First, I will be comparing Kennedy and Trump. Kennedy started his speech with a strong sense of change, he wanted Americans to stick together, like glue, so that we can work together as one. Kennedy wanted everyone to know that with him as president, America will be closely united instead of loosely united. To prove this, he said, "...born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage, and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world." Here is where Kennedy expressed pathos, because of the unity that he conveyed. He planned his wording shrewdly because he could be talking about a couple of different issues that he wants to change; racism or the threat of Russia. Since both are on his to-do list for abolishing, the way that the audience takes in what he said would be true for either topic. That would make him seem like an even better president for confronting both problems.
Trump, on the other hand, noted in the very beginning that he is not perfect by saying, "We will face challenges. We will confront hardships, but we will get the job done." Even though hardships will come by, what is needed to be done, will be accomplished under his presidency. Then, Trump went started making this speech about the people by saying, "For too long, a small group in our nation's capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have born the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs and, while they celebrated in our nation's capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land." He used pathos here to lead the people into his next point, which was to change that so the people can reap what the government sows. He wants the government to be more about the people and not just the facilities that make up the government. Trump also shows pathos by stating, "We are one nation and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home and one glorious destiny. " He takes himself as the president out of the equation and showed the people that everyone is together, like a family. That is where he is similar to Kennedy, they both want America to be united and to show that the people matter and have voices as well. Those are great qualities to use in a speech because it makes the audience feel like they're being heard and are appreciated.
Now, I will be comparing Lenin's speech to his soldiers and Trump's inauguration. Lenin's speech started with him saying that the Provisional Government must be destroyed. Lenin wanted the people to have more of a voice in the government, you can tell when he said, "We desire a different republic, one more in keeping with the interests of the people, more democratic." This shows pathos by giving people the encouragement to listen to him and potentially take action. After this, he repeatedly said that the police, bureaucracy, and anyone else from the Provisional Government should not rule the country; the people should. Lenin is very tactful by saying what the soldiers wanted to hear and put in bits and pieces of his overall goal into his speech. He spoke a lot about how the Bolshevik Revolution will be the one thing that will save Russia. Then, he said that the Soviets shall, "...not only be obeyed, but also respected, by the workers and peasants." Then he elaborates a little more about the Soviets and how they will solve the problems of the Russians an example would be land, peace, and bread, which was exactly what the people wanted but didn't get from the Provisional Government. After that, he goes back to saying that the police should not be re-established. The anaphora, "not allow the police to be re-established" puts an extra emphasis on the fact that in order to change Russia to the way he wants it, everything has to go. This is very different from President Trump, for he wants change, but he won't be getting rid of everything that is currently set up for the government facilities. The speeches are similar in the way of giving the people what they want, but what is given is different. Lenin gave the Russian people peace, land, and more food, unlike the Provisional Government, which made him more appealing and helped him gain trust and control over the people. Trump gave the people more of a voice and promised for a better America. As said before, Trump wants the people to reap what the government sows whereas Lenin wants to reap what the country sows. In the end, Lenin had ethos, because his Bolshevik Revolution worked by taking out the Provisional Government and putting himself in the place of power.
Overall, Kennedy's speech and Lenin's speech were pretty effective, whereas Trump's speech left me confused as to whether or not it's effective. Kennedy's inauguration brought more light upon subjects that had to be dealt with, Lenin's speech made him the ruthless ruler of Russia, and Trump's inauguration had mixed emotions. The people who liked Trump, kept liking him and the people who didn't still don't like him, but people are more open about how they feel about Trump whether it's good or bad.
If I had to choose one speech to be the most effective speech, I would probably choose Lenin's speech because his speech lead to the largest change. Russia's whole entire government changed. It may have something to do with the tone as well. Even though it was kind of relaxed, there was power behind Lenin's words and a sprinkle of greed when he was talking about the Bolsheviks. Kennedy's and Trump's tone were different from Lenin's tone. Both presidents had gratitude for being elected, and both of them were passionate about bringing America closer. One difference that I noticed is that Kennedy had power and reassurance in his tone while Trump had confidence and pride in his tone. Kennedy's power and reassurance showed up when he said, "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Trump's confidence and pride show when he said, "From this day forward, it's going to be only America first. America first...America will start winning again. Winning like never before. We will bring back our jobs...We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams."
I really enjoyed reading your blog post. I found it interesting considering how you compared Trump's Inaugural Address to multiple speeches, including John F. Kennedy's speech and John Lenin's speech. Out of all the blogs that I read, your post was the only one to go this extra mile. Aside from this, I found the analysis you conducted for each speech to be thorough and well written. You included quotes in your post, which is another plus. As a whole, you managed to conduct a detailed analysis on not two speeches, but three, and you did a great job.
ReplyDeleteJoey - John LENNON is from The Beatles; Vladimir LENIN was the Communist revolutionary thinker.
DeleteGreat job Kayla! I love how that you had went the extra mile and decided to compare and contrast three speeches instead of just writing about the two speeches. I believe that comparing the three made you blog post extermely more interesting and brought up a lot of good points. Plus, that they were all coming from three different time periods but its relevant as you were anaylzing the rhetorics that were being used and pointing out the effectiveness of all the speeches. The two speeches, Trump and Kennedy were the only ones that I was really familiar with but the Lenin speech i wasn't. But your every informative of all of them and did a great analysis!
ReplyDeleteYou go very in depth and go the extra mile by comparing 2 other people to Trump and his speech. I mostly agree with what you have to say with some disagreements here and there. Over all a very good blog
ReplyDeleteYou go very in depth and go the extra mile by comparing 2 other people to Trump and his speech. I mostly agree with what you have to say with some disagreements here and there. Over all a very good blog
ReplyDeleteYour thoughts were very organized and I liked how deep you analyzed all three of the speakers.
ReplyDeleteThe organization of the post was on point and developed well. Most of the mistakes or errors in the post are either just oversight by you or will come with more practice. The one thing that stood out to me was the use of an expanded vocabulary. Some of the larger you used seemed slightly out of place because they were surrounded by smaller words. If it doesn't naturally to you while writing, I wouldn't put it in. On the other hand, simply reading it out loud can help determine if the sentence sounds out of place with the rest of post. Good work.
ReplyDeleteImpressive job going the extra mile and comparing two other leaders to Trump! I liked how you backed up all your claims and facts with quotes from both of the speeches, however, I wish you had more of your own words analyzing the quotes. I think your concluding opinion on not knowing whether or not Trump's speech was as effective as Kennedy's and Lenin's would be stronger/more justified if you had given specific reasons. What does Trump's speech not have that the other two speeches do???
ReplyDeleteKayla, I can tell you put tons of time and effort into these blogs and I am very impressed with your analysis of the three speeches and your knowledge on the topic. Another great blog.
PS missed u at school today xo
An interesting cast of characters are presented here.
ReplyDelete