Monday, 22 March 2010
Monday, 1 February 2010
Great Persuasive Speaking
With the Chilcott Enquiry currently underway, now seems a good time to go back to one of the bravest, most powerful examples of persuasive speaking of the modern age. While Blair and his cronies were making sure the case for war suited their aims as well as it could, very few politicians were ready to stand up and protest. One of the few who did was Robin Cook, who resigned from his post as Leader of the House of Commons.
His resignation speech, which you can watch here, on the BBC Democracy Live website, is a masterpiece of controlled, powerful speechmaking. (You can read a transcript of his speech here.)
Firstly, look at the structure of the speech. He begins using figures of ethos, in which he establishes a relationship with his audience, an ensures that they will take his criticisms seriously. The paragraph beginning 'I applaud' is a very effective strategy: in order not simply to be seen as a critic of Blair's premiership in general, he praises his opponent. This makes his criticisms harder to ignore, and is a very effective technique when arguing any case or using language persuasively.
There follows a long section which employs the technique of logos. Cook presents clearly and rationally the reasoning behind his criticism of the war. Even here, though, we can find simple techniques to help us improve our use of language. He uses a list of three countries which want more time for inspections, and each paragraph begins with a sentence that clearly states the topic which he will discuss.
Cook does not rely, though solely on facts; he ensures that he uses logos to support his argument, and to 'tell a story'. For me, the most powerful example of this is in the paragraph which begins 'The threshold for war will always be high'. This is a particularly fine example of how to integrate all three persuasive appeals into one paragraph: there is the statistic (logos) of the 'thousands of casualties'; his appeal to ethos, for example, of his belief that the servicemen will 'acquit themselves with professionalism and with courage' (it's never a good idea to be seen publicly to criticise the troops who fight for their country); and lastly, there is the telling remark, 'I hope that they all come back.' Cook has shifted the tone with great effect, switching from a complex sentence to a simple sentence which expresses a simple, and very moving reminder that war will cost lives.
Cook concludes his speech with an appeal to pathos, to the emotions of his audience. He begins by drawing on a sense of national pride, referring to 'the collective wisdom of the British people.' His choice of the pronoun 'they' to describe the British public may appear unremarkable, but it has the effect of reminding MP's that their support for the war is at odds with the public mood, and it conveys the sense of the public being a powerful force with which it would be unwise to grapple.
Effective appeals to pathos are always positive; attempts to bully, frighten or cajole one's audience often create resentment. Cook's final paragraph is a masterpiece in its simplicity. By drawing MPs' attention to public criticism 'that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics', he offers them a choice: either they prove their critics wrong by condemning the war, or, if they accept Blair's decision, they prove their critics right. When you use persuasive language, try to offer your audience a positive choice at the end, in which they see that supporting your ideas will bring them benefits of some kind.
As you watch the video, think about the men who were sent to war because of Blair's decision, and of those families here which never saw sons, husbands and fathers come home. I hope you will have been inspired by Robin Cook's speech.
His resignation speech, which you can watch here, on the BBC Democracy Live website, is a masterpiece of controlled, powerful speechmaking. (You can read a transcript of his speech here.)
Firstly, look at the structure of the speech. He begins using figures of ethos, in which he establishes a relationship with his audience, an ensures that they will take his criticisms seriously. The paragraph beginning 'I applaud' is a very effective strategy: in order not simply to be seen as a critic of Blair's premiership in general, he praises his opponent. This makes his criticisms harder to ignore, and is a very effective technique when arguing any case or using language persuasively.
There follows a long section which employs the technique of logos. Cook presents clearly and rationally the reasoning behind his criticism of the war. Even here, though, we can find simple techniques to help us improve our use of language. He uses a list of three countries which want more time for inspections, and each paragraph begins with a sentence that clearly states the topic which he will discuss.
Cook does not rely, though solely on facts; he ensures that he uses logos to support his argument, and to 'tell a story'. For me, the most powerful example of this is in the paragraph which begins 'The threshold for war will always be high'. This is a particularly fine example of how to integrate all three persuasive appeals into one paragraph: there is the statistic (logos) of the 'thousands of casualties'; his appeal to ethos, for example, of his belief that the servicemen will 'acquit themselves with professionalism and with courage' (it's never a good idea to be seen publicly to criticise the troops who fight for their country); and lastly, there is the telling remark, 'I hope that they all come back.' Cook has shifted the tone with great effect, switching from a complex sentence to a simple sentence which expresses a simple, and very moving reminder that war will cost lives.
Cook concludes his speech with an appeal to pathos, to the emotions of his audience. He begins by drawing on a sense of national pride, referring to 'the collective wisdom of the British people.' His choice of the pronoun 'they' to describe the British public may appear unremarkable, but it has the effect of reminding MP's that their support for the war is at odds with the public mood, and it conveys the sense of the public being a powerful force with which it would be unwise to grapple.
Effective appeals to pathos are always positive; attempts to bully, frighten or cajole one's audience often create resentment. Cook's final paragraph is a masterpiece in its simplicity. By drawing MPs' attention to public criticism 'that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics', he offers them a choice: either they prove their critics wrong by condemning the war, or, if they accept Blair's decision, they prove their critics right. When you use persuasive language, try to offer your audience a positive choice at the end, in which they see that supporting your ideas will bring them benefits of some kind.
As you watch the video, think about the men who were sent to war because of Blair's decision, and of those families here which never saw sons, husbands and fathers come home. I hope you will have been inspired by Robin Cook's speech.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)