Conflicting Perspectives Speech

Conflicting perspectives offers multiple angles on an event, situation or personality from which an individual may construct their own meaning from. Good morning teachers and students. Today I will be discussing how Intense opinions and contrasting views are presented in Shakespeare??™s Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, The Presidents Address to the Nation by George Bush and ???Against Going to War with Iraq??? a speech by Barack Obama as a senator. These texts use a range of language forms and features to manipulate their audience unique to their medium of production, purpose and audience
I would like to focus firstly on the funeral oration of Julius Caesar where Brutus uses logos and ethos to justify the assassination of Caesar ???As he was valiant, I honour him. But, as he was ambitious, I slew him.??? The use of taxis creates a facade of a logical argument and by which Brutus controls the audience??™s response through the juxtaposition. Brutus also uses rhetorical questions inconjuction with symploce to manipulate the audience in giving a desired response ???Who is here so vile that will not love his country If any, speak??”for him have I offended???. The effectiveness of his argument is shown in the plebeian??™s response ???Live Brutus! Live! Live!??? By contrast, Mark Antony uses Pathos extensively because his purpose is to manipulate the plebeian??™s emotions to an extent where this would spark a mutiny. Antony provides anecdotal evidence of the generous qualities of Caesar. ???He hath brought many captives home to Rome whose ransoms did the general coffers fill.??? Coupled with rhetorical questions ???Did this in Caesar seem ambitious Through the rhetorical question he generates provocative insights into his perspective on the nature of Caesar. Through Antony??™s repetition of the phrase??? Brutus says he was ambitious and Brutus is an honourable man??? inconjuction with the evidence he provides, the plebeians are provoked to doubt and question Brutus??™s honour and justification for killing Caesar . He also uses interruptio to exploit facts as he gives the impression of being emotively overwhelmed ???Bear with me. My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, and I must pause till it come back to me.??? This is also effective as it provokes the audience to empathise with Antony??™s perspective as shown in the plebeians??™ response ???There??™s not a nobler man in Rome than Antony??? As shown in Julius Caesar, intense opinions and contrasting views have been represented to create meaning and also has effectively influenced the audience??™s response, however as Brutus could not manipulate his audience to the extent that Antony has, it ultimately led to the audience disregarding his argument completely
The medium of production lends itself to the rhetoric and language devices used. Different techniques unique to the textual form can be utilised to serve the purpose of the composer. Shakespeare utilizes theatrical property to increase persuasion and effectiveness shown when Antony uses Caesar??™s body and will to manipulate the plebeians. ???Show you sweet Caesar??™s wounds, poor, poor dumb mouths???. The explicit visual imagery combined with the personification of his wounds is not only shown effective to the plebeians but also to the Elizabethan audience. Similarly seen in my related text, the two speeches present intense opinions and contrasting views regarding ???the war on terror???. George Bush uses inclusive pronouns such as ???we??? and ???us??? to accentuate his connection with the audience combined with anaphora which manipulates his audience so that his opinion becomes the opinion of theirs, thus manipulating them to feel unified and powered ???We will defeat our enemies. We will protect out people and We will lead the 21st century into a shining age of human liberty. George Bush also uses repetition of freedom combined with antithesis, quote ???we are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom???, it provokes the audience into taking action as they are threatened that their freedom is at risk. This is similar to how Brutus manipulates his audience through rhetorical questions with an obvious answer.
The contrasting view of Obama is shown in his speech that he disagrees with George Bush??™s ???war on terror???. He represents his contrasting view throughout his speech by providing anecdotal evidence on the successive outcomes of past wars which American has been involved in, followed by the repetition of ???I don??™t oppose all wars???. Obama furthers represents his intense opinion by using short sentences in conjunction with the juxtaposition of passion and reason which emphasises the impulsive actions taken towards the war on terror ???That??™s what I??™m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion.??? Through the establishment of a strong foundation in Obama??™s speech, he ends by conducting an imaginary debate with George Bush with a rhetorical question which expresses his contrasting view to the War on Terror. ???You want a fight, President Bush.??? Intense opinions and contrasting views have been represented to create meaning as well as to influence the audience??™s response.
As seen in Shakespeare??™s Julius Caesar and my related texts, intense opinions and contrasting views are presented to the audience effectively through its representation and have caused the audience??™s responses to be influenced by it. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *