Purpose: To inform people of the denial of education of young boys and girls and fear in those who receive one. She also aims to persuade people to join her cause.
Audience: The UN, Taliban, and people fighting for education.
Context: A 16 year old girl, Malala Yousafzai, speaks to the UN after being shot on the left side of her forehead. She was shot by the Taliban after advocating girl's right to education.
Section 1: Introduction
Purpose: To give thanks, introduce the subject and set the tone.
Appeals: Ethos and pathos
Technique: Throws attention off herself by saying she is just one out of many. "One girl among many." She speaks not for herself but for all children. She also uses repetition to emphasize "their right."
Effectiveness: It is very effective in making you feel united with everyone and the repetition gets the point across.
Section 2: Background:
Purpose: To tell the audience what happened and show she holds no grudge.
Appeals: Ethos and pathos
Technique: She continues to use dear brothers and sisters to make everyone feel united. She doesn't focus on the fact that she got shot and shows she stays true to her word of being peaceful and loving everyone. She uses illusions to bring up famous people that fought peacefully like MLK, Gandhi, Mandela and more.
Effectiveness: Shows she stays true to her word
Section 3: Push for Action
Purpose: To unite everyone with her ideals and push to action
Appeals: Logos: and Pathos
Technique: She uses illusions saying, "we realized the importance of light when we see darkness. We realize the importance of our voice when we are silenced." She compares this to realizing, "the importance of pens and books when we saw the guns." She also uses the quote, "The pen is mightier than sword" to say education is more important than violence and war.
Effectiveness: Calls people to arms and takes action
Section 4: Final Call to Action
Purpose: To finish the speech and move people to take action
Appeals: Pathos
Technique: Repeats dear brother and sisters and we call upon. She then brings the speech home with an anaphora.
Effectiveness: Only works for people who believe education first.
General Evaluation: Malala uses lots and lots of pathos but shows she is still a young speaker. Only people with same ideals will support her.
Monday, December 8, 2014
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Thoreau vs Machiavelli
Machiavelli and Thoreau are both very influential men that discussed their views on how to govern. However each is writing to a different audience therefore their ideas clash. Thoreau writes as a person being governed while Machiavelli writing is aimed at the person ruling.
Both focus on the relationship between the people and their leader. Machiavelli strongly believed in prudence and instilling fear. Machiavelli took the view of a prince and said that rule needed to focus on efficiency over morality. Thoreau believed in objecting anything we think is morally wrong. He wanted to take action against an unjust government. Thoreau says that free man is one who is imprisoned by an unjust government. That person isn't living the lies or following the rule. That person is fighting for what they think is right. Thoreau has faith in humanity. He believes some people will take a stand to fight against and fix the government. He thinks the action you take matters more than the result. He himself was thrown in jail for taking action against paying taxes. Machiavelli thinks a prince doesn't have to worry about taking action. They only need to maintain their rule whether or not it is morally correct as long as the people believe it is.
Machiavelli sees the public as "ungrateful, false, fickle, and covetous." He believes people are bad and that you need to manipulate them rather than being manipulated. Machiavelli writes a guide on how to manipulate men. He represented the view of people in power while Thoreau represented the general public. This is why the two are polar opposites. Thoreau believes people should have more power because he believes in humanity and its ability to detect evil. But Machiavelli shows the view of the people of high power with complete control.
Both focus on the relationship between the people and their leader. Machiavelli strongly believed in prudence and instilling fear. Machiavelli took the view of a prince and said that rule needed to focus on efficiency over morality. Thoreau believed in objecting anything we think is morally wrong. He wanted to take action against an unjust government. Thoreau says that free man is one who is imprisoned by an unjust government. That person isn't living the lies or following the rule. That person is fighting for what they think is right. Thoreau has faith in humanity. He believes some people will take a stand to fight against and fix the government. He thinks the action you take matters more than the result. He himself was thrown in jail for taking action against paying taxes. Machiavelli thinks a prince doesn't have to worry about taking action. They only need to maintain their rule whether or not it is morally correct as long as the people believe it is.
Machiavelli sees the public as "ungrateful, false, fickle, and covetous." He believes people are bad and that you need to manipulate them rather than being manipulated. Machiavelli writes a guide on how to manipulate men. He represented the view of people in power while Thoreau represented the general public. This is why the two are polar opposites. Thoreau believes people should have more power because he believes in humanity and its ability to detect evil. But Machiavelli shows the view of the people of high power with complete control.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)