Through a wide variety of rhetorical devices the orator, Wiesel, attempts to instill a form of guilt into his audience, as he makes his desperate plea to the American people, and to the president, to take a stand against the great evil he witnessed. Wiesel uses apostrophe, juxtaposition, and causal analysis to ensure he effectively drives his message home, implementing them each in their own way to ensure the necessary ethos and pathos is built so that Mr. Wiesel can sway his audience to his opinion, and ultimately encourage them cancel the visit to Bitburg, achieving his final rhetorical goal. Juxtaposition plays an essential role throughout the oration in evoking pathos, more specifically guilt and abhorrence. What Wiesel does to evoke this emotion is the contrast between the horrors of Nazi Germany, …show more content…
President, I have seen children, I have seen them being thrown in the flames alive. Words, they die on my lips", with the historical moral standard of American people. He expresses strong gratitude, "Mr. President, I was there. I was there when American liberators arrived. And they gave us back out lives. And what I felt for them then nourishes me to the end of my days and will do so.", but he also expresses dismay that this standard is not being upheld, that these values are being disregarded, a comparison which instills guilt in the audience. Moreover, the most important juxtaposition is clear throughout the piece, the choice between indifference, siding with the killers, and the moral choice, standing against oppression with the victims. Through clear,concise diction he lays out the difference between the two, "For the opposite of love, I have learned, is not hate, but indifference. Jews were killed by the enemy but betrayed by their so-called allies". He makes it clear to the audience through this juxtaposition, that they are better than this, that they can rise above this terrible indifference by cancelling the
Writer, Elie Wiesel in his metaphorical speech “The perils of Indifference” argues that the future will never know the agony of the Holocaust and they will never understand the tragedy of the horrific terror in Germany. Wiesel wants people to not let this happen but at the time many modern genocides that are occurring and people shouldn’t be focused on just the Holocaust, they should focus on making this world a better place; moreover, Wiesel expresses his thoughts about all the genocides that has happen throughout the years. He develops his message through in an horrifying event that took place 54 years ago the day “ The perils of Indifference” was published. Wiesel illustrates the indifferences of good vs evil. He develops this message
He was finally free, no joy filled his heart but abandonment was drowning it. How dangerous is indifference to humankind as it pertains to suffering and the need for conscience understanding when people are faced with unjust behaviors? Elie Wiesel is an award winning author and novelist who has endured and survived hardships. One of the darkest times in history, a massacre of over six million Jews, the Holocaust and Hitler himself. After the Holocaust he went on and wrote the internationally acclaimed memoir “Night,” in which he spoke out against persecution and injustice across the world. In the compassionate yet pleading speech, ¨Perils of Indifference,¨ Elie Wiesel analyzes the injustices that himself and others endured during the twentieth century, as well as the hellish acts of the Holocaust through effective rhetorical choices.
The message that is sent across in this speech is also something that makes it so effective. Wiesel’s goal is not only to inform the people of the horrible events of the Holocaust, but also a call to action. This call to action is to end indifference throughout the world. Wiesel tries throughout the speech to inspire his audience within the White House, as well as the people of the world to act in times of human suffering, injustice, and violence. Within this call to action, Wiesel argues that indifference is an action worse than any other. Even anger, according to Wiesel, is a more positive action than indifference. “Even hatred at times may elicit a response. You fight it. You denounce it. You disarm it. Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response.” When Wiesel states this simple, yet powerful statement, it forces any listener to consider how negative of an emotion hatred is, then puts indifference well below it. Wiesel also addresses how easy it is for any person to be indifferent. He states, “Of course, indifference can be tempting—more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims.” This quote
Elie Wiesel’s speech falls into the deliberative genre category, and was designed to influence his listeners into action by warning them about the dangers indifference can have on society as it pertains to human atrocities and suffering. The speech helped the audience understand the need for every individual to exercise their moral conscience in the face of injustice. Wiesel attempts to convince his audience to support his views by using his childhood experience and relating them to the harsh realities while living in Nazi Death Camps as a boy during the Holocaust. He warns, “To be indifferent to suffering is to lose one’s humanity” (Wiesel, 1999). Wiesel persuades the audience to embrace a higher level of level moral awareness against indifference by stating, “the hungry children, the homeless refugees-not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope, is to exile them from human memory”. Wiesel’s uses historical narrative, woven with portions of an autobiography to move his persuasive speech from a strictly deliberative genre to a hybrid deliberative genre.
Elie Wiesel has given the listener a wonderful opportunity to feel the intense movement of his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”. His speech is centered around the need for vigilance in the face of evil. Throughout this speech, with which he moved so many, he shared his experience with being sent to Buchenwald, a concentration camp, the treacherous conditions in which they were living, and the way that indifference has separated human beings. He explained, that through anger and hatred a great poem or symphony can be written, because “One does something special for the sake of humanity because one is angry at the injustice that one witnesses.” (Wiesel, 1999/16, p. 78). The three strategies that will be explored throughout this analysis are ethos, logos, and pathos.
