John F. Kennedy And Brandenburg Gate Speech Analysis
Two Speeches, One Seminal Voice How can it be two men from two different eras, speak distinct words, yet were able to articulate the same exact message? Well in “Remarks at the Rudolph Wilde Platz” speech by President John F. Kennedy and the “Brandenburg Gate” speech given by President Reagan these men conducted precisely such act. With this in mind, both men did infact share the same ambition. In spite, of their sole purpose they did have diversities in their speeches. Whether it be different techniques of persuasion and, or rhetorical devices nonetheless, the ending culmination was met.
“After World War II, Germany was divided into two countries .. the berlin wall was a symbol of the division between Communism in Eastern Europe and democracy …show more content…
To demonstrate, an explicit example of Kennedy’s work is the opposition arguments in paragraph four where he goes into depth “many people of the world who don’t really understand or say they don’t know what is the great issue between the free world and the communist word. Or the ones who say that communism is the wave of the future” furthermore there are those who admit to communism being an “evil system but it permits us to make economic progress”. Granted, repetition was frequently throughout his speech “let them come to Berlin” phrase inparticular stands out since it was indeed crucial as it emphasizes an imperative action that had to be taken to open eyes. Additionally, in spite of the strong matter at hand Kennedy was able to use flattery to his advantage “proud” and “distinguished” (par.1). Furthermore, President Kennedy also made use of the German language to try to relate to his audience. He even had the audacity to declare himself one of them “Ich bin ein berliner” in doing so, he was able to use the plain folks appeal. Another rhetorical device used was parallelism “beyond the freedom.. beyond the wall.. beyond yourselves” (par. 7) which accentuated Kennedy’s analogy “when one man is enslaved, all are not free” (par. 8). Moreover, quite a combination of logos and ethos was “freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people …show more content…
5) alluring to one’s ethics(ethos), emotions(pathos), and logic(logos) all in one punch. In contrast, to Kennedy Reagan did not beat around the bush nor did he do flattery or pleasantries. For example, his “Mr.Gorbachev, open this gate!” (par.13) “Mr. Gorbachev-- Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” (par.14) flat out demands. Furthermore, Reagan continued to speak his mind without filter for “in the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind -- too little food” (par.8) he saw it fit to speak what others did not or could
“After World War II, Germany was divided into two countries .. the berlin wall was a symbol of the division between Communism in Eastern Europe and democracy …show more content…
To demonstrate, an explicit example of Kennedy’s work is the opposition arguments in paragraph four where he goes into depth “many people of the world who don’t really understand or say they don’t know what is the great issue between the free world and the communist word. Or the ones who say that communism is the wave of the future” furthermore there are those who admit to communism being an “evil system but it permits us to make economic progress”. Granted, repetition was frequently throughout his speech “let them come to Berlin” phrase inparticular stands out since it was indeed crucial as it emphasizes an imperative action that had to be taken to open eyes. Additionally, in spite of the strong matter at hand Kennedy was able to use flattery to his advantage “proud” and “distinguished” (par.1). Furthermore, President Kennedy also made use of the German language to try to relate to his audience. He even had the audacity to declare himself one of them “Ich bin ein berliner” in doing so, he was able to use the plain folks appeal. Another rhetorical device used was parallelism “beyond the freedom.. beyond the wall.. beyond yourselves” (par. 7) which accentuated Kennedy’s analogy “when one man is enslaved, all are not free” (par. 8). Moreover, quite a combination of logos and ethos was “freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people …show more content…
5) alluring to one’s ethics(ethos), emotions(pathos), and logic(logos) all in one punch. In contrast, to Kennedy Reagan did not beat around the bush nor did he do flattery or pleasantries. For example, his “Mr.Gorbachev, open this gate!” (par.13) “Mr. Gorbachev-- Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” (par.14) flat out demands. Furthermore, Reagan continued to speak his mind without filter for “in the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind -- too little food” (par.8) he saw it fit to speak what others did not or could