FDR Pearl Harbor Speech

FDR Pearl Harbor Speech
Substance=Message	Style=Rhetoric
The facts speak for themselves. Surprise Attack.	Less is more.
	Use of incremental repetition.
Our fight is result of actions by Japanese leadership/military	Sets stage: “a date that will live in infamy”—odd syntax
I am Commander in Chief	Preacher/salespitch/radio-movie—lend gravity to situation—but also sense of confidence--authority
Seek declaration of war
Japanese as enemy—deception	Infamy, dastardly, deliberate, calculating, respect/disappointment; Empire; Japanese people; diplomatic process--
Moral right; righteousness; Victory; Propaganda Rhetoric of State—get American People outraged—righteous anger
We are Good Guys; they are Bad Guys	Repetition; tone of voice—rational not overly emotional; moral righteousness; Mature

Audiences: Japanese (Emperor, military, people, etc.) ; American people (radio audience, movie-reel audience, newspaper audience) ; Military (greatness/confidence/victory); Congress (declaration of war); Big Business; Hawaiians

What can you attack in the speech? Tone/Delivery: Anger Negotiation: We told you we didn’t think we should continue; What did US do? Hawaii—independent Kingdom overthrown by US imperialism (Guam, The Philippines), how “moral” are we?

How was GW Bush 9/11 speech different from FDR’s Pearl Harbor speech?

George W. Bush 9/11 Speech
Substance	Style
Religious quote; we retain values—doesn’t use Lord or God in quote	Generic; lifeless? With no audience; too gentle? Affected? Steel metaphor? String of metaphors Lack of gravity
Demonize enemy (Evil)—more judgmental less rational	Radio allows theatricality; TV is a cool medium that requires less emotion
	Teleprompter makes it mechanical, passivity
	Foundation of building vs foundation of America—clever does not equal persuasive—too speech-writerly in effect and lack of situational dynamics

Carl Rogers=student-centered learning, self-monitor, actuator, participator, experiential basis, facilitator, open-ended learning (life-long learning) curiosity as much critical thinking

Traditional=teacher-centered; skills and knowledge sets; information; reward and punishment

A growing openness to experience – they move away from defensiveness and have no need for subception (a perceptual defense that involves unconsciously applying strategies to prevent a troubling stimulus from entering consciousness).
An increasingly existential lifestyle – living each moment fully – not distorting the moment to fit personality or self concept but allowing personality and self concept to emanate from the experience. This results in excitement, daring, adaptability, tolerance, spontaneity, and a lack of rigidity and suggests a foundation of trust. "To open one's spirit to what is going on now, and discover in that present process whatever structure it appears to have" (Rogers 1961)^[12]
Increasing organismic trust – they trust their own judgment and their ability to choose behaviour that is appropriate for each moment. They do not rely on existing codes and social norms but trust that as they are open to experiences they will be able to trust their own sense of right and wrong.
Freedom of choice – not being shackled by the restrictions that influence an incongruent individual, they are able to make a wider range of choices more fluently. They believe that they play a role in determining their own behaviour and so feel responsible for their own behaviour.
Creativity – it follows that they will feel more free to be creative. They will also be more creative in the way they adapt to their own circumstances without feeling a need to conform.
Reliability and constructiveness – they can be trusted to act constructively. An individual who is open to all their needs will be able to maintain a balance between them. Even aggressive needs will be matched and balanced by intrinsic goodness in congruent individuals.
A rich full life – he describes the life of the fully functioning individual as rich, full and exciting and suggests that they experience joy and pain, love and heartbreak, fear and courage more intensely. Rogers' description of the good

Arguments

	Classical		Rogerian
Introduction (Exordium)	Capture the audience’s attention. Introduce the issue and create exigence for your claim. Why is this an issue? Why do we need to pay attention?	Introduction	State the problem you hope to resolve. By presenting your issue as a problem you raise the possibility of positive change. Often opponents will want to solve the same problem. Not the rodeo clown approach—but already building sense of empathy—common problem Consensus through problem solving; presenting in humane way—dialogue not dialectic What are the possibilities—you’re going to need input from others
Statement of Background (Narratio)	Supply the context needed to understand the case you present. What circumstances, occurrences, or conditions do we need to be made aware of?	Summary of Opposing Views	As accurately and neutrally as possible, state the views of the people with whom you disagree. By doing this you show that you are capable of listening without judging and have given a fair hearing to people who think differently from you. Consensus and empathy up front—classical model seeks to refute from get-go
Proposition (Partitio)	State your position (claim/thesis), based on the information you have presented, and outline the major points that will follow. The partitio divides the background information from the reasoning.	Statement of Understand-ing	Also called the statement of validity. Show that you understand that there are situations in which these views are valid. Which parts of the opposing argument s do you concede? Under which conditions might you share these views? Stipulation such as gun training, safe place, permit, lock, etc.
Proof (Confirmatio)	Present your reasons, subclaims, and evidence. Establish inferences between claim and support. Provide additional evidence for subclaims and evidence, where necessary. Explain and justify assumptions. Teachers will reduce in-class crime. Increase in student achievement/motivator Increased respect/less discipline Gun makes you feel a foot taller	Statement of Your Position	Now that readers have seen that you’ve given full consideration to views other than your own, they should be prepared to listen fairly to your views. State your position. Not an agonistic model—me and you—a consensus model
Refutation (Refutatio)	Anticipate and refute opposing arguments. In this section you demonstrate that you have already considered the issue thoroughly and have reached the only reasonable conclusion. Accidental shootings—gun training, some kids are asking for it Frightened kids won’t achieve—those students are immature babies that will never Grow; root out “bad eggs” Teacher on teacher violence—scare off Those who don’t really want to teach	Statement of Contexts	Describe situations in which you hope your views will be honored. By showing that your position has merit in specific contexts, you recognize that people won’t agree with you all of the time. However, opponents are allowed to agree in part and share common ground.
Conclusion (Peroratio)	Summarize the most important points. Make a final appeal to values, motivations, and feelings that are likely to encourage the audience to identify with your argument Ethos—appeal to common values	Statement of Benefits	Appeal to the self-interest of your opponents by showing how they would benefit from accepting your position; this concludes your essay on a hopeful, positive note. More open-ended, not win-or-less; Traditional argument Agon-based (gk for struggle) where
	Tradition legal trial of adversary positions Synthesized by jury		Rogers is consensus-based. Mediation instead of adversary trial.

Lou Gehrig Pride of Yankees

Straight to-the-point	Prolong the experience, entertain,
Emotional impact	Cap off, show the listeners—name individuals
Unadorned fact and restrainst	Gets rids of “lot to live for”
Selfless

Lou Gehring Farewell Speech

"Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got. Yet today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of this earth. I have been in ballparks for seventeen years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.

"Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day? Sure, I'm lucky. Who wouldn't consider it an honor to have known Jacob Ruppert? Also, the builder of baseball's greatest empire, Ed Barrow? To have spent six years with that wonderful little fellow, Miller Huggins? Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy? Sure, I'm lucky.

"When the New York Giants, a team you would give your right arm to beat, and vice versa, sends you a gift - that's something. When everybody down to the groundskeepers and those boys in white coats remember you with trophies - that's something. When you have a wonderful mother-in-law who takes sides with you in squabbles with her own daughter - that's something. When you have a father and a mother who work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body - it's a blessing. When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed - that's the finest I know.

"So I close in saying that I may have had a tough break, but I have an awful lot to live for."