The world is cruel and harsh; what does it take to prove that you and your experiences are capable of persuasion. In this world, you’d want as many allies as possible, and building emotional bridges with others is a definite way of proving that you matter to others. It’s a matter of philosophy; human nature emphasizes on individual existence; therefore rhetoric is effective to measure one’s importance. Elie Wiesel, a man of age, is a jewish holocaust survivor who has a story to tell and a story to be heard. Does the man have what it takes to prove himself worthy of a rhetoric leader? Elie Wiesel’s speech, The Perils of Indifference, Mr. Wiesel takes advantage of rhetorical questions and the appeals of pathos and logos to persuade and inform the audience about their inner indifference towards the havoc happening around the world.
Rhetorical devices are devices that are used to convey a meaning to the reader and create emotions through different types of language. Elie Wiesel uses rhetorical devices such as personification, metaphors, and rhetorical questions to emphasize and establish the theme of losing faith.
“He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart. He thought there never would be again”. This quote stated by Elie Wiesel from his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, refers to the day Elie Wiesel got liberated from the Holocaust when he was young. The Holocaust was just one of the many horrific tragedies that occurred during that century. In hopes of changing the future for the better, Wiesel decides to deliver a speech about helping the victims of injustice. He gives this speech intended for the President, Mrs. Clinton, members of Congress, Ambassador Holbrooke, Excellencies, and friends hoping that they will make positive changes for the future. By using rhetorical strategies such as anaphora, rhetorical questions, and ethos, Wiesel tries to help the victims of injustice and prevent future tragedies from happening.
The Perils of Indifference is a speech which uses appeals to the listener’s emotions to make it effective. “Fifty-four years ago to the day, a young Jewish boy from a small town in the Carpathian Mountains woke up,...He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart.” (American Rhetoric). This statement grabs at the listener's emotions, the listener feels pity for the young boy with no joy. The listener feels deeply for the boy because kids should be filled with joy and look at the world
Wiesel is effective with his speech by connecting exaggeration within his revelation. He questions the guilt and responsibility for past massacres, pointing specifically at the Nazi’s while using historical facts, such as bloodbaths in Cambodia, Algeria, India, and Pakistan to include incidents on a larger level such as Auschwitz to provide people with a better idea (Engelhardt, 2002). He is effective in putting together the law and society’s need for future actions against indifference by stating, “In the place I come from, society was composed of three simple categories: the killer, the victims, and the bystanders” 7.(Wiesel 223).
Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, in the speech “Perils of Indifference”, calls out the American government for being indifferent in an important time in world history. He claims that indifference is a very horrible thing and bad things have come from. He supports his claim by first explaining his childhood, then he goes on to talk about what it means to him, next explains the power it can have and finally explains the consequences that can come from it. His purpose is to educate his audience about indifference in hope of preventing indifference to continue in the future generations in order to accomplish his purpose for the speech. He establishes a calm tone for his audience.
On the 12 of April 1999, Elie Wiesel gave an encaptivating speech conveying to the American government of how they must change their ways. In the speech he shares with his audience some of his personal experiences he encountered due to their indifference during the Holocaust. While sharing with the audience his experiences he conveys how "they no longer felt pain, hunger, thirst. They feared nothing. They felt nothing. They were dead and did not know it." Though he never once added himself into that group he spoke of. How come he used the pronoun "they" instead of "we"? Did he not consider himself apart of that group? If not why did he not consider himself like
Elie Wiesel uses the following rhetorical strategies: hyperbole, anaphora, chiasmus, biased diction, and allusion to persuade president Reagan from attending a German cemetery; where several Nazi officers
Elie Wiesel’s speech “The Perils of Indifference” is a mind opening and emotional speech that prompts the audience to change the indifference that plagues America and many people in this time and age. He expresses to the audience that indifference is the reason appalling and horrifying events, such as the Holocaust, occur and why no one takes immediate actions to help the victims. To get his point across, Wiesel uses his own history and experiences so that the audience can visualize the Holocaust through the eyes of a survivor and to project the feelings of hopelessness and defeat that the victims felt when no one came to end the injustice. In this critique, Elie Wiesel’s rhetorical speech of indifference will show its effectiveness through testimony, emotion, and rhetorical questions; this speech accomplished its goal and without a doubt persuaded most of the audience to call out for change in indifference.
On 1999, Elie Wiesel, a Jewish writer gave a magnificent speech about apathy. In this speech, Wiesel thanks his fellow supporters who helped him and his people when they were in danger. Wiesel talked about his own experiences and uses history that he knows and supports his concern about not taking action. He focuses on those who stay back and watch others take action, which they could as well. In the speech, he repeats a significant amount of words that have a purposeful meaning towards the reason of why being apathy is unacceptable. In Wiesel’s The Perils of Indifference speech, Wiesel influences the audience by appealing to their emotions with pathos, using anaphora