For my rhetorical analysis I'm planning on analyzing
Reagan's and Romney's speeches. While
the speeches have some similarities, I felt that they both differed enough that
I would be able to pull out opposites to compare and contrast. While the overall exigencies of the two speeches
differ quite dramatically - having a great effect on the way the speeches were
written, given, and received - I feel that comparing similar rhetorical
strategies will provide interesting analysis.
Both speeches were primarily addressing Republicans but
from different perspectives - defensive and offensive. As mentioned above, considering the exigency
of each speech is an important place to begin.
The respective primary audiences had to have had differing expectations
- making the purpose of using similar strategies different overall. However, even considering this, Reagan
appears to have been the more effective speaker overall.
I
plan on approaching the analysis as follows:
Reagan -
Eloquence and morality - Shows he's
educated but also relies on his faith in God.
Shows he understands the audience.
Effectively establishes trust from both believers and non-believers.
If - Then/Repetition - The reasoning
is logical and he encourages the audience which effectively unifies and
promotes action from them.
Imagery - Shows emotion
and thus appeals to his audience's emotion which unifies their relation.
Personal/Biblical/Historical/Poetic
Anecdotes
- Establishes, appeals to, and logically proves beliefs and faith to be an
important factor within national affairs.
Romney
-
Personal beliefs/convictions - Establishes
and presents beliefs in response to the audiences concerns. Addresses concerns but could have been more
specific. Sort of vague.
Flips argument - Designed to
allay concerns by addressing an underlying issue and unifying faith
Repetition/Equality - Establishes
and compares faiths in hope for a unified result.
No comments:
Post a Comment