"...it was human to be inhuman."

The title of this post is a quote from Elie Wiesel during a speech at Buchenwald Concentration Camp. On June 4, 2009, Wiesel stood before a crowd on a stage with President Barack Obama and Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel, and spoke of a few harsh realities from his fight for life, as well as his father’s, during the Holocaust. His quote referencing the normal or “human” feeling of considering oneself to be inhuman was said in the context of life in concentration camps, where those in the depressing and unimaginable captivity were not seen as humans by camp officials as the prisoners themselves began to eventually see in themselves inhumane emotions. For more on Elie Wiesel, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elie_Wiesel.

My second premature blogging attempt at rhetorical criticism will try to briefly analyze Wiesel’s speech using a cluster criticism. A cluster criticism seeks to do exactly as its name says:  criticize a speech by identifying clusters of main points, terms, or ideas around a central worldview or even a single term. In the case of Wiesel’s speech, a central idea he focuses on is humanity and the recollection of historical events to bring the change our world today seeks but doesn’t see occurring. Wiesel makes a memorable attempt to answer, “What must we do to see the change we desire for our world, for improving the human life in a troubled world?”

For Wiesel, he sees remembrance of such events like the Holocaust as key to saving humanity. In the following quote directed to President Obama, he makes this worldview clear:

Mr. President, we have such high hopes for you because you, with your moral vision of history, will be able and compelled to change this world into a better place, where people will stop waging war – every war is absurd and meaningless – where people will stop hating one another; where people will hate the otherness of the Other rather than respect it. But, the world hasn’t changed.

The change Wiesel is speaking of is characterized by words like memory, a sense of security, and bringing people together. Our societies cringe at the fact that the Holocaust happened, and yet tragic genocides in Rwanda and Darfur have continued to make depressing marks in our world’s history. Wiesel states that it’s not necessarily a lack of attention to such devastations, but rather a lack of memory that continues to tear our communities apart. According to Wiesel, “Memory must bring people together rather than set them apart…What else can we do except invoke that memory, so that people everywhere will say the 21^st century is a century of new beginnings, filled with promise and infinite hope, and at times profound gratitude to all those who believe in our task, which is to improve the human condition.”

The mini clusters of memory, humanity, and partnership are all in support of Wiesel’s main point – practicing the methods to make the much sought-after and needed change for this world happen. His speech invokes us to ask, “What am I doing to change and improve humanity and the world?”

For a video and text of this speech, visit http://americanrhetoric.com/speeches/eliewieselbuchenwaldspeech.htm.

One of many attempts to restore BP's reputation.

As America suffered the results of a fire and explosion on the Deepwater Horizon that would result in what has become history’s worst oil spill, British Petroleum (BP) CEO Tony Hayward became the most-watched man. In numerous interviews, Hayward addressed the steps BP would take in repairing the extremely damaged surrounding environment and trying to compensate for all damages done. Approximately three weeks after the accident on June 17, 2010, Hayward addressed the U.S. House of Representatives Energy Subcommittee on the oversight and investigations surrounding the oil spill. 

The impact of this speech is hard to decide because of its recent timeline, but something to take note of is that Hayward announced his resignation July 27, and was under much public scrutiny and charged of “not caring” and “failing to address the situation responsibly, like a real man should”, according to various Twitter posts.

The canons watched for in Neo-Aristotelian criticism are:  invention, organization, style, delivery, and memory. Concerning invention, the logos, or logical argument, of Hayward’s speech seemed to begin with inductive reasoning as he shared his experience of mourning with family members of 11 deceased workers. Hayward then applied those feelings of anger and hurt to the rest of America’s population.

Hayward then establishes his ethos/credibility as a speaker by speaking of his work with President Obama, and also talks of his responsibility to the American people.

Now enters the emotional appeal, or pathos. Something has to truly identify Hayward, the CEO of a major company that has just royally messed up, with those hurting and looking to point the blame at someone. He shares the story of his experience at the memorial for the deceased workers. Hayward continues, saying, “I've been to the Gulf Coast. I've met with fisherman, business owners, and families. I understand what they are going through and I promised them, as I am promising you, that we will make this right…I give my pledge as leader of BP that we will not rest until we make this right.” 

It may be said that Hayward’s speech followed a problem-solution organization. He speaks of the tragedy resulting from the spill, and then speaks of BP’s goals to cap the leak and reimburse billions of dollars. The problem is the accident and gross amounts of oil polluting the Gulf’s environment. The solution involves monetary compensation and extreme engineering to cap the leak, not to mention good public relations to restore BP’s reputation.

Hayward’s style looked for the support and trust of America as he established BP’s reputation. Having “a responsibility to the American people”, Hayward reassured his audience that BP is a strong company, and would do everything in their power to get to the solution.

The speech was delivered from a manuscript, and omits the need to consider the canon of memory. As Hayward spoke from his manuscript, he kept an even tone, made consistent eye contact, and took pauses when necessary, especially after emotion-based statements. 

For the speech, go to http://americanrhetoric.com/speeches/tonyhaywardbpcongressstmt.htm. 

I guess this is an introduction.

Hello to all reading this.

As you may or may not know, my full name is Ashley Rose Veurink. I am a junior business communication major at Trinity Christian College.  Blogging is something I've wanted to do for quite some time, but have never been able to imagine what I would blog about. This blog, although it's been started because of an assignment in a class, will hopefully become something I continue to do once the class is over.

The professor of my Communication Criticism class asked each of us in the class to create a blog where we will be posting entries concerning topics in communication. I'm not entirely positive how to explain what will show up in later posts, other than to say I hope it makes sense to those reading, whether or not they are in communication field.

I won't use this introductory post as a way to tell you more about myself. If you see my profile, you can learn a little more about me if you'd like. I hope you have a great day, and are blessed by the world around you.

A new blogger,
Ashley Veurink