursue an angle that readers may not think about immediately. You can always speak to me during my office hours or set up an appointment to go over your work. I’m happy to go over drafts or help with brainstorming. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Good luck! Sumbul
Bibliography
4
1. "Transcript of Bill Clinton's Speech at the DNC." Fox News. FOX News Network, 05
Sept. 2012. Web. 20 Sept. 2012 <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/05/transcript-bill-clinton-speech-at dnc/>.
2. Goshgarian, Gary. Exploring Language. Thirteenth ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson,
2012, 2010, 2007, 2004. Print.
5
The Democratic National Convention (DNC) is a special time of year for the Democratic Party. It’s a time of excitement and acknowledgment for who is going to represent the Democratic Party for the coming election. As the DNC took place, there were many key speakers for the event. However, there was one key speaker who stood out from the rest, President Bill Clinton. Clinton had an inspirational, yet factual speech about why President Barack Obama should be re-elected for another term of presidency. There were many techniques which President Clinton used to engage the audience in his speech. His styles of persuading were exactly what the Democratic Delegates wanted to hear, and every word was to their interest. First, President Clinton was one of the most successful presidents to have ever represented the people of the United States of America. It was quite an honor for President Obama to have a key note speaker with a great deal of respect by the American people. Although he is already a well-known man, Clinton decides to talk about some things he did as governor before taking office. “I worked with President Reagan in his White House on the first round of welfare reform and with President George H.W. Bush on national education goals” (FOX 2-3). President Clinton establishes his Ethos, or trustworthiness, from the beginning of his speech. He wants the Delegates, as well as the American people watching on television, to know that he has been in President Obama’s situation before.
1
Also, Clinton decided to woo the audience’s emotions by proclaiming what the Republican Party is negatively aiming towards. He says, “They want to cut taxes for highincome Americans even more than President Bush did” (FOX 5). For any American, performing an act worse than what President George W. Bush did is complete foolishness. The audience’s Pathos, or emotion level, boosted from this very statement, causing citizens around the nation to question the Republican Party even more. President Clinton used many versions of propaganda throughout his speech in order to reach out to the Democratic Delegates. To do this, he used some of the devices explained in “How to Detect Propaganda” from Exploring Language (13th Edition). He used devices such as “Glittering Generalities” and “Plain Folks” (Goshgarian 429-30). Clinton used Glittering Generalities to create hope within the Delegates. He spoke with “virtue words” about how Obama would bring back justice to America and Americans would go back to work. He said, “Investments in education and infrastructure and scientific and technological research increase growth” (FOX 2). President Clinton says this to allow the Delegates to think that Obama will be doing this for the next four years. The use of Clinton’s virtue words helped the Delegates to be engaged in his speech, causing an eruption of applause. Next, Plain Folks was another propaganda device that President Clinton used in order to appear as if President Obama were one of the Delegates. The use of Plain Folks allows Obama to be a regular working American, standing up for the rights of his fellow citizens. It was the key device which caused the Delegates to believe that President Obama was being re-elected for each of them. Clinton would state, “Supporting our veterans when they came home”, “lowers the cost of federal student loans”, “millions of seniors are receiving preventive care”, “a lot of that money is spent to help people with disabilities” (FOX 4-9). Within all of these statements, President
2
Clinton reaches out to each member of his audience as if he was talking to them individually. Allowing President Obama to appear as if he was situated in each individual’s shoes, President Clinton did a fine job scoring attention throughout his speech. To follow up, President Clinton used a device which can never be proven wrong, statistics. The Logos, or logic, of Clinton’s speech came with correcting the Republican’s claim that the United States is not better off than we were four years ago. He says, “We were losing 750,000 jobs a month”, “The Recovery Act saved or created millions of jobs and cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people” (FOX 5-6). With this kind of information, President Clinton was able to fight for Obama’s case. He was able to inform the American people how and why the state of our nation is better than it was four years ago. These devices that President Clinton used were clearly effective as all of the Delegates were shouting out the words to Clinton’s speech before he even reached them. Although the Republicans were right about some aspects, President Clinton made sure his speech would disregard all of their statements. He was confident his speech would influence the Delegates and the American people to vote for Obama. There was no better way than to end his speech by saying, “My fellow Americans, if that is what you want, if that is what you believe, you must reelect President Barack Obama” (FOX 13). With the right usage of oratorical devices and rhetorical ideas, President Clinton had constructed the most inspirational speech at the Democratic National Convention. Alvin, this rhetorical analysis has a lot of potential; by that I mean, you can (and should) revise it, because with a little bit more organization and a stronger claim, this paper can be really effective! [ √ ] Some things to consider:
3
You organize your thoughts pretty well, beginning with an intro, then moving into Clinton’s appeal to ethos and pathos, his use of propaganda devices, and his appeal to logos. As you revise this, I’d like for you to think about how your discussion of the various propaganda devices fit into the critical vocabulary we’ve been developing. Does his use of the glittering generalities device appeal to his audience’s emotions? Does it use logic? Once you’ve answered the question “Can this fall under the category of an appeal to ethos, pathos, or logos?” you will immediately recognize how to better link your paragraphs together and transition between them. Also, where do these paragraphs fit within your larger argument? What is your larger argument? Your main argument seems to be that “President Clinton had constructed the most inspirational speech of the convention.” Alright... so what? What I would like for you to think about as you revise this is how you can make an argument by using your analysis of Clinton’s use of devices and rhetorical appeals as support. This can be done by keeping your audience in mind and writing for them. Why should your readers care that Clinton’s speech contains strong logic and tons of statistics? You tell them what you want them to know… now, why do you want them to know it? What do they need to know in order for them to do what you want them to do? (What do you want them to do?) You can try to read this as the reader yourself (instead of the writer/student in college). If you were reading this analysis as an article in the NY Times, what more would you want to know? In any article I read, very early on I’d like to know why the writer is bringing things up. Why are you discussing Clinton’s use of certain propaganda devices? So what if he uses glittering generalities? Why should that matter to the reader? Perhaps you can delve into the reasoning behind Clinton’s choice of topics and words (the economy; “bring back justice”; “stand up for the rights of ordinary citizens” etc.)? Or why he focuses on himself a lot (and what that does rhetorically). View Clinton’s speech in a new light. Pursue an angle that readers may not think about immediately. You can always speak to me during my office hours or set up an appointment to go over your work. I’m happy to go over drafts or help with brainstorming. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Good luck! Sumbul
Bibliography
4
1. "Transcript of Bill Clinton's Speech at the DNC." Fox News. FOX News Network, 05
Sept. 2012. Web. 20 Sept. 2012 <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/05/transcript-bill-clinton-speech-at dnc/>.
2. Goshgarian, Gary. Exploring Language. Thirteenth ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson,
2012, 2010, 2007, 2004. Print.
5
