These two essays are extremely different. The tones are particualrly differnt due to topic, occasion, and purpose. Lincon's speech is not so much one that is asking the audience for something, but, more or less, telling them how things are going to be. He sort of lays down his plans for the people of America to let him know what his ideas are. However, in a way he is hoping they will adopt these ideas because it is always easier for a president to deal with things when people agree with them. On the other hand, Thoreau's tone is full of rage and opposition. He is fed up with how the government is running things and wants people to help change this. It is ok for him to take on this tone because his audience shares the same view, but this would not be a successful approach if he were writing to an audience that supported the war.
Another big difference is the authors' use of pathos. Thoreau's tone compliments his pathos. He uses the feeling of rage to draw in and persuade his audience. When he mentions how the soldiers are looked down upon, a feeling of fury can be felt. He says they get no more respect than a lump of dirt, and they are worth no more than a horse, yet they are human beings (324). Anyone who is in the military or has a loved one in the military would read this and feel very angry or upset with this fact. Invoking people's emotions is a good way to get people to act so this was a good decision on Thoreau's part. Unlike Thoreau, Lincon does not use much pathos; instead, he uses more logic. He states facts instead of appealing to people's emotions. He does not really give the people the choice to think on their own, but rather manipulates them by saying slavery is going to stay around instead of opening a debate whether it should be outlawed or not.
One thing theses essays have in common is that there is not much of a need for ethos. Lincon is automatically going to have a lot credibility because he is the president of the United States and the majority of the people like him and his views. If this was not the case, they would not have elected him. Also, Lincon is going to have support from his audience because they also voted for him based on his ideas. He even states, "Those of you who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this, and many similar declarations, and had never recanted them (207)." Likewise, Thoreau is writing to people who already support him. He is just trying to convince them to act on it.
In both Lincon and Obama’s speeches they share a similar audience, the people of America after being newly elected. Both Lincon and Obama use ethos to their advantage. Obama’s speech really makes use of pathos. He wants the audience to feel they have made the right decision and gain support of those who did not vote for him and emotion is the easiest way to gain that support. As I stated earlier, Lincon used more logos. Although these two presidents used different approaches in their speeches, comparing them illustrates that there is more than one possible approach to constructing an essay and each approach can be just as effective as the other.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Amanda, I'm compelled by your idea that "there is not much of a need for ethos" in either of these essays -- or at least, the rhetorical situation does not require that the authors build their own credibility, for different reasons. I'm beginning to see through the class's analyses that ethos looks very different in each essay, and that it is sometimes even absent.
ReplyDelete