"Ich Bin Ein Berliner"

            When John Fitzgerald Kennedy stepped up to the podium to deliver his address to the citizens of West Berlin in 1963, it was impossible for him to know the impact "Ich bin ein Berliner" would have on the German populace.  To this day, Kennedy's speech in West Berlin is considered one of his most notable speeches, and it couldn't have come at a better time.  At this point in history, the Berlin Wall divided the nation of Germany, and West Berlin was an exclave of West Germany.  West Berlin and West Germany were separated.  Tensions were high, morale was low, and denizens needed some encouragement.  He employed many rhetorical devices that are vital to a successful discourse.  One can ascertain Kennedy's method by analyzing his speech through Burke's dramatistic pentad, how he used pathos, and how he visualized the future.
            Kenneth Burke's theories on rhetoric and persuasion teach us that rhetoric is similar to a play.  This includes an act (what's being addressed), a scene (where it's being addressed), agent (who is speaking), agency (how agent delivered) and purpose (the occasion).  For act, Kennedy is addressing the morale of West Germany.  But why is he in Berlin?  Why didn't Kennedy choose another location in West Germany?  The scene addresses this.  Berlin is the capital of Germany.  At this point, West Berlin was completely surrounded by East Germany, and was cut off from West Germany.  Clearly, the agent in this case was Kennedy, but his delivery was his most fantastic moment.  He used the phrase "Ich bin ein Berliner" as a device to enhance his delivery--a prop, in a way.  This deals a lot with pathos, which will be discussed shortly.  Finally, the purpose links greatly with the scene and act.  West Berlin was suffering from the fear of isolation from West Germany, and the fear that East Germany would simply take over.  The citizens of West Berlin had families and friends who were severed from contact with them.
            Aristotle had a theory on rhetorical methods, and he narrowed down all rhetoric to three forms: Logos, Pathos, and Ethos.  Ethos is clearly established, since Kennedy is the president.  Some could be said about Logos, but Pathos (emotional appeal) seems to be the central rhetorical method that Kennedy uses.  He makes several attempts at emotional appeal.  A good example can be found in the statement, "I know of no town, no city, that has been besieged for 18 years that still lives with the vitality and the force, and the hope, and the determination of the city of West Berlin."  Kennedy says this with such passion, and does so even without looking at his notes.  The crowd erupts in cheers, shouts, and clapping immediately following this statement.  In this case, Kennedy made an empathetic appeal.
            Finally, Kennedy visualizes the future by a series of several statements.  First, "There are some who say that communism is the wave of the future.  Let them come to Berlin."  Though this seems more explicit in his mention of the future, that is not the central focus.  This statement, and all the following, hints to those who were considering communism as valid to look no further than Berlin.  Berlin was the future of communism.  Kennedy forces the audience to view the future in this statement as well:  "... then we [can] look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one and this country and this great Continent of Europe in a peaceful and hopeful globe. When that day finally comes, as it will, the people of West Berlin can take sober satisfaction in the fact that they were in the front lines for almost two decades."  He paints the picture of what the future will be like when Europe is peaceful.
            In conclusion, Kennedy without a doubt captivated his audience while giving this speech.  His speech, "Ich bin ein Berliner," earned the title of being one of his most respected and motivating speeches.  His speech was effective, considering that the citizens held out for another 26 years, when the Wall finally fell.

Duty, Honor, Country

            Where bombs and bullets pierce the air, General Douglas MacArthur's spirit is alive and well.  According to Francis Miller, his name was so renowned that he was a common American household name.  Everyone knew of his tales from Asia (Miller 1).  Douglas MacArthur was born the youngest on January 26, 1880 as an army brat.  His father, Lieutenant General Arthur MacArthur, Jr., was a soldier at the time of Douglas' birth.  When he attended his first military academy, he was valedictorian.  When he graduated from West Point, he was ranked at the top of his class.  Not only was MacArthur the youngest major general at that point in history, he was also the youngest Chief of Staff at 50 years of age.  His most famous speech was in 1962 with his acceptance of the Sylvanus Thayer Award, awarded to "... a citizen of the United States, other than a West Point graduate, whose outstanding character, accomplishments, and stature in the civilian community draw wholesome comparison to the qualities for which West Point strives, in keeping with its motto: 'Duty, Honor, Country'" (The Sylvanus Thayer Award).  Clearly, the award is not given to just any person.

            Imagine a massive room, smelling of old wood, and crowded with men in sharp suits and the glistening of hundreds of medals, badges and awards pinned to their chests.  You've just experienced West Point Academy, and Douglas MacArthur's audience.  MacArthur's audience was perfect for his speech.  They were soldiers and former soldiers who had tasted the terrors of battle as he did; they were recruits who had experienced the blood, sweat and tears that would make them soldiers as he had experienced; they were the families of soldiers who had fought and died for the betterment of their family's safety and quality of life as he once fought.  MacArthur had to have known all of these things in his speech.  Not only did he know who his audience was, but the audience knew who he was.  No doubt, the soldiers had heard his name hundreds of times before.  Imagine the soldiers' reactions when he summarized his conversation with a doorman:

As I was leaving the hotel this morning, a doorman asked me, "Where are you bound for, General?" And when I replied, "West Point," he remarked, "Beautiful place. Have you ever been there before?"

Even without the audio from the speech, one can gather that the room probably erupted in laughter (in fact, it did).  He had a credibility that had already been built before he had stepped foot in the room.  Though many of these men had probably never seen nor heard MacArthur before, they appreciated and welcomed his presence.

            While analyzing MacArthur's speech, one can see many patterns emerge.  A key note is his use of repetition.  Throughout his entire speech, he uses many of the same words over and over again.  Now, mind you, that doesn't mean it's ineffective.  MacArthur uses a lot of the repetition to illustrate the same idea, but worded somewhat differently each time.  For instance, MacArthur said, "The unbelievers will say they are but words, but a slogan, but a flamboyant phrase."  Most of the repetition that MacArthur uses is the repetition of the first word, such as "to," "they," "every," and "are they," to name a few instances.  But from all of MacArthur's speech, his finest and most emotive moments are his regularized iterations of the West Point Academy Motto: "Duty, Honor, Country."

            This small, fragmented sentence that he repeated several times deserves an entire analysis of its own.  The fact that he used the motto over and over again demonstrates that MacArthur has a target audience in mind--those who know West Point first hand.  To the lay person, this sentence would mean only its literal interpretation.  But to anyone who has ever trained at West Point, including MacArthur, the words mean more than just the letters that form them, or the dictionary that defines them:

But this award is not intended primarily for a personality, but to symbolize a great moral code - the code of conduct and chivalry of those who guard this beloved land of culture and ancient descent. That is the meaning of this medallion. For all eyes and for all time, it is an expression of the ethics of the American soldier. That I should be integrated in this way with so noble an ideal arouses a sense of pride and yet of humility which will be with me always.

The words mean brotherhood, safety, discipline and integrity.  To some, the motto may conjure images of who they are fighting for.  To others, the motto may invoke images of battle, blood and bullets.  MacArthur knew the background of his audience.  He could identify with them, which is why he chose to repeat the West Point Motto.  By MacArthur repeating the West Point Motto, he incites a sense of pride--not only in the soldiers, but undoubtedly in himself as well, perhaps further empowering his speech that much more. 

            What emotions is MacArthur trying to induce in his audience, whom we've established as present and soon-to-be soldiers?  As the speech is analyzed, it's found that MacArthur is endeavoring a speech of encouragement.  "This does not mean that you are war mongers.  On the contrary, the soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war."  In this passage, and at least one other, he is creating an identity with his audience.  He is saying, "I know what people say about you, but I know that you are not this way."  His identification with the audience is a recurring theme, and he uses identification in conjunction with emotional appeal to make this speech one of the best speeches at West Point.

His name and fame are the birthright of every American citizen. In his youth and strength, his love and loyalty, he gave all that mortality can give. He needs no eulogy from me, or from any other man. He has written his own history and written it in red on his enemy's breast. But when I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism. He belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom. He belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements.

The soldiers probably were feeling rather betrayed by their countrymen.  War protests were becoming part of mainstream America (as they are today), and soldiers were not considered as dignified as they once were.  The timing for MacArthur's soldier eulogy, another theme of his speech, couldn't have been better.  America was in the middle of the Vietnam War.  Vietnam was considered the first public war, and every household had access to the insides of warfare and what it was really like.  Needless to say, the American citizens were not impressed.  The soldiers and soon-to-be soldiers needed some encouragement, and MacArthur delivered.

Lastly, MacArthur used various sensory imagery to relate to the audience.  He said, “In my dreams I hear again the crash of guns, the rattle of musketry, the strange, mournful mutter of the battlefield. But in the evening of my memory I come back to West Point. Always there echoes and re-echoes: Duty, Honor, Country.”  One can extract auditory and tactile imagery just from this one section.  Clearly, “the crash of guns,” “the strange, mournful mutter of the battlefield,” and “echoes and re-echoes” are all examples of auditory imagery.  Consider the example of tactile imagery: “the rattle of musketry.”  One could argue that it’s possible to use this example as an audio sensation, but rattling is also something that is felt.  The rattle of the muskets could be felt by his hands.

In the end, the biggest point that I want to make is that MacArthur was brilliant in his identification with his audience.  The setting was perfect, his use of his personal experiences on the battlefield helped his audience relate to him, and his use of the hardships the soldiers faced as they re-acclimated back into society was just what his audience needed to hear.  I really feel that, by far, this was the best speech I’ve studied so far.  Granted, there were a few elements missing that could have made it that much better, but the identification is the largest key to the audience’s attention.

Bibliography

Miller, Francis. General Douglas MacArthur: Fighter for Freedom. Philadelphia: The John C. Winston Company, 1942.

The Sylvanus Thayer Award. 2010. 19 October 2010 <http://www.westpointaog.org/netcommunity/page.aspx?pid=946>.

Patton's D-Day, Minus 1

          George Smith Patton was a General with the United States Army during World War II. He is best known for his guidance during the world war, and was also well known for how open he was while speaking. Enter D-Day, minus one. The speech he gave to the Third Army who were about to raid France was, and still is one of his most famous speeches. In this speech, Patton uses victimage rhetoric to attempt to stir up a significant amount of emotion. More specifically, Patton uses war rhetoric—that is, he is uniting his soldiers against the axis powers. He dehumanizes, emasculates, and embarrasses the enemy in an attempt to inspire his men. Interestingly enough, Patton also uses martyr victimage to create a commonality within his Third Army. He details various inspirational individuals whom he defines as “real men” and heroic. Undoubtedly, this did inspire and persuade his men. He also turns this around to once again emasculate the enemy, establishing that the enemy wasn’t smart or manly enough to see them coming.
          All of this victimage rhetoric helps Patton establish cohesion with the audience. First, in a “right of passage” identification, Patton says, “All through your Army careers, you men have [sic] about what you call 'chicken [sic] drilling'. That, like everything else in this Army, has a definite purpose. That purpose is alertness.” This statement creates a feeling that they’ve all gone through the same things together. Next, the language that Patton uses is just right for the group he’s speaking to. They are probably scared, they know that it’s possible that they may die, and he even states that everyone will go through fear. They all know exactly what he means, and they can relate to what he’s saying. Lastly, they all share a common goal. The most obvious goal is that they all want to win this war. Patton states that they don’t want to lose, because if they lose, their friends and families lose as well. Another, less obvious common goal for them is ultimately braveness and masculinity. He argues that the soldiers cannot be cowards. He even goes so far as to threaten cowards and virtually calls for their execution.
          Obviously, it’s impossible to know just how much of an effect Patton’s speech had on the Third Army, since it was never taped. However, the effect that this speech has on readers can determine the effect it had on the Third Army. The presence of many of the elements of Burke’s theories indicates that the speech may have been just what Patton’s men needed, given the context of what was facing them.

COMM 3283: Aristotle's Definition of Rhetoric

A summary of Selected Moments From Aristotle's Rhetoric

Throughout the article, Aristotle attempts to define rhetoric.  Simply put, Aristotle states that rhetoric is a persuasive argument that is meant to help others arrive at a truth